WASHINGTON, July 3, 2008
Bush: Ruling May Free Terrorists In U.S.
White House Lashes Out Again At Supreme Court Decision On Gitmo Detainees
-
Photo
President Bush returns to the White House following an afternoon bike ride, Thursday, July 3, 2008, in Washington. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Gitmo Suspects Win New Rights
The Supreme Court has ruled that detainees at Guantanamo Bay have the right to challenge their detentions in civilian court. Wyatt Andrews reports.
-
Special Report
War On Terror
Complete coverage of the military's battle against terrorism.
-
Interactive
The Supreme Court
History, traditions and key cases, plus what it takes to get on the bench.
The high court ruling, which gave all detainees the right to petition federal judges for immediate release, has intensified discussions within the Bush administration about what to do with the roughly 270 detainees held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
"I'm sure that none of us want Khalid Sheikh Mohammed walking around our neighborhoods," White House press secretary Dana Perino said about al Qaeda's former third in command.
President Bush strongly disagreed with the Supreme Court decision that the foreigners held under indefinite detention at Guantanamo have the right to seek release in civilian courts. The 5-4 ruling was the third time the justices had repudiated Mr. Bush on his approach to holding the suspects outside the protections of U.S. law.
The legal ramifications of the Supreme Court decision remain fuzzy, but it's unlikely that a federal appeals court would order a detainee released into the United States even if a judge finds that the government was holding the detainee improperly. A court might tell the Bush administration to let a prisoner go, but it presumably would be up to the executive branch to figure out where.
Attorney General Michael Mukasey had predicted that the Supreme Court's decision would unleash a torrent of court filings from detainees seeking their freedom. Judges, however, have been particularly wary of telling the executive branch what to do with the detainees.
Late last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the military had improperly labeled Huzaifa Parhat, a Chinese Muslim, as an enemy combatant. The court said Parhat deserved a new hearing or should be released. But the court deftly avoided saying where he should be released - an indication that the courts expect the executive branch to wrestle with that decision.
Glenn Sulmasy, a national security fellow at Harvard University, said if the matter remains in the hands of civilian courts, there is an element of truth to the White House warning that detainees could be released in the United States. But he said that while it's possible, it's not probable.
He said the legislative and executive branches should find a third legal way - not through military commissions or the civilian courts - to deal with the detainees, perhaps a national security or other type of special court. "What is needed is a hybrid court," he said.
Quote
The administration opened the detention facility shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to hold enemy combatants, people suspected of ties to al Qaeda or the Taliban.We are in uncharted territory, and we have never had enemy combatants afforded constitutional rights like all of us have.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino"We are in uncharted territory, and we have never had enemy combatants afforded constitutional rights like all of us have, so anybody who thinks that they know exactly what's going to happen if a detainee challenges his detention - his or her detention - in court, they're not being honest because we don't know what's going to happen," Perino said.
"But there is considered judgment, from many federal government lawyers - all the way up to the attorney general of the United States that it is a very real possibility that a dangerous detainee could be released into the United States as a result of this Supreme Court decision."
Judges at Washington's federal courthouse are moving quickly to process about 200 cases involving Guantanamo Bay detainees. Those cases would force the Justice Department to say why the detainees are being held and defend the decision to label them enemy combatants. Defense attorneys are convinced that, in many cases, the evidence will not hold up.
"The judge might say to the United States, 'You don't have enough evidence to hold this person,"' Perino said. "And then what do we do? ... Is he allowed to leave? And if so, is he picked up by immigration? Even if that's the case, they're only allowed to be held for six months."
Judge Thomas F. Hogan set a hearing for Tuesday to decide how the cases will proceed. Under the schedule expected to be adopted, judges could start reviewing evidence in a matter of weeks and some cases could be decided by September.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Video and Galleries from U.S.
-
Video
Kidney Transplant Chain
-
Video
Taxing The Rich
-
Video
Cash For Clunkers
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 223 CommentsWe are in uncharted territory, and we have never had enemy combatants afforded constitutional rights like all of us have. Dana Perino
No one in Washington ever gave this a thought?
Our government continues to prove just how incompetent they are!
Bush has been in "uncharted terrority" his whole life.
Our government has done nothing ar all to keep our country safe--come on Mcvet--lets sing it out!!
http://www.fed-soc.org/aboutus/
http://www.cga.edu/display.aspx?id=3094
What a maroon.
Dipstick.
Let''s see the White House take things one step at a time. Start by proving they''re terrorists. Seven years so far and not one conviction!
Back in your cage, or no banana tonight!
The s.***.
"I''m sure that none of us want Khalid Sheikh Mohammed walking around our neighborhoods," White House press secretary Dana Perino said about al Qaeda''s former third in command.
================
Oh yes, I am sure Dana Perino, you little H*OOKER for the Bush Admin you, that he will be *wandering* around in our neighborhoods.
Ja*ck****
Of course Bush fears these people going free.
Not because they are terrorists, but because they will levy war crimes charges against Bush and his henchmen for torture and various other human rights violations.
Bush''s ploy to use military tribunals to silence the truth, has failed.
This is going to be ugly, people!
Looks like people are desperate for a good mindscrew.
After the train wreck of this administration, I wish I could slap myself and wake from this nightmare.
Apparently this clown of a president can''t grasp that some phoney bounty hunter simply grabbed people for a $4,000 payoff without any reason to believe they are guilty of anything.
Even Bush''s father understands the disaster that is this presidency. Of all the people around Bush, he''s the one I have the most sympathy for - because he understands.
Most of the others are simply oblivious.
or complicit (Cheney)
#######
How is it terrorists that Bombed the WTC in 1993 were convicted and in prison in a year and a half after the bombing - and this Administration has GITMO...
Bush is the individual who, in November, 2005, facing an assembly of his own party members critical of his NSA spying program, bristled like a teenager caught drinking after curfew-- "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It''s just a GD)((#@*! piece of paper!"
Is this figure, who claims to be president of the United States, the same who pledged an oath to "protect, preserve and defend" the document he calls a "GD)((#@*! piece of paper"?
Perhaps a review of the current Articles of Impeachment against Bush will raise a few eyebrows and information levels. See--
http://www.impeachbush.tv/progress/dk_aoi_bush/
WHAT?!? Why does he need to be picked up by immigration? The judge said you can''t hold him so what do you do? YES! just allow him to leave! Why is this even a question?
This has got to be the most insane argument from the monkey president!!
Most of the detainees were plucked from their home countries like the UK, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, even Australia etc. Why can''t the government just let them go back?
As a matter of fact, the government has already released some detainees in the past and they just went back to their home countries.
More importantly, where is the proof that these guys are even dangerous? Like someone said below: seven years and not a single conviction. So, now if a court finds that a certain detainee did not do anything and hence, cannot be held any longer, doesn''t that mean he is innocent?
So, why would he still be a danger even if he roamed the streets?
I am not a judge and even I can figure this out.
So, why can''t the judges? Well..I''ll tell you why. because they are afraid of Bush.
This is going to be a long six months.
HermitDave - that is an excellent and valid point. The point is lost on this administration, which is apparently incapable of understanding that these abuses give credibility to the real terrorists, and is a valuable recruiting tool for them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"How is it terrorists that Bombed the WTC in 1993 were convicted and in prison in a year and a half after the bombing - and this Administration has GITMO..."
Posted by IOWEIGN
IOWEIGN, that was different. The president didn''t torture those suspects, and so did not fear what they might say in a court of law.
Very different from today. Tell you what, I''m going to have one kickin'' party once the idiot is shooed from office in coming months.
---
Peripheral''s offhand-style is perfectly suited to dropping a preposterous and fear-mongering speculation from Bush or perhaps Cheney.
If Peripheral had thought about it, she might have delivered her lines in Britney-style, chewing gum for emphasis.
Her grammar is equally beyond reproach, rivaled by Bush''s inability to pronounce nuclear except as "knucular". Clearly, she was the first choice of Bush. What a team!
The nominal press secretary has learned also to deliver her lines with a straight face, the height of her brief career. Next, surely, is Hollywood or perhaps a stint at a Beltline lobby, drafting campaign copy for McBush.
Hardest for Peripheral, understandably, was spelling the sheikh''s name. As for knowing his background, don''t ask. She won''t confess, even if waterboarded. She doesn''t know.
****************
Have you ever listened to what kind of sponsors put commercials on that show? Hardly anyone we know of from the major commercials. Yet, somehow that show gets that much revenue despite his obvious lies, racism, and overall hate speech. It is just one long political commercial using our public airwaves.
I hear you. It''s all protected speech, but the content does reflect very poorly on the country. It''s pretty sad.
I place Rush Limbaugh''s credibility in the same league as Ghost Hunters, Psychic Friends, Horrorscopes, and bald-head spraypaint treatments.
He was, after all, high on drugs, which goes a ways to explaining his wierd way of thinking.
But in reality I think it''s all an act, for the money. I doubt he believes what he says. Nobody is -that- stupid (except perhaps the audience).
------------------------------------------------------Posted by smurfcrusher at 01:08 AM : Jul 04, 2008
=============================================
There is fascinating story on Rush Limbaugh this week in the New York Times. Lots of details about his background, his home, his money and how he works etc.
Read it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/magazine/06Limbaugh-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
In an interview within the story, he himself acknowledges that first and foremost he is a businessman whose only goal is to attract the largest audience so he can sell airtime for ads.
If it suited for him to be a Democrat, he would turn in a hearbeat. Unfortunately, there aren''t enough Democrats who will religiously listen to talk radio. There are millions of stupid Repubs though.
Second, if they had rights ''like we have'' they wouldn''t have been treated so badly the past 5-6 years! Waiting for rights & trials that never happened!
Third, if a judge decides to let them go---so what?!
They''re foreigners! NOT Americans! Got it?! They have no ''right'' to stay here! Send''em home! Pretending they have this right and the outcome will be they''ll roam our neighborhoods, in order to scare us, is cowardly but typical of the ploys that this administration continues to practice against the U.S. public!
And finally, thanks for demonstrating---once again---that this administration refuses to accept ANY responsibility for IT''S actions! And, can only create problems! So, very sad! :(
I can think of one terrorist who''s already free
The bad news is, this backs them into a corner. It might be time for them to do something rash to divert attention, such as attacking Iran.
Probably before October would be my guess.
The answer to those "fears of terrorists being allowed on our streets" is totally rediculas.
Send them back to where they were, when they were detained. If these people are found to be held as enemy combatants but falsely accused by people who wanted the "bounty" paid for terrorists by the bush administration, send them to their own countries.
On the eve of Bush''s last G-8 appearance, the dollar''s gyrations are again in the crossfire. This time, it is a weak currency, upended by slumping growth, a housing recession and record gas prices, that is gnawing away at the world economy.
The dollar''s 41 percent drop against the euro during Bush''s term writes the economic epitaph of an administration that set out to restore American preeminence. Instead, Bush heads to Japan next week for his final international summit with diminished leverage as Russian and Chinese influence grows.
"Between the economic duress facing the United States and the global community at large and the fact that the clock is running out on the Bush administration, Bush does not hold a good hand,'''' said Charles Kupchan, an international-relations professor at Georgetown University in Washington. He called the summit a "damage-limitation'''' exercise to show the world that governments are trying to contain food and oil prices.
He''s as much a Christian as Hitler was.
He''s as much a Christian as Hitler was.
that they just forgot about the detainees spurred the court''s decision, so they have no one but themselves to blame.
Go crawl in a hole somewhere your ignorance is showing. Try communication rather than your Diatribe of the same old crud...
What your attempting to say in a pre 8th grade education is you dont like Bush so other than your usual tripe try telling us your reasons and attempt to do so in an intellegent way if you would! Or is that even possiable for you to formulate a preposition or reasonable responce or retort rather than resort to mindless diatribe of ignorance and hate filled words attempting to razz and befuddle us with your less than stellar Matriculation record?
Et Tu Brutus?
Bush has certainly had a run of poor political advisors to guide him who must have skipped History and ethics class''s.
---------------
OK, RINOs are dumber and more desperate than I thought. The only way he''d get in would be by Bush''s Open Door Illegal Immigrant Policy.
The GOP is a dead corpse than just can''t stop stabbing itself with the Stupid Knife.
Your leader Nancy Puslosi want to give FARC rights and recognize them as a non-terrorist organization. Your all sick! They''ve butchered children, women, men and the elderly! But again, even on the 4th of July, you find blame with America, where you live in the comfort of A/C, Heat, Fresh Water, Medicine, Plentiful Nutrition, Transportation, Hospitals, Communications, Education, Jobs and yet you still complain!
I%u2019ve got 2 names! Look them up if you''re not a coward and tell me their fate! Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston, Texas, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Oregon who where so severally tortured, that DNA Tests had to be conducted to just ID our brothers. There has been torcher in every conflict, we won WWI because we became more vicious then our enemy the only reason the tide was turned! Keep living in your glass house!
From,
The Few The Proud %u2013 The Marines
Ps Happy 4th of July!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 223 Comments