Comments on: SCOTUS Slaps Bush In The Face. Again.

By: sarabeth

sarabeth — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:58:15 +0000

Actually, he supports the summary execution of possibly innocent people. And here you are, trying to reason with him, and offer him facts.

By: DCX2

DCX2 — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:35:53 +0000

Gil: The problem with your statement is that many of the people in Gitmo were not captured on any battle field. For instance, the Chinese Uighurs. In fact, I believe the ACLU has a fact sheet which indicates that 86% of the people who were ever in Gitmo were handed over by Afghani or Pakistani bounty hunters.

The whole point of habeas corpus is to protect innocent people from being held indefinitely without charges. Therefore, if you support the suspension of habeas corpus, then you support the indefinite detention of innocent people.

By: sarabeth

sarabeth — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:30:40 +0000

The BBC summed it up very nicely yesterday. The Bush administration's "unprecedented system of detention", they said, "will not be remembered by history as a decisive or successful means of dealing with a terrorist threat."

It has been mired in international disapproval and undermined by legal challenges from the very start, and diplomatically at least it has been counter-productive.

It has been counter-productive and ineffective in every possible way, actually. Apart from fueling al Qaeda's recruitment and fundraising drives.

By: matt

matt — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:04:49 +0000

>Easy solution to that problem: take no prisoners.

i’m quite sure there’s a recruiting office very near you. i can’t wait to hear about your exploits on the battlefield.

By: Gil

Gil — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:02:33 +0000

So, SCOTUS says persons captured on a battlefield, trying to kill Americans, have the same rights as U.S. citizens. Easy solution to that problem: take no prisoners.