"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in message
...


Daniel Mahoney wrote:
On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:15:23 -0500, CatNipped wrote:

This case hits rather close to home and I was wondering if it were
possible for us to discuss this rationally. I can sort of see both
sides of the issue.

I can too, kind of. I used to support the death penalty in cases of
extreme wanton violence, and this would qualify. In recent years, though,
I've come to rethink that and now believe that no human being has the
right to determine the life or death of another.

However, I think the biggest point here is the one make by Senator Ellis.
The US cannot thumb it's nose at the rest of the world with impunity. If
the US chooses to ignore the findings of the World Court, then other
countries would be justified in ignoring World Court findings regarding
US citizens. To assert that we need not be concerned with the findings of
extra-territorial legislative bodies is to make those same bodies unable
to protect US citizens.

Besides, regardless of whether the killer informed the cops that he was a
Mexican national at the time of his arrest, that does have a bearing and
he was entitled to speak with a Mexican consular officer. That warrants
at the least a retrial. Ignoring the court that hears Geneva Convention
cases? The very thought
makes me shudder.

I thought we fought a civil war to determine whether individual states
could ignore national laws? I get the impression Texas (and Arizona)
think the South won?

Actually, according to our Constitution, state laws *should* supersede
Federal law in all but cases involving crossing state lines. Don't let
anybody kid you, the Civil war was about the north not getting its grubby
hands on taxes generated by cotton plantations (as all wars throughout
history, no matter the lip service paid to ideological beliefs, it is
*always* about money).

Nose Kisses,

CatNipped