If All Rights Are Subject To Laws and Regulation, hmmm..........................

Great arguement and legal logic. However, the people who need to pay attention would just laugh it off. This is because they are not sincere in the least.

Despite the fact that there are people who think we all should be regulated, the fact remains that Rights are not subject to regulation. Enemy combatants have no rights under our Constitution, and that Supreme Court decision is in error. Non- citizens have no rights under our Constitution either.

Hello Gewcew, Yup, Red's absolutely 'spot on'! You have presented a bullet-proof legal argument here. Too bad it wasn't hammered home in front of the High Court! Situational adaptation has been a reality since our nation's founding. Situational adaptation was employed in our first extra-territorial war against the Barbary Pirates. It was employed when Lincoln temporarily rescinded Habeas Corpus. And, it was feverishly employed under FDR's administration. Incidentally, Lincoln's rescindment of Habeas Corpus was very much like what we are facing now, since the Supreme Court handed down its ruling on Habeas Corpus rights for enemy combatants. It is just as impossible today for our military personnel to get an arrest warrant, and then 'arrest' someone on the battlefield. Then, read them their rights, and secure the crime scene, as it was during the Civil War. Granting those enemy combatants legal rights positions every one of the charges filed against them to have to be thrown out of court, unless the arresting military member can prove the merits of the charges. So, the Supreme Court has, in essence, nullified our military. How can our Military men & women be serving overseas if they have to testify in a U.S.courtroom? It would seem that the Supreme Court believes our men and women in uniform have the time and opportunity to provide depositions, and have them notarized while deployed during a time of war. Moreover, the decision contraindicates the realities of heated moment of the battle, where survival is the prime directive. Instead of focusing on how to stay alive, our soldiers will have to be thinking about the details of the 'crime scene', and worrying about the 'chain of evidence'. The High Court's rulings about FISA is equally subversive of the role and duties of the U.S. Military and intelligence services. It spits in the face of time-critical decision-making, and ignores the reality that people aren't listening to those calls -- a computer is! Human ears are only called to task when the computer picks up relevant key words. Oh, and I love your application of quotation marks around Constitutional Law "professor". I have to wonder how many might miss that poignant reminder?

So... what are you getting at?

I think that it is the responsibility of the newspaper to tell all that they have, and to try to find more. The issue here is that if it hadn't been leaked, it wouldn't have happened. So who is at fault?