http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QICLyzsvtgI

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7542794.stm

On August 5th, 2008 at 9:54 am, Rusty said: This is shockingly stupid. The treaty applies to foreign nationals.

Just more people on this thread that have no idea what they are talking about. Just a knee-jerk reaction to the idea of a World Court and people who want to kill another human being.

In the future, if you don’t like a treaty, urge the president to back out of it formally. That’s the right way to go about something like this.

What’s shockingly stupid is your total ignorance of the Constitution. Again: Where is the amendment including ILLEGAL ALIENS? The Vienna treaty does not trump the Constitution. Whether you like it or not, a “world court” does not hold jurisdiction over an ILLEGAL ALIEN who gained entry into the U.S. and committed more crimes against American citizens. Don’t like it? Tell the south-of-the-border-governments who dump their human garbage across our border.

Assclown.

11 pm Texas time

The world court is a joke, and so is Mexico. This whole thing is more open borders bullcrap. If he had been an anchor baby 3 years prior this issue wouldn’t exist. He grew up in Texas, went to school in Texas and didn’t mention being a Mexican national till long after the fact.

I bet those two fathers are furious right now, and I’ll be praying they have the courage to restrain themselves from wanting to barge into the prison and see justice done right themselves.

I think a special actions squad needs to be sent in to finish this. And a nettoyeur to tidy up.

http://www.khou.com/topstories/stories/khou080805_tj_medllin_appeals_deathrow_ertman.19fa99c4.html

Unfortunately for him, he won’t be able to join us for a celebratory toast.

Indeed, by my watch he has about 5 minutes until the earthly justice called upon him by the citizens and courts of Texas and upheld by our Constitution and Supreme Court and he dies for his most evil of crimes.

HA HA HA

and ignatius…lucid now, but lets see if they stay that way.

Abstractmind beat me to it.

I’ll add though:

Let’s be honest here. This hand-wrangling over his consular visit is just a ploy by the anti-death penalty crowd. Are you seriously suggesting that the rest of the world will decide it will no longer treat Americans fairly because they didn’t give a loathsome POS like this his consular visit? Come on man. First off, a sizeable portion of the world wouldn’t treat American fairly in their courts under any circumstances. Secondly, out of the civilized nations, I don’t think either side’s government will loose sleep over whether or not a rapist and murderer’s case stuck to the exact letter of a treaty; treaties often being somewhat “flexible” anyway by their nature.

Good thing SCOTUS did the right thing this time. What’s up with them? First the DC gun thing, now this? Good for them.

It should be only moments now before aforementioned POS is permanently removed from existence… sweet.

On August 5th, 2008 at 2:06 pm, abstractmind said:

Wouldnt [a SCOTUS stay] be running backwards, based on what the SCOTUS ruled? Seems odd to me if they did something like that.

It certainly seems to me that it would. And yet, it is incredible that the SCOTUS has such a moment of lucidity in this case.

It would truly be remarkable to me if they ruled that the law did not support what they wanted just at the moment so they were going to forbid the execution to give lawmakers an opportunity to pass a law that they like. Such a thing, of course, would not really surprise me. It would merely ignite my violent rage.