Not at all Jet, as we've discussed, I'd cut your Balls off if I thought I could get information from you that would save American Lives. I didn't let my Education make me an effeminate Liberal like yours did..but that IS the price of an affirmative action education.

Now jet, why won't you acknowledge Bush's House was BUILT Eco-Friendly, BEFORE Gore ever even started to babble his nonsense?

__________________
There are those, I know, who will say that the liberation of humanity, the freedom of man and mind, is nothing but a dream. They are right. It is the American dream.
~Archibald MacLeish

I'm sure Uncle Fidel will be extremely pleased to find out that Guantanmo Bay isn't U.S. territory. Perhaps we should start flying the Cuban flag above the Stars and Stripes there, in recognition of this surprising little factoid.

Here is the real per curium definition: The fucking justices were too chickshit to sign their names to their decision, because it was the most "political" decision since Dread Scott.

Of course, we all know that Sandra Douch O'Conner was the flip-floper who gave the dickheads a majority, which SHE LATER REGRETTED.

Did you hear the oral argument when Waxman told Roberts and Scalia about the Terms and Conditions of the Gitmo Lease Agreement? They got a quite as a mouse.

Roberts and Scalia apparently get their legal advice for Lush Rimbaugh, and never read the briefs that had a copy of the Gitmo Lease Agreement with Cuba.

__________________

Flanders

The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

You logic is very flawed. What American companies do or their status is irrelevant. A company is not a sovereign state.

Why would it matter if the property (Embassy or Gitmo) was provided under a lease or free? That is no more important than if there is dirt or cement under the building.

What is important is the AGREEMENT or CONTRACT. Embassies have defined International status as Diplomatic Missions, with long understood Rights and Responsibilities (See below).

In the case of Gitmo, the sovereign power is the USA, by CONTRACT. No 6th grade rewording is going to change the facts. I'm sure you think Justices and Lawyers change the meaning of words daily, but it is actually your ignorance of the meanings of historical precedence is what keeps you from understanding the obvious.


Diplomatic mission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
...
Extraterritoriality
Under international law, diplomatic missions enjoy an extraterritorial status and thus, although remaining part of the host country's territory, they are exempt from local law and in almost all respects treated as being part of the territory of the home country. They are also only required to pay taxes equal to their respective countries' guidelines.

As the host country may not enter the representing country's embassy without permission, embassies are sometimes used by refugees escaping from either the host country or a third country. For example, North Korean nationals, who would be arrested and deported from China upon discovery, have sought sanctuary at various third-country embassies in China. Once inside the embassy, diplomatic channels can be used to solve the issue and send the refugees to another country. Notable violations of embassy extraterritoriality include the Iran hostage crisis (1979–1981), the Japanese embassy hostage crisis which took place in Lima, Peru 1996, the 2006 embassy burnings in Iran, Lebanon and Syria of Danish, Norwegian and Chilean embassies. ...

To toxic: Either you’re trying to be clever or you’re another Lefty whose reading comprehension skills leave much to be desired. I suspect that it is the latter.

You cited the Wikipedia definition on the status of embassies without mentioning the status of enemy combatants who kill corporate employees on leased land in a foreign country. The court obviously gave habeas corpus to enemy soldiers everywhere. That was my point in asking the question. In other words, every terrorist is a criminal entitled to a trial in a civilian court. That is the judgment Democrat traitors have been after for five years. Bin Laden himself would go into a criminal court were he captured.

Following the High Court’s logic, enemy combatants killing Americans within the confines of an American embassy would also be entitled to a trial in a criminal court. Not to put too fine a point on it, the Boumediene v. Bush decision says that the International community must approve of every action taken by the American judicial system. American traitors have been working toward their primary objective for many decades. Now they have it thanks to five treasonous lawyers who should be impeached at the very least.

And since you can't comprehend what I write, don't presume to tell me what I think.

__________________

Flanders

The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

Well it is difficult to have a war when no STATE is involve.

Of course, moron Republicans have been losing wars to Nouns for sometime now ... like Drugs, Al Queda, Detainees, Science, Evolution, Art, ...

Yet, you still are trying to claim that "something has changed", but NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

Surely, you know by now that Writ of HC was provided to WWII Japenese, Viet Cong civilians in Vietnam, Brits in the Revolution, US Sailors by Brits (Common Law Precedence), etc.

So I guess your whining is for some poor moron here that doesn't know the truth and will listen to your crap.

__________________

Flanders

The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer