Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Judge States the Obvious

A story well worth your attention:

"In a significant legal breakthrough for Guantanamo Bay prisoners, the federal judge who has previously upheld the broadest detention power for the government ruled on Monday that torture of an individual and the passage of time after he had ties to terrorism can end his status as an enemy of the United States, and require his release."

Duh. Anyone who thinks this is wrong should try reading the fifth and sixth amendments to the Constitution:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,

by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Funny how all those conservatives that are always shreiking about the sanctity of the constitution seem to have never read it. There's so much that we could be doing in this country, it's a real shame that we have to spend so much of our time on repairing the damage deliberately caused by the conservative movement.

And by the way, is there anyone out there that thinks that being tortured under interrogation doesn't amount to being compelled to be a witness against himself? Or anyone who wants to defend "Justice" Scalia's position that this torture is not cruel and unusual punishment, because interrogation isn't punishment?

No comments: