wrote in message ...
In article , Larry Smith says...


"pacplyer" wrote in message
. com...
Larry, Larry, Larry,

While I hate to agree with a guy who claims to have hardware in lunar
and martian orbit, for example, who always posts in invisible
ink,)

It's Acme's Disappearing Reappearing ink, thank you. And the lunar stuff
I
designed isn't in orbit, it's on the surface. At least it's intact,
unlike
Larry's brain.

BTW, did you and BWB go on vacation together? He stopped posting on Sept
28,
you disappeared on Sept 29th. Then you started posting again with the new
return address on Dec 19th, he came back on Dec 21. Your IP shows you're
in the
Direcway Southwest spot beam that covers Las Vegas. And you two are the
only
ones here that don't like Sydney. Are you two neighbors or something?


And while a lot of the Patriot Act alarms me. It seems to me Larry,
there was plenty of precedence

Are you talking about "precedents"? No the Japanese internment was not
precedent and every legal scholar in the country, including the courts,
agrees that THAT was illegal and violated core mandates of the United
States
Constitution.

It was really a hate reaction after Pearl Harbor.


And what do the legal scholars say about Peter Burger and Herbert Haupt?
American citizens, arrested on American soil, not having committed any
crime on
American soil, one executed and the other (who cooperated, and turned
himself
and his companions in) given 30 years by a military tribunal without
independent
legal representation?

The Supreme Court upheld it in Ex parte Quirin. Or don't you like "that"
SC?
And the SC upheld Japanese internment in Korematsu v. Mott. Every legal
scholar
may not like it, it may be ugly law, but neither one was ever overturned.

The law is what the SC says it is. That's our system. If the SC says
that
absolutely every aspect of our lives can be regulated by the Federal
Government
under the commerce clause, it is, as it has been for the last 70 years
(though
it looks like the 9th Circus is trying to put some limits on that. Now I
can
smoke weed and build a machine gun in the privacy of my own beadroom!).

If the SC says there's a constitutional right to sodomy, or to unequal
treatment
by the government on the basis of race, there is. If the SC says you have
to
put underwear on your head, shove pencils up your nose and say "wabbel" -
well,
then you're all set, Larry.

Your law, like your tech, is junk, nameless. I'll do us up a little memo of
law showing how In re Quirin is not apt, although Bush is trying to rely on
it. I have already reported that the federal courts are closing in on Bush
and Ashcroft.

You must have slept through the last 20 years, triple-ass. Kinda like a
20th century Rip Van Winkle.