It doesn't matter, because when George Bush said he was going to rebuild New Orleans no matter what it costs, he didn't really mean it.

Spoken like a true Stalinist.

You want to know how this guy was tortured? Read the Gulag Archipeligo by Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Bush and Cheney took their cues directly out of Stalin's playbook: sleep deprivation, cramped quarters, stress positions ... the Soviets had it down to a system and Bush/Cheney did it all. Waterboarding they took from the Nazis and the Khmer Rouge. Now, the self-described defenders of "American values" cheer on such Stalinist practices and turn their anger toward trial by jury. What a nation of cowards we've become when this type of barbarity can even be debated in America. I'm with Lincoln, who said: "military necessity does not admit of cruelty."

Well ... since Dachau is in Germany, the US Constitution does not apply there. Germany can prohibit whatever it wants. Maybe, if Germany were more like the US -- with a Constitution that protected minority religions from the tyrrany of the majority -- a place like Dachau might have remained a sleepy German town instead of a monument to human barbarity. As far as a Japanese cultural center at Pearl Harbor -- for all I know there might just be one there already. I've been to Pearl Harbor, and it's full of Japanes tourists snapping photos and eating ice cream. Two blocks from my office is a monument to Japanese American soldiers who died fighting fascism in WWII. That's the beauty of America and why we've always been different from...

The debate over the muslim center two blocks from Ground Zero has nothing to do with tolerance. It has to do with whether the government can prevent a religious group from building a place of worship anywhere in America simply because a bunch of people don't like it. If the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, then the answer has to be no. If you don't like that, then you probably don't belong in America. There are all kinds of countries that don't tolerate minority or unpopular religious expression. France, for example, has a real problem with Islam. Freedom isn't free. Get it? That means if you want to live in a free country, you sometimes have to deal with people, ideas, religions, activities you don't really like. ...

You have to be careful of Ann Coulter's "legal reasoning" The basis for birthright citizenship did not just spring out of Justice Brennan's head in 1982. It goes back to 1868, when the US Supreme Court held in the Wong Kim Ark case that a person born in the US to Chinese parents was a US citizen under the terms of the 14th Amendment. In that case, the Court held that there were only two classes of people excluded from birthright citizenship: (1) children of diplomats and (2) children of enemy invaders occupying the country. What Justice Brennan said is that having illegal immigrant parents doesn't fall into either of those two categories -- and, therefore, it's irrelevant for determining birthright citizenship under the 14th...

As soon as I saw the title of this article, I knew it would be a worthwhile read. Not for the contents of the article, of course. But for the comments! Oh how I love to see the compassion of the American conservative on display -- the family values, the respect for the constitution, the christian charity! Heh heh heh .... The parents are criminals, so stick it to the kids! If they already have US citizenship -- revoke it! The constitution says you're a citizen if you're born here -- so what! You troglodytes are always good for a laugh. Thanks for making my day!

Funny isn't it? On a battlefield, you can just shoot people. But when you take a person and lock him up in a cell, you eventually have to give him a trial.
I know that bugs you flag-waving America-haters, but let me ask you this:
What if President Obama decided that people who want to put people in prison for life without trials were actually trying to overthrow the America system of government? What if he then instructed troops to come to tea party rallies and round these America-haters as nothing more than a bunch of terrorists? (After all, wasn't that guy who flew his plane into the IRS building a tea-partier at heart? Wasn't Timothy McVeigh a fellow-traveller?)
What if Obama then decided to ship these people off to...

You don't hate America?
Hmmm...
Are you saying accused terrorists deserve trials? Because that's not what I hear from the Cheneys and the Coulters and the Malkins in this country.
What I hear from you people is that America needs to lock people up for life.
Without trials.
Without access to lawyers.
What I hear from the Glen Becks and the Rush Limbaughs is that America needs to keep on torturing people in order to be safe.
My point is this:
In America everyone -- and that means EVERYONE -- is innocent until proven guilty. We can't just declare war on "terror" and then start locking people up forever.
Where does that end? Who's to say you won't be next?
But that's what Ann Coulter believes. ...

Oh yeah -- you're right. Ann Coulter and Liz Cheney and the rest of the people talking about "The Al Quaeda Seven" are just talking about small-time personnel matters in the Justice Department. This has nothing to do with trying to link lawyers defending clients to Bin Laden. How could I be so blind as not to see the reasonableness of your position?
Even Ken Starr thinks you guys are whacked out on this one. Keep it up. The Ann Coulter Anti-America crowd is always good for a laugh.