Habeus corpus, according to the constitution, can only be suspended in case of invasion or rebellion. That implies that it only exists under US sovereignty. I really wonder about this decision and its applicability overseas. Does every US base outside the country fall under habeus corpus jurisdiction? What about every ship or flagged vessel? Are the rules different in another country? E.g. if the army takes a prisoner from enemy or another country's territory to a US base, do they move from an area without habeus corpus to one with it? That will certainly result in us taking fewer prisoners.

This decision leaves more questions than answers.

King,

Technical difficulties?!?! ARRGH! After the first 20 minutes of the second half sucked, we miss the match of the tournament. I can't believe it. ESPN better replay the whole damn thing tonight.

The German broadcast apparently went on by tapping into the local Swiss one, which was unaffected. I understand that these things are complicated and it was way more important to the Germans than ESPN, but the game is still going on. Instead of pointing the camera at the fans in the fan zone, couldn't they have pointed it at the TV the #$$@#%^@!# fans were watching!!!!

However, what's done is done. But if they don't rebroadcast the game (ESPN often does a replay in the middle of the night) in its entirety, with the missing portions put back in, then the four-letter truly doesn't give a crap about their fans.

You know, the fun part about Jesse Helms' death is the anticipation. The left is now crowing and "speaking ill of the dead" in violation of the latin "nil nisi bonum". It is nerve-wracking to have to wait until either Ted Kennedy or Robert Byrd dies, and the right does the same to them, and the left screams "how dare they!"

Read a couple of the Helms' obits on Townhall.com, and see, just for a moment, from the other side. Then realize we'll go through the whole thing again in a couple of years, but on the other side. Judge the reactions for yourself.

Eeek, where's the edit key? I didn't mean a couple of years literally, but more along the lines of someday soon.

It is disingenuous to examine this case as though it is an anomaly, existing in a vacuum. Of course this case is about more; the increasing number and influence of serious, conservative muslims in France. It's easy to scoff at the french citizens, who see their society changing decade by decade, and becoming less familiar.

Tolerance education! Multiculturalism! Diversity! Progress!

Is it really progress to accept people who live by a seventh century code (actually even more hideous, the burqa is nowhere mentioned in the Koran)? Who cannot even accept the existence of certain types of people (atheists, pagans, homosexuals)? Who see Christians and Jews as only dhimmi, or worse, slaves?

In a vacuum, this case is unfair to a prospective french citizen. In this world, the one we live in, it is an attempt by a small segment of a two thousand year old culture to preserve itself.

King, I have an objection to NBC's coverage and the announcers. They overshare; a little TMI. I was watching the trap shooting on Sunday and they shared an anecdote about Michael Diamond from Australia, who, the announcers announced, apparently missed some training before the last Olympics because his firearms license was suspended. The announcers went on to say it was because of allegations from his then-girlfriend who accused him of hitting her. The color commentator then stated (paraphrasing), I know Mike and he wouldn't do that. My jaw was on the floor.

What does this have to do with the sport? Talk about the history, talk about rivalries, talk about anything else but the personal lives of the Olympians, especially when they are sordid (ahem, Italian swimmers). Just let the damn performance speak for itself, and let the scandal sheets cover the scandals.

I read a quote one time, "if sheer righteous fury could accomplish anything worthwhile, wolverines would long ago have inherited the earth." Just relax and focus on constructive activities and try to remember that people on the other side think the same things about the democratic convention.

You could have mined the border to keep us out, but you banned anti-personnel landmines with the Ottawa treaty. You can still get out of it until the fighting starts, unless it starts less than 6 months before the fighting. We can use them against you of course, because we didn't sign that ridiculous treaty.

Why are we like the Nazis? Do we support plans to conquer you and the rest of the world? If you can't tell the difference between America now and Germany in 1932, you've got bigger problems than your neighbors.

I appreciate the author’s forays into these murky waters. My opinion is that people, in movies, TV, or real life, who use words like midget, retard, etc., are going to run into problems. They should take a lesson from a classic Salon article “How to say you’re sorry”.

http://archive.salon.com/people/feature/2001/08/23/sorry_if/

e.g. "I'm sorry for what I said" is better than "I'm sorry if you took what I said the wrong way."

That said, I am still against setting certain words off limits to protect listeners from the awful things other people say. Is it so horrible to listen to something that offends you? Or insults you or those you love? It’s only words. Amazingly enough, there’s this thing you can do that will stop the experience right there, it’s called walking away. There’s also argument, discussion, even pure reason if you should choose to engage in a talk with an “offensive” person.