Comments on: Today’s Winners and Losers

By: Hot News » So Long At The Fair

Hot News » So Long At The Fair — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 09:30:32 +0000

[...] was based on a true story of an actual disappearance during the Exposition Unive Usefull Posts http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2009/04/20/todays-winners-and-losers/…Mockups 1.6 Release: Linking Mockups, and More! | The Balsamiq Blog…Oh, Dear, What Can The Matter [...]

By: Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:00:00 +0000

twv: “When I read the Bill of Rights, I see no indication that “it pertains to us citizens only.” Many of the provisions proscribe action by Congress, thus defending everyone’s right from Congress.

The idea that the rights apply only to citizens seems very contestable.”

this reasoning is buttressed by the federal scheme: the bill of rights was just meant to be superfluous, and to emphasize the federal government’s lack of powers, which was already inherent in the limited-and-enumerated powers scheme. The feds are given no power to (generally) violate (just any) citizens’ or non-citizens’ rights. So the Bill of Rights which reinforces this, of course also “applies” to non-citizens.

By: Harry Rossman

Harry Rossman — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:27:46 +0000

“…The idea that the rights apply only to citizens seems very contestable.”

Not as I view it. Government – any government – has powers: not rights. By my definition, a “right” is any human practice which is accepted by society as good and proper. Given no wrong doing, as viewed by society, a right will always (should always) win when there is an inadvertent direct conflict with law. Under all our government, the onus to protect those rights existing in and around the Bill of Rights, rests with government guided by it’s citizens.

And yes. I am well aware that anything can be shifted to be ‘wrong’.

By: twv

twv — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:00:45 +0000

When I read the Bill of Rights, I see no indication that “it pertains to us citizens only.” Many of the provisions proscribe action by Congress, thus defending everyone’s right from Congress.

The idea that the rights apply only to citizens seems very contestable.

By: Taking the Wrong Approach | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen

Taking the Wrong Approach | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:01:05 +0000

[...] envisioned doing things far worse to than the CIA ever dreamed. In this sense, then, and despite taking a fair amount of flack for it, the King of Hyperbole Robert Stacy McCain was (mostly) pretty well in-line with an awful lot of [...]

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:14:39 +0000

Even Benedict Arnold had rights…

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:14:13 +0000

A military tribunal is fine with me, so long as they receive fair and impartial treatment under whatever law they are tried.

By: ken mcdonald

ken mcdonald — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:10:33 +0000

Although i may not agree with mccain, i must say:
the bill of rights pertains to us citizens only.
that is rhe way it was written.

the gitmo/guantanimo prisoners are not part of a formal army for the most part, so the geneva convention doesnt apply.

the only category left, to my knowledge is spies and sabateurs, which gives much leeway in how to deal with them.