McCain: Guantanamo Decision One Of the Worst Ever

[one...two...tree 2,762]

John McCain heightened his rhetoric about the Boumediene v. Bush decision, which grants the Guantanamo detainees to question their confinement in civilian courts:

"The Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country," McCain said.

The statement met with great approval by voters at the candidate's town hall meeting:

The crowd of more than 1,000 supporters, packed into a gym at Burlington County College, exploded into applause at McCain's comments.

The presumptive GOP nominee then read from Chief Justice John Roberts' dissent, and predicted the courts would now be "flooded" with habeas corpus lawsuits.

The harsh rebuke is a sudden shift from McCain's position yesterday, when he first learned of the decision:

It obviously concerns me . . . but it is a decision the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know, I always favored closing of Guantanamo Bay and I still think that we ought to do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/13/m...o_n_107057.html

[GaryC 7]

John McCain heightened his rhetoric about the Boumediene v. Bush decision, which grants the Guantanamo detainees to question their confinement in civilian courts:

"The Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country," McCain said.

The statement met with great approval by voters at the candidate's town hall meeting:

The crowd of more than 1,000 supporters, packed into a gym at Burlington County College, exploded into applause at McCain's comments.

The presumptive GOP nominee then read from Chief Justice John Roberts' dissent, and predicted the courts would now be "flooded" with habeas corpus lawsuits.

The harsh rebuke is a sudden shift from McCain's position yesterday, when he first learned of the decision:

It obviously concerns me . . . but it is a decision the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know, I always favored closing of Guantanamo Bay and I still think that we ought to do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/13/m...o_n_107057.html

I can see the comments now. Closing Gitmo and giving terrorists constitutional rights are two different things. All throughout our history we haven't given constitutional rights to unlawful enemy combatants. They have always been tried by military courts. Now the SC has overturned 225 years of settled law. I thought settled law means something to the left. I guess that only applies when it's something they want to keep.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

But Gary, I thought you believed that whatever ruling the Supreme Court gives on matters, that's the final word? Didn't we discuss that idea not too long ago?

[alienlovechild 75]

Either way, McCain has more credibility on issues with Gitmo than Obama ever will. The man was a POW who, to my knowledge, never had a lawyer when he was a guest at the Hanoi Hilton.

Also people should compare the basketball courts and Muslim prayer services at Gitmo with the iron shackles attached on the floor the the cells of the Maison Central (Hanoi Hilton). I've seen them and the guillotine in the courtyard. I think most fools are under the impression McCain was getting room service at a four star hotel. It's was a Hilton hotel, right?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

John McCain heightened his rhetoric about the Boumediene v. Bush decision, which grants the Guantanamo detainees to question their confinement in civilian courts:

"

The Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country,"

McCain said.

The statement met with great approval by voters at the candidate's town hall meeting:

The crowd of more than 1,000 supporters, packed into a gym at Burlington County College, exploded into applause at McCain's comments.

The presumptive GOP nominee then read from Chief Justice John Roberts' dissent, and predicted the courts would now be "flooded" with habeas corpus lawsuits.

The harsh rebuke is a sudden shift from McCain's position yesterday, when he first learned of the decision:

It obviously concerns me . . . but it is a decision the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know, I always favored closing of Guantanamo Bay and I still think that we ought to do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/13/m...o_n_107057.html

Hmmm Exaggerate much?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Great, another issue that the poodle takes both sides on.

[mawilson 2,133]

I honestly don't see what the big problem is.

If they really are "enemy combatants", charge them, convict them, lock them up, throw away the key.

If there's no evidence to convict them..... let them go.

It's really that simple.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

I honestly don't see what the big problem is.

If they really are "enemy combatants", charge them, convict them, lock them up, throw away the key.

If there's no evidence to convict them..... let them go.

It's really that simple.

before too long, we'll need court appointed attorneys on the battlefield.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I honestly don't see what the big problem is.

If they really are "enemy combatants", charge them, convict them, lock them up, throw away the key.

If there's no evidence to convict them..... let them go.

It's really that simple.

You better go tell Georgie Boy and his Poodle.

[jundp 191]

I honestly don't see what the big problem is.

If they really are "enemy combatants", charge them, convict them, lock them up, throw away the key.

If there's no evidence to convict them..... let them go.

It's really that simple.

I gotta agree with you mawilson.

That being said, I'll just reiterate that anyone who thinks the US doesn't engage in torture is deluded. And yes, we should have closed Gitmo down years ago.

[Scott & Lai 12]

before too long, we'll need court appointed attorneys on the battlefield.

And CSI teams on the battlefield, complete with yellow crime scene tape...

[Nagishkaw 510]

I honestly don't see what the big problem is.

If they really are "enemy combatants", charge them, convict them, lock them up, throw away the key.

If there's no evidence to convict them..... let them go.

It's really that simple.

before too long, we'll need court appointed attorneys on the battlefield.

Shhhhh... don't give em any ideas, Charles.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

before too long, we'll need court appointed attorneys on the battlefield.

And CSI teams on the battlefield, complete with yellow crime scene tape...

What battlefield are you guys talking about? The battlefield of the war on terror? Should the captives of the war on drugs also be held w/o any rights? What other wars are we going to invent to deny ever more individuals the most basic of rights? The war on drunk driving perhaps?

[jundp 191]

before too long, we'll need court appointed attorneys on the battlefield.

And CSI teams on the battlefield, complete with yellow crime scene tape...

What battlefield are you guys talking about? The battlefield of the war on terror? Should the captives of the war on drugs also be held w/o any rights? What other wars are we going to invent to deny ever more individuals the most basic of rights? The war on drunk driving perhaps?

I'd like to nominate the War on Stupidity.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

before too long, we'll need court appointed attorneys on the battlefield.

And CSI teams on the battlefield, complete with yellow crime scene tape...

What battlefield are you guys talking about? The battlefield of the war on terror? Should the captives of the war on drugs also be held w/o any rights? What other wars are we going to invent to deny ever more individuals the most basic of rights? The war on drunk driving perhaps?

I'd like to nominate the War on Stupidity.

The administration would be sitting in Gitmo then...