November 11th, 2005

yellow_elephant

Holy Carpe Phallum For Veteran's Day!

It seems that The Greatest Military Leader EVER! was unable to attend the traditional wreath laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Veteran's Day. So he decided to send the appropriate message to the Veteran's Community, He Sent DICK.

It is so good to know that an administration that is so concerned about "sending the message", cared enough to Dick The Veteran's Community....
yellow_elephant

Strategy For Victory

Uh, ok, so why is the Evil Liberal Media Covering UP the president's strategy for victory? Why do they keep citing the same parts of his speach where he says that it is ok to disagree with him, but that it is 'baseless' to raise questions about what he has done, and more importantly ask why our congress has been unwilling to finish it's work on the intelligence products that got us into ThatIraqiThingiePoo.

Or is that the real problem here. The 'victory' has nothing to do with say saving the lives of American GI's - it is simply more of the same old same old desperate plea by a guy who decided not to attend his generations 'greatest time of their lives' events in south east asia, so that folks will not think that he is as much a wimp as the rest of the americans who have voted with their feet to avoid active military service this time around - that has crippled the ability of the American Armed Forces to have enough boots on the ground to actually secure 'liberated zones' that they have swept.

Hum.... What is the President's Strategy For Victory?

Or is that the core problem here - there is no plan, there was no plan, and none of ThatIraqiThingiePoo has ever been about any of the alledged excuses for doing it....
yellow_elephant

The Same Is More Same When Different....

"We are working to better unify our political and military activities in the field," Ms. Rice said, citing the creation of three "provincial reconstruction teams," one in Mosul and two in other northern cities, Kirkuk and Hilla. In general, she said, the American objective was to "redefine the mission" toward more cooperation between military forces and the effort to rebuild the area.
[ cf pravda on the hudson ]
ok, so we are redefining the mission, does this mean that we are going to use new terms for the same old same old? Or is there going to be a redefinition of the mission, as in changing what has not worked for what will work?

You'd think that perchance there were some way to work out how getting American GI's Killed, Maimed and Wounded so that the draft dodging class could compensate for their lack of active duty time, were a gooder thing this time around than it had been the last time around. Or is that cutting too close to the BONE for the victims of chickenHawk angst to cope with...
yellow_elephant

Can Congress Overturn the Constitution?

It is simpler to support McCain's ammendment approach to DOD funding measure's as his intention is to simply establish that in america american law is the law of the land, even when the amerian people are not sure if we are more or less at war than ever before.

There is a cooler gambit in play:
The Senate voted Thursday to strip captured "enemy combatants" at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, of the principal legal tool given to them last year by the Supreme Court when it allowed them to challenge their detentions in United States courts.
...
If approved in its current form by both the Senate and the House, which has not yet considered the measure but where passage is considered likely, the law would nullify a June 2004 Supreme Court opinion that detainees at Guantánamo Bay had a right to challenge their detentions in court.
...
In its June 28, 2004, decision in Rasul v. Bush, the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 that the Guantánamo base was not outside the jurisdiction of American law as administration lawyers had argued and that the habeas corpus statute allowing prisoners to challenge their detentions was applicable.

[ cf American Pravda ]
I can appreciate that our friends over at the New York Times may not spend much time becoming conversant in american culture, heritage, and the rest of the things that they would like to destroy as a part of their WhateverOnWhomever as the Evil Liberal Media, but they might want to pause longer and think a bit about how american constitutional law works.

The Ruling of the Supreme's with regards to the writ of habeus corpus is not one of those majikal and mythical made up rights that was created out of whole cloth by the 'black robed tyrannts' - but is reasonably well grounded in american legal history.

So our friends in the Senate may also wish to pause a little longer and consider if they really want to openly attack the right of habeus corpus in their desperate efforts to support Torture. They might also want to work out if they really think that anything less than a constitutional ammendment banning the right of habeus corpus would actually overturn the US Supreme Court. I mean without one minor, and obscure constitutional ammendment, the Dred Scott Ruling would be the law of the land for a REAL OWNERSHIP society.

Update: forgot to include the scary thought part of the piece, the June 28th, 2004 ruling of the Supreme's that asserted that american law is american law in the areas that americans control - such as Gitmo - in spite of the efforts of the administration authorities to assert that some how majikally they could create their own lawless zone where anything could go...
yellow_elephant

Let Us Just ASK the ugly question

given the policies of the current american administration, including but not limited to the divine right to detain anyone indefinitely at the whim of the Greatest Military Leader EVER!, does the current american administration believe that there are any 'civilians' left?

Since all can be detained as possible enemies of the state, or 'non-lawful combatants', can there be any other distinction drawn than that there are those of us who are Veterans, and those who have not yet been vetted one way or the other by the state security apparatus. And if one is released from the state security apparatus, does one achieve the status of 'civilian' or merely the status of un-detained potential enemy of the state?