Friday, July 09, 2004

Hussein's Constitutional Rights?

Attorney Curtis Doebbler is appealing to United States Supreme Court on behalf of Saddam Hussein, in an effort to declare his detention unconstitutional. Huh?? Unconstitutional because.....why? Well, what would you expect from someone who had to say this about the United States military:

"The world's most powerful army is an army of cowards. They are soldiers who are willing to risk the lives of innocent civilians to protect their own. I don't know about my fellow Americans, but I don't feel very much protected by such cowards."

Ah, you can just feel the hypocrisy now can't ya?

And I'm still having trouble with why Hussein's imprisonment is unconstitutional. Doebbler says it's because:

the detention of the 67-year-old violates multiple international laws and his constitutional Fifth Amendment right not to be deprived of "life, liberty or property without due process." ...

I would pointy out the millions of people who were deprived of their lives by this lunatic, not to mention their liberty or pursuit of happiness, but I digress. Hasn't Hussein already been determined to be guilty? Isn't that why we went to war in the first place?

Another conundrum brought about by this whole thing is the question as whether or not non-U.S. citizens are entitled the rights protected (not granted) by the constitution? In my not so humble I know that's not many of my esteemed readers want me to say, especially not those who follow the path of the Founding Father's Party or Objectivists or even some of my conservative friends. Many of you would argue that every man is born with the same rights, and should be entitled to the same protection of those rights as we are. And to a certain degree I agree with that. But if we went out he**-bent on protecting the rights of everyone all over the world, we would essentially have to go to war with the better part of the world. Not that we couldn't do that, but we it's just not practical. We have to realize that there are those who actually PREFER to live in a socialist or communist society. I have no idea why, but they do. In order to protect these rights, we have to offer a safe haven for those who value those same beliefs; not go around the world cramming them down the throats of other countries. But isn't that what we did in Iraq? Well, yes. But the difference is...American interests were directly involved with the liberation of Iraq, and the entire ME for that matter. Iraq had to be liberated in order to guarantee our protection, both militarily and to a lesser degree, economically.

Thanks to Emperor Misha, who does (as usual) a masterful job of fisking this article, which you can read in its' entirety here.