Traitors

catocom

catocom

Well-Known Member
These are the people on the high court that are (effectively) in support for funding both sides of the war...

Justice Stephen Breyer took the unusual step of reading his dissent aloud in the courtroom. Breyer said he rejects the majority's conclusion "that the Constitution permits the government to prosecute the plaintiffs criminally" for providing instruction and advice about the terror groups' lawful political objectives. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor joined the dissent.
Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/2...g-material-support-terrorism/?test=latestnews
 
Terrorist sympathizers?

Everyone knows a wise Latina makes better decisions than any old White guy!
 
"that the Constitution permits the government to prosecute the plaintiffs criminally" for providing instruction and advice about the terror groups' lawful political objectives"

so, cato, what exactly does this mean?
 
from a quick look on google, it looks like you are referring to "international" law.
 
the language in what you posted is not very clear. but apparently it is quite clear if you know which some of us and them you are on.
 
2minkey said:
the language in what you posted is not very clear. but apparently it is quite clear if you know which some of us and them you are on.
Click to expand...

we had better know.
That's part of what the cia is supposed to be helping figure out.
 
the CIA is supposed to be watching over the legal opinions of supreme court justices as to what kind of linkages to groups nominally identified as terrorist should be prosecutable?

so, if were to provide economic development advice to a lebanese shi'a civic organization that has a few members that at some time sympathized with hizballah, am i fucked? are they the enemy? what if helping them develop will actually reduce the level of desperation and likelihood of 'angry young men' being successfully recruited into terrorist groups? you think palestinians would be so mad if they actually had anything at all resembling real economic opportunity? let's not think about where any of this goes. let's just choose sides and pretend we're luke skywalker.
 
2minkey said:
the CIA is supposed to be watching over the legal opinions of supreme court justices as to what kind of linkages to groups nominally identified as terrorist should be prosecutable?

...
Click to expand...

no, simply to provide intel, maybe possible solutions, and carry out directives...

2nd part doesn't apply in this part.
 
Why is it so many "angry young men" come with Ivy league educations and/or high-brow backgrounds?

The CIA doesn't do domestic.
 
by law.

I put nothing past government by there is no need...they have the FBI & the BATF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top