Well, isn't this a knee to the happy sack of all those Canadian "law-and-order" conservatives:
On Thursday, the [U.S. Supreme Court] turned back the most recent effort to subvert justice with a stirring defense of habeas corpus, the right of anyone being held by the government to challenge his confinement before a judge.
The court ruled that the detainees being held in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, have that cherished right, and that the process for them to challenge their confinement is inadequate. It was a very good day for people who value freedom and abhor Mr. Bush’s attempts to turn Guantánamo Bay into a constitutional-rights-free zone.
Yeah, that's going to make life a little inconvenient for a number of Blogging Tories, whose mantra for months now has been, "We can't interfere, it's being handled properly, it's working its way through the American legal system and it would be grossly inappropriate to try to intervene now. The legal system is taking care of it the way it should."
Except that, of course, that position is now so much complete clap-trap, given that the U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that the way things are being run at Gitmo are most assuredly not the way the legal system should be taking care of it, which puts all of those staunch law-and-order groupies in a bit of a bind, doesn't it?
Conservative MP Deepak Obhrai deflected questions about the U.S. court decision, saying the government would "not comment on the judicial process of another country."
But Obhrai, the parliamentary secretary to the foreign affairs minister, did stray from the government's previous media lines to raise the issue of international legal standards and human rights.
"The government of Canada strongly believes that the fight against terrorism must be carried out in compliance with international law including the established standard of human rights and due process," he said.
Yeaaahhhh, and it's going to be a bit uncomfortable trying to fake respect for international law if you don't acknowledge the clear decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, don't you think?
I can't wait for Canada's shrieking, pants-wetting neo-cons to start accusing those terrorist-loving Supreme Court Justices of treason. You know it's coming. Oh, yeah ... it's coming.
Canada's Blogging Tories: They've got principles. And if those principles become inconvenient, well, they've got others.
AFTERSNARK: It's amusing that that rancid little weasel Obhrai has the nerve to take the position that the government will "not comment on the judicial process of another country," given that that's all they've been doing for months. As in, as long as they could make the case that the American legal system was doing its job, the Cons had no problem commenting that they were happy as pigs in shit about proceedings at Gitmo, and they were satisfied that Khadr's rights were being protected, and yadda yadda yadda everything was just ducky. Truth be told, you couldn't shut them the fuck up about how pleased they were with "the judicial process of another country."
But now that their little fantasy world has been bitch-slapped unconscious, suddenly, it's not appropriate to comment. Well, isn't that special? And isn't that convenient? And, depressingly, isn't it annoying that they're going to get away with it? Who's going to call them on it? The Liberals? That'll be the day.
P.S. My contempt for the Libs these days runs so deep that, well, if you want to know how I truly feel, think "Wullerton." Yeah, like that.