Bush: will take Guantanamo court ruling seriously

[sabra]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/WBT005616.htm

Bush: will take Guantanamo court ruling seriously

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Thursday said he had not fully reviewed the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found the current military tribunal system to try Guantanamo prisoners unlawful, but promised it would be taken seriously.

Bush said he would consult with the U.S. Congress to attain appropriate authority for the military tribunals the high court said violated U.S. military rules and the Geneva Conventions.

"We take the findings seriously," he said at a news conference with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "We will work with the Congress" on a way forward.

[SharonRB]

1. So he's just going to get his cronies in Congress to change the laws

so that what he's doing will become legal?

:wtf:

[Kagemusha]

5. You had doubts?

Hey, at least he's making noises that there's a rule of law still. Even that's more than I expected.

[Cybergata]

15. Anyone who doesn't believe History repeats itself needs to

study Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Act. Deja Vu all over again. I'm wondering if at this time, Bush with so little support of the people of the U.S., will actually dare to get Congress to vote for a law to override the court ruling, especially considering the upcoming 2006 elections. Jackson could get away with it because the people who could vote supported Jackson, and benefited from the Indian Removal Act.

[Lerkfish]

2. this just in: thieves promise to take a serious look at theft laws before

ignoring them.

[nolabels]

21. What more needs to be said?

:rofl:

[Soloflecks]

3. Oh, that's serious alright.

So his reaction is that he will just find a way around the decision? How is that any different than what he's already doing? I hope Congress surprises the hell out of him on this, because otherwise we're pretty well finished.

[Amonester]

24. Even if the cowards in Congress surprise the hell out of **...

... the li'le king will just issue another illegal and out-of-thin-air 'signing statement' and voila.

It's like if Al Capone had the power to sign a piece of paper, saying he had no intention of paying any income tax for the rest of his life, and proclaimed at the same time that nobody in the whole world could hold him accountable for not paying them like everybody else had (and still have) to; then got the FBI to agree with that!! :crazy:

The little tyrant king of (his) Divided States of America thinks he's above all laws, and so far, nobody's busted his idiot a$$ (yet), so he's quite confident nobody ever will. Hence, his 'smirky' arrogance.

:grr:

[sweetheart]

4. "president lie again, lies again, lie again, seriously!" nt

[Rose Siding]

6. He's going to get them to bail on Geneva

The Court ruled Geneva violations, as well as violations of US law.

[kurth]

7. Give the liar an inch:

"There is nothing in the text or legislative history of the AUMF even hinting that Congress intended to expand or alter the authorization set forth in Article 21 of the UCMJ." - Justice Stevens

(AUMF: Authorization for Use of Military Force; UCMJ: Uniform Code of Military Justice)

[xxqqqzme]

8. '...he had not fully reviewed...'

translation 'speedy hasn't told me how I can ignore this ruling.'

HE had not fully reviewed - sorry, raisin brain, there are no pic-o-graphs 2 follow.

[mike_c]

9. get ready for an open, bald-faced legislative assault on human rights...

...spearheaded by the Republican leadership in Congress. Get ready for Amerika's version of the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich," better known as The Enabling Act of 1933. This is the same congress that passed the USA PATRIOT Act without reading it, and the same congress that thinks a debate about an anti-flag burning amendment is the most important piece of business before it. In other words, a congress consumed by appearances, a congress that stumbles over itself to march in lockstep with the administration rather than appear "unpatriotic."

[LeftHander]

10. He has not had it to read to him...

....in small words....very slowly...

The tutors are still dumbing the opinion down...

[gratuitous]

11. Notice he didn't say he'd follow the ruling

Just that he'll take it seriously.

Is that a high crime or a misdemeanor yet? Maybe Snarlin' Arlen will make some more tough-sounding statements about the rule of law and holding the administration accountable. He apparently thinks his little joke never gets old.

[Up2Late]

12. Yeah, Right.

Sure he will.:sarcasm:

I foresee a toothless law, written by the Justice Department, passed i the dead of night by Congress, and than add a "presidential Signing statement" to that, all fixed. :banghead:

[hogwyld]

13. An accident waiting to happen

All those Guantanamo detainees are going to wind up in a fatal air crash on their way to the U.S. district court.

[Bill McBlueState]

14. "We take the findings seriously"

The fucking arrogance.

So where in the Constitution does it say that the President gets to decide how "seriously" to take the findings of the Supreme Court?

[kestrel91316]

25. 'Cause he declared himself "The Decider". End of subject.

[Bill McBlueState]

30. oh, that must be in the long-lost Article VIII

Article VIII.

Section 1.

If the President, during the course of his Term, determines that he is Incompetent and Unable to fulfill the duties of his Office as outlined in Article II, he shall declare himself The Decider, and for the remainder of his Term, the People of the Several States shall give him a Free Pass to run the United States into the Ground.

[ColonelTom]

16. "thank you for the question on a, quote, 'ruling'" by the Court

If that quote doesn't show you Bush's contempt for the Supreme Court and the rule of law, I don't know what does.

[Supersedeas]

17. Oh, now....now, he wants to work with Congress...not that * should have

ever thought to do that prior to getting his filthy swamp ass handed to him by the Supremes.

[SammyWinstonJack]

29. ** on working with Congress="Twisting arms and banging heads"

Which is the way he described his impending relationship with members of Congress, back on Dec. 18, 2000. He followed that up with his dictator line.

[Betty]

18. he thinks he can do a "signing statement"

on supreme court rulings.

[htuttle]

20. Wouldn't be surprised if he does

He'll probably try to use Andrew Jackson's ignoring the Supreme Court about the Indian Removal Act as a precedent...

[applegrove]

19. What does that mean? I guess it is news.

[Vidar]

22. Here we go again.

[onehandle]

23. Now prisoners will not be tried, they'll all be disappeared.

Like many of them are anyway.

[Lerkfish]

28. precisely. They don't regret Gitmo because of their crimes, they

regret Gitmo because it made their crimes EVIDENT.

[NYC Liberal]

26. "Bush on Thursday said he had not fully reviewed...the ruling"

:rofl:

You think Bush himself will EVER "review" a Supreme Court ruling? :rofl: He doesn't even read the morning paper.

[HuffleClaw]

27. basically what bush did was the equivalent of

roger ebert saying, 'i haven't seen the film but i've decided i hate it'. i also note that thus far the media is giving him a complete pass on his declaration that the courts decision is irrelevant, that he's simply gonna legislate his way around it and that he has no intentions of putting a stop to military tribunals.