Court upholds detention without trial for U.S. Citizens – Judge Says 5th Amendment is “so 20th Century”

prison cellOh goodie. A judge has determined that a Jose Padilla doesn’t have a right to a trial because he’s an enemy combatant.

So, riddle me this, Federal Court of Appeals. We live in a society that supposedly has this quant maxim of law “innocent until proven guilty”. You have thus made the determination that he is an enemy of the state, and is thus guilty of treason against the USA. However, if guilt of a Citizen can only be determined by a 12 member jury of his or her peers, then we have a good ole fashion catch 22 don’t we.

Are you telling me you wont’ give the man a trial because he’s guilty? Well hello fuck-tard, then try him and make it official. We have no problem putting OJ on the stand, or Clinton on the stand, or Michael Jackson on the stand… and yet we are scared of this one person with no power, fame, or money? Give me a break. Ya know he’s innocent, and you don’t want a media explosion in your face.

Doesn’t it make you feel all warm inside, that you too can be held without trial? Whatever happened to “due process of law?” You’re life is in the hands of a judge that was probably appointed by the same branch of government that is prosecuting you. Well my my my, that separation of powers idea doesn’t seem to be working anymore.

4 Comments
  1. Nice to have all 3 branches under 1 controlling party isn’t it!? The sad thing though… the other “major” party often has representatives that go along with the current controlling group. So… which of those 2 “major” parties is different!?

    Turn to your favorite network news station… get your own twisted fix for the day. There is no choice, you are insignificant, so why care!?

    Do it for your insignificant and expendable little brats! ;-)

  2. LOL.

    Yeah, gotta love the myth that there is a lick of difference between the republicans and democrats. The democrats could’ve had a field day pointing out all the lies and deceptions. Instead, they sit back and do nothing. There might as well only be one major party right now.

    In fact, that would be better for libertarians, as people would stop jumping back and forth from being a republican to a democrat and vice versa.

    If only people knew…

  3. This is why the status quo must be maintained at all costs. Having more than 2 parties at the debates or having merely 1 party to choose from would open too many peoples eyes to the controls already in place.

  4. Perhaps time for refreshers:
    The Libertarian Party had a Presidential Candidate on the ballot in 48 states yet was denied access to the debates. A real chance of winning, yet restricted from providing a real alternative for Americans. Network media upheld this ruling, and basically ignored truly viable candidates.

    More info:
    http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/debates.html

    http://opendebates.org/theissue/strengthenmajorparties.html

    http://opendebates.org/theissue/candidatecontrol.html

%d bloggers like this: