>>>>http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e1de1572-1089-11db-8eec-0000779e2340.html
>>>
>>>Even nicer, the ruling is based on the premise that there's no such thing as I-am-above-the-law-I'm-a-super-duper-commander-in-chief. Which then tears down the whole house of cards (NSA eavesdropping, phone calls datamining, SWIFT intrusion etc etc).
>>>
>>
>>It says nothing about any of those. You are reading way too much into the decision.
>
>Not I. Don't shoot the messenger. I've read this in someone's comment on DailyKos. IOW...

Shocking...

>stuffing the supreme court with loyal guys doesn't necessarily mean they're loyal to you. They may be loyal to the law and constitution first. Tough.

Ummm, Bush only picked nominated one of the justices who ruled on this. Hardly a "stuffing". Besides, Bush has gone further than the Court suggested.

"It bears emphasizing that Hamdan does not challenge, and we do not today address, the Government’s power to detain him for the duration of active hostilities in order to prevent such harm." This defends the administration's legal authority to detain the prisoners without trial for the length of the war.

>
>>You do realize that we are at war and that information is the primary weapon, do you not?
>
>I do, just not sure where's the business end of this weapon aimed. I just assume, just in case, that whatever I say or write anywhere may be collected, analysed and stored somewhere.
>

How would you suggest we follow our enemies movements? Phone records, bank transactions, internet traffic all seem reasonable to me. Especially considering the congressional oversight being applied. Reviews ever couple weeks, weekly intelligence briefings, judicial oversight. These have all been involved since day one, which by the way is why no legal challenge will hold up.

Personally I admit that it is creepy the amount of survailence we are under, but that's the world we live in today. Cameras on every corner and dangerous people using the same institutions we rely on for illicit means. As I repeatedly say, we have choices. If you don't want to be tracked then take all of your money in cash, stuff it in a sack, move to the middle of Montana in a shack with a well and no electricity and raise chickens. That way you'll be sure that the only thing Uncle Sam knows about you is whether you've paid your taxes or not.

>>>Good thing in that article that you mention is that it also has a link to the text of the Geneva Convention: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm
>>>Recommended reading from article 49 and onwards - that's what I meant with Bremmer's ruling by edicts, while doing nothing to fulfill the obligations of the occupying force.
>>
>>You're going to have to be specific here. I don't have time to go through them article by article.
>
>49 to about 60. Not much.

What specifically did Bremer's authority not do?