1,410
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 462:
Line 462: + + + + + +
Gonzales statement is not controversial
"''Mr. Right, It Turns Out, Does Not...''". Just wanted you to know I came across that, and got a chuckle out of it. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 19:48, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
"''Mr. Right, It Turns Out, Does Not...''". Just wanted you to know I came across that, and got a chuckle out of it. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 19:48, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
== Gonzales statement is not controversial ==
Hello. Regarding [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Habeas_corpus&diff=171451&oldid=171414 this]...I am the person who added that section title. However, upon reflection, I agree, that Gonzales's statement is not controversial. The implication is controversial to me, and probabably many others on the left and the right, but he is technically correct.
Habeas Corpus was such an important individual "right" (really, specified as ''privilege'' in the constitution) that it is one of the few individual rights/privileges mentioned in the Constitution. Personally, as a conservative who believes in the rule of law, I ''do'' think the Gonzales's implication is controversial, but this is my opinion, and you were right to revert it. (Mind you, I am not one to think that Habeas Corpus applies to enemy combatants held in Cuba--rather, I do fear the day they take away the right to petition for habeas corpus of U.S. citizens held by U.S. officials)...Could you imagine if Hillary decides to make use of or expand upon Gonzales's statements? [[User:HeartOfGold|<big>HG</big><sub><small>HeartOfGold</small></sub>]] [[User_talk:HeartOfGold|<sup><small>talk</small></sup>]] 23:07, 21 May 2007 (EDT)