Comments on: McCain on Bush’s Failed Guantanamo Policies

By: runasim

runasim — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 11:02:13 +0000

The WOT can not legitimately be called a war, in the sense that 'times of war' has been inserted in previous documents. The WOT can conceivably go on forever, and become a permanent condition.
That's precsiely why it's so important to be more careful about what we are willing to suspend, since a suspension could turn out to be a permanent elimination.

Conditions of war and conditions of crime, as in the violence associated with the global drug trade, are in many situations indistinguishable. Armed drug gangs act very much like terrotists. Even though, at other times, as in Aghanistan, it is clearly a war in the old sense, overall it's a mixed bag of conditions.

I just hope Congress realizes how much the world has changed, and that we are changed, but that we must gaurd against changing so much that we become unrecognizable.

,

By: KYJurisDoctor

KYJurisDoctor — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:08:59 +0000

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]."

I guess one can REASONABLY conclude that the Court's Majority knew where they wanted to end up, and proceeded to get there, however s-l-o-w-l-y they weaved their way through precedential minefield!

OsiSpeaks.com

By: StockBoySF

StockBoySF — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 02:53:04 +0000

And there are millions of Americans who feel that all the detainees at Guantanamo should be taken out and shot.... It's not just Bush, McCain and a few leaders who believe in locking up these so-called enemy combatants and throwing away the key.

I think Obama was right when he said, " The fact is, this Administration’s position is not tough on terrorism, and it undermines the very values that we are fighting to
defend." I've said many times that Bush is a lot of bluster. He hides behind superficial battles and his swagger because he doesn't know what else to do. He got it right when he went into Afghanistan, but he screwed up everything else after that (including his premature withdrawal from Afghanistan to attack Iraq).

Bombing a country (or threatening to) does not make one tough or a defender of America and our interests. Bush swore to uphold the US Constitution, but all that means for Bush is that he will if it is in HIS best interest, not the country's best interest.

By: runasim

runasim — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 01:21:06 +0000

It's very clear now what out vote will be about.: everything.

By: Jim_Satterfield

Jim_Satterfield — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:08:01 +0000

Oh, please. While it is likely there are people there for whom bad would be an understatement, there are also many whose detention is based on questionable accusations with no evidence behind them. What about them, Senator McCain? What about those who are in fact innocent but have spent years detained by our government? Don't they deserve more consideration than the system you came up with has shown them?

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:44:12 +0000

Excellent post!

Since Associate Supreme Court Justice Stevens is almost 90 years old, the next President will certainly appoint his successor.

Elections have consequences.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:38:41 +0000

I wrote a quick reaction to this story on my blog today:

Justice Scalia practically pissed his pants in his dissenting opinion. “It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed,” Scalia said. “The nation will live to regret what the court has done today.”

Republican nominee McCain reaffirmed his radical views on executive power by calling this Supreme Court ruling one of the “worst decisions in the history of this country.” Then went on to piss his pants like Scalia. “Our first obligation is the safety and security of this nation, and the men and women who defend it,” McCain said. “This decision will harm our ability to do that.”