Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (24077)	7/14/2006 2:00:22 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541786

Indeed, and what SCOTUS did in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld was slap the people down. I hardly think, thank heavens, that we've reached the point at which The National Review speaks for the people.

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (24077)	7/14/2006 2:17:12 PM
From: Paul Kern	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541786

The question is: What are the possible charge against Hamdan? 1) Driving? 2) Maybe driving without a license? 3) Forgetting to put his registration in the glove box or driving an unregistered vehicle? 4) Driving without insurance? 5) Driving under the influence of too much heavily sugared tea? As I recall he was Bin Laden's driver. Can we indict Skilling and Lay's drivers?