Comments on: Levin and McCarthy on Supremes directing Appeals Court to reconsider torture suit http://marklevinfan.com/2008/12/15/levin-and-mccarthy-on-supremes-directing-appeals-court-to-reconsider-torture-suit/ Unofficial fan website for the Great One, Mark Levin! Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:14:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: task http://marklevinfan.com/2008/12/15/levin-and-mccarthy-on-supremes-directing-appeals-court-to-reconsider-torture-suit/comment-page-1/#comment-43738 task Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:20:19 +0000 http://marklevinfan.com/?p=3999#comment-43738 After several centuries this Supreme Court finally figured out what every previous Supreme Court never discovered. This Court understands the Constitution better than what the originators actually understood when they wrote what they wrote; these Supreme leftists are mind readers who don’t even need to refer to the written document. Just when we thought that Hillary Clinton had communication with Eleanor Roosevelt we need to assume that some of the present Court must have psychic perceptional powers that span centuries since they communicate with the Founding Fathers. If the Executive Branch, by executive order, or by some invented authority overstepped their Constitutional limitations and invaded the space of the judiciary, just the way the judiciary invades their space, they would rightly be castigated; and yet the opposite can be done by the Supremes, without consequence or even notice, because they seem to possess the inviolable righteousness of Gods. There is no recourse from their decrees, there is no way out, there is no workaround. The Romans said, “who watches the Watchers?” Moreover who can stop these watchers? Why would any government founders, let alone our own, develop a system that would undermine itself, and place its’ constituents at risk? Imagine a doctor that has taken an oath to cure, and to do no harm, actually, deliberately use that oath to disregard the health of his wards? The freedom, liberty and ability to pursue happiness cannot automatically be provided, by our Constitution, via domestic courts, to all World inhabitants, when they are not citizens, not on our soil and when they are caught in acts pertaining to our demise. Our own military does not posses that advantage. Only recently have courts leaned that way and yet there is sound, long-standing precedent to prevent such overreaching. The safety and security of the US and its citizens is the domain of the Executive and Legislative branches and to that extent the one branch that has the least authority to be involved with such activity is the Judicial. With this present crew you might as well consider military courts and tribunals for foreign, non-uniformed combatants as vestigial and useless. After the 1993 WTC attack I suspected that we would be hit again so 911 did not surprise me. The reason I knew was because we never really fought a war. The enemy was fighting a war of terror and we responded using the courts as our battlefield while using ineffectual laws and statutes as our weapons; the enemy took no casualties, hence we had 911. We are now unlearning the lessons that we learned from the 911 tragedies. We had a good start but now appear to be shifting into neutral. Does Obama and his nominees throw us into reverse? There will never be a defense as good as an offence and so this war will never be won in the courts. The only way we seem to get it right is after we endure civilian casualties and to that extent our own legal system and media has become the preferred weapon of the enemy. It is not legislators and executives that need sons and daughters in harms way… it is the judges. After 1993 I looked at the future and I didn’t like what I saw. Considering what our enemies would like to do to us I again don’t have a very good feeling; the last thing we need as a solution is a Supreme Court that has about as much understanding of how to run a war as they do of the Constitution that clearly tells them not to get involved. After several centuries this Supreme Court finally figured out what every previous Supreme Court never discovered. This Court understands the Constitution better than what the originators actually understood when they wrote what they wrote; these Supreme leftists are mind readers who don’t even need to refer to the written document. Just when we thought that Hillary Clinton had communication with Eleanor Roosevelt we need to assume that some of the present Court must have psychic perceptional powers that span centuries since they communicate with the Founding Fathers.

If the Executive Branch, by executive order, or by some invented authority overstepped their Constitutional limitations and invaded the space of the judiciary, just the way the judiciary invades their space, they would rightly be castigated; and yet the opposite can be done by the Supremes, without consequence or even notice, because they seem to possess the inviolable righteousness of Gods. There is no recourse from their decrees, there is no way out, there is no workaround. The Romans said, “who watches the Watchers?” Moreover who can stop these watchers?

Why would any government founders, let alone our own, develop a system that would undermine itself, and place its’ constituents at risk? Imagine a doctor that has taken an oath to cure, and to do no harm, actually, deliberately use that oath to disregard the health of his wards? The freedom, liberty and ability to pursue happiness cannot automatically be provided, by our Constitution, via domestic courts, to all World inhabitants, when they are not citizens, not on our soil and when they are caught in acts pertaining to our demise. Our own military does not posses that advantage. Only recently have courts leaned that way and yet there is sound, long-standing precedent to prevent such overreaching.

The safety and security of the US and its citizens is the domain of the Executive and Legislative branches and to that extent the one branch that has the least authority to be involved with such activity is the Judicial. With this present crew you might as well consider military courts and tribunals for foreign, non-uniformed combatants as vestigial and useless.

After the 1993 WTC attack I suspected that we would be hit again so 911 did not surprise me. The reason I knew was because we never really fought a war. The enemy was fighting a war of terror and we responded using the courts as our battlefield while using ineffectual laws and statutes as our weapons; the enemy took no casualties, hence we had 911. We are now unlearning the lessons that we learned from the 911 tragedies. We had a good start but now appear to be shifting into neutral. Does Obama and his nominees throw us into reverse?

There will never be a defense as good as an offence and so this war will never be won in the courts. The only way we seem to get it right is after we endure civilian casualties and to that extent our own legal system and media has become the preferred weapon of the enemy. It is not legislators and executives that need sons and daughters in harms way… it is the judges.

After 1993 I looked at the future and I didn’t like what I saw. Considering what our enemies would like to do to us I again don’t have a very good feeling; the last thing we need as a solution is a Supreme Court that has about as much understanding of how to run a war as they do of the Constitution that clearly tells them not to get involved.

]]>