The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008



Obama, McCain Respond to Guantanamo Bay Ruling

By Michael D. Shear
The presidential candidates reacted to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision today to grant terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay access to the federal courts.

Republican John McCain told reporters in Boston that he had not yet read the opinion, but expressed concerns about the rights it might impart to the people being held there.

"These are unlawful combatants, they are not American citizens and I think we should pay attention to Justice Roberts' opinion in this decision," McCain said, referring to the chief justice's dissent. "But it is a decision that the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know I always favored closing Guantanamo Bay and I still think we ought to do that."

Democrat Barack Obama issued a statement expressing support for the decision, saying that it strikes the proper balance between fighting terrorism and "protecting our core values."

"The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo -- yet another failed policy supported by John McCain," Obama said. "This is an important step toward reestablishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus."

Obama said he voted against the Military Commissions Act, which created the extra-judicial system of hearings for detainees at Guantanamo, because of "sloppiness" that would lead to the kind of decision the court announced yesterday.

"The fact is, this Administration's position is not tough on terrorism, and it undermines the very values that we are fighting to defend," he said. "Bringing these detainees to justice is too important for us to rely on a flawed system that has failed to convict anyone of a terrorist act since the 9-11 attacks, and compromised our core values."

Posted at 3:54 PM ET on Jun 12, 2008  | Category:  DEPT. OF JURISPRUDENCE
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in | Digg This
Previous: Obama Shakes Up the DNC | Next: Citing His Age, Italian Prime Minister Backs McCain

Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Way to much trolling going on in most of these responses. I mean the first seven are by the same person..

Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2008 7:45 AM

The ruling that the sumpreme court handed down was in line with the U.S. Constitution. That is the law of our land the fact that the congress gave up its power to the Executive Branch(President Bush)in direct voliation of the Constitution is what led to the mess that we are in right now. The money being spent right now could be being used to inspect cargo coming into this country and truly securing our borders. Any person that thinks that they know better than our founding fathers should get the hell out of our country. You want to act like animals and terrorist then move to one of those countries that didnt have the fore-sight to create a constitution, bill of bill rights etc. We are the greatest country in the world not because of or military might. But we are made mighty by the strength of our convictions that man is created in the image of god and therefore entitled to inalienable rights. That means that there is no criteria by which you can seperate the man from his rights that were given not by man but this creator. This is the bedrock, the key stone on which we have built this great nation and any person that thinks that they can create a better nation a better society than the one that our fore fathers envisioned. Get the HELL OUT OF AMERICAN and CREATE A UNION THAT IS MORE PERFECT THAN OURS

Posted by: USA | June 15, 2008 1:19 PM

@ James Madison

Your argument is the only conservative one that makes sense. It's a pity you don't here it more often.

However, these people cannot be tried as war criminals because no war was declared and they have been defined as 'enemy combatants'. Both these decisions by the Bush administration were deliberate so that they could say the Geneva Conventions did not apply and nor did normal military justice. It was done in bad faith with the effect of making the administration jailer, prosecution, judge and jury.

This ruling gives these people access to Justice that was denied them. The reason they now have access to civilian courts is precisely because they have not been classified as soldiers. The administration could if they wish, class them as POW's and then try them for war crimes using standard military courts, but they never will because then the Geneva Conventions would apply- and they've broken all of those.

They've played their cards and lost. I applaud the court.

Posted by: Simon Davis | June 14, 2008 6:34 PM

I was struck by how so many right wing Republicans posting here claimed the reason the Supreme Court decision was "wrong" was because none of the Enemy Combatants are American citizens.

That argument has little validity if you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, as I suppose most of these supposed "Christians" do, or more to the point, the documents our country was founded on. As another poster pointed out, our Founding Fathers declared the belief that all men are created equal and our endowed with unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

They didn't say these rights were reserved only for people like themselves, who were basically the governing body of the newly formed USA. That was the whole point of this country. We were founded on the basis of being fair and inclusive, not as being elite and exclusive! So the idea of somebody being of a different race, creed or color was supposed to mean nothing in how you were treated - especially in a court of law.

What's astounding is nobody is giving these
enemy combatants a release or pardon. It merely means they have to have a FAIR trial. How can that happen if they don't even know what the evidence is against them?

Maybe some of you right wingers are right, and all of them deserve to die or stay in Prison forever. But maybe, just maybe, one or two or several more are TOTALLY innocent. Should they die or remain in jail forever, without being charged?

Obviously, many people here think so, as does President Bush, which explains why, depending on your view, Mr. Bush will go down in history as one of the worst or best Presidents. Although with 70% of the country now against him, I wouldn't count on him making a very dramatic comeback as the "worst President."

Posted by: Todd Baesen | June 14, 2008 3:14 AM

"The once great U.S. has already been trashed and sold down the river. Congress is totally useless and broken, and in 5 to 10 years or even sooner we will be nothing but a third world nation."

This is already nearly true, and you can thank Ronald Reagan for it. It was the plan actually, good bye middle class.

Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 9:19 PM

If the Iraqi's government is talking to Iran and is in friendly conversation with Iran doesn't that undermine what is being said in the media. If the spin of Iraq is being used now for us to invade Iran, what will be next. Alot of people have to realize that Americans are suffering. Job are not there any longer and the economy is in a recession and the government won't come clean and let us know what really is going on. 77 percent of Iraqis don't want us there. 81 percent of the world don't want us there. So somebody please explain why we are still there. Since Al Quada is no longer occupying the region why are we there. I guess this war was about the oil.

Posted by: bush hater | June 13, 2008 7:04 PM

To American,
well done

Posted by: Mike S | June 13, 2008 3:32 PM

To Retired Vietnam Vet

I am asking you to think just for a few minutes. Please close your eyes and imagine that the Russians or the Chinese invaded the US to take over the wealth and oil. Their troops broke into your house, shoot your brothers dead, raped your wife and little girls under your eyes, and they took the rest of your family to prisons, where they mentally, sexually and physically assaulted them. Now when you and who left from your family are trying to fight back I think it is absurd and ridicules if someone called you a terrorist. The people of Iraq never from near or far had anything to do with 9/11, but the greed of Dick Cheney, Bush and stupid people like you were the real reasons behind the barbaric invasion to Iraq. Slaughtering the Indian, lynching the blacks, nuking the Japanese, napalming and carpet bombing the Vietnamese, killing the Palestinian and Iraqi children everyday is OK in your book. People like McCain, Bush, Cheney and you will bring America down the toilet

Posted by: American | June 13, 2008 3:20 PM

Very well said Freedom.

Posted by: Something To Think About | June 13, 2008 3:13 PM

Ok this might not be the right blog for this opinion but since others have brought the issue up I will pipe in. I am glad that we invaded Iraq and toppled Hussein. Do I think that the administration used WMDs as an excuse to go into Iraq with popular support, yes I do and, even as a republican, I think the administration was wrong to use this excuse. Honesty should have worked better. Let's face it, Hussein was a monster, and worse he was a monster with money, power and influence. He proved that he was capable of using WMD's if he had them, and he tortured and killed hundreds of thousands of people. Let's be real folks, we have sent military forces to parts of the world to defend people that were having a lot less done to them than what Hussein was doing and we did it with nothing but cheers for the administration in charge at the time, why, because it was quick and relatively easy in most cases.

Even as a republican I am not all that happy with President Bush. I tend to like his ideas but his implementation and absurd loyalty to some very under qualified personnel to run his programs has left me less than happy, this is especially true of the war in Iraq. What needs to be done now is to get someone in office that is capable of fixing it, not walking away from it. The Middle East has 3,000 plus years of history that show any power vacuum created will be filled by the people with the biggest guns.

Twenty years ago we used the invasion Afghanistan to bankrupt the Soviet Union. This move cost that country there infrastructure, schools, hospitals, government, there lives and anything else you can think of that a country needs to be anything closely resembling a country. At the end of this we left, no funding to rebuild, no support of any kind and we did this at a time when that country was friendly towards us and really needed our help. But the decision was made by President Clinton that our country needed the money more so we left them to there own means. The Taliban filled that gap and look what happened.

Whether you agree with my opinion to go to war with Iraq or not it doesn't matter. We are there! If we pack up and leave without giving the Iraqi government every opportunity we can the same thing will happen. Let's not forget about the rhetoric from the lovely neighbor Iran. Do you really want even the smallest possibility of that President filling the power gap?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 3:12 PM

This is still the best place to be.
ask me, I was not born here, but this place { usa }is the best thing that ever happenned to me or my family.
I'm a land owner, I have 15 cars. I have at least 15 guitars, I dont mean to brag, but when I came here @ 9 years old...all I had was a mother, and my clothes on my back.

can you say AUDIE MURPHY-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a lot of young guys gave up everything they could to make this place safe.
Back the troops...they earned it before, and they earn it every second of the day.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

nothing is perfect...but this is really close to it for my life!

Posted by: Gary | June 13, 2008 2:58 PM

Retied Vietnam vet.Thanks for the graphic post.It reminded me that without giving basic human right's to all,(even enemy's) we WILL be a third world country!

Posted by: MJC | June 13, 2008 2:56 PM

How can so many people hear sit there and say the things that are being said. These are the same people who would jump to the side of animals instead of another human. I really feel that we are going to find something out that we the American people was not suppose to hear about. They claim that these people are terrorist, so if they are then prove it. People of America WE ARE THE TERRORIST!!! It is a known fact that the intel was flawed and that turned out to be another lie. How many more lies do we have to hear. How do we know that these people were not just picked up from anywhere and then tortured to admitting something that they didn't commit. So people of America can feel that this Administration is doing something good. It happens alot in Law Enforcement. The right to a lawyer and the to see and be heard by a judge is one of the great things that our fore father passed down to us. As a Marine I was taught to follow the rules. For all you people out there that would put an stupid dog or cat infront of a human really need to take a look at what you really stand for as an American. If you are highly upset at this decision then you are UNAMERICAN!!!! You are a traitor the nation that I stand up for and would fight for at the drop of a dime. The same way I feel about my country is the same way that most Iraqi's feel. Now that this Administrator are putting pressure on the Iraqi's to take a proposal that makes American occupy Iraq with military might and have asset to their finances. Tell me how many people would pick up a rifle if Iraq came and started to invade America. How would you feel. Think about these people that have been held in that prison, maybe there is a chance that they didn't what this Administration said that they did. In African-American communities the same has happen to them as well has hispanic and anybody that has no money for lawyers. Lets it it right this time. Lets be americans and show the word that we an not bullys how invade other countries because we can. Let get our dignity back so the world would stop looking at us as terrorist.

Posted by: freedom | June 13, 2008 2:45 PM

Retired Vietnam Vet, Can you please tell me what difference it makes from you and a terrorist if you think they dont need righs?

Posted by: Human | June 13, 2008 2:41 PM

Reading the comments on this lively thread makes clear that there are a good deal of folks in our society who would rather have a perceived sense of safety and security in their lives than have the rule of law and principles of liberty upheld. For these folks, as long as they can go to bed at night believing that bad guys are under lock and key at Guantanamo, with no chance of ever getting released, the U.S. Constitution doesn't matter, due process doesn't matter, habeas corpus doesn't matter, the presumption of innocence doesn't matter. Never mind that most Guantanamo detainees have been released without ever being charged, never mind that many of these "terrorists" were turned in by neighbors looking to steal their land, never mind that no evidence of their guilt has been presented to a tribunal -- to these folks, the perception of security is all that matters. They need to take stock of Benjamin Franklin's sage observation: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Posted by: James Madison | June 13, 2008 2:39 PM

I would like to start by saying that I am conservative and I do agree with the theory of GITMO. With this said, those people do need to be brought to trial in a timely manner, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Regardless of the atrocities that they more than likely did they are still entitled to the laws, doing anything less with the reasoning that they held no trials and cut peoples heads off, etc. etc. gives us no right to lower ourselves to there level. In fact, because of what they did we must ensure that we hold ourselves to the highest level otherwise we are somewhat justifying what they did. By this I don't mean that we did the same kinds of things but that we are showing ourselves to be just what they think, the big guys on the block that do what they want with no worries of retribution. I like to believe that the beliefs and laws of the United States still hold sway and that, for the most part, we still do the right thing as a country.

Now for the problem with the ruling. This ruling allows for the detainees to file suit in civilian court, this is the part that is wrong. These are prisoners of war; they need to be tried as such and in a military court. There is nothing wrong with this under the constitution, the Geneva Convention or any other treaty or law I could find. The ruling would have been much better and much better received by all parties had it stated that this should be done and must be done quickly. Part of what the Supreme Court did overstepped the bounds of what should have been done.

You would think that if the Supreme Court debated this matter with bipartisan effort at compromise that something better should have been come up with by both sides of the line. This is the one place where the constitution and not party lines should hold sway. This is there job, there only one. Leave the parties to the Congress and the White House where they belong.

Posted by: MrRogersneighborhood | June 13, 2008 2:39 PM

TO MUD ROY, Do you know how many got killed in the 9/11. Do you know how many got killed in IRAQ(our own soliders) solely because our president said there is WMD in IRAQ. Its more than 9/11. Also there is no WMD till date. What is 9/11 to do with IRAQ.

Also do you know how many IRAQIs have been killed so far. Think for a second what will happen to our country if the brothers, sisters, parents, relatives and friends of those IRAQIs who were killed think like you.

Posted by: Nanda | June 13, 2008 2:36 PM

Truly our Constitution has been totally trashed! Since when do terrorist combatants have "Constitutional rights!?" What "rights" have ever been given to our troops when they were taken prisoner by the same terrorists? Our troops were given the "right" to be tortured, maimed, beheaded, disemboweled, or a miriad of other "rights" from a very nasty list. Most of you LIBERAL BABIES have no idea what the Viet Cong liked to do to our troops. How long do you think it takes a man to die when his belly has been sliced open very carefully so he does not bleed but all of his guts are on the ground? Another VC favorite was to skin a man alive, being careful again that he bled very little. Usually another U.S. soldier would come along and with tears streaming down his face, pull out his 45 and mercifully put a bullet in the poor guy's head. I got many more, want to hear them? Didn't think so, cause you can't handle it.

It is now very obvious what the military must do with terrorist combatants, and that is to TAKE NO PRISONERS!! I don't think I need to spell that one out, do I?

On another note, Obama, i.e., Obamanation, is nothing but an empty suit who will sell this country out to the United Nations as fast as he can sign his name with his presidential pen. McCain is no bargain either. Both Obama and McCain have their heads up where the sun doesn't shine. The once great U.S. has already been trashed and sold down the river. Congress is totally useless and broken, and in 5 to 10 years or even sooner we will be nothing but a third world nation.

Posted by: Retired Vietnam Vet | June 13, 2008 2:33 PM

Something to think about,
You are my hero!!! If only more people thought simplistically and with a little common sense we would not have to have these conversations.

Posted by: Former Marine | June 13, 2008 2:32 PM

Give a copy of our Constitution to MUD ROY, he will wipe his ass and also his neighbours

Posted by: Nanda | June 13, 2008 2:31 PM

By ignoring our own ideals, standards and constitution we might win the battle, but we will loose the war. The real war is for the hearts and minds of the next generation of people around the world that is the western secular freedom school of thought better or the religious up to down authoritarian system. Terrorism exists today because they are threatened . Threatened that their children are desiring the western way of life, this is their last gasp for air.

Posted by: AC | June 13, 2008 2:31 PM

I love the US but I believe the terrorists and 'rogue' nations seeking to acquire WMD's think and believe its all about millitary might. It's time the US look within for the solution to the hate of the US by so many peoples of this world.
Its a pitty such a great country has such narrow knowledge and view of this beautiful world.

Posted by: Mac | June 13, 2008 2:29 PM

What makes ALL of these people terrorists? Is it the fact that they were trying to defend there country from soldiers invading it? Does that make them terrorists? Or maybe a US soldier heard him saying something against the US occupation of there homeland. HUMMM.. Sounds like a terrorist to me.

Does the fact that I openly speak against the current administration ( I will not call him our President) make me a terrorist? No, I didn't think so. Then why are citizens of the US being held in Gitmo and at other secret bases around the world?

The Supreme Court ruling only said what Bush already new but doesn't want to admit, HE IS NOT THE DECIDER and YES HE IS ACCOUNTABLE TO SOMEONE!!

Posted by: Something To Think About | June 13, 2008 2:26 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 2:25 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 2:22 PM

Without due process and trials how can we be sure that some of those we detain aren't the very one's we went to liberate!

Posted by: MJC | June 13, 2008 2:21 PM


Posted by: TRUE MAN | June 13, 2008 2:16 PM

BUT I MUST SAY KUDOS TO THE USA FOR ALWAYS ACTING with great regard to human rights.The USA shows why its Great and suprises us at times!this shows the whole world the sense of fairness of Americans.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 2:14 PM


Posted by: STEVE | June 13, 2008 2:10 PM

KYJurisDoctor, I agree that the writ can be suspended, but definitely NOT during wartime. I think the clear language of the Constitution controls here: in times of invasion or insurrection ONLY. Wars waged in an offensive manner on the other nation's soil, such as the current one (whether preemptive or not), would not qualify. I guess it makes more sense when you look at it as we can only suspend the writ in the most dire circumstances, not a debatably elective war.

Posted by: Libertyman13 | June 13, 2008 2:09 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 2:08 PM


Great comment. Very smart, well thought out, and inoffensive. People on both sides of this decision should learn to respond in the manner you have.

For the record, I disagree with the decision in terms of constitutional legality. Though, I agree with both candidates that gitmo should be closed immediately. As McCain stated, lets accept the decision and move forward together.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 2:07 PM

I guess you did not read the ruling of the 5 judges who upheld our constitution while the other 4 cronies or Bush's brain made that ridiculous decision. The executive branch of our government have run a muck and lost any respect it had before and during 9-11 from the majority of our society. So the so call Bush cronies like yourself is still trying to hang on to your sadistic way of thinking. Lord help you and our nation.

Posted by: Former Marine | June 13, 2008 2:06 PM

Does any right wing conservative have a brain in their head? How can we demonstrate a moral high ground in the world when we violate international laws and the Geneva convention. I applaud the Supreme Court for their descision... and glad to see that their is still some democracy in our government. I am so sick of George Bush's Facism! I believe terrorism needs to be dealt with but invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 was wrong. We made our country more unsafe because we turned away from our Democratic values. Iraqi citizens who had nothing to do with terrorizing the US are being killed, maimed, and driven from their homes... is that not the make up of most of the insurgant groups in Iraq! Would we view another country like Russia coming over here, destroying our infrastructure, and bombing our own citizens as Liberators? I think not and thats why our country fought the British during the Revolutionary War.

Posted by: worried citizen | June 13, 2008 2:04 PM

Doc, before you start calling people "uneducated," you may want to brush up on your apparently weak knowledge of the United States Constitution.

Article VI, paragraph 2, of the U.S. Constitution makes treaties the supreme law of the land on the same footing with acts of Congress. This includes the Geneva Conventions, to which the U.S. is a signatory.

Like so many others criticizing the majority's opinion, you confidently refer to the U.S. Constitution without actually knowing what the heck you're talking about. Par for the course.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 1:59 PM

What I can't understand is why it is still taking 5 to 6 years just to get some of these detainees into court? Folks involved in 9-11 (some admitted) can basically wait years and years before they even see a court of anykind. That's a broken and flawed system. It should never take this long to try and convict a suspected terrorist.

Posted by: 2pacolypse | June 13, 2008 1:59 PM

to Mud Roy

You just proof that you are one of the typical ignorant and stupid redneck.

Posted by: true man | June 13, 2008 1:59 PM

Historically NATIONALISM was the cause for the start of WW1... and WW2. Are we to invoke WW3?

Posted by: Janwn | June 13, 2008 1:58 PM

I would feel more terrified to have a president such as Mc Cain, who will be a continuance to Bush's doctrine, who is also on a subconscious revenge spree for all the suffering he received in 'Nam.

I can't belive it took a 5-4 majority to protect individuals, friend or foe, foreign or domestic.... to receive habeas corpus.

Posted by: janwn | June 13, 2008 1:56 PM

Oh that's right, Bush and company have been staunch supporters of the constitution, and only that crazy liberal Supreme Court is off the ranch.

You're out of your mind with nationalism.

Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 1:56 PM

Mr.Doc, Can you please tell me what do you mean by american burns, Is it the wild fire are you taking about. Have you seen the country IRAQ. Do you think they are having luxury life their with swimming pool for summer and skiing resort for winter. If you think America is burning and IRAQ is so great why dont you go to IRAQ for a vacation of one year.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 1:55 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 1:53 PM

What the Supreme Court did, my uneducated liberal friend, is trash the Constitution of the United States of America. There is no law that protects the "rights" of those who attacked our troops, except the Geneva, please tell us what "law" they upheld? For the first time in American history, the Judicial Branch has disregarded the joint ruling of the Executive and Legislative branches.......This country, as Justice Scalia has now publicly warned us, will live to regret what the Court did yesterday. If your head wasn't in your butt, you might realize what hell lies ahead. You jump and sing while America burns. You're "useful idiots". Oh, I'm probably don't understand what I mean. I guess you'll have to look it up and think about it.

Posted by: Doc | June 13, 2008 1:48 PM

Tony R.,
Did you go to school and learn anything about the history of this country and what our founding fathers fought and died for? Do you or have you even read any parts of our constitution? It amazes me how we as a country is still looked at from afar as a powerful country with values and respectability when we have people like you thinking the way you do. Apparently, you having served in our nations finest military because our men and women from time to time get caught up and imprisoned and because of people like you then end up coming back to their love ones in pieces. I suggest you enlist and learn what it is all about; however, if you have served then you're SOS stuck on stupid.

Posted by: Former Marine | June 13, 2008 1:47 PM

TON R, laws are what make the difference between us and them, laws are what make the difference between modern and pre-historic, laws are what we live by. ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO LIVING LIKE AN ANIMAL?

Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:47 PM

Please send me your address and I will ship you a free working keyboard. Not wandering if you are one of McCain supporter

Posted by: true man | June 13, 2008 1:47 PM

All of our casulites, 4000+, 30,000 wounded, 125,000+ Iraqi civilians and their 2,000,000 displaced were not even connected to 9/11...

Posted by: JWN,TX | June 13, 2008 1:46 PM

"it amazes me sometimes to sit back and read what americans say on these posts. To believe a self admitted terrorist should have access to our laws."

These people are not self-admitted. Those that are will not be set free by having a trial.

"Are you people in control of your own mind?"

More than you.

"Why should the rights that people have fought and died to protect be given to the very people who have no regard to any belief we have,"

This is actually very Christian, but that's irrelevant.

This is also very American.

"they sit and laugh at you idiots knowing they can kill again at random and some bleeding heart will cry for thier rights."

Where are these random killings happening? You think we actually have all the bad people in GTMO now?

"Cry for the people that had no choice and thier families tore apart forever."

I do cry for them, and the fault for the families now torn apart belongs to Bush. Many more people have died and have their families shattered AFTER 9/11 than on it.

"You turn my insides,and I dont think we should sentence these people to death, I think they should be sent to Pelican Bay or Brushy Mountain or levinworth, and let the powers that be distribute thier rewards, instad of the martydom they seek."

And that's exactly what trial will bring. Without them, they just sit in limbo. Bring them to justice the America way.


Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 1:46 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 1:44 PM


Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:42 PM

There is no liberal media. The media is lock step in line with the corporate power that runs the world.

They liberal media myth was created to trick the lower middle class into abandoning their own interests.

Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 1:41 PM

it amazes me sometimes to sit back and read what americans say on these posts. To believe a self admitted terrorist should have access to our laws. Are you people in control of your own mind? Why should the rights that people have fought and died to protect be given to the very people who have no regard to any belief we have, they sit and laugh at you idiots knowing they can kill again at random and some bleeding heart will cry for thier rights. Cry for the people that had no choice and thier families tore apart forever. You turn my insides,and I dont think we should sentence these people to death, I think they should be sent to Pelican Bay or Brushy Mountain or levinworth, and let the powers that be distribute thier rewards, instad of the martydom they seek.

Posted by: tony r. | June 13, 2008 1:40 PM

For those who are in favor for persecuting the Guantanamo Bay detainees without fair trail, you people are the true icons of ignorance and arrogance and brainless. First the American constitution is not limited to only American citizen as Mr. McCain and his supporters stated. Any person who committed a crime on American soil should be persecuted under the American laws either this person was an American citizen, legal resident or illegal alien. The legal black hole made by this administration is a great shame for the United States of America. We brag about democracy and freedom but at the same very time we denied for others. In one hand we criticize and attack the third world countries for violating human rights and at the other hand we enjoy torturing and humiliating the detainees in the Guantanamo Bay and Abou Gharib prisons. We show caring and sympathy for animals and invade other nations killing their men, women children and animals for oil.
Please read the following article:
Perhaps the one aspect of American politics that everyone can agree on is that things are not always as they appear. The smoke and mirrors used by the candidates spin machines and public relations advisors tell you that your own eyes and ears are not to be trusted and the pundits enable them by buying into their contrived headlines and messages. Perhaps, elections seem to have come down to this, who is best at misleading might actually get elected. There is no better example of a politician who understands and embraces the value of fooling the people more than John McCain; a politician who has been at it for years and is running for President yet again at the age of 72. McCain loves to position himself as the straight-talking reasonable independent, even someone with the backbone to stand up to the extremists in his own party. There is one problem with that though. John McCain is the extremist in his party. He is as extreme as they come. Today on MSNBC's Hardball, even conservative Pat Buchanan said this about McCain "He's very bellicose, he's got that very in your face attitude that Bush does. I think we could very well be at war with Iran, I think he's Bush on steroids"
John McCain would arguably take this country down the same disastrous road we have been following for the last seven years. An older and slightly more intellectually capable George Bush impersonator, he seems totally committed to continuing our current abysmal foreign policy of confrontation and arrogance as well as our domestic policy of corporate greed and a disdain for working Americans. All of his campaign rhetoric and political hyperbole aside, let's look at who this man really is and what he really stands for.

Certainly the most dangerous and extreme part of McCain's views are his militaristic instincts, which could in the end make Bush and Cheney seem like novice war mongers. A staunch defender of George Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq and the so-called war on terror, McCain said the following.
Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war.
While most everyone, including many Republicans are now calling for a reduction and eventual withdrawal of US troops in Iraq, McCain has brazenly called for increasing troops on the ground and says there are simply not enough American forces in Iraq, more troops are necessary.
McCain has said that a greater military commitment now is necessary if we are to achieve long-term success in Iraq. This is what he said.
"I don't think Americans are concerned if we're there for one hundred years or a thousand years or ten thousand years"
Granted, he was in a prison camp in Vietnam and he was tortured. Of course here is no justification for torture, but let's remember that the North Vietnamese had been carpet-bombed and napalmed by US pilots and watched their children being blown to shreds in their homes. No one knows what hell McCain must have been through personally, but in context does that excuse his racial stereotyping of billions of Asians? It makes me wonder how's McCain is going to feel sitting down and dealing with China or what might slip from his tongue at a delicate moment?

Posted by: true man | June 13, 2008 1:38 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 1:38 PM


Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:38 PM

This is not about innocence this is about due process. By and large I suspect the great majority of those held at Gitmo are guilty of the offenses stated. BUT due process trumps any offense. You can not have a cop beat a confession out of anybody. By saying that these detainies don't have rights because they arn't U.S. citizens it like saying that everybody else in the world dosn't have rights.

Posted by: MrlewisH | June 13, 2008 1:37 PM

"In God we Trust" this is the slogan of Amercians.

Who are the terrorists? one who are suppressed by the Super Powers converted into a terrorist.

Honestly speaking American Politians are the greatest evil on the earth and the worst terrorists of the modern world.

They are the one, used the atomic bombs in Japan during 2nd world war. They are the one sent their troops to fight inside the other countries.

All Muslims are not the terrorist as western media falsely made propaganda. A few percentage of Muslims are called as terrorists, when they fight back for their liberty.

Nobody cries when millions of Muslims are killed with the aids of American militry.

Bush, the so called mighty American President, falsely alarmed that Saddam Hussain has the most dangerous weapons and cowardly got the support with its allys to attack Iraq.

Is there any weapons found there until today. they killed millions of innocent lives in Iraq. They hangged Saddam Hussain. This is politics, power dtruggle, cowardly act of Bush.

Yes. every one believes "IN GOD WE TRUST"

Please don't kill innocent lives and turture innocent people saying they are terrorits. justice is there, bring them to the court, prove them as crimainal, then Punish them.

There are so many natural disasters on American soil. Learn from this disasters and try to show your humanity to others.

Because of Bush, Americans are loosing their integrity among world people.


Posted by: Kam | June 13, 2008 1:36 PM

If its true that bush and cheney ignored the intel before 911, dont you think we should blame them instead? these people are guilty, assuming bush's right, why dont we judge them with our laws, you know, the one we always use for all guilty defendants?

Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:36 PM


You first must understand that we aren't fighting against an organized military that follows the rules of the Geneva Convention. We are holding and fighting people who have no value of American life or life at all. Do you see us removing parts of their bodies, and torturing people to the point where they wish a quick death? As I recall I haven't seen any Americans removing the heads of terrorist. Do your research and understand how Americans were treated in WWII and now. I think we treat the people at pretty damn good. Even better yet ask McCain how he was treated. Now please remove yourself from the bubble and the rear echelon that you support for 30 years and understand what the guy on the line goes through.

Posted by: CNB | June 13, 2008 1:35 PM

I see a lot a people posting on this comment are full of hate and discourse. Those prisoners are human beings who deserve a fair trial like anybody else. If we treat those people inhuman then the rest of the country will treat our men and women inhuman because of our actions. Apparently, the people who think because we are at a so called war, and I say that lightly, we should be just like the ones who attacked us. I have something to say to that, "Suck on Stupid" and I would like to say this again, "STUCK ON STUPID." The ones who think like this are the ones who voted from George Bush twice and I say it for the third time, STUCK ON STUPID (SOS).

Posted by: Former Marine | June 13, 2008 1:34 PM

Hey Mudroy - you are a total nincomkpoop. Bush - the greates president? HA HA HA. You're the one brainwashed. Look at the condition this country is in thanks to your butt buddy Bush. Go back to your cave and learn a little more before spewing your bs.

Posted by: cisco | June 13, 2008 1:34 PM

"Does anyone remember 9/11 anymore?"

I do remember 9/11, and I remember being shocked and scared and willing to accept actions I now look back on as unamerican and based on that shock and fear, and I'm ashamed.

GET OVER 9/11.

We have killed far more than the 3000 that died that day in response, and they are the wrong people. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians.

In the larger scheme of history, 9/11 was not as damaging to America as Bush and his response to it.

The goals of the terrorists on 9/11 have been accomplished, as evidenced by the right wingers on this blog.

Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 1:33 PM

Do you think we americans will be silent and accept when some country military thinks you are a terrorist, enter your living room and put in the prison like Guantanamo and give you no chance to prove your innocence?

I dont mean to say all the people in Guantanamo Bay are innocents. But can you be 100% sure there is not even a single innocent in Guantanamo Bay?

Posted by: Nanda | June 13, 2008 1:32 PM

Ever seen the movie "RENDITION?" All of you should, then put yourself in their place. Only then can we understand about Human Rights, Justice and a deplorable outcome such as 5-4.

Is the revenge of less than 3,000 Americans who died in 9/11 justified for the 4,000+ soldiers, who died, the 30,000+ wounded, the 125,000+ Iraqi civilians who got killed in the process and their 2,000,000 we displaced to other countries.

What would we do if China, or Russia or any other country would resort to such policies?

WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO FEEL IMPETUOUSLY INDIGNIFIED, for creating such havoc in the world?


Posted by: JanWN | June 13, 2008 1:31 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 1:28 PM

GLENN, how about you educate yourself about international laws and waterbording definition, how about you argue about keeping someone in unhuman condition of GTMO for six years without charging him for a crime and determine what torture really mean. if ther's such a thing as UNAMERICAN not following the law should and is on the top of the list. BUSH SHOULD GO TO PRISON

Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:26 PM

Stop saying they don't deserve protection under the Constitution. The US has broken many of the international laws that we helped shape and signed.

Posted by: Mike | June 13, 2008 1:21 PM

It's not about supporting terrorists rights. The problem is if you deny rights to people in our custody, it paves the way for OUR rights to become futher infringed upon, legally and without question. That is what is at stake here, and if you've crawled into a little hole because of the scare tactics, you've already succumbed to fascism.

Posted by: Think for once. | June 13, 2008 1:19 PM

Obama's never nominated any suprime court judge, if you're happy to have had bush in the white house you consider the fact that most people didnt and that most people should get their turn as well. bashing Obama would not help. LETS SHARE AMERICA

Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:18 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 1:18 PM

In the Declaration of Independence, our Founding Fathers declared the belief that all men are created equal and endowed with unalienable rights. They didn't say these rights were only for those that supported their cause or for citizens of the soon-to-be United States. Yes, the prisoners held at Gitmo were taken as non-lawful combatants. But if we can't PROVE their status, then we have no right to continue holding them. I mean, yeah, I realize it takes time to put together evidence...but if you can't pin something on a guy after SIX YEARS? If he wasn't a terrorist when he was captured, he's sure going to be sympathetic to their cause after that kind of treatment. The ruling isn't a blanket release order--it's just forcing the administration and the military to follow some kind of due process--a demand that was one of the reasons behind our nation's founding, in the first place.

Posted by: Curtis | June 13, 2008 1:17 PM

After reading many of these posts I continualy see references to GTMO being worse than stateside prisons filled with torture and mistreatment. Some posts stated that the detainees are held in solitary for five years. For those of you that made those comments I have one Question, When was the last time you were there, When was the last time you walked the blocks in the prison, had personal interaction with the detainees? Oh thats right, never. Well I am someone who has and I am here to tell you soldiers are not torturing detainees, the prisons here in the United States are actually worse with more corruption and mistreatment. Detainees are not held in solitary for five years. The United States Military operates of the understanding that what separates us from our enemies is our moral compass. So before you go off talking about things you dont know like they are facts, educate yourself.

Posted by: Glenn | June 13, 2008 1:14 PM

When I was little I learned:
Innocent until proven guilty, and
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
God Bless America and thank you to the ACLU for pushing this to the Supreme Court where there was really no other way for them to rule. The opposite decision would have meant the end of America as we know it.

Posted by: Sally | June 13, 2008 1:14 PM

The bush policies are not what this country was made of, times have change and we should change with our values not without them.

Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:13 PM

I have one better on the good Idea,
Any of the freed Terrorist should move IN with Obama, in his palatial home, he's got to have plenty of room up there.
And I'm sure Michelle would also love to cater to them!
Just be sure to keep the knives out of their reach.
Does anyone remember 9/11 anymore?

Posted by: from Chicago | June 13, 2008 1:12 PM

This ruling DOES NOT FREE ANYONE. It just opens the door for trials.

What will come out in the trials is the torture and the mismanagement of any evidence they may have had.

Most likely these people are innocent bystanders swept up for no good reason and this ruling will allow light to be shed.

Anyone that is dangerous will be proven so and stay in prison... unless you don't believe in America.

Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 1:11 PM

The Founding Fathers designed the Constitution to protect everyone and our strength as Americans comes from following it even when doing so is difficult or unpopular. If the 9/11 attacks cause us to abandon our core values of freedom, liberty and justice for all, only then do the terrorists win. Bush and his cronies have played right into their hands and history will rememeber him.

I applaud the Supreme Court (or at least 5 of them) for reminding us of our true heritage.

Posted by: Let Freedom Ring | June 13, 2008 1:10 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 1:08 PM

The reason the Supreme Court is involved is because our AMERICAN PRESIDENT claims to be acting under AMERICAN LAW. Under AMERICAN LAW--military or civilian--it is the Supreme Court who decides what is or is not lawful. The AMERICAN PRESIDENT does not make those decisions. This rule distinguishes our government from that of a theocratic dictatorship. The court seems to be almost evenly divided between justices who believe that the law is our best protection and those who believe that the government is our best protection. It is a tough decision to make in perilous times, but for almost 232 years, we have endured nationally under the spirit that we are better protected when law controls government; not the other way around. America's strength is in her belief that a lawless government is not a reliable protector of its people. The Supreme Court decision was directed at our government's conduct; not at foreigner's rights.

Posted by: willie-a | June 13, 2008 1:07 PM

I feel the pain many perceive in releasing these men at Gitmo, they are scary and could cause future terrorist attacks on Americans somewhere. But as stated by a few we have to live by a higher standard that we preach in this country and make the right decisions and hopefully the law will work if proof exists to imprisions the terrorists. George bush as the greatest president? what kind of glue is this guy who said that sniffing, I'm sure Bush is a nice guy, he cried at his daughters wedding after all, but leadership and world changing decisions aren't his strong points and should be for a president. He was the wrong president at the worst of times, I'm sorry for him but he is a diaster andno matter how republican hell bent you are at some point ya gotta see te light.

Posted by: jeff | June 13, 2008 1:07 PM

Any educated person who argued that keeping these terrorists in Gitmo or who dont agree with the suprime court decision are not educated enough. The US has alwas try to promote HUMAN RIGHTS around the world, in fact, that's one of the reasons we're in Irak and Afganistan, why tell them that our way of life is the best and treat them the opposite of everything we believe?

Posted by: Thomas T | June 13, 2008 1:04 PM

It's frightening that the vote was even that close. We are one Supreme Court justice away from Fascism.

Thank God our system of checks and balances has at least a thread of sanity remaining, but our only hope of restoring the vision and dream of America is Obama for 8 years, followed by another democrat for another 8.

Get over 9/11. Our over reaction to being attacked is tragically embarassing and has made us far less safe.

Posted by: MikeH | June 13, 2008 1:04 PM

My question is why do we even take prisoners? Take no prisoners...have to problem.

Posted by: Old Soldier | June 13, 2008 1:04 PM

Supreme Court ruling is a joke. In the furure, we don't need to be afarid of other contries, we are proven to be our OWN worst enemy.

Posted by: steve | June 13, 2008 1:03 PM

CSMRLB you are right on the money coudnt have said it better god bless america land of the free

Posted by: getsmart | June 13, 2008 1:00 PM

The fact that a terrorist should be held is not in question,but,without due process and a trial how can we be sure we have the right to hold him.If another country holds a US citizen without charge we're outraged,yet,justify it when we do.I'm a veteran,with a son leaving to serve in Iraq in 3 weeks and well aware of the steps needed to secure our nation.We as a nation lead the world with our democratic might and power,our every action observed and scrutinized,seeing if we practice what we preach.A terrorist may not be allowed rights by the letter of the law,but,as a example to the world should be processed in the spirit of the law.

Posted by: MJC | June 13, 2008 1:00 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 12:59 PM

fox-news rules

Posted by: american | June 13, 2008 12:56 PM

after reading all of these hate letters i would like to make a comment The people held in gitmo were captured in a war and they were trying to kill americans. There are no american citizens held at Gitmo. The constitution was written for American ccitizens not the whole world. If you people??? who do not like what this country is doing they should move to a country that gives their citizens no rights

Posted by: american | June 13, 2008 12:55 PM

After reading down through a number of these comments I'd have to say your all a little crazy.

Posted by: Kal | June 13, 2008 12:54 PM

I think it's ridiculous that so many on this thread are so dead set against these people getting fair trials. How is this a bad thing? Most of these people have not been charged with ANY crime, been tortured and held in worse conditions than any US prison for 5 years or more. What, fair trials should only be applied to some but not others? Give me a break, that's not the America i grew up in. I believe the decision is absolutely just.

Posted by: MPH | June 13, 2008 12:51 PM


Posted by: MUD ROY | June 13, 2008 12:50 PM

Also it shows OBAMA LYING about McCains support of G-Bay when clearly untrue. What happened to his clean campaign, yet another lie/attack against McCain by Obama.

Posted by: Joe | June 13, 2008 12:46 PM

More like Obama respects legal due process and realizes that someone picked up in a field in Afghanistan isn't necessarily a terrorist just because the government says so.

Legal process, even for people who are actually guilty, is one of the most important ingredients for ensuring freedom for everyone.

Posted by: Kevin | June 13, 2008 12:46 PM

So basically Obama supports the rights of Terroists.

Posted by: dan | June 13, 2008 12:39 PM

I wish to direct my comments to individuals the likes of Paul Bernard on this blog. You sir, clearly are not aware which justices voted for or against in this case. Sadly, you don't even know how to spell the surnames of the justices. You sir, are clearly simply venting rather than conducting any research.'s not that difficult. Justice has prevailed! God bless everyone!

Posted by: Nezahualcoyotl Oriega | June 13, 2008 12:34 PM

Talking about terrorism! You folks forgot that Bush's presence in white house spewed terrorism. The enemies of Bush family attacking innocent citizens of our dear country.
We need the change that OBAMA brings!I look forward to it!

Posted by: Right Change | June 13, 2008 12:34 PM

I have a great idea: any detainees who are freed ought to be able to live in an apartment complex next to those idiots gisberg, kennedy scalia and the other traiters to the protection of the u. s..

Posted by: paul bernard | June 13, 2008 12:10 PM

I guess the courts should base all the decisions they make on fear instead of law. Hey, they may decide you having a gun scares them and put you in jail. Who knows, someone just might end up living next to them, but they did not let that fear keep them from protecting the constitution. I believe you would use it as toilet paper, and what it stands for. Clearly the terrorist have won against you.

Posted by: mrchick | June 13, 2008 12:27 PM

When I listen to some of the comments posted, I realize how brain-washed many people are. Secondly, I see a lot is written without research or knowledge of the subject. The personnel held in Gitmo are classified as non-combatants (hint) therefore; they're subject to civilian court. Most of you forget the primary reason these people were allowed to be held there was because they were not at war; thus the title non-combatants. If they're not military prisoners how can they be tried in a military court? Most importantly, if there was substantial evidence to show their guilt the trials would be over and they would be locked up or executed and we would not be having this conversation. Other countries have so much animosity toward us because the Bush Administration applies just-us, lol, as it pertains to this country. I served in the military for 30 years and one of the most important things I learned and applied was respect for your enemy if they were captured and held by us. That's because as a soldier you expect the same in return. If any other country was doing what we're doing currently in Gitmo with US personnel we would be saying they're wrong. We would not stand for it. Therefore; we're either a democracy or we're not. We can't change the rules when they don't fit our purpose.

Posted by: CSMRLB | June 13, 2008 12:18 PM

To Danec:
Your lack of knowledge of Obama is profound! Barack is not "Cut from the same blood lines;" he is a Christian with good core values. Yes, his father was Kenyan with Muslim relatives. So what! I am a Christian with Muslim friends. Not all Muslims are terrorists. Please do your homework before you give an opinion. In fact, I suggest that you read "Dreams From My Father" or "The Audacity of Hope" in order to understand this very intelligent man who has the uncanny ability to unite people of different ideologies. Bush has no concept of unity, as is so notably understood in his inability to lead. Pay very close attention to Obama's reasoning and strategies; he's exactly what this country needs in these horrendous times! Remember another noteworthy fact: McCain who is, without a doubt, a war hero and worthy or respect, however, he has a character flaw that scares me; he has a hair-trigger tempermant and that is not a worthy trait in a president. Trust me!

Posted by: Bev of Boston, MA | June 13, 2008 12:12 PM

I have a great idea: any detainees who are freed ought to be able to live in an apartment complex next to those idiots gisberg, kennedy scalia and the other traiters to the protection of the u. s..

Posted by: paul bernard | June 13, 2008 12:10 PM

So for all of you who disagree with the Supreme Court's decision the question is: It would be OK for the Afgan/Taliban/Al Queda people to decide that you are a threat to their lifestyle/religion and could come here to the U.S. and take you away and if you had a GUN that would justify their presumption that you are an enemy combatant & they were to put you on trial without providing any information to you (National Securty reasons) and said you were guilty and you had no right to dispute/appeal their decision. It would be a GOOD & JUST Thing.
That's what I'm hearing you say.

Posted by: EdtheCommonMan | June 13, 2008 12:09 PM

I'm a human being like any republican or democrat.and like any one of you I long for answers to problems.and the question is what do I use for answers, hate, revenge , or just and fair ones.I love the idea of justice and that idea chaleng me continously since the parameters from which I can choose are deliniated very well by all sort of the coments contain in this pages. your opinion is yours and I respect it my opinion is base in what I percive as just and fair.
I'm just a individual that try to live up to the precept such as be, make it better.

Posted by: angel lupianez | June 13, 2008 12:04 PM

I don't really think we are going to release the people that are INNOCENT nextdoor to your house.I'll bet that the ones we do allow to go back to there home lands would ever want to come back here again.Even if they do try I would hope our government would be smart enough to not let them in.
I'm sure that the ones that we let go WON'T be very happy about America,but if Bush put you in prison with no charges or proof or any kind then let you go after 5 years wouldn't you be angry.
I think they deserve a day in court.
Bush's idea of justice is that you have NO rights under the so-called "Patriot Act"
Even You could be held without notice as a enemy combatant.
Just be careful there are terrorists in EVERY neighborhood and behind every tree.

Posted by: NAVVET | June 13, 2008 11:52 AM

THE TERRORIST ARE WINNING!! there are so many posts on this thread that are against the Majortiy decision of the Supreme Court. They do not discuss the legal and constitutional reasons the decision is wrong. They tell us "BE AFRAID BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID" Isn't that the goal of terrorist, to make you afraid. Be so afraid that you would give up Constitutional protections. Look at why you are against this decision, are you scared. The Majority decision is correct. I am not going to be frightened into abandoning the Constitution that so many have given there lives to protect.

Posted by: mrchick | June 13, 2008 11:47 AM

"W' is the most crooked person to ever take the oath of office.He has done more damage to our country then Bin Laden ever could have done.
He tries to control the country with fear which is the definition of a terrorist.
Maybe he should be put on trial for treason against America.
He has lied to the public every step of the way about everything from taxs to war spending.
We don't have food for our poor families because there was no room in the budget
But "I need another $165 billion for MY war in Iraq"
Republicans love stupid people because they will believe anything they say.It is easy to covince a moron to vote for anything that is repeated more then once.
Why don't you republicans go and listen to your pill poping buddy Rush,or Glen Beck.
I'm sure they can tell You what You think

Posted by: Bufort T Justice | June 13, 2008 11:32 AM


Posted by: DANEC | June 13, 2008 11:31 AM

I truly don't understand when people defend a position based on the scale of things, wrong is wrong. Is what the Nazi's did in WWII wrong, yes of course and millions of people died because of Hitler but the only real difference here is scale based on resources. If Al-Qaida was able to develop a war machine that equaled what Hitler had then the atrocities would have been matched. It was mentioned that this is based on a religious belief but that belief among the extremist terrorists is that if you are not Muslim then you are wrong and don't belong, this sounds rather familiar to the if you are not German then you are wrong and don't belong.

OK with all that said, do I think that the courts ruling is correct, no but I understand it. I think that people who wage war against any country should be held accountable under that country's military code of justice, but that justice system still needs to be carried out in a timely manner. Guantanamo detainees have definitely passed this point. I don't like that the Supreme Court made the decision they did but I like even less that it got to a point where they were required to have to make the decision at all.

Posted by: MrRogersneighborhood | June 13, 2008 11:30 AM

RenoDodgerSam, check your facts -- most of the detainees at Guantanamo have been released by the U.S. without ever having been charged. So, to assume, as you seem to do, that everyone there is guilty before even putting them on trial and presenting evidence, is foolish and unfair. You seem to be the lemming around here, speaking without knowing your facts...

Posted by: Archibald O'Malley | June 13, 2008 11:16 AM

Thanks God that all the U S citizens in Guantanamo are getting rights.......wait a minute, they're NOT U S citizens, these are enemy combatants who kill soldiers and innocent bystanders with IED's, bombs strapped to their bodies, and decapitation. Way to go lefties, you stupid lemmings.

Posted by: RenoDodgerSam | June 13, 2008 11:12 AM

I will never read you garbage again Washington post

Posted by: the jackal | June 13, 2008 11:04 AM

you block my comments because you do not want to hear the truth, we need to got rid of all biast news papers and the people who tell you what you can and can't say. If we live in a free society ALL people have a right to be heard ALL PEOPLE.

Posted by: the jackal | June 13, 2008 11:01 AM

So, Greg, you would have wanted to execute the hundreds of men the U.S. has released from Guantanamo without pressing charges against them? Way to uphold the presumption of innocence and due process that the Founders made hallmarks of the Bill of Rights. And, I think you also need to examine your history books. To conflate al-Qaeda, a ragtag band of stateless terrorists with the threat posed to the world by the Nazis represents stunning ignorance. The Nazis wanted to take over the world and nearly succeeded. Al-Qaeda, despite Bush's silly rhetoric about wanting to establish a "caliphate," (which you've obviously swallowed hook, line and sinker) seeks, in a brutal misguided, and vicious way, to defend what it perceives to be threats to the Islamic faith posed by the U.S. Hitler and the Nazis started a war that led to 25,193,700 military deaths, 41,815,400 civilian deaths, and 6,000,000 Holocause victims. Al-Qaeda has killed a few thousand people so far. Not that Al-Qaeda isn't a threat that needs to be dealt with, but to put that group on the same footing as the Nazis not only gives them way too much credit, but also minimizes the atrocities and casualties that arose from the Nazi regime. It's a comparison that isn't supported by facts or numbers, and shouldn't be made casually.

Posted by: Bill Smith | June 13, 2008 11:00 AM

Someone wrote, "W (Bush) will go down as one of the greatest leaders of this nation." Really? I wonder if even Laura Bush thinks like that any more - given his performance!

Posted by: Ken Basington | June 13, 2008 11:00 AM

All of a sudden Justice kennedy is starting
to stand up for the constition,and justice for all ,but where were you and,when we need you doing Bush V Gore, I just hope that Obama don"t chose Gore for VP, we don't need nice guys and wimps,to lead our party,Scalia,Thomas your time is about up, we won"t let you guys steal this one.not this time.

Yes We Can

Posted by: s.Hannity lover. | June 13, 2008 10:57 AM

American politics is full of "divide and conquer" tactics. Its the same all sound bytes: "rich against the poor", "white against black", homosexual against heterosexual, command market against free market, and son and so on. We still are the greatest country in the world. The tryants of the world would love to bring us down. Don't let the media and the poltical thugs of the world fool you like a herd of sheep being led to slaughter. Stand on your own two feet and do not bend down on four. Fight for freedom! Let freedom and liberty prevail!

Posted by: Bogdan | June 13, 2008 10:53 AM

American politics is full of "divide and conquer" tactics. Its the same all sound bytes: "rich against the poor", "white against black", homosexual against heterosexual, command market against free market, and son and so on. We still are the greatest country in the world. The tryants of the world would love to bring us down. Don't let the media and the poltical thugs of the world fool you like a herd of sheep being led to slaughter. Stand on your own two feet and do not bend down on four. Fight for freedom! Let freedom and liberty prevail!

Posted by: Bogdan | June 13, 2008 10:53 AM

"WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PRESIDENT BUSH AS BEING THE WORST PRESIDENT WE EVER HAD. HE RAPED THE WORLD." -Really? Some flaming liberal must be quite upset about Bush, and to go that far? In the last 8 years, the world has been ruined and "raped" by George W. Bush... it is disgusting to see that type of language used when not warranted. W will go down as one of the greatest leaders of this nation, although it will be decades from now when the world looks back and sees him as the leader in the fight against a true evil, a greater evil than was seen with the Nazi's of WWII. These terrorists should have no rights under our constitution as they are not U.S. Citizens at all. There is no discussion on that, it is a fact, and traitors (U.S. citizens who have fought against the U.S.) Should be executed in the most timely matter.

Posted by: Greg | June 13, 2008 10:42 AM

"Realitycheck" perfectly exemplifies the ignorance of Americans who like to refer to the U.S. Constitution as if they know what they are talking about, but obviously don't.

"Realitycheck" writes "These people are enemy combatants, not US citizens, they fall under the Geneva Convention, not the U.S. Constitution."

Article VI, paragraph 2, of the U.S. Constitution makes treaties the supreme law of the land on the same footing with acts of Congress. This includes the Geneva Conventions, to which the U.S. is a signatory. So, next time, you would do well to actually read the U.S. Constitution before you start citing it in support of your ill-informed opinions.

Posted by: Guy B. Jones | June 13, 2008 10:40 AM

The Job of the President of America is to protect the American People against terrorists and destruction of the the REPUBLIC. The Guatanamo detainees are a danger to both! The Military knows best and as Scallia said: "America will regret this decision". Some of the detainees released, quickly returned to their agenda of terrorism. Young Americans lack education in the "REAL" history of this country.
This decision should give the Military a right to interrogate the enemy and shoot them on site and not waste any funds, time or efforts on giving them the benefit of the doubt. The Court, Media, and Geneva should not interfere with the Military! Did Geneva hide funds of the Nazis? hmmmmmmm

Posted by: Pat | June 13, 2008 10:40 AM

But how do we know they are guilty unless we put them on trial? They are not guilty just because Bush and Cheney say so, for they are not exactly paragons of honesty.

McCain should be glad that the North Vietnamese did not simply execute him when they shot him down for bombing their country. As far as I know, the United states had never declared war against Vietnam, and what McCain was doing (bombing a country without a declaration of war) qualifies as awar crime under international law.

Posted by: alzach | June 13, 2008 10:39 AM

What is McCain doing that he cant keep up with U.S. current events?
Obama can't be keeping him THAT busy.
I suppose its nap time.

Posted by: wtf? | June 13, 2008 10:31 AM

There are times in this evil world even in the freest of nations (which we aren't always although more often than most) where survival demands that under very specific conditions you violate the principles of societal decency and goodness.

We fought a civil war where those that disagreed weren't Mirandized but instead whose corpses were piled high on the battlefields of our own soil. The South didn't have Constitutional rights for a number of years after the war.

During WWI the Sedition acts were passed that removed many of the rights to protest.

During WWII un-uniformed enemy sabotours were executed by military courts. We firebombed civilian populations and nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These things not only insured our victory but also reduced our losses in men and materials used to defeat our enemies. Could we have won without doing so? Perhaps but it would have taken years more and cost thousands more lives and billions in materials.

These creatures...for lack of a better word...aren't uniformed soldiers of a hostile nation. They are enemy spies and sabotuers and the Geneva Convention specifically denies them any rights or consideration whether on the battlefield or ON THE SOIL OF THE UNITED STATES. the only recognized legal fate of captured spies of a foreign power has always been death.

The fact that the Supreme Court has now arrogantly given to itself the power to submit decisions that should be only under the review of the military and its commander-in-cheif is frightning.

This is Bush's fault though. He should have never brought them to Gitmo or to any recognized place in the Western world where they could get legal representation, the UN, the Red Cross, and the media.

They should have been taken out and shot as soon as their interrogations were over and only hold on to those whom there is some question over their involvement. This especially applies to FORMER (as in they took up arms in a foreign country against us) US citizens - they should have been executed as soon as they were identified.

Posted by: Wayne | June 13, 2008 10:19 AM

To Ron Smith. So all the communist and terrorist countries are supporting Barack Obama - They cannot support anyone - they don't vote. The can voice an opinion of someone they can TALK to - like England, France, Germany, India and others.Even Reagon and Bush I TALKED TO COMMUNISTS - NIXON WENT AND OPENED RELATIONS WITH CHINA, REAGON TALKED TO RUSSIA AND THE WALL FELL. What are you afraid of?

Posted by: Sue | June 13, 2008 10:12 AM

what id like to know is why is it that all the communist and terrorist countries are all backing barack obama for president there has to be a good reason for this why arent you reporting on this.

Posted by: ron smith | June 13, 2008 10:02 AM

The biggest problem with Guantanamo is that the Bush administration tried to create a legal situation that is neither under out Constitution nor under the Geneva Conventions. The detainees in Guantanamo are either criminals or prisoners of war; it is not up to the Oval Office to create some new classification of its own accord. That's why this was the correct decision. Now, if only we had an executive branch that would abide by our laws and by the repeated decisions of the Supreme Court.

Posted by: Roy | June 13, 2008 10:02 AM


Posted by: silk | June 13, 2008 9:58 AM

Peter Attwood 4:37 AM gave specific examples of why this ruling is good.

I want to address the general principle. It is possible to support this ruling and have little interest in the men detained at Gitmo. The citizens of our country must have confidence in our government. The final arbiters of trials are judges, in this case it is federal judges and ultimately the supreme court. In our system of justice trials are not overseen by prosecutors and ultimately the president.. Had the minority prevailed the prosecutor, the president, would also be the judge. That is a perversion of the way Americans do things.

My support for the majority has little to do with my feelings for the detainees but rather for my love of this country as hard to believe as that may be for those who seek vengeance like reality check 8:11 AM. The difference between reality check and me is not in our patriotism but whether we seek revenge or retribution.

Posted by: Gator-ron | June 13, 2008 9:54 AM

Fellow Americans,

This is all about the U.S. Constitution. That's why you have to pick someone who knows the Laws thus he/she cannot abuse his/her executive power.

Posted by: Susie | June 13, 2008 9:50 AM

Always a joy to see so much hate passed around, especially from those totally oblivious to history.
Who gave Osama all the tactics and weapons?
Wow the great war hero Reagan, in his attempt to fight the Russians.
Please Love and appreciate those that assist terrorist organizations.
Sadam wow was that a picture with Cheney shaking hands with him. I am done being asked to clean up for Republican ineptitude. Wonder why those college educated people love Obama, because they know history. Go King George you rule.

Posted by: Pilliger | June 13, 2008 9:42 AM

To Editor:

WP really needs some sort of system to block hate speech in this section like NYT: Some of postings only waste our limited space, and apparently some can not read newspapers.

Posted by: peace4world | June 13, 2008 9:42 AM

As I have recently visited our nation's capital and am again baffled by unending fascination, awe and curiosity, who were these guys, the framers? They studied the rise and fall all the great civilizations of history, those causes which created them, those elements which propelled them forward and upward and those forces which eventually sent them spiraling downward into the dust of history only to be remembered in fable, legend and fragile record of their greatness which once was. Armed with such knowledge and an ethical, moral, spiritual insight our forefathers forged a living document which has more than survived, thrives, to this very day. It is a document which serves a foundation to a triad form of government which has afforded consenting and dissenting opinions a forum for expression that has within it instruments which insures the protection for such expressions, objective, subjective or otherwise, and has as shining beacon one ideal which challenges all the ideologues of the ages, that ideal is no system is worth protecting which does not recognize that tyranny is truly the suppression of voice whether that is of the minority or the majority.


Posted by: Curtis Johnson | June 13, 2008 9:37 AM

As I have recently visited our nation's capital and am again baffled by unending fascination, awe and curiosity, who were these guys, the framers? They studied the rise and fall all the great civilizations of history, those causes which created them, those elements which propelled them forward and upward and those forces which eventually sent them spiraling downward into the dust of history only to be remembered in fable, legend and fragile record of their greatness which once was. Armed with such knowledge and an ethical, moral, spiritual insight our forefathers forged a living document which has more than survived, thrives, to this very day. It is a document which serves a foundation to a triad form of government which has afforded consenting and dissenting opinions a forum for expression that has within it instruments which insures the protection for such expressions, objective, subjective or otherwise, and has as shining beacon one ideal which challenges all the ideologues of the ages, that ideal is no system is worth protecting which does not recognize that tyranny is truly the suppression of voice whether that is of the minority or the majority.


Posted by: Curtis Johnson | June 13, 2008 9:37 AM

Posted by: phred6 | June 12, 2008 6:53 PM

I should think Ms. Justice Ginzberg might have some of these detainees, granted habeas corpus and rights formerly reserved for US citizens, over for dinner. Maybe one of the Jewish Holdays would be a good time. I'm quite sure they won't be jumping bail.
Do I smell a little anti-Semitic rat here?

The theoretical foundation of our rights is the concept of natural rights. They stem form being human, not American. These rights are protected by, not created by, the US Constitution and it's amendments. You must have been absent from Civics 101 when that lesson was covered.

Posted by: Neo1153 | June 13, 2008 9:04 AM

What better way is there to help create loathing for the USA and it's citizens than to cast broad nets among the masses, imprison them and then after years release them after skipping our due process. Yeah, that is G. Bay and Bush's process.
The detainees are prisoners of war not pawns for Bush to play with. If there is validity then they should be detained, if not then they should not be captured in the first place. We do not allow guilty until proven innocent.
Our government uses social engineering to control the populous of the US first and the globe second.
It is time for us to have a president that is willing to cut all funding that leaves our country (it is the citizens of the USA hard earned ... and taken money NOT the governments). Forever? No, just until we regain our superiority and respect as the global power we once were AND we take care of our own first! The past 16 years of presidency have given all this away. Unfortunately, the two choices we currently have for our next supreme commander are of the same ill cloth.

Posted by: Frederick VonFlintstone | June 13, 2008 8:59 AM

"Barack Obama was an active part of ACORN at the time, helping it legally in court and helping it organize voters. By 1996, ACORN and the New Party were essentially the same body. Along with the Democratic Socialists of America, the New Party endorsed Barack Obama in his State Senate bid."

My grandmother always use to tell me, "Show me who your friends are, and I will tell you what you are."

Barack Hussein Obama is a socialist/marxist. He wants to tear down the U.S. any way he can. The Muslim brotherhood has declared that the U.S. government will perish from within. I wonder how they think that will happen - Obama.

Posted by: Adrian | June 13, 2008 8:58 AM

I believe the declaration of Independence and the Constitution talk about the inalienable, God given right of "ALL MEN'. I do not believe it says only US citizens. The Supreme Court majority got it right, thank God. That is the basis and soul of this country.

Posted by: mrchick | June 13, 2008 8:36 AM

Everybody should read the following post: (Posted by: reality check|June 13, 2008 8:11 AM).

That post is a prime example of exactly why this country needs to change. The poster (reality check) is wrong on so many levels that it blows my mind that any AMERICAN who understands anything about the foundations of this country could possibly come to the conclusions at which he has arrived.

Thank God and the writers of the Constitution that complete, absolute idiots and bigots like reality check are in a very small minority.

We are a nation of laws and if you don't like it - as you say - leave!!

BTW I am a WASP, a retired 24-year military officer, and a 'R'.

You, sir, are a complete idiot, and I served so you could be an idiot - but that doesn't make you right.

Posted by: swanieaz | June 13, 2008 8:35 AM

Medi Dara Alavi - the scenario you so eloquently outlined is exactly why people of reason and intelligence in this country are happy about the Court ruling yesterday. We've already trod down the slippery slope of declaring U.S. Citizens "enemy combatants," and denying them their rights as citizens to be tried in a court of law. I shudder to think what else the Bush administration is capable of, but I have a feeling if Obama takes office in January 2009 we'll have plenty of time to find out.

Posted by: Mazarin | June 13, 2008 8:28 AM

These people are enemy combatants, not US citizens, they fall under the Geneva Convention, not the U.S. Constitution...I question the loyalty to their own country of the people who support this ruling. These are terrorists and enemy combatants, they have no right to civil or criminal recourse against this country. Not to mention, the cost passed on to the American people by a group that has caused nothing but hardship for this country and it's citizens. The attorney's who brought this to the Supreme Court ought to be brought up on charges of treason and the Supreme Court needs to realize it's job is not to make policy. This atrocity against the American people needs to be addressed and the Supreme Court needs to be removed.

Posted by: reality check | June 13, 2008 8:11 AM

"Sympathy with hardcore Islamic militants ?

Are you people out of your mind ?"

No, we're Americans and Patriots. If you don't like freedom and liberty for all you are welcome to move to some third world dictator ship where "Enemies of the people" are thrown in jail forever with no trial.

There is the American Way and the Terrorist way and I'm glad the supreme court just choose the American Way.

Posted by: Megaduck | June 13, 2008 7:56 AM

McCain wants to be President, the ultimate defender of the U.S. Constitution and the rights it memorializes, but he seems to lack an understanding of the concept of "due process." Only one detainee at Guantanamo has been tried and convicted of any crime. The majority of men detained there have been already released. Many detainees were fingered by neighbors eager to get their land or possessions. My point is that to assume all these men are guilty "terrorists," before even presenting formal charges and evidence against them, is the exact kind of tyranny and abuse of power that the Founders were seeking to prevent when they drafted the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Posted by: Guy B. Jones | June 13, 2008 7:23 AM

I think the court ruling is in the best interest of the American government and its system.As a government with democracy as a model in the world, this puts US still in the front row of human right campaigner,world peace promoter and mediator through her fair, just and transparent views on issues.As a leader, US does this so as to lead other leaders of the world towards the 21st century ideals. This is even so as the two presidential candidates have strong support and appreciation for the ruling.Moreso I give kudos to US juduciary.

Posted by: south-south | June 13, 2008 5:56 AM

Spencer wrote:-
"The Constitution protects the citizens of the United States of America. Not Terrorists, not illegal combatants, and definitely not persons on foreign soil. Get over it. "
The US Constitution (amongst other things) binds the government to any treaties, signed and ratified. That includes the Geneva Conventions (all of them).

The Geneva Coneventions do not recognize any such category as 'unlawful combatants'. Indeed, the Fourth Convention goes out of its way to deny any gap between PoWs and civilian prisoners.

Posted by: strum | June 13, 2008 5:43 AM

As an American-Iranian citizen I would like to amply some of the statement Schuyler Thorpe made above:

Let me put this simple question to all of the people, led by President Bush, who disagree with the Supreme Court decision that gives not just American citizens, but citizens of the world, the right to habeas corpus.

Many people will argue that the detainees are enemy combatants, who shouldn't have the same rights as American citizens, because they allegedly killed Americans in the 9/11 attacks. In other words, Mr. Bush and everyone who agrees with him, would simply disregard the United States Constitution, simply because while we may have no hard evidence against some of the enemy combatants, we have very good reasons to suspect some of these people may be very dangerous and if released may become involved in future terrorists attacks against the United States of America.

Now, let's just imagine for one moment that our government (which currently is under the control of President George W. Bush), had the FBI or CIA break down your door one night and declare that you were an enemy combatant, but gave you no reason. Possibly it was simply because of a phone call you made to Iran, because you are of Persian descent, and although you were born in America, and our an American citizen, as I am, and your name is Medi Dara Alavi. Then you recall, you made the innocent mistake of making an overseas phone call to Iran, trying to reach your Grandfather. You dialed the wrong number and were connected to a terrorist group, instead of your Grandfather. A few minutes later you re-dialed the same number, and a day later try again. Despite the fact that you talk less than a minute on each of these misdirected calls, the U.S. government was "listening in." As a result, your have become a "suspect" Iranian-American citizen, simply because of your repeated attempts to get through to a phone number you repeatedly mis-dialed in Iran. As a result of this innocent mistake, a few weeks later, you are seized and put into jail under the sweeping powers of the Patriot Act. You don't know why, but the reason is presumably because you "may: be a possible enemy terrorist.

Given the nature of the Bush administration's perchance for paranoia and secrecy, as well as disregard for the rules and laws that govern our nation, how could you, an American citizen of Iranian descent, possibly defend or even acquit yourself, in the light of these terrifying circumstances?

As an American citizen, shouldn't I have the right to be heard in a court of law, even if I was brought up as a Muslim and took a religious oath on the Koran instead of the Bible? That is what the framers of the Constitution of the United States decided, over 300 years ago, wasn't it. And
isn't basically what the U.S. Supreme Court decided today, despite having 7 members appointed by Republican Presidents, and only 2 members appointed by a Democratic President.

Posted by: Medi Dara Alavi | June 13, 2008 5:38 AM

Obama, McCain
Whoever becomes next president of America has been giving power by the America court to change current hostile global atmosphere, terrorists should be challenged to come under one umbrella and state their case against American government through transparent channels. If their case is found to be a true injustice done to the poor or rich people of Arab Africa Asia and America. Be them from Iraq, Palestine, Iran North Korea, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, etc, America should compromise to solve such problems because America is built to defend human rights. The new slogan should be- tell us Americans the wrong we've done, not we will find them wherever they are and crush them.
The only way forward for American government on global leadership is to stop focusing on one sided diplomacy in internal conflict of a nation, is time we look at basic not background. should always check how deeply represented is the ruling power of any nation in conflict, should check to see if truly the elected is a good leader through his hand work especially on the kind of facilities made available to the ruling masses such as electricity, road net work, schools, Medicare, welfares looking at such country economy.
If I'm asked to interpret the definition of global leader, should be a leader that supervises leaders. Where by the leader is like one of the leaders he supervises, nothing will move forward. for example ,if every time American ambassador meet with a corrupt nation leader and kept telling him publicly that his road water electricity schools hospitals transportation system etc is not what it ought to be. That leader will return home with those alarms sounding on his head, if a sincere leader he will seek solution and should be help properly. By helping him put proper roads water electricity hospitals schools etc, by setting an administration that will see that money allocated for any project should not be diverted to his pocket or his administrators' pocket.
We all know how to stop corruption and put things in order, no nation under this universe exist without true leaders born among them. Help poor nations ,help people that are tightly cornered by wrong kings generals presidents prime ministers and oppressive majority that still exist in east west north and south current universe. make white house a court of peace instead of ceremonial house of world power, if disagreed people believe they will get peace in white house invite them and sit them down and tell them the truth of the matter they dispute about.
American government can do this by putting up every organizations rebels terrorists cases on the table of their nations, by compelling ruling government to inquire or listen to their demand. Any organizations rebels or terrorists whose demands are for themselves rather than unjustly treated people should be discouraged through reasoning through their religious and community leaders. Leaders that are accused of corruption should be changed with another leader in same ruling party till their terms are over for the sake of peace and justice. one man should not be allowed to destroy a nation for sake of his party been
Elected, is time American government help change colonial policies that still exist in poor nations and middle east. American government should focus on better harmonious world for Europe Arab Africa Israel Latin America Asia, else they should completely hand over global leadership to united nation .

Posted by: Anthony Martin Okafor | June 13, 2008 4:41 AM


Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 4:41 AM

Kate earlier stated that the protections of the US Constitution are only for American citizens. She is quite mistaken. Reading the document, she will find that the Bill of rights, the 14th Amendment, and other such refer to "persons," not US citizens. It's a Roman imperial idea that citizens are entitled to equal treatment and have rights while non-citizens have no rights that anyone is bound to respect.

While we're in there, we have no evidence that the people in Guantanamo are terrorists. That is precisely why they don't want to bring these people to trail in a real court. Most were in the wrong place at the wrong time, were sold by bounty hunters and picked up on nothing but the word of those profiting from their sale, and in some cases were as young as 12 or 13.

Posted by: Peter Attwood | June 13, 2008 4:37 AM

The responses that are posted here, shows how crazy, bigoted, and imperfect America is like the rest of us. With a lot of money though, and some sophisticated armoury, you wield a great influence around the world. No wonder, Osama bin laden, Amedinejad, and people like them, believe it is still all about acquiring wealth and weapons of mass destruction, and bringing down your greatest threats. America believes this obviously. Thanks to you all, this is nothing but a sophisticated jungle.

Posted by: dennis | June 13, 2008 4:31 AM

You have not read the opinion? And you're willing that we move on, before you have enough time to respond? You want Gitmo closed? What do we do to the residents? For God's sake, who is this McCain guy? Is this how he intends to tackle the complex issues of United States as president?

Posted by: meks | June 13, 2008 4:15 AM

"The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo -- yet another failed policy supported by John McCain," Obama said.

Sounds like Obama's "losing his bearings" or "getting confused".

Posted by: AsperGirl | June 13, 2008 4:12 AM

"The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo -- yet another failed policy supported by John McCain," Obama said.

How can Obama say this when McCain always pushed to close the Guantanamo Bay camp? Isn't this statement kind of over the line into falsehood tarritory?

Was Obama questioned about this statement? Is he okay now with outright lying about his opponent now and what does this say about the rationality of his opposition against MCain?

Posted by: AsperGirl | June 13, 2008 4:11 AM

What is certain is that President Bush has not respected the constitution of our land and besmirched it greatly. The terrorists held in Guantanamo could have been dealt with in a more formal way that did not make a mockery of our core values.

Bush set aside constitutional rules in a way that was not right.

Posted by: Jorge | June 13, 2008 3:11 AM

What a very sad and very long thread of conversation, with no one listening to anyone else.

The constitution was written for US citizens. Not for the world. Not for who ever we want to force it on. There are rules of war and conduct specific to prisoners or war. The constitution doesn't apply to anyone not born in the US or who hasn't been granted citizenship.

How very strange that people are arguing about the Supreme Court and the constitution... Bush broke it. He took it away. It's gone. Take a good long look at the patriot act. We have lost our rights as citizens. Yet we want to extend constitutional rights to people captured on the battlefield?

Is everyone in GITMO guilty? Nope. I am quite sure there are some who are innocent. Happens in every prison (as much as we try to deny that). Under the rules of war they should all be given their day in court. A war tribunal will decide their fate. The trials are put off until such a time as they are no longer deemed a threat, or that the war is over. Trials have and will most likely continue to be held against the soldiers running the detainment facilities. How about the Supreme Court stop wasting time on what is basically a public relations gimick and actually vote on making the US sign the Geneva Convention?

Justice will take time for those being held. A long long time. The war will take time and lives. Walking out and letting the whole middle east implode at this point however would be even worse. And in the end McCain will get my vote because unlike clueless Obama, rebuilding and stabilizing after a war can take a VERY long time. We still have troops in Germany and Japan.

We also have soldiers still MIA or POW (thats Missing in Action or Prisoner of War)from Vietnam, Korea, Afganistan, Iraq, and many other 3rd world countries. Yet I don't see people crying over their violated rights, screaming that they have been detained and tortured.

Posted by: Kate | June 13, 2008 3:01 AM

It's always interesting to read the opinions of the so-called liberal left. The DNC and Obama talk about core values and the rule of law while their surrogates the ACLU (Anti-Christian Lawyers Union) continuously and tirelessly work to subvert and reshape America into some kind of Marxist Aldus Huxley Brave New World Pie in the Sky Utopia. Liberal judges continue to use the penumbra and emanations argument to further the Social Marxist ideals they were brainwashed into believing in during their University days. The detainees at Gitmo are not US Citizens. How can they be entitled to rights under the US Constitution? (See penumbra and emanations.) Those of you with core values that lead them to believe that these enemy combatants are entitled to hearings in US Criminal Courts should re-examine those values. These people want to kill you. And they are just as much convinced of their righteousness in doing so as you are in your belief in the wondrous Ecotopia that Mr. Obama will deliver unto the American People.
Please try thinking independently. Don't believe everything you hear on NPR and NBC. George Bush is not the enemy. He's trying to protect you. Ok, maybe he hasn't done such a great job, but I believe he is sincere in his efforts. And remember this, President Bush could not have done anything without the approval of the Democrats in Congress and the Senate.

Those of you who believe that the Patriot Act is being used against them should wrap themselves in aluminum foil. If you do a double wrap, they won't be able to track you via the embedded microchip anymore. And if you think the GOP is organizing paramilitary squads to squash civil unrest, you're wrong. It's the DNC and their Union goon squads that are going around dissuading Republican voters by any means possible. Democrats should also remember that you don't have to prove US Citizenship to vote. This would apparently disenfranchise the poor people who can't afford to get a driver's license or something. This also means that you are free to register your dog, cat, goldfish and gerbil to vote. Dear departed relatives and illegal aliens (and maybe those guys detained down in Gitmo) are free to register. Like they used to say in Chicago (or probably still do): vote and vote often. Cheers!

Posted by: rongjon | June 13, 2008 2:58 AM

How can we understand, when we are still gropping in darkness where thier bombs flung us. How can we understand when our minds still grope through the rubbled blasts there tore and stunned us. is 9/11 such a forgotten history? how about London, Tanzania, Kenya, yemen, Somalia. America is a great country that is a sleep to the reality, you want to warm yourselves to a people that hate your guts. they are waiting for the final embrace which will end it all by a thrust of the dagger through your guts. Dont let your blind hatred for Bush obscure your judgement. He might have done it wrongly but at least he had the guts to stand up and say enough is enough... while America slept

Posted by: clive | June 13, 2008 2:45 AM

I support Obama's opinion on this topic, but I question how much he really cares about the constitution or the law of the land, for instance he claims its important to uphold the laws in the constitution, but at the same time he's a strong supporter of gun control which most definitely violates our constitutional right to bare arms.... Interesting food for thought there...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 2:30 AM

60 Minutes recently did a story on a 19 year old German boy named Murat Kurnaz who was imprisoned and tortured for 5 years by the United States before being released.

This is why Guantanamo should be closed.

Posted by: Justin Foral | June 13, 2008 2:10 AM

"9/11 was just a test by the bush regime to see how much power they could siphon from a false flag attack. I wouldn't put it past them to do it again on a larger scale before November; declare marshal law, suspend the elections and establish a totalitarian dicktatorship. A country (and world) run by total di@ks"

Funny and yet very scary.
not only is that possible it's highly probable.

Posted by: 2cents2 | June 13, 2008 2:07 AM

I guess my main concern is U.S. citizens are being sent to Guantanamo Bay without trails. If terrorist who aren't from this country are tried, the justice system hopefully will do its job and give rightful punishment. I guess what I'm trying to say is terrorist will get what they deserve, death, in this life or the next. But there must be a trial because innocent people foreigners or not, have been convicted to death for crimes they did not commit.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 2:02 AM

It is absolutely atrocious and anti American to hold anyone with being charged and convicted. And yes, under Homeland security the potential to group American citizens into this is very real, and scary. Wait until the government starts doing this to their own citizens, what recourse will they have..absolutely none!!!

Very scary indeed, the government has WAAAAAY too much power over the people!

Posted by: Allen | June 13, 2008 1:58 AM


So long as we keep playing the role of the bad guy--the terrorists will never stop attacking us.

Here at home. Or abroad.

Just how much of your American Pride is worth all this endless war, killing of innocent people, and wasting away our economic strength?

At some point--not now--you're going to start seeing the futility of your own pointificated lust for revenge.

You're going to find out just what kind of damage your vengeance and personal crusade has cost this nation so dearly.

Hate me all you want, but my words ring true.

We are a nation of justice and freedom. If we cannot uphold the laws which our founding fathers bled and died for, then we aren't the democratic nation so many the world over had beheld us to be.

As an ancient philosopher once said: "To the vain go the foolish."

Posted by: Schuyler Thorpe | June 13, 2008 1:54 AM

Maybe there's something I've missed since we first took up the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: why didn't the President ask Congress to make a formal declaration of war? (Don't think you can surmise how I feel about whether or not we should be there; that's a separate consideration. You can't.)

If there had been formal declarations of war, then the "enemy combatants" would clearly be POW's, their legal status clear. The Geneva Convention would kick in, which doesn't afford the same rights as the US Constitution, but it provides *some* cover for POW's.

Neither of the extremes we so often see in this kind of discussion is, IMHO, ultimately the answer.

Just my two cents' worth . . .

Posted by: MekhongKurt | June 13, 2008 1:46 AM

Sympathy with hardcore Islamic militants ?

Are you people out of your mind ?

You must read this..

Obama's father was Muslim and hence he will always have a softcorner for terrorists.

read this and than comment it.

When the Afganistan War Broke out, terrorists from Chechnya/Pakistan were joined Mullah Omar and those who are held are not legitimate citizens of any country.

Posted by: HIND | June 13, 2008 1:45 AM

Did anyone realize that under the Patriot Act an American Citizen can be accused of terrorism (which is defined in very loose terms and can mean any challenge against the government), loose their citizenship, even if they were born in the U.S. and be sent to Guantanamo Bay without ever seeing a count room. That right, Convicted without a trial. This actually happend to a college student who was raising some questions in regards to our government, I believe in Portland. Undoughtably this case had something to do with the Supreme Court Rulings.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 1:44 AM

So let me put this to everyone who thinks terrorists shouldn't have "rights".

All right then. Fair enough. These people shouldn't have rights because they killed people.

Let's just imagine for one moment--that your own government (the Bush administration) had their people bust down your door in the middle of the night and declared you an enemy combatant for no given reason.

Given the nature of this administration's perchance for paranoia, secrecy, and the like, how would you be able to defend--let alone *acquit*--yourself in light of these terrifying circumstances?

As an American, you *should* have rights, right?


Not according to Bush. From his POV, you *are* the enemy and you deserve no such rights.

So you spend days and days down the road--incommunicado--cut off from the outside world. You don't have access to a phone. To a lawyer. To a court of law.


Under such war time provisions meted out by this adminstration, you are to sit there and rot until such time that you are deemed no longer a threat, or you are convicted of either aiding or albeiting terrorism.

In the meantime, you spend lonely hours in your cell, cut off from all outside stimuli.

No reason given.

The days stretch into months and every now and then you are subjected to what amounts to torture through psychological and physical deprivation techniques used by the CIA and approved by Bush, the AG, and the Pentagon through covert means.

Out of the public's eye.

Your mind starts to unravel bit by bit--leaving you to wonder if you actually did any wrong. If you actually *did* kill people.

Your jailers tell you you did, you are a threat, and you will be punished however they see fit--until the time comes when a trial might be deemed in your best interest.

But you aren't charged with a crime.

Your jailers tell you: "That'll come later. When we feel like it."

But you keep screaming and screaming at that point that you are an American! And you have rights!

These same people whom incarcerated you--just laugh in your face; then kick you. Or punch you. Or subject you to more mind-numbing deprivation techniques.

Anything to soften you up. To make you confess under duress.

Or just to shut you up.

This goes on for what amounts to years. And still, they don't charge you.

Until you go to court on trumped up charges.

But by then, you're past caring. You just want this all to end...


Sound familiar?

It should. This was done by one American we should all know. A man whom was only guilty by association--but later convicted on charges that didn't fit the original crime.

The crime of being a terrorist and working for Al-Qaida. Of threatening to blow up cities with a 'dirty bomb' and apartments with natural gas.

The man in question?

Jose Padilla.

An American citizen.

Posted by: Schuyler Thorpe | June 13, 2008 1:41 AM

The Gitmo prisoners are not Americans (whine to FDR about bogus incarcerations, leftwits) -- and are lucky they aren't already dead for the horrific trouble they've caused and supported. The SCOTUS lives in some fairy tale not even George Washington could have imagined. Pathetic ruling.

Posted by: Howard Scream | June 13, 2008 1:37 AM

"...have some compassion and tolerance..." ??? These clowns were caught on the BATTLEFIELD, with computers containing ATTACK PLANS, aiding & abetting TALIBAN. Appeasement, alas, is not peace. Never was. Never will be. Ask any surviving Rwandan, or Somali, or Sudanese, or Vietnamese...

Posted by: Skippy O'Bonger | June 13, 2008 1:33 AM

These are the attitudes that keep Americans isolated from the rest of the world. Should I not be treated as humanely as an American criminal? Are we not all human? Do unto others.....

Posted by: Ugbased | June 13, 2008 1:33 AM

I actually agree with Obama on this one. A government which feels it's above the law of the land is not a government ran be the people, and its certainly not a free government, our four fathers built the constitution in such a way as to protect the people of this country from the very crimes the Bush administration is committing behind CLOSED DOORS AND in secrecy or in the "Name of National Security," which many of you all remember is the same reason President Nixon gave to cover up Watergate and withhold evidence which would have and did eventually find him guilty. We've got to come together to combat the Patriot Act and hold the government accountable to the law, or collectively we will no longer be free to govern ourselves.

Posted by: Lexie H. | June 13, 2008 1:31 AM

Gitmo closed? It should be EXPANDED -- with Obama the next new resident.

Posted by: Ben DeNova | June 13, 2008 1:29 AM

President Bush's trusted lieutenant Musharraf betrayed him after consuming $12 billion, otherwise like OBL would have met al-Zarqawi's fate.
OBL is hiding in Baluchistan province where even Musharraf is not willing to > attack. Islam is so united when it comes to protect World's No.1 terrorist, that an army general also doesn't dare to go against their wish.

I think people should try to understand the difference between a 'murder' and 'slain'.

Ram slew Ravana.
Bush slew Zarqawi and desperately and sincerely waiting to slay OBL.; BTW ,
How serious is our Manmohan SIngh ? (read further)

Naxlites murdered COPs.
COPs slew Naxlites.

The difference between murder & slay is - "killing a perpetrator, who
initiated a violence/murder is a 'slay' and a righteous work", while killing by a terrorist is "unlawful and a murder".
While our Indian leaders are busy on appeasing Islamic Terrorists, Bush was busy on hunting down terrorists with utmost sincerity.

Bush killing terrorists is a righteous job (a reaction) while terrorists killing civilians is a sin (action).

Please analyse Why America is safe heaven for people, while India has turned
a safe heaven for terrorists, where hanging of a terrorist is stayed by UPA
just because that will upset a section of Muslims in J&K .

Posted by: Hind | June 13, 2008 1:29 AM

Is this America? The country which has a constitution providing for equal protection of the laws, equal rights and privileges and due process? I am so appaled at the writers here. Please have some compassion and tolerance on persons who have neither been convicted of any of
the accusations of terrorism so strongly
asserted. Please continue to demand respect in this world by being the fair minded and value nation which earned us so much respect and leadership around the world.

Posted by: judy | June 13, 2008 1:28 AM

Appreciate President Bush for his passion and detrmination to hunt down terrorists.

US lost 3000+ brave soldiers but it helped millions of Iraqi's to live under democracy. It hunted down Al-Quida and keep doing so..

You are safe only because of President Bush.

Posted by: HIND | June 13, 2008 1:25 AM

Obama's willingness to afford non-citizens -- TERRORISTS at that -- automatic rights and taxpayer privileges should scare any decent American.

Posted by: Alexi Ballsless | June 13, 2008 1:25 AM

No doubt on the M.I.C.

Blackwater just this month opened a training facility in San Diego to train mercs (mostly ex-military) for US civilian control during national emergencies. There are also several federally funded detention facilities going up in rural areas with rail access across the country.

Can you say police state coming soon to a town near you.

Posted by: conspiracy reality | June 13, 2008 1:23 AM

To Richard,

I guess you believe it would be OK if "enemy combatants" and "terrorist" like Bush/Cheney and Co. were given the same royal treatment by our adversaries? The rest of the world can only take so much of America's arrogance before they decide to take matters into their own hands, kinda like the cowboy diplomacy that Bush slings around.

Posted by: MY Muslim | June 13, 2008 1:21 AM

Ivmacp brings up a frightening possibility. I was in the U.S. military during the 1970's stationed in the Philippines when President Ferdinand Marcos, during his last term, did exactly that. A stacked Supreme Court there approved his actions.

Posted by: RGHTJD | June 13, 2008 1:20 AM

Have we forgotten the lessons the Nazis taught us during the second world war?

It's easy to rally the people around a singular cause--than it is to convince people that they are under attack and need to throw everything out the window in order to survive.

Bush and Cheney have simply upped the ante. They think that by usurping the laws, morals, and values of this nation--we can certainly do anything we want; because no one would *dare* check us in our time of vengeance and hatred.

9/11 was certainly a dark time for America, but it needn't have gone this far.

We have LAWS people. We are a nation OF laws. Not a nation of reckless endangerment, total anarchy, and a complete disregard for human life and people's rights.

This ruling has put Bush's war crimes in the spotlight once again. Once again, him and his minions are tripping over themselves to justify their actions--and talking about more legislation to cover their butts.

Because they know--once they leave office--they are fair game.

But we need to remind ourselves that we are Americans. We aren't savages. And no matter what the crime or the intent, we don't go stooping to the same level as our enemies.

Posted by: Schuyler Thorpe | June 13, 2008 1:20 AM

Its really simple:

They are not Americans. We are not doing anything different to them than their own countries have the right and authority to do. When they become citizens of the US, then grant them their rights.

Posted by: Karious | June 13, 2008 1:19 AM

President Bush made this problem come about.

The issue is that most of the prisoners at GITMO are classifeid as illegal enemy combatants. Which under the Geneva Convention means that they were captured and were not wearing a distinctive uniform, which would have given them classification as a "Enemy Combatant". An illegal enemy combtant is not afforded all protections under the Geeneva Convention. Since they are classified as illegal enemy combatants waterboarding and other physical discomfort measures can be used to gather information. The rpblem is that when you do not give them status as "Enemey Combatants" they can then appeal for habeas corpus under our laws.

All the President had to do was have them declared "Enemy Combatants" instead of illegal enemy combatants and we could have then held them for as long as the Global War on terror continues but of course then we could not use waterboarding and the like.

Posted by: John | June 13, 2008 1:19 AM

As for Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain, one wants to appease the enemy, the other wants an extended war of 100 years. I feel sorry for whichever one becomes President on January 20, 2009, because by then our current President will have the UNited States inovlved in a war with Iran. So much fof the compassionate God-fearing President George W. Bush.

Posted by: richardcolonel | June 13, 2008 1:17 AM

I here to tell you all here that it's alays the same every election and every
candidate are the same.. They have great words for everyones itching ears but then whenever they are in office it's the same
song and dance as others before them. Obama
is pulling the wool over every Americans eyes and the Republican party is all about
the money. Is every American deaf and dumb
read between the lies.........

Posted by: ths90125 | June 13, 2008 1:13 AM

We have to remember that these detainees are prisoners of war, not American citizens therefore they have no legal rights in this country. They attacked our country in 9?11 and they attack and kill American soldiers at will, why should this country allow them to have access to legal representation. Why has their government not come to their aid? What kind of world are we living in when we have an enemy who does not care who gets hurt. They hide in the homes of innocents and then when bombs fall upon those homes, they blame The Americans. These people need to learn that they are the ones to blame when it comes to blaming anyone. As far as I am concern President Bush took the United States into a war that is going to cost many lives over time. So the President who got us over ther, needs to bring all American soldiers home. and he should stay away from Iran. Why does he want to expand a war that he knows full well he is not going to win.

Posted by: richardcolonel | June 13, 2008 1:12 AM

What most of you fail to see is that the court has written new law. Apparently everyone in the world now falls under the protection of the constitution. We had POW's in WWII on American soil should they have had access to our courts? In WWII America was not worrying about innocent people in Germany or Japan the assumption was if you lived there you new the risks and we were at war for survival. America might as well eliminate its military since most of America no longer has the stomach to win a war and just let what ever Sociallist/Communist/Lets just all get along politician take over. What ever happen to Americans attitude of kill 1 of us will kill 100 of yours. You all need to ask yourself personally what will it take for you to stand up and fight. I am afraid there are to many of you that will fight for nothing. If you do not understand what our constitution says maybe you should read it then read the history of America and our founding fathers to understand the meaning of it.

Posted by: Common Sense | June 13, 2008 1:12 AM

To Conspiracy Reality,

Remember what our former President Gen. Dwight Eisenhower said before he left office. He feared that the M.I.C. (Military Industrial Complex) would take over the country and corrupt it's soul. Notice how many favors McCain gives to his defense contractor buddies- most recently a sweet deal that cut American giant Boeing out of the deal for a foreign defense contractor with ties to McCain. It's no wonder the warmonger McCain and his talking head generals on FOX Noise want 100 years or more of war! It's good for their business!

Posted by: MY Muslim | June 13, 2008 1:05 AM

How come the "conservatives" are calling this Supreme Court "liberal"? Most of these judges were appointed by Reagan, Bush and Bush jr. They passed the "litmus" test of being anti-abortionists. Strange when I read tables are always turned by the right wingers. As long as they are protected by the constitution, everything is fine. The moment they see things going other way, they start crying. Grow up, get some education. But then most of you think going to top Ivy League Colleges is elitist and rather be high school drop outs and work as blue collar workers and then whine about your low pay and high taxes, how little you bring home after driving gas guzzling Made in Detroit cars. By the way, I am not an American, so please don't waste time telling me get out of USA as I don't like American cars.

Posted by: truthspeaker | June 13, 2008 1:03 AM

"my muslim" is right.

As Bush's hero once said:
"the vast majority of people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than a small one" Adolf Hitler

by the way 9/11 was an inside job

Posted by: conspiracy reality | June 13, 2008 12:58 AM

To Byron,

Perhaps you would want the same treatment while traveling overseas? Have you not learned any lessons this campaign season from McCain's imprisionment and torture stories from Vietnam? You probably enjoy masachism and torture treatments too!

Posted by: MY Muslim | June 13, 2008 12:53 AM

Posted by: impeach bush | June 13, 2008 12:51 AM

After seeing this statement from Obama, his clear lack of understanding the US Constitution changes my mind about voting for him. No way do we need a President who does not even realize the Constitution is for USA Citizens, and our welcomed guest, but not our enemies. It is painfully clear obama and his supporters do not have an understanding of the Foundation of our Nation. Did they even read the Federalist papers which clearly explains this? Of course it appears 5 Supreme Court judges didn't read them (Federalist Papers) or the Constitution either.

Posted by: Byron | June 13, 2008 12:46 AM

Dear Meadow,

I agree 100% with you about the Bush/Cheney doctrine of "might is right". Only Halliburton and Blackwater mercenary cronies need apply for the taxpayer giveaway contracts to aid the expansion of their oil empire. Meanwhile McCain will tell you we don't have anything left for veterans, healthcare, education, infrastructure, or any other worthwhile domestic investment. To the Bush/Cheney regime supporters I say "BOO HOO!" to you. And gas prices were going to go down after we attacked Iraq- remember that fairy tale that the Neocons floated to justify their murderous campaign for more control of oil? Some Americans are easily fooled!

Posted by: MY Muslim | June 13, 2008 12:45 AM

I say that it is about time law and order returned back to this country. Hopefully world especially Europe is watching now and we retain back respect which we had in world before neo-cons destroyed our reputation.

Posted by: Jarda1 | June 13, 2008 12:42 AM

9/11 was just a test by the bush regime to see how much power they could siphon from a false flag attack. I wouldn't put it past them to do it again on a larger scale before November; declare marshal law, suspend the elections and establish a totalitarian dicktatorship. A country (and world) run by total di@ks.

Posted by: lvmacp | June 13, 2008 12:40 AM

I respect all men and women of the military! But if we would have never gone to this unnecessary war, then you wouldn't be in harms way getting shot at, dodging rode side bombs etc. You would be right here in the homeland protecting The Great America. But reality is, we have stretched our military thin, ruined our world image and relations, and stuck in two wars with no end in sight.

Have we every paid attention to our aggression creating more enemies for us? Violence and war is not always the answer! We have people dying at alarming rates, all at the hands of fighting terror. Don't forget about Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia...people are dying. It's sad to see a human want to see another human suffer. We need to drop the hate somewhere and pick up the love. It's gone take a majority with open minds and love in their hearts, to make a difference. People lets rise up and respect each other and help our neighbors, and not just your next door neighbor.

I root for Obama, not because I'm a young black male, but because I'm inspired by his message of change and hope, which is also the message I carry with my hip hop career. I'm not your normal hip hop artist. I'm here to bring change to a culture that I feel could use some healing, just as Obama is here to bring change to a country, that could use some healing.

If your interested and want to hear my music or learn more about my Hope Hop Movement..feel free

God Bless

The Ambassador of Hope Hop!

Posted by: TC aka The Ambassador of Hope Hop | June 13, 2008 12:39 AM

How can the leaders of this country continue to speak out about democracy and freedom and condemn others for "human rights violations" when they are holding "enemy combatants" for years without a fair trial and doing many of the same things to those prisoners they have condemned other leaders for doing? Why is it that so many Americans fail to see the hypocrisy in this? Have we fallen so far that we no longer care about what's right or just? Do we only seek revenge at this point? Or do we have our heads buried so far in the sand that we can't see the direction this country is going in?

Posted by: Meadow | June 13, 2008 12:31 AM

It must be sad when one must hate to feel some sort of love, to allow someone other than yourself to tell you what is right and what is wrong, what to believe in and why. You are the perfect republician voter, just what they want not one who thinks for themself but needs them to think for you. And when things go wrong in your life they will tell you whose fault it is and why. Too many good people have fought and died for this country and the freedoms that it gives so that even some-one as narrowminded as you can say what you think[in your case let someone else tell you what you think] but you would rather this country become like china or russia where only the gov't tells you whose right or wrong no fair trials only what they want you to know!! Elect John McCain

Posted by: kert | June 13, 2008 12:29 AM

liberalism is a disease that is rotting America from the inside out! How anti- American and unpatriotic can they get!

Posted by: Duane D | June 13, 2008 12:29 AM

To Ben and Mr. Don't Care,

You seem confident that the Bush/Cheney dictatorship will pass you over for an eternal trip to GITMO! They must have you so afraid of your own shadow to make you want to defend their crimes against humanity unconditionally! Who's to say you won't be next on their list?:) At least now the Justices have prevailed with common sense and a good sense of the protections guaranteed to all people by our Constitution. Perhaps you also believe that Nazi concentration camps were fair game for the Jews? Or perhaps the internment of the Japanese during WWII is more your style? You are facists to believe that there is no rule of law to keep in check the fugitives of justice and mob bosses named Bush and Cheney.

Posted by: MY Muslim | June 13, 2008 12:23 AM

I say let all the Gitmo people go. Bring them to Chicago and let them go. Turn them over to their lawyers and the ACLU and let them free into America. Ask for volunteers to take care of them. There should be millions of volunteers, especially since these people have been unfairly persecuted - as opposed to unfairly prosecuted. Since I have been reading here that Bush and Cheney are the real terrorists, then these guys at Gitmo must be the fake terrorists and then they are perfectly harmless. LET THEM GO! BRING THEM HERE!

Plus we should stop the war on terror. It is just too difficult and controversial. Plus, since Bush and Cheney are the real terrorists, we don't really need a war on terror, since it is only 2 guys. We should just be able to have some Democrats watch them.

Posted by: Mr Don't Care | June 13, 2008 12:07 AM

shocking that we have people defending ruthless killers - the democrats dont seem to understand that these murderers dont distinguish between political parties they would kill a liberal as quickly as a conservative - this is serious stuff and i think the fellows on the court that stood up for terrorrism are traitors

Posted by: ben | June 13, 2008 12:07 AM

There are so many ignorant comments here. I agree with you Will Smith. Bush and his "genius" buddies can detain any one of us!!! NO CHARGES!!! NO LAWYERS!!! NO EXPLANATION!!! NO TIMETABLE!!! NO COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE OUTSIDE!!! I see that people have stated that there are people being released and captured again. Has there been any people released from GITMO and went home? Did any of the people released BECOME "combatants" only after being "questioned" in GITMO?

Posted by: Dee | June 12, 2008 11:51 PM

What you people need to do is read the constitution. There are reasons for check and balances. There are reasons for not holding people without charges. Educate yourself.

Posted by: Stophatenow | June 12, 2008 11:49 PM

Before we completely close down GITMO, I suggest we try Bush/Cheney & Co. at the Hague for their war crimes. Once they get the chance normally reserved for humans to defend themselves before the world court, I'm sure they'll be convicted of their crimes against humanity. Meanwhile we'll have an executive suite prepared and waiting for their arrival at the tropical island paradise called GITMO. One thing though- they should forget about bringing their Bibles with them (LOL). They'll only be torn, peeded on, and flushed down the commode of justice they created!

Posted by: MY Muslim | June 12, 2008 11:42 PM

Soooo, they THINK they want their Day in Court?


Charge against the Defendents, who are Civilians NOT Members of a Legitimate Army;

Murder, and Attempted Murder.

Punishable by DEATH!

OK by me! :-)

Just expedite BOTH Processes!

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 12, 2008 11:42 PM

Please to conservative thinkers...Stop trying to defend the issue here to a bunch of moronic libs. They wouldn't step up to defend another innocent person on their doorstep much less around the world. Amazing the praise they heap on the Court today versus when they defend innocent life in the womb. Trying to talk sense with sniveling cowards who weep over whales and worms but turn the blind eye to innocent humans is a lost cause. Spend your time rallying around people with real values. The libs always cry out for the poor and mistreated like those in gitmo, but as usual they only are willing to reach in our pockets for a coin, in this case to reduce our safety or rights. God bless the men and women who've kept us safe since 9/11 including the President and for the honor they have shown in defending the real victims of this war when it was thrust upon us in 2001.

Posted by: whywasteyourtime | June 12, 2008 11:35 PM

It is kind of funny; you hate Bush so much you will side with Terrorists over your own country. Blinded by hatred.

Posted by: Chicago | June 12, 2008 11:34 PM

While I AGREE with today's majority opinion that "all enemy combatants detained during a war, at least insofar as they are confined in an area away from the battlefield, [but] over which the United States exercises 'absolute and indefinite' control, may seek a writ of habeas corpus in federal court," I also AGREE with Chief Justice Roberts (and his fellow dissenters) that the Writ can be suspended in time of war, such as the war on terror that we find ourselves involved in right now, and that suspension power belongs to Congress, such as Congress has exercised in this case, "as the Constitution surely allows Congress to [wield]."

Posted by: KYJurisDoctor | June 12, 2008 11:15 PM

Patriotism is not only the province of soldiers and Republicans; it cannot be narrowly defined as shedding blood or saluting flags. Like any such term it is rich in meaning; dissent is definitely Patriotic, speaking Truth to Power is likewise Patriotic; both of these examples were embodied and displayed in full measure by our original Patriots as they rose up against the tyranny of the British Empire, well before a shot was fired or a flag unfurled.
I am sick and tired of being bullied by loud and arrogant types whose ideology is a hammer and everything that differs is seen as a nail to be pounded on.
I wonder how patriotic such types would feel if they were suddenly swept up in a government 'search & destroy' operation, mistaken for the 'enemy' and disappeared to some hell-hole for an 'indefinite' period of time; maybe even tortured??? I wonder if their patriotism would stand up under such a brutal and unjust situation???
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY is as American and Patriotic as it gets!!!!!
We live under the rule of law, Thank God; not under the emotional whims and tyranny of self-proclaimed Patriots, who disrespect all who disagree, and who justify the killing of the innocent as they march to the music of their private Patriotism.
I suggest that such self-proclaimed Patriots watch the film entitled, The OXBOW INCIDENT. Three innocent men are hanged by an angry possey, looking for some horse rustlers. The possey comes upon three men sleeping on the open Range, they made themselves judge, jury and executioner and, as a result, wrongly killed three innocent men.
I will never understand how anyone can justify killing the wrongly accused ...
The pathetic, unspoken answer however is ... "well, someone's got to pay!!!!"

Thank God for the rule of LAW!!!!!!!

it allows for nuance and subtely when it comes to words like

Posted by: Jody Ellsworth | June 12, 2008 11:15 PM

Lets open our eyes and fight together against Bush and McCain before its too late

Posted by: amdara | June 12, 2008 11:08 PM

Bob, a fundamental principle of the legal system the United States inherited from Great Britain is that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in court. So the government is not permitted to imprison someone indefinitely based on an accusation, giving him or her no opportunity to contest that accusation. That is the 800-year-old principle of habeas corpus, not an American right, but a basic human right. Even kings have been compelled to recognize it, that is, except for our own King George--until now.

Posted by: Jon | June 12, 2008 11:05 PM

May I suggest that anyone who does not believe and obey the United States Constitution move to another country more in line with their beliefs. They can take Dick and Gorge with them. I would suggest Somalia or Uganda for starters.

Posted by: Old Coot | June 12, 2008 10:51 PM


Posted by: Sunny | June 12, 2008 10:39 PM

The US military is not and never has died for, fought for, or defended freedom. NO one other than the bush regime and "patriot act" has EVER attacked our rights or freedom. Certainly no one in Iraq or even Gitmo. To all those who swore to defend the constitution against all enemies; foreign and DOMESTIC... I ask you: why is bush still around?

Posted by: false sense of pride | June 12, 2008 10:39 PM

The blood of thousands of inocent US citisens will be on hans of our stupid supreme court and the democrat party. But the Democrats want socialism anyway so they don't care.

Posted by: gandeland | June 12, 2008 10:37 PM

YBE Richard Reed was conviced in the Federal Courthouse in BOSTON. He is serving his sentences in the ADX Florence, a Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado.

Please remind me again exactly how I am wrong.

Posted by: jim s | June 12, 2008 10:32 PM

So justfine, those that are against Obama are not intelligent and are unable to think for themselves? Maybe we like the Republican Party because they stand for a few moral/ethical values. Unlike your candidate Obama who is married to a hate spewing, whitey hating woman (I dare not call her a lady for fear of insulting my mother), was mentored by his "like a father" hate spewing, down with whitey pastor, business associate/friend with a federally convicted felon, and takes credit for not voting for the war when his silly butt wasn't even able to vote since he wasn't in the congress at the time. He really stands for something doesn't he? Support your big boy there and god forbid the state of the country in 4 yrs and the amount of reverse discrimination that will be going on. And don't tell me that it won't happen, just tell me in 4 yrs that I was right.

Posted by: James | June 12, 2008 10:24 PM

Finally there is a branch of governement who still thinks that America is made of laws not men. Thank God five americans have the balls to stand up to King George and his merry band of thieves. Only seven more months of this monarchy before we return to the USA we all love. May all you criminals of these past 7 years get what you deserve. Remember, there is a God in the end.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 10:22 PM

Most people can not list ten valid reasons why they support any political party. Wouldnt it be nice if every one just tried to learn what the Canidates are about, who they are, thier records, and what a President can and can not do and try and learn just who runs the government. Presidents do not give tax breaks, or raise taxes. Presidents do not have absolute authority to just at will make laws. Why cant everyone just stop the childish finger pointing and just use their most valuable gift " the Vote" wisely, and prudently? Most of all America just grow up.

Posted by: Tom | June 12, 2008 10:21 PM

How do we fight? We don't even know what we are fighting for. Are we fighting for freedom? First of all the USA government needs to change the idea of what freedom is. We are fighting against terrorists, but what about fighting against immorality, corruption, pollution, pornography, same sex marriage, abortion, music with profanity that brings us a message of violence and hatred, what about racism? And we all think that we are fighting for freedom. If the USA doesn't change from within, we will never reach true freedom.

Posted by: kolnesher | June 12, 2008 10:21 PM

Mr. Jim S, I do believe you are the one who needs to work on knowing what you are talking about. Richard Reid was convicted by the British under British law. Thus your comment is completely irrelevant in regards to what Mr. Obama or anyone on this blog has said.

Posted by: YBE | June 12, 2008 10:14 PM

I find it extremely sad to think I fight for the rights of you all that think these enemy combatants should be afforded the same rights as an American Citizen. Gitmo was established so that we could provide them a place to be held as "enemy combatants" after we captured them committing or plotting to perform deadly acts against American Forces. We feed them, clothe them, give them time for worship and yes we question them. I am sorry that you feel they should be let go to bomb, shoot, kidnap and eventually behead my fellow soldiers. If we were not a humane military, they would have all been left for dead on the battlefield. If you feel so strongly for their right to shoot, wound and kill Americans...I invite you to take up arms with me so you may find yourself the victim of an IED, wounded, shot or tortured at the hands of the enemy and eventually beheaded.

Posted by: Bob | June 12, 2008 10:13 PM

Why is it that those who appear to blindly follow the directions of the Republican party and its leaders oftimes appear semi-(at best) literate? I realize that America no longer seems to desire intelligence in our leaders, preferring instead those with whom one might want to share a few beers instead.

This is the leader of the Free World (formerly) and all we American ignoramuses seem to want is one of our "peeps".

Well, guess what--these multimillionaires are not your, or my, peeps.

Think, read, reason and most importantly show some concern before you blindly cast your vote in November. That of course assumes that you actually take the time to vote.

God Save America--from itself.

Posted by: justfine | June 12, 2008 10:07 PM

Our Founding Fathers had a vision of what they wanted our country to be. It was not the Dark Ages when people could be thrown in a dungeon without trial, without knowing their crime or facing their accuser, and without any way to defend themselves or any communication with the outside world.

What is most disturbing about the way we are detaining "unlawful combatants" is that anyone can fall into this designation. No proof is required. Many Muslims were swept up off the streets of Iraq when the Bush Administration demanded that the military gather intelligence. Others were accused by jealous neighbors or personal enemies as being suspect. Others were at the wrong place, at the wrong time.

If we really do have proof why haven't we brought them up for trial and formally charged them with their crimes?

We have very short memories, but doesn't this remind anyone of how our government rounded up everyone living in this country of Japanese descent when WWII broke out and put them in detention camps to prevent them from collaborating with the enemy? Never mind that many had been born in this country and considered themselves American. They looked like the enemy and that was enough. By the time they were let out they had lost everything they had worked for. Today we apologize for it and admit we were wrong to do it, but we are repeating the same mistakes because we refuse to learn from them.

If it were true that we are only holding criminals intent on harming this country I would have no objection. But we have incarcerated many innocent people for years with impunity. We have not had to formally charge them with any crimes. The proof of their guilt is their religion.

I say let the trials begin. Those who are guilty should serve their sentence. Those who are innocent should be returned to their families.

Posted by: Myrna Diaz | June 12, 2008 10:02 PM

To everyone that keeps spouting off about muslim and christian values. You shouldn't hate people just because their magical fairies are different than your magical faeries.

Posted by: realist | June 12, 2008 9:58 PM



Posted by: hillary08 | June 12, 2008 9:40 PM

Hey Idiot!
Provide the proof and let's prosecute.

Otherwise, if you just want to spout off with accusations of warcrimes at the Marines in GITMO, you should read below at what "WhyGlenn?" said to "Glenn".

Posted by: Amend It! | June 12, 2008 9:37 PM

a republican is an advocate of a republic, a form of government based on the rule of laws, not a monarchy or dictatorship.
Bush tries to circumvent the constitution, the legislative and judicial branches every time he wants to break US or international laws. So by definition: Bush is a wanna-be Dictator. NOT a republican

Posted by: lvmacp | June 12, 2008 9:37 PM

In war and battle there is something called giving no quarter(no prisoners taken-kill all compatants on battle field)it is used when on side kills or dismembers any prisoners taken on the battle field which is the case for all our captured troops. They have already released some prisonsers from GITMO only to have them captured again on the battle field killing our troops. So if we can't keep them in jail can we give no quarter?

Posted by: Chicago | June 12, 2008 9:26 PM

If you want government, no religion, and Oprah to rule your life ... vote for the next "cult" hero" Oslama.

Posted by: Hark | June 12, 2008 9:22 PM

I will accept your label. Torture did take place at GITMO

Posted by: Idiot | June 12, 2008 9:14 PM

All I am saying is that if we agree that the US Constitution and habeas corpus does not apply, and the combatant prisoner is under the Geneva Convention Treaty, then we can detain those at war with the US until the war is over.

We have not done that completely. We have released those that are determined to no longer pose a risk or that by releasing them will flush out others. We have not held them without giving them good food and water and they are not treated inhumanely, like our troops have been. They are afforded freedom of religion right up to the part of killing the infidels, which is looked down on in GITMO.

We are not governed by the Geneva Convention, but we adhere to its principles and go beyond its provisions.

I just know some idiot is going to spout off with, "Torture!" again. Water boarding, Lack of Sleep, etc. are not examples of torture or humiliation; they are forms of discomfort. Torture is dismemberment, electrocution, pulling out finger nails, putting a rat in a bucket on someone's chest or head, and other acts that have been used on our troops.

Posted by: Amend It! | June 12, 2008 9:08 PM


Dont be silly Republican is not a monolithic whole. Some are more conservative than others. It means that you would consider Bush a Republican who is on the Liberal side of things. I dontagree but there u go. He has supported some liberal ideas but that does not make him not a republican. That is the problem with labels

Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 9:00 PM

It's crucial to remember that the Bush administration arbitrarily believes it can suspend habeas corpus for American citizens arrested on secret evidence on American soil. That is, the feds can pick you up and make you disappear into solitary without any charges being lodged against you, and hold you forever. This is exactly what they did to Jose Padillo, American citizen arrested in Chicago -- until forced by the courts to cough him back up after years of detention. People critical of the Courts should think of this before they denounce them for forcing the US to uphold the universal human right of habeas corpus.

Sic semper tyrannis!

Posted by: Will Smith | June 12, 2008 8:55 PM

I am Republican but a vote for McCain is just a third term for Bush. Bush is NOT republican.

Posted by: lvmacp | June 12, 2008 8:51 PM

Ament it you are a very puzzling personality. On he one hand you seem reasonable, apoligizing for pushing the God principle yet you are suggesting that detainees are held indefinately. If that is applied all the time the innocent are oing to get caught up. You might want to say that is collateral damage, i say no, no human being must be referred to as collateral damage. Innocent til proven guilty

Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 8:50 PM

Right! the Geneva Convention applies, not the US Constitution and habeas corpus!

I agree, we should actually read and apply the Geneva Convention Treaty (which the US never signed) and hold these combatants indefinately without trial.

*Sorry to push the Christian God principles. You are right, He doesn't discriminate.

Posted by: Amend It! | June 12, 2008 8:43 PM

U R on target Gail tell them

Posted by: Tell them | June 12, 2008 8:42 PM

U R on target gail tell them

Posted by: Tell them | June 12, 2008 8:40 PM

let us vote for McCain he was a POW he was tortured etc
give me a break

Posted by: vote 4 McCain | June 12, 2008 8:38 PM

Violence only begets more violence. According to the Geneva Conventions, common sense and common decency, treat people as you would wish to be treated. Gitmo is a disgrace to America, the perfect monument to President Bush and his cronies, and should be closed immediately. Any harm we do to one another harms us all - haven't we learned ANYTHING after all these centuries?

Posted by: Gail | June 12, 2008 8:36 PM

"If you want to apply it to the world, amend it to do so. Until then, POW's and what they do on foreign soil is not covered by our constitution."
You're right it may not apply to them but the Geneva Convention does. Are we hypocrites that say treat our soldiers this way but we'll treat yours however we want?

Posted by: lvmacp | June 12, 2008 8:26 PM

Well said jiak willis.
Amend it be carful how you talk about Christian values. Christian Values do not discriminate the way you want to. God is a God of justice for all.

If you want us to talk about the short comigs of the constitution we can do that but dont equate it to christian values if all it does not assume that all people are equal. By the way i am not suggesting either that there are no christian values in the constitution

Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 8:25 PM

I think this Jerry guy's posting is interesting. From his message i assume he is a red-neck living in cow country. His english is broken and his comments make nonsense more sensible.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 8:23 PM

If you are still arguing against GOP's and Dem's you need to wake up. There is no difference.

Bush, who both sides has issues with, is not a conservative. He passed more liberal spending bills than Clinton and he wants open borders like every other liberal. McCain is so close to being like Hillary the liberal side had to swing left to pick up Barack Hussein Obama.

I think some just need to slap someone because they feel bad about what's going on. Get a clue.

Posted by: No Difference | June 12, 2008 8:23 PM

Obama is definately wrong on this one again. How dumb is he to constantly place McCain with the "same failed polices of pres. Bush?" where the heck has obama been? McCain has opposed Bush on a GREAT NUMBER of things, which is why the most conservative people do not like McCain. Obama has the arrogance to say, "The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo -- yet another failed policy supported by John McCain," and still doesn't realize that JOHN MCCAIN WANTS TO CLOSE GUANTANAMO BAY. McCain does NOT support the whole idea of Guantanamo, but as we all know, Obama is all talk but no walk. He'll dazzle the crowd with his speeches and say whatever he can do get elected. We don't need another Jimmy Carter president. Obama hasn't fought a day in his life. Time for Mccain, a person who has been TORTURED by communists as a POW and knows what it's like, to take charge.

Posted by: AntiObama | June 12, 2008 8:19 PM

The most puzzling part of this article is that a man running for President of the United States does not know about Richard Reed aka the shoe bomber. Reed was arrested in Dec of 2001 for trying to blow up a plane. In Jan 2003 he was convicted on terrorist charges. Yet OBAMA stated...."The fact is, this Administration's position is not tough on terrorism, and it undermines the very values that we are fighting to defend," he said. "Bringing these detainees to justice is too important for us to rely on a flawed system that has FAILED TO CONVICT ANYONE of a terrorist act since the 9-11 attacks, and compromised our core values."

If you want to be our Commander in Chief at least know what you are talking about!!!!

Posted by: jim s | June 12, 2008 8:18 PM

The US Constitution is not in error, Winny.

If you want to apply it to the world, amend it to do so. Until then, POW's and what they do on foreign soil is not covered by our constitution.

You can criticize the President, the Courts, the Parties, the Congress, and anyone else I didn't mention. But, the US Constitution is the foundation of the American way of life. It is based on the Christian values of our founding fathers. Some should read it, before they try to slap it on the rest of the world. It just doesn't apply to them.

Posted by: Amend It! | June 12, 2008 8:13 PM

In times of war or when holding colonies it is common for a country to take on the characteristics of the enemy, the GOP and the people who oppose this ruling use the actions of the Religious Extremists we are fighting as a reason to act like them. Yes, they would execute some prisoners without trial, and so; the right wingers argue, we should act like them and become more like them. The GOP becomes step by step closer to the Taliban and Al Quaeda, using violence to achieve its goals, letting their personal religion enter the political sphere, and generally opposing personal freedom, hating gays, fearing change and science(global warming, evolution, stem cell research etc etc ) etc etc. The values of the GOP and the "enemies of america" converge and are at points undifferentiable.

Posted by: jaik Willis | June 12, 2008 8:13 PM


Posted by: BOBSTER | June 12, 2008 8:07 PM

Since when does the fact that they have access to courts mean they are automatically released. That is the whole point. They get the right to challenge their detention.

Besides, this decision still means little as all of the other executive power grabs (facilitated by the brown noses of the Congress) still grant them the right to detain any non-American residing in the US indefinitely as well as scrutinize our emails, phones, and library holdings. And there are plenty of examples of the abuse of this unfettered access.

Sorry, but maybe it's the Libertarian in me, but I think all of you who swear "allegiance" to the Constitution while simultaneously wiping your arse with it should get a clue (may i suggest a 6yrs to forever sentence to Guantanamo?).

Posted by: Chris | June 12, 2008 8:03 PM

To be critical of one's country is not a lack of patriotism but a sign of maturity. I do not have any uncritical commitment to anything except God.

Posted by: winny | June 12, 2008 7:58 PM

Hey Jody,

The patriots of this country paid with their blood and their families' blood. The great tyranny of that time wiped out whole families and towns. The patriots fought against and spoke against the British rule and were definately "punished" for doing so.

But, to say these could be innocent bystanders has got to be a joke, "Who me? I am just an innocent bystander. What this? It's just a toy...I know, it looks real...don't they make them look so real these days???" HA!

Posted by: HeyJody | June 12, 2008 7:56 PM

this kind of anti american crap will continue until we the people are heard. words," Passive resistance". we take 2 weeks or so and nobody buys or sells anything we pay no bills we pay no taxes and buy no gas!, we do nothing until our governments, local ,state and federal remembers who pays their salaries then MAYBE we can restore the constitutions original message and commonsense may make a come back. A little radical, but it would get their attention in a hurry.I think they would start listening to the majority and stop listening to hollywierd a all the radical liberial activist.

Posted by: cab | June 12, 2008 7:54 PM

innocent til proven guilty

Posted by: spam | June 12, 2008 7:51 PM

I think we give our Supreme Court too much power sometimes. With a single stroke of its pen it can free the bad guys or lock thousands of innocent people away (including children). Who ends up paying for the mistakes, we the people eventually. I think if we're going to pay for anything, we should decide!

Posted by: hum | June 12, 2008 7:50 PM

Emotive argument dave hill, they would have been wrong. America stands for justice and that wa what make her great

Posted by: winny | June 12, 2008 7:48 PM

Wow! What a crushing blow to the American citizens, victims of 9/11 and all those who lost their lives to save this country. Those five liberal justices have the power to decide "liberating" those POW's (and you know they will eventually go free and the US will be paying them retribution for as long as they live) I just wonder how all our innocents currently rotting in foreign prisons unjustly by circumstance would gladly change places with them.

Posted by: Tarco | June 12, 2008 7:47 PM

if our people did this in there country and were caught ,these people are dead.

Posted by: dave hill | June 12, 2008 7:44 PM

Well said Jody

Posted by: Winny | June 12, 2008 7:42 PM

Maybe 10 of the 400+- detainies are known terrorists. All others are innocent until proven guilty. They were in the wrong place and wrong time. Also, some of them were 'given in' by their friends to make a a few bucks -offered as rewards from the US. However, they were not given the due process. Bush has failed to find charges for these prisnors, after holding them for 6 years. We should release them and pray for thier forgiveness.

Posted by: hv | June 12, 2008 7:41 PM

A Patriot is someone who stands for our homeland, our flag, and has sworn to defend our US Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. Just to help you clarify, Patriot.

What lies about terrorism are you referring to? Did the towers fall or not? Did the USS Cole have a big hole in the side or not? What lies?

Posted by: WhyAreUAPatriot? | June 12, 2008 7:40 PM

The most amazing thing that no one ever seems to consider in all this is the very real possibility that folks who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and got swept up in the action ended up as a detainee when all they were doing was, for example, going to the store for some groceries. War is marked by chaos and confusion and it is very possible that some folks are arrested in the heat of combat who have nothing to do with the actual fighting; just as innocent civilians are killed in what is referred to as collateral damage. I have heard of numerous examples in my own culture/time where, at a legal demonstration, the cops have lost control, and simply arrested anyone and everyone, figuring they'd sort it out later. To be held for over six years, possibly tortured during that time, when it happens to be the case that you are, in fact, innocent of any wrong-doing, seems to me to be the core of this Supreme Court decision. I am appalled by the ignorance and hatred of people who justify their harsh mindedness as somehow being patriotic. Patriotism is NOT 'my country right or wrong', Patriotism is the courage to dissent, it is the ability of a citizen to speak Truth to Power, without being punished for doing so.

Posted by: Jody Ellsworth | June 12, 2008 7:36 PM

great day for justice, notwithstanding the small margin of victory. In an uncanny way america has been spared from itself and a conservatism that pretends that it speaks for God. By the way fundamentalism wherever it is found is dangerous, whether george Bush's or Osama's

Posted by: winny | June 12, 2008 7:36 PM

Posted by: patriot | June 12, 2008 7:33 PM

GOP is right is this one. Obama knows nothing.

Posted by: Julio Perez | June 12, 2008 7:31 PM

I used to be a gun toting conservative until i realized what it was to be a patriot. A patriot was someone who had rebelled against British control. In this respect, a patriot is not someone who believes the Bush lies about terrorism and is definitely not someone who believes our constitution is something that can be suspended on the basis of a "suspicion" or "belief"! If you think its right to keep someone locked up for either one of these reasons without a trial, your not a Patriot. You're not a real American. Your a Douche bag

Posted by: Patriot | June 12, 2008 7:30 PM

Isn't the 14 Amendment to the UNITED STATES Constitution?

Read it's definition of "citizens" covered
under the limited jurisdiction of the Constitution-as applicable only to CITIZENS--not the WORLD, not a captured
enemy combatant.

Posted by: drgene1 | June 12, 2008 7:30 PM

I can tell there are allot of people that have never left home and are still on the teet. The Constitution protects the citizens of the United States of America. Not Terrorists, not illegal combatants, and definitely not persons on foreign soil. Get over it. This is one more chance to be politically correct instead of being smart. The Supreme Court blew it. And in a big way. Send these POWs back to the Middle East and let them be protected by their own countries constitutions... Oh, wait a minute, they don't have any... US civilian laws do not and should not apply outside the US in matters of war... The Geneva Convention covers this. Too bad it doesn't protect illegal combatants either.

Posted by: Spencer | June 12, 2008 7:29 PM

Thank you US and Saddam, for taking the eye off the ball and allowing me to escape and run free after being responsible for 9/11.

Posted by: bin laden | June 12, 2008 7:24 PM

When you illiterates study the history of lebanon, you will discover that they were just like us very liberal and loving people and accepted muslims at face value.But then when they were strong enough, they killed all non-believers of islam. Our country is going down the same path. Talk to some of the people who were kept and tortured in iran by adengiabad., then tell me any muslem desreves anything, just read 3 surah in the koran. It is a religion of hate and we practice a different religion., But you have to fight fire with fire or get your hwead cut off.

Posted by: jerry | June 12, 2008 7:23 PM

A Declaration of Withdrawal from the Republican Party

My reasons for leaving the Party that I've felt at home in since I became politically aware are numerous. I will start with quoting countless conservatives who feel as I do - I didn't so much leave the Republican Party, it was the Party that left me. The elected Republican officials failed to implement a conservative agenda, despite having the Presidency and both houses of congress. No Child Left Behind, Prescription Drug Entitlements; they even tried to force Amnesty for illegal aliens upon us. They have given us a government that would make even LBJ blush. Our businesses and land have more regulatory red tape to deal with than ever.

Where is the Republican Party that stood for limited government, personal responsibility, a strong national defense, and against being the world's policeman? As recently as the 90's Republicans railed against a foreign policy of "making the world safe for democracy", (which is historically the Democrats foreign policy, ala Woodrow Wilson) when Bill Clinton was President and he took us to war in Bosnia and Kosovo, without U.N. approval I might add. Which reminds me, the United Nations is something the GOP used to believe we needed to get out of, not an institution to be defended when a rogue nation violates U.N. resolutions.

I am also reminded of former Senator Robert Taft, who was known in his day as Mr. Republican, when he said "I do not believe any policy which has behind it the threat of military force is justified as part of the basic foreign policy of the United States except to defend the liberty of our own people" and my favorite President - Thomas Jefferson, who said "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, and entangling alliances with none."

From its inception, the Republican Party advocated a humble foreign policy in line with our founding fathers recommendations, now, with John McCain as the leader and voice of the GOP, we are told to get behind his idea for a "League of Democracies" which sounds terrifyingly similar to Wilson and his Progressive Democrats "League of Nations" almost 100 years ago.

We are also being told by McCain that we will have to Cap and Trade our liberty and our pursuit of happiness in the fight against global warming, essentially that if we don't give government more money and power, utopia will never be reached.

Some have told me that I should support him because he will appoint conservative judges, but I ask these questions - 1. Who's definition of conservative are we talking about? And 2. Why would I trust the man on this issue when he is one of the "Gang of 14" who was blocking President Bush's conservative lower federal court and Circuit Courts of Appeal judicial nominees? I would also remind you of his historical propensity to appease those even more liberal than himself. His version of "reaching across the aisle" looks more like a group hug when he crafts legislation like the McCain / Kennedy and McCain / Feingold bills. McCain / Feingold happens to be the reason McCain should not get the NRA's endorsement, the NRA spent years fighting this trampling of our 1st amendment rights. McCain has not been the solid 2nd amendment supporter he would like you to believe he is - he had a barely passing "C" grade from the NRA in his last senate run in 04' , and in 2000 worked with Americans for Gun Safety, an anti-gun group with a deceiving name.

The differences between McCain and Obama are minimal, when you consider that both believe big government can save you from yourself, and that we can save other nations from themselves as well. Given McCain's track record of conciliatory dealings with Democrats, I fear what this man would do with a Democratic House and Senate. I will not play along with the game of lesser of two evils, as I believe that is part of what has plunged this nation into the mess we find ourselves today.

Once upon a time the Republican Party stood against special interests, corruption and abuse of power. Today their candidates campaign is " of the lobbyist, by the lobbyist, for the lobbyist." A man who admits Washington's corruption has tainted him. Google Keating 5 and read all about it.

The Republican Party today would be unrecognizable to my favorite Republicans of yesterday, such as Barry Goldwater, who said " A government that is big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away." President Eisenhower, who warned us of the Military Industrial Complex, and one whose party membership is a surprise to many today but shouldn't be, Martin Luther King Jr. " Violence is a poor chisel for carving out peaceful tomorrows." The party is just as unrecognizable to myself and others of my generation.

I had to draw a line in the sand, and the Republican Party wasted no time in crossing it, when they and the President pushed for "economic stimulus checks." The only problem is this, the money isn't money that we have, its money we are borrowing, and our excessive borrowing becomes a tax on future generations, as we wont be paying it off any time soon. Want to try to sell this as economically conservative? Excessive borrowing and spending has the added affect of devaluing our currency, so it acts as a hidden tax on us today. As I heard one of the presidential candidates say in regards to these stimulus checks, " Whose economy are we stimulating here? Ours or Chinas? We are borrowing more money from China so everyone can go buy more stuff made in China." I get it, others in the GOP get it, so why doesn't the party leadership?

I can't take anymore disrespect for conservative values, and unless the Republican Party wakes up and gets it's head on straight real soon, I will be taking my vote, my time, energy, money, and passion from the GOP and taking it to the Libertarian Party to send a message to the Republican leadership that I will not be taken for granted. I believe that it is solid conservatism that wins the day and elections - limited government, individual responsibility, and a strong national DEFENSE (secure the borders!), not conciliation and surrender to Democrats to the point that our differences become blurry.

The Libertarian Party seems to be a perfect temporary home, the GOP has its work cut out if its sincere about winning me back, even President Reagan said "Libertarianism is the very heart and soul of conservatism." I will be doing everything I can to sway like minded conservatives to join me in this exodus and vote for Bob Barr for President and Wayne Root for Vice President on the Libertarian ticket. Both of them were recently Republicans, and are among those countless conservatives I've heard myself say " It wasn't that I left the Republican Party, it was the Party that left me."

Please visit and give conservatism a voice in the Presidential debates and beyond.

Thanks and God Bless, from Zak Carter

Posted by: Zak Carter | June 12, 2008 7:21 PM

After reading many of these comments it is clear there is a great misunderstanding about the primacy of the rule of law being a universal human value. We believe in an ideal that "no" man should be denied of life, liberty or property without due process of law. We cheapen ourselves and the ideal of the rule of law by trying to make distinctions of whether non-citizens should have the same rights. These are universal ideals that should be applicable to all men under our dominion and control. We should not make artificial distinctions since by doing so we must define other humans as less than full or equal men or women. Our greatest strength lies in embracing and exporting these truths not just when it is easy and popular but now when it is difficult so that all may see our commitment. To knowingly do less makes us worse than the terrorist for they sin and fail in ignorance and we do so with full moral knowledge of the truths we betray.

Posted by: Julian Jensen | June 12, 2008 7:15 PM

Glenn, you call another one of our boys a rapist and I hope he comes and visits your gaping hole.

You want terrorists get their day in court, but when the Marines that were accussed of the acts you bring up are acquitted, you are saddened.

Why, Glenn?

Don't you love this country? Aren't you a patriot? Don't you love that young dumb Marine that is so willing to kill a few of the enemy and, if he has too, give his life so you can say some stupid $#!+ about how he is a rapist?

Posted by: WhyGlenn? | June 12, 2008 7:15 PM

The prisoners at GITMO are just "suspected" terrorists or "unlawful combatants". If they really are terrorists, then it shouldn't be such a big deal to prove that fact in court. If the actual proof of them being valid terrorists exists (which most likely would be the reason they're there in the first place), then why sweat their day in court? When did the business of GUILTY til proven innocent start? WHO deems them unlawful combatants? There is also the "Violent Radicalization and homegrown terrorism prevention act"....which will allow them to target AMERICANS who dissent, to be put in prison, with no trial, no lawyer and no charges. The language of this act is VERY vague and could target just about any US CITIZEN. Let's see how you react if you end up being a target...and get no lawyer, no trial or no charges against you. The GITMO prisoners should be allowed their day in court, and if found guilty, THEN they can be kept forever (or until the end of the war...most likely indefinately)

Posted by: just me | June 12, 2008 7:14 PM

Let's see...just what exactly is "terrorism" and what is a "terrorist". Let's go to our old friend the "dictionary"...

American Heritage Dictionary - ter·ror·ism (těr'ə-rĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Use your words wisely...and be immpecable with them.

Posted by: Gary | June 12, 2008 7:09 PM

I guess you guys don't get it....

Does the Constitution of the US cover individuals on foreign soil performing military acts on US Forces??? If it does, then the court made the right ruling. If it doesn't, they just made up law. If it now applies to prisoners of war only because they are held on US soil in Cuba. They need to be moved. They were only held here to be humane in not executing them on the battle field. Maybe that's what should happen??? If someone is arrested on US soil as a terrorist, supporting terroism, or treason, then yes, try them in US courts and execute them as prescribed by law for those acts against our country.

POW's are not criminals, they are combatants. It is not Bush that says so, it is the Marines, the Sailors, and the Soldiers that captured them in the field of battle.

Posted by: bewildered | June 12, 2008 7:07 PM

It was a good ruling. Why do so many morons keep bringing up 9/11 and Iraq.
Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11.
The only terrorists we need to be worried about is the Bush regime.

Posted by: lvmacp | June 12, 2008 7:05 PM

"Yea just let them out so they can get back to killing innocent people."

Wow. You do realize that if they were captured and had an AK on them that they will NOT be getting released. This is simply re-instituting the great American Right of Habeas Corpus.. and YES, some of the prisoners held there are American citizens. The system that Bush put in place reeks of Fascism.. locking them up and throwing away the key, and going ahead and torturing them during the meantime. Why do they need to be held for 5-6 years without charges being brought against them? Why are so many prisoners released after five years with no explanation of what circumstances caused them to be detained in the first place?

Posted by: Robert | June 12, 2008 7:03 PM

The comments posted here reflect the dumbing down of America and demonstrate why so many people vote Republican. They have no idea why this country was founded nor the rational for the USA.

It was to fight this type of indiscriminate use of government power. Get a clue and educate yourself. Then go back to watching the UFC.

Posted by: joe d | June 12, 2008 7:03 PM

Basing on the majority of the comments, it is indeed a sad day, that many accept the notion that certain class of human beings should have no rights at all and killed extrajudicially. What happen to the statement 'you are innocent until proven guilty'. They may be terrorists, but that is not for me and you to decide. The courts or a legal system has that responsibility. Giving them their right to defend themselves is a basic right of any human being. It does not mean that they will not be executed or justice will not be served. Have anyone considered that the terrorist want be know matyrs and welcome such blatant disregard of justice and fairness. They know that many more matyrs will be born. A legitimate government cannot go down the slippery slope of the terrorist methods. It will lose credibility and only stoke greater violence. To take a moral high ground we will need to sacrifice more, but it is worth it because that is what it takes to be human and win in the long run. I am also disappointed that for such a simple case, it was a hard fought 5-4 judgement. Fundamentally them and many citizens have forgot their own hard fought freedom and the constitution.

Posted by: Singh | June 12, 2008 7:03 PM

For Tom Burns: The question you posed, "who gets to decide?" misses the point by such a mile. The detainees got to decide for themselves, and their actions at the time of capture are the evidence that indicts them. The fact that many have been recaptured fighting should give you some pause. This is why the majority of Americans do not trust Democrats to use rational, common sense in dealing with national security and fighting evil...they want to argue abstracts and engage in political food fights while vicious killers plot more mayhem against innocents. WHY is it so difficult to recognize, define, and deal effectively with the threat real evil poses? Why bolster evil's resolve?

Posted by: Jack | June 12, 2008 6:57 PM


Posted by: BORN AGAIN AMERICAN | June 12, 2008 6:56 PM

Those prisoners are terrorists, but they must have some status and rights. Bush doesn't want to give anything, well, judges will decide what is good for us and fair justice to them. If our soldiers get caught in the crimes like that, we probably want them to be treated same way, not stock them like animals and keep them locked. BIG WIN FOR DEMOCRACY AT LEAST. THANK YOU JUSTICIES. GOOD AND FAIR.

Posted by: BOBSTER | June 12, 2008 6:55 PM

I should think Ms. Justice Ginzberg might have some of these detainees, granted habeas corpus and rights formerly reserved for US citizens, over for dinner. Maybe one of the Jewish Holdays would be a good time. I'm quite sure they won't be jumping bail.

Posted by: phred6 | June 12, 2008 6:53 PM

As for dropping bombs by mistake and killing unarmed citizens tell that to the thousands killed on
sept 11. And the people killed in the London bombings. And since when are they SO CALLED SOLDIERS? Id like to see you say that to a soldier.

Posted by: Martin | June 12, 2008 6:52 PM

A man wants tokill you and you caught him,then you leave him with his knife still in his hand.If he later kills you ,God will send you straight to hell.
Well,it is better now to kneel down and beg the terriorists like Obama suggested,maybe they will allow us to have some days for ourselves and work for them like slaves on some other days.

Posted by: Gregory | June 12, 2008 6:48 PM

martin, you're a moron! eye for eye ? then why are our so called soldiers not being held responsible for raping and killing innocent Iraqis ? dropping bombs by mistake .. killing unarmed citizens .. maybe it's time the Iraqi people did an eye for an eye

Posted by: Glenn | June 12, 2008 6:46 PM

There are checks and balances in our government for a reason. When there is an unconstitutional law it is up to the courts to step up outside partisan lines and strike it down. Have we forgotten the shamefull legacy that led to thousands of asians being put into camps without trial during WW2?? We are a nation of laws and heros that said "give me liberty or give me death." That statement means more now than ever. Just because the "enemy" decides to do one thing that does not mean we follow suit. Our freedoms are at stake and how can we possibly say that we are promoting freedom abroad if we fail to live up to it at home? They are human beings with famillies that our weaapons have killed as well. They have lost more than we have. As a nation of laws and freedom we must stand up for everyones rights, not just some of the people. True that may mean there may be another attack on our soil at some point and that is horrid to imagine. Unforunately thats war. I however am tired of being ashamed of a government that has tried to destroy the very essence of what makes this country great. Our freedoms and our resolve to help others no matter what. That is heroic. It also seperates us from the regimes that we brought down. I'm extremely proud that the system works and our Supreme Court upheld the law.

Posted by: Chris | June 12, 2008 6:45 PM

my only thoughts and questions are "who" says these people are terrorists? i wonder what this government would do if you were held 5-8 years without beinbg accused ..?? do any of you realize that hundreds have literally been released already and suing this gountry from the World Courts in Germany and winning millions of our dollars ? ever hear of false imprisonment? anyone ever take a trip and come back thru customs in Alaska? i was there several times and watched ANYONE non white being pulled out of line and interrogated ! is this the country we strive to better ?

Posted by: Glenn | June 12, 2008 6:42 PM

Bring back the old days, when prisoners were fed bread and water, and not given more rights than the people that committed the crimes against. I think the terrorists should be executed the way our soldiers were, then post the video on you tube. EYE FOR AN EYE.

Posted by: Martin | June 12, 2008 6:42 PM

i do believe that all you people who are crying for the release of the gitmo detainees. will have a different opinion when we do release them and they go back to their countries and continue their terrorist activities. how many times have we read about people we have detained who pleaded their innocence only to be caught or killed later in a terrorist plot against the u.s? if something else were to happen in the u.s. all of you will be screaming for retribution. i guarantee it

Posted by: mr. smith | June 12, 2008 6:30 PM

I cannot understand how we got here. I can understand the steps, I cannot understand the why. Why do our citizens support the Supreme Court making up legal entitlement from the bench? Why do you jump in the fight, no matter what you lose, because it slaps Bush. Don't any of you understand that terrorism, an opposing militarized force, has just been given access to the court system, something only you had??? They are NOT citizens. They have NO peers in the US to be judged by. They, as many have, will return to pick up arms against your children and posibly you when they bring the war here.

Also, the original post, "...some regard for the law." has no clue. Penrice, what law are you referring to? The one they just made up? Justices do not have the authority to make law. They interpret and apply it. Congressional members that you vote for make the law, just in case you were confused.

If we are at war, military law holds prisoners of war until the conflict is over and then they are repatrioted with their original country. This ruling now creates a problem for our future combat events. Now, our future POWs get a chance to spend some American tax dollars in court. Nice. Doesn't anyone else see how idiotic this is???

Posted by: bewildered | June 12, 2008 6:26 PM

McCain is on record in 2006 Senate proceedings as saying he supported the Military Commissions Act... seems pertinent to add, considering Obama's assertion that he voted against it.

Posted by: Brian | June 12, 2008 6:12 PM

@Joe White

So my biggest issue is jut who gets to decided if a person is a terrorist?

You? Me? George? That is the problem here isn't it?! And this is precisely why we have a court system. So people who are trained can make this assessment free of political (ideally) pressure and self interest (again ideally). It is a shame that the recent Supreme court vote (5-4) is so close. It is a shame that Human Rights is now a liberal vs conservative thing.

Your statements reflect a complete disregard for Human Rights. These are some of the same rights you seem to take for granted.

Tom Burns

Posted by: Tom Burns | June 12, 2008 6:10 PM

By treating terrorism detainees as criminal suspects and not 'prisoners of war' or the wishy-washy 'unlawful combatants' who enjoy the rights of neither, we are doing two things: first, we are validating our system of justice as something in which we as Americans actually believe and behind which we stand -- not something that just sounds nice but we have no intent in adhering to; second, we are not *legitimizing* terrorists as warriors or martyrs (mind you, "jihad" carries very noble connotations -- not necessarily violent, either -- in Islam) but we are instead underscoring the fact that they are fringe-element criminals who should not be dignified as anything else. In short, we are not dignifying Islamic extremists as a legitimate organization, and we are setting an example to the world by living up to our values.

Posted by: Nate | June 12, 2008 6:07 PM

Yea just let them out so they can get back to killing innocent people.

Posted by: tc | June 12, 2008 6:01 PM

These words could have come straight from Saddam Husseins mouth:

Joe White wrote: These terrorist should never have been brought to justice. We should have held them in an un-named foreign prisoner of war camp. Run by afghan or Iraqi government forces so the Geneva Convention does not apply. Squeeze them for all the information we need then let them rot in foreign prison until the war is over. This way everyone would have been happy. The Bush administrations biggest mistake was trying to bring them to justice we should have been satisfied with good revenge.

Posted by: BK | June 12, 2008 6:00 PM

let's see how you feel about it when you are held without rights and tortured endlessly. have we reverted back to barbarism? if that's the case, let's just go back to using swords and clubs that way we can really feel what it's like to have blood on our hands.

Posted by: nomoretyrants | June 12, 2008 5:59 PM

you do realize that not everyone at guantanamo is actually a terrorist.

some of them are innocent men, who we imprisoned in solitary for five years of their life, before letting them go without charges.

does that sound like justice?

Posted by: uh... | June 12, 2008 5:57 PM

These terrorist should never have been brought to justice. We should have held them in an un-named foreign prisoner of war camp. Run by afghan or Iraqi government forces so the Geneva Convention does not apply. Squeeze them for all the information we need then let them rot in foreign prison until the war is over. This way everyone would have been happy. The Bush administrations biggest mistake was trying to bring them to justice we should have been satisfied with good revenge.

Posted by: Joe White | June 12, 2008 5:51 PM

Since the first day when an army was kind enough to take prisoners instead of killing them on the spot war prisoners were are and should be prisoners for the duration. The idea of criminalizing being a combatant is lunacy in motion. In a way what we really have is a turf war between the courts and he executive. Add to this a general hatred of George Bush and an thing you can think of that will give him a black eye and you have the recipe for what we see happening. In any event, it is a ruling by the self same Supreme Court that said slavery was OK. In any event the creap-o terrorists could always try slinking back into there holes and leaving the rest of the world alone.
Stan Kerns

Posted by: stanley Kerns | June 12, 2008 5:34 PM

Clueless vs. clued in.

Are there people out there who are seriously considering voting for this man? He knows little about the economy (HIS words), he hasn't read this, he hasn't looked into that. Come on. This is the best the GOP has to offer?


(On a lighter note: Are you a first class snarker? I am looking for YOU! You're gonna love this! Come join the fun and tell us why YOU are voting Republican.)

Posted by: MsJoanne | June 12, 2008 5:25 PM

The Bush Administration has a tough time dealing with all the "noise" from Congress and the Supreme Court.

Posted by: hamishdad | June 12, 2008 5:23 PM

At least the supreme court still has some regard for the law!

Posted by: Penrice | June 12, 2008 4:44 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2009 The Washington Post Company