Comments (78)

Long Memory wrote on June 12, 2007 5:55 PM:

Just another "little punk, he never had to serve." (Thanks, Don Henley) Tony has lived as an apparatchik, and he'll die as an apparatchik.

bobh wrote on June 12, 2007 6:00 PM:

What shocks me is that the press is COMPETELY incapable of putting this lemming in his place.

Habeas Crpus, can u spell that Tony?

Why were Americans held without a trial for years on end, Tony?

Why were Americans denied their CONSTITUTIONAL rights, Tony?

Do you have any excuse Tony?

And keep repeating the question until you get an answer.

The noise machine that is T. Snow is not capable of answering as that is not his job - show him for what he is by refusing to quit asking the question hes drowning out with his smack talk.

sweetgumroot wrote on June 12, 2007 7:08 PM:

Tony, at your podium and in under 15 seconds
flat, you just played prosecutor, judge and
jury. At your podium you just convicted all
Gitmo detainees terrorism in support of the
Taliban.

Tony, do you know what "The Rule of Law" means?

anon wrote on June 12, 2007 7:10 PM:

Fun with Young Tony? Track down his letters from Kenya to his alma mater's school newspaper written shortly after he graduated from college. Let's just say it was an introspective time for Young Tony.

Code: parcel, as in "Hey, is that another of those airmail letters from Tony?"

Garzoid wrote on June 12, 2007 7:38 PM:

Hey guys don't you get it...this is all part of the Republican's Freedom for Oil program....

Char wrote on June 12, 2007 7:40 PM:

That clip makes me very sad, Tony basically barked down the reporter with a straw man argument, and that's the part that the MSM is going to play. When tony asked "Are you saying we shouldn't detain people we capture?" The reporter should have answered "No, I'm saying we shouldn't detain anyone without due process of law."

Of course, even if he countered the straw man correctly, there would have been some deeper layer of BS to cut through. le sigh.

neo1 wrote on June 12, 2007 8:04 PM:

I just wish I could spit in the man's face.

neo1 wrote on June 12, 2007 8:04 PM:

I just wish I could spit in the man's face.

mencken wrote on June 12, 2007 8:08 PM:

why does tony snow hate america so?

bjobotts wrote on June 12, 2007 8:15 PM:

Our constitution doesn't apply to outsiders.

But our constitution does apply to us and how we operate in the world. Snow has ceased to be a voice for our country just like his boss.

Johnsnottoodistracted wrote on June 12, 2007 8:17 PM:

Planting seeds.
Have to start this process to produce at least a few believers.Hey he's the guy who gets his paycheck with his script.Has for years.Why does anyone expect anything but this.
From fraud tv to the wh toxic fumes will not generate clear thinking.
The truth is: even this type debate is a little distraction.
The heist is on big time.The msm is now their cover.
Don't get distracted.

hueyplong wrote on June 12, 2007 8:19 PM:

These guys always throw out false assumptions.

Since when have large numbers of people on American soil been "plucked off a battlefield?" 1864?

Diverik wrote on June 12, 2007 8:20 PM:

Tony Snow: "Are you saying that detaining people who are plucked off the battlefields is an assault on democracy?"

Jose Padilla was not "plucked off the battlefield". He was arrested at O'Hare Int. Airport as a material witness and later changed to an "enemy combatant".

Ali al-Marri was not "plucked off the battlefield". He was arrested in Dec. 2001 in Peoria, IL as a material witness, subsequently charged with credit card fraud and lying to FBI. He was not declared an "enemy combatant" until June 2003.

Maher Arar was not "plucked off the battlefield". He was arrested in JFK airport and transported to Syria where he was tortured before it was determined that he was innocent and was released.

This administration keeps putting forth the idea that everyone declared an enemy combatant was captured while actively engaged in hostilities against US forces or citizens. (i.e. "plucked off the battlefields".) That is an outright lie. When is the press going to call "BS" on these guys?

BVD wrote on June 12, 2007 8:32 PM:

Memo to Diverik: The answer is - Never. They will never do it. Not... ever.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on June 12, 2007 8:36 PM:

Tony Snowjob snatching up tayererists all over Battlefield Earth and storing them up in GITMO 'til dey be safe.

Greenpeace best be on the look out.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on June 12, 2007 8:37 PM:

Tony Snowjob snatching up tayererists all over Battlefield Earth and storing them up in GITMO 'til dey be safe.

Greenpeace best be on the look out.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on June 12, 2007 8:37 PM:

Tony Snowjob snatching up tayererists all over Battlefield Earth and storing them up in GITMO 'til dey be safe.

Greenpeace best be on the look out.

IntelVet wrote on June 12, 2007 8:37 PM:

"Just another "little punk, he never had to serve." (Thanks, Don Henley) Tony has lived as an apparatchik, and he'll die as an apparatchik."

He sounds more and more like Baghdad Bob to me.

Don wrote on June 12, 2007 8:46 PM:

Jose Padilla was plucked out of O'Hare airport...

JD wrote on June 12, 2007 8:47 PM:

I would be the last to say that any detainee at Gitmo should NOT spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison. But AFTER a fair and impartial trial. I, unlike all in the Bush cabal am not afraid our justice system, that it won't work correctly and swiftly.

31tudor wrote on June 12, 2007 8:55 PM:

When do other countries get to defend their land when Bush attacks them? When is a simple person, like a farmer or student, who was attacked and occupied in the name of PAX America fights back and then be called an insurgent or a terrorist? I dont know about the Rep/Cons, but if my country was attacked and occupied ,I would fight back with everything I had. IED's, sniper, anything. And I would hope that my other border alies would come to help to destroy the occupiers,PERIOD!

JD wrote on June 12, 2007 9:02 PM:

How can anyone advocate killing American soldiers? Only an unredeemable soul.

Craig Donsanto wrote on June 12, 2007 9:07 PM:

Richard- You said that.

Styve wrote on June 12, 2007 9:15 PM:

Tony is looking pretty sick, like he has lost quite a bit of weight during his recovery from cancer.

I wonder if he will survive a jail term, or if he is even considering that possibility.

Vampa wrote on June 12, 2007 9:21 PM:

Tony thought he could enjoy a Fox News moment there and, considering how inept the reporters were/are, he was right.

Hagop wrote on June 12, 2007 9:32 PM:

Maybe we need a Sam Donaldson or Dan "no, are you" Rather to actually ask a follow-up. Treat it like a deposition: keep asking until you get an answer to your question.

buckheaddad wrote on June 12, 2007 9:36 PM:

What are all these people going to do when they're no longer in the White House?

Where are they going to hide?

lilybart wrote on June 12, 2007 9:46 PM:

I am astonished that someone would want to spend his last months on earth, LYING for these criminals.

Cheney justs gets meaner the more near-death experiences he has.

TedPax wrote on June 12, 2007 9:59 PM:

"What are all these people going to do when they're no longer in the White House? Where are they going to hide?"

One would think that, but don't be surprised if you see Tony SnowJob running for the Senate after his stint as Bush's apologist. I hear they're already priming him to run. (someone say it's not true!)

I read the WH press briefings whenever they're released. The WH press corps is a joke. They have no backbone. Poor Helen Thomas, she's about the only one with any integrity. This is the kind of reporting we get when the news organizations are bought and paid for by the corporate giants.

Mary wrote on June 12, 2007 10:01 PM:

Further to Diverik @ 8:20, not only those, but of the actual GITMO detainees, the Seton Hall study - pretty much the most thorough study done of the detentions at GITMO, shows that less than 10% had even an arguable "battlefield" connection. All kinds of people were just sold by warlords to Americans willing to engage in human trafficking.

All kinds of detainees both at GITMO and in Iraq and Afghanistan are drug from their homes and their beds. Those mount into the thousands.

The Chinese Uighurs at GIMTO have been a particularly sad story and the Chinese have used the sale of Uighurs by warlords to the US and the status as "GITMO terrorists" of the Uighurs to unleash even more abuse on them. After all - Bush has said they were terrorists, right?

There's even been Congressional testimony that most of those at GITMO were not battlefield captures (and even the least generous estimate I've seen, that from Dr. Nakhleh http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/09/sb-six-questions-emile-nakhleh-1158706094 says that at least one-third were not terrorists nor even jihadists and are people who "wouldn't have been there if we weren't paying a bounty to Pakistani security forces for every Middle Eastern-looking person they handed over to us")

Incredible immorality and blatant criminal behaviour and all Snow can do is spew nonsense.

Why doesn't the press EVER mention any real life situations back in response to his talking points? The bipolar chef from London who was just sent back to Morocco for example? The Brits sent to GITMO after and African stop under the pretext that their battery charger might have been a terrorist device. Kurnaz, who had about 200 pp of EXCULPATORY evidence (just about everything in the file) "classified" with his lawyers threatened that they couldn't use any of it and or talk about the fact that all the evidence was exculpatory - bc, after all, it was secret, etc.

Bad guys on a battlefield do need to go into some kind of POW type detention. Unfortunately- hardly anyone at GITMO or in our Afghan or Iraq facilities (or secret prisons) were battlefield captures and the "battlefield" for some who were involved our attacks on their homes and villages and their self defense. Which, at a minimum, required the be given POW treatment.

Instead, they got the monstrosities of the Bush DOJ and DOD.

CletusBleaker wrote on June 12, 2007 10:01 PM:

The state of the fourth estate makes me very sad. These bullies must be throw out and prosecuted by the voting box.

Anonymous wrote on June 12, 2007 10:12 PM:

"What are all these people going to do when they're no longer in the White House?

Who says they're leaving?

The Congress and the Judiciary have no say anymore with the doctrine of the Unitary Executive (advocated by a sitting Supreme Court Justice.). As with Gonzales and every other act of this malignancy, the Executive can tell the rest of the country to go fuck itself.

What, in the last 6+ years, has stopped them from doing exactly what they decide.

They need only install a loyalist as president in 200(.

The game was over when the USSC ruled that counting the votes wasn't necessary to determine the winner of the election.

Hope springs eternal, but reality trumps hope.

Califlander wrote on June 12, 2007 10:19 PM:

Fundamentally, Bush abhors any system that might tell him he's wrong. It's not just that he has to win all the time: he can't even stand the *possibility* of being told he's wrong.

A habeas review, or any other form of due process that might lead to an enforceable conclusion that he erred in locking someone up is anathema to him. He's the decider, after all.

EH wrote on June 12, 2007 10:29 PM:

I guess a natural followup question would be to ask what ISN'T the battlefield in the GWOT. It serves the administrations priorities for the battlefield to be defined as "everywhere."

vox clamantis in red state wrote on June 12, 2007 10:31 PM:

Trust our justice system? Well I swain.
With the DOJ as f---ked as it is, with a supreme court whose majority appointed this president with no legal justification, with sentencing recommendations by caring, well place and well paid people of position for leniency, even pardon, for the SOB who blatantly lied about the eviseration of his own CIA's security apparatus, those prisoners at GITMO would surely have their fate thrown to winds appearing in an American court these days.
Justice in America = a snowball's chance in hell.

vox clamantis in red state wrote on June 12, 2007 10:32 PM:

Trust our justice system? Well I swain.
With the DOJ as f---ked as it is, with a supreme court whose majority appointed this president with no legal justification, with sentencing recommendations by caring, well place and well paid people of position for leniency, even pardon, for the SOB who blatantly lied about the eviseration of his own CIA's security apparatus, those prisoners at GITMO would surely have their fate thrown to winds appearing in an American court these days.
Justice in America = a snowball's chance in hell.

Rick wrote on June 12, 2007 10:40 PM:

"What are all these people going to do when they're no longer in the White House?

They will be placed at Gitmo.

Herb wrote on June 12, 2007 10:46 PM:

BUSH IS LIKE A CHICKEN, RUNNING AROUND AIMLESSLY AND FLAILING, WITH HIS HEAD CUT-OFF. HE THINKS ANYBODY "MEAN" IS A TERR'IST! OFTEN, HE JUST CALLS 'EM "THE KILLERS," LIKE HE CAN FERRET ALL THEM OUT WITH YOUR MILITARY -- ALL BECAUSE HE "DECIDED" TO STAY ON VACATION WHEN WARNED IN AUGUST 2001 OF THE NINE-ELEVEN ATTACKS.

GUILTY-CONSCIENCE? NOT IF HE'S A SOCIOPATH...

koolaidsf wrote on June 12, 2007 10:48 PM:

I think his testicles have gone haywire...again.

Keith Thompson wrote on June 12, 2007 10:53 PM:

Well, strictly speaking, it's not an assault on democracy. It's something arguably worse, an assault on freedom and justice. (After all, if 51% of the people want to throw someone in prison forever without charges, that's "democracy".)

Sure, I'm nitpicking over words, but I think it's important to remember that democracy and freedom are not synonymous, and neither actually guarantees the other. Not all good things are the same thing, and we have to keep working to maintain both.

Tony Prentakis wrote on June 12, 2007 10:58 PM:

Mr. Snow suffers from the delusion that habeas corpus is only for the benefit of the detained person. In fact habeas is about OUR rights, too. We, the citizens who are (in principle, anyway) the owners of the government, need habeas in order to know whether our government has locked up the RIGHT persons.

My government provides me no sort of protection from al-Qaida when it locks up somebody who is NOT, in fact, a supporter, adherent, or dues-paying member of al-Qaida. Unlike Britney Spears, I cannot "just trust our President". I want him to SHOW ME that he's "detaining" the right person. The way to do that has been established over many centuries: public examination of the evidence, in open court, with effective counsel for the accused.

I want the people who are trying to kill me taken prisoner, and held for the duration of the war. In the good old days, it was obvious who those people were: anyone in a Wermacht uniform, corporal or general, cook or commando. In these trying times, it's not so easy: a man who has never openly acknowledged his allegiance to al-Qaida, and never committed an overt terrorist act, may well be the next Mohamed Atta -- or he may be just another random Arab Muslim. If my government CLAIMS he is an enemy combatant, I want to know WHY it thinks so. If its reasons cannot stand up to scrutiny, then it is wasting its time and my money. Detaining random people is not useful. "Round up the usual suspects" was a JOKE, not a strategem.

Habeas corpus is not just for detainees, Mr. Snow.

-- TP

anonymous wrote on June 12, 2007 11:03 PM:

...I wonder if he will survive a jail term, or if he is even considering that possibility...

A jail term for Snow is a pleasant thought but, come on, I can't think of any circumstances that he might end up in jail. You can be prosecuted for lying in WH press conferences? I doubt it.

thersitz wrote on June 12, 2007 11:04 PM:

"What are all these people going to do when they're no longer in the White House?

they'll get huge paying jobs with major corporations -- the same corporations that built K-Street, that continually flood enormous amounts of money into election campaigns, that care more about their institution than they do about this country.

Is that really a question you do not know the answer to??

jeffgee wrote on June 12, 2007 11:08 PM:

More approved WH talking points. Bush says it , so it must be true. "Plucked up off the battlefield." Are there any "battlefields" anymore? How 18th century.
Never mind that a large percentage of the "combatants" are just unlucky people who were turned in for a bounty by their tribal rivals.

judyinnm wrote on June 12, 2007 11:09 PM:

Does Tony Snow want Hillary to have the powers he advocates for georgejr??? Does anyone want anyone to have that kind of power? Am I the only one who sees Negroponte's fine hand in all this?

Meah Bottoms wrote on June 12, 2007 11:49 PM:

This guy is now in the inner circle. He gets Karl's talking points verbatum. And the others are there too. Can't you see them going back and forth coming up with this garbage? They make this stuff up on a daily basis, and they believe that just saying something like this will pass for reality. We used to just be incredulous with our mouths open. That has passed. Now we expect anything but reasoned governance. It really is madness.

John Wilson wrote on June 13, 2007 12:40 AM:

But that's the whole purpose of Gitmo

A place where there is no law
but Gitmo law.

As Powell sez: Shut it down
not tomorrow, this afternoon.

The price of liberty IS eternal vigilance
...

is total distain for the citizen
therefore our fault?

Dwight Spencer, Ph.D. wrote on June 13, 2007 12:57 AM:

What Tony Snow has been putting on as a colossal display of stupidity and illogical reasoning as White house press secretary for the White House has been of no surprise to me. I was first introduced to Snow's intellectual feebleness when he appeared - just weeks before his appointment - on Bill Maher's Real Time show. The incredibly ignorant and outright false statements he uttered on that program brought forth the loudest audience chorus of boos that I can remember, and even Bill - who always tries hard to stay calm no matter the controversy - finally became enraged with him. Snow is just another of the hundreds of Bush hacks now screwing our country.

Dwight Spencer, Ph.D. wrote on June 13, 2007 12:57 AM:

What Tony Snow has been putting on as a colossal display of stupidity and illogical reasoning as White house press secretary for the White House has been of no surprise to me. I was first introduced to Snow's intellectual feebleness when he appeared - just weeks before his appointment - on Bill Maher's Real Time show. The incredibly ignorant and outright false statements he uttered on that program brought forth the loudest audience chorus of boos that I can remember, and even Bill - who always tries hard to stay calm no matter the controversy - finally became enraged with him. Snow is just another of the hundreds of Bush hacks now screwing our country.

Allen wrote on June 13, 2007 3:17 AM:

Well, what do u expect from Tony Snow. I slept with dogs while at faux Fox-News... one a doggy with fleas and lice, u can't expect him to be anything more than an dog with fleas and lice...

Anonymous wrote on June 13, 2007 3:49 AM:

Another victim of American Public education.

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 7:22 AM:

I would be the last to say that any detainee at Gitmo should NOT spend the rest of their miserable lives in prison. But AFTER a fair and impartial trial. I, unlike all in the Bush cabal am not afraid our justice system, that it won't work correctly and swiftly.

Posted by: JD
Date: June 12, 2007 08:47 PM

So they should get a "fair and impartial trial" -- but premised upon a presumption of guilt?

I.F. Stone's advice to journalits: "You only need know two words: governments lie." As the burden to prove guilt is on the gov't, not the burden to prove innocence on the defendant, we don't prevent defendant's getting to court so as to force the gov't to either put up or shut up and release.

VL wrote on June 13, 2007 7:23 AM:

Stop flailing at Tony and deal with the correspondents.

Stop thinking that the residents of the White House Press Room (with one exception) really CARE about getting the facts. They DON'T. They care about getting in the press room the next day. They care about their editors. They care about their paychecks.

And what's more, they LIKE Tony. They respect how he blows them off. They love his tactics--maybe they say, as did Klein of Atwater, that Tony is a "completely feral human being." Takes no prisoners! Lies with a straight face! What a MAN!

These guys (with one exception) aren't on your side. They share Bush values. They've been coopted. Tony just plays along. They're hoping someday Bush will cut a personal tax break for them. They think it could happen.

sc SNAKE, as in don't nurse them in your bosom

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 7:27 AM:

How can anyone advocate killing American soldiers? Only an unredeemable soul.

Posted by: JD
Date: June 12, 2007 09:02 PM

Who advocated such? Those who put the military in harm's way? Or those who humbly suggest that the legal occupants of such as Iraq have an unquestionable right to defend their country against illegal invasion and occupation?

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 7:40 AM:

I guess a natural followup question would be to ask what ISN'T the battlefield in the GWOT. It serves the administrations priorities for the battlefield to be defined as "everywhere."

Posted by: EH
Date: June 12, 2007 10:29 PM

Bushit has already been careful to include the US as a battlefield in his "War on Terror". The decision against his view the other day held, in part, that the "Commander-in-Chief" role does not apply to his treatment of persons within the US and its territories. In other words: he is not the boss of "We the people" who can dictate to us, and lock us up without recourse if we refuse to obey.

It also holds, in part, that the military cannot seize persons within the US. There remains a difference between, on one hand, military power, and on the other, police power. And the court ordered that the defendant, a civilian, be turned over to the police authoriity for specifically "criminal" prosecution, if the evidence warrants that.

lower tiberius wrote on June 13, 2007 7:45 AM:

ahhh hem!

Tony, I'd like to point out that we ... yes WEEEE ... supported the Taliban when it was convenient to administer as many headaches to the russian armed forces as we could back in the day. Gee Whiz Tone ... I guess it's true what they say ... patriotism is more akin to a date on a calendar than any true loyalty and honor

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 7:51 AM:

Another victim of American Public education.

Posted by:
Date: June 13, 2007 03:49 AM

Yeah: let's replace American public education with "religious" indoctrination for a fee. And if you can't afford the fee, no education at all.

American public education is not the reason for a lack of ethics. The lack is a choice by the individual.

Your Mother wrote on June 13, 2007 8:14 AM:

oh and JD

screw you you son of a bitch

in my opinion tudor is right on the money

freedom is a precious thing, not your entitlement

everyone else's life is a miserable one cept your's

and they deserve a "swift" determination of condemnation adjudged on them by a blind dispicable chump, and while getting bread and coffee in the morning a woman and her children should be shocked and awed by you and your blinding justice because they happen to have skin that's the wrong hue for you or they live on land you feel is your manifest destiny cause the fucking tooth fairy visited you in your sleep and said it was so. do the world a favor and go hang yourself in the closet.

freedom is a struggle
fight for it

Official A wrote on June 13, 2007 9:30 AM:

And to think that General Washington felt it important to treat his British prisoners better than the British treated their rebel prisoners. How quaint and pre-9/11 of him.

Official A wrote on June 13, 2007 9:34 AM:

Posted by: Your Mother

Well said!

JEP wrote on June 13, 2007 9:39 AM:

See, I was right, "Tony Snow" translates to Tariq Aziz in Farsi!

Xman wrote on June 13, 2007 10:07 AM:

Why does the press seem to lack both brain and backbone?

1. Because they are part of the same club as those they question. "State Media".
2. Because they are lazy and don't do their homework, so have no intelligent questions.
3. Because they are selected for their jobs because they can't think on their feet.
4. Because they are afraid to buck the system. Have no courage.
5. Because they have never read our constitution, bill of rights, etc.
6. Because they have never served in combat.
7. Because they have the same moral s as those they question.
8. Because it is all a show.

Xman wrote on June 13, 2007 10:16 AM:

Why does the press seem to lack both brain and backbone?

1. Because they are part of the same club as those they question. "State Media".
2. Because they are lazy and don't do their homework, so have no intelligent questions.
3. Because they are selected for their jobs because they can't think on their feet.
4. Because they are afraid to buck the system. Have no courage.
5. Because they have never read our constitution, bill of rights, etc.
6. Because they have never served in combat.
7. Because they have the same moral s as those they question.
8. Because it is all a show.

Frankly, my dear, ... wrote on June 13, 2007 10:17 AM:

"See, I was right, "Tony Snow" translates to Tariq Aziz in Farsi!"
Posted by: JEP

Actually, "snow" in Farsi is "barf".

TSop wrote on June 13, 2007 10:18 AM:

Tony Snow is Baghdad Bob!

Bearpaw wrote on June 13, 2007 10:21 AM:

"Our constitution doesn't apply to outsiders."

Actually, it does, though I can certainly understand why some people prefer to think otherwise.

While there are obviously differences in laws and regulations, "[t]he fundamental civil liberties protections of the Bill of Rights and Constitution apply to all 'persons,' not just citizens." [ACLU]

Frankly, my dear, ... wrote on June 13, 2007 10:24 AM:

"Our constitution doesn't apply to outsiders."

Horseshit.

Our constitution applies wherever the jurisdiction of the United States runs, and that includes Guantánamo Bay.

"Amendment V"

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

What part of "no person" don't you understand?

W Smith wrote on June 13, 2007 10:33 AM:

War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.

David wrote on June 13, 2007 10:36 AM:

When White House apparatchiks like Snow say that it's OK to detain terrorists and criminals indefinitely, without a hearing, I wish journalists would say something like,

"They're not terrorists. They're not criminals. They're all completely innocent. If you think they're criminals, then prove it."

Mark F. wrote on June 13, 2007 11:13 AM:

Tony Snow was officially an A-Hole long ago. Now he's an Uber A-Hole.

cevrero wrote on June 13, 2007 11:29 AM:

"Are you kidding me"

Hey Tony,
We're not laughing. That's the whole fuckin point, you stupid douschebag....We don't know they've been plucked off the battlefield. In fact when the battlefield is anywhere in the world, how do we know that those people weren't mistakenly taken from their beds in the middle of the night and their children left to starve because their fathers have been tortured for the last 5 years in some secret CIA prison. Don't they deserve the right to prove their innocence. At least give us some evidence that the words you speak aren't complete utter bullshit....because it smells too high heaven everytime you open your trap. We the people in the united states of america believe in due process according to the rules and regulations set forth in the constitution. Do not insult us, by saying fascism is a part of democracy. Now go fuck yourself!

MisterOwl wrote on June 13, 2007 1:07 PM:

Note that "the battlefield" in the "War on/of Terror" has been defined as the entire planet.

Remember that, and listen closely to his carefully-worded statements.

Tomazulob wrote on June 13, 2007 1:19 PM:

You mean a Fox alum doesn't understand history and civics? I'm shocked--shocked, I say. How much longer are we going to have to endure this before our responsible Congressmen begin to understand their duties?

Tom Simon wrote on June 13, 2007 1:36 PM:

Is there no one in the Republican party who can defend the constitution? Why is this not an issue to direct at the GOP candidates?

Sully18 wrote on June 13, 2007 2:26 PM:

Can these criminals( ie.,Bush et.,al.) be prosecuted even after they get out of office?

FC wrote on June 13, 2007 7:45 PM:

Het Tony, why are you outraged when US soldiers are captured by US enemies on the battlefield ?

FC wrote on June 13, 2007 8:00 PM:

How can anyone advocate killing American soldiers? Only an unredeemable soul.

Posted by: JD
Date: June 12, 2007 09:02 PM

As the grandson of a french terrorist (you know, during WWII) who has been caught on the Les Glieres battlefield by the Wermacht and escaped to use IEDs, grenades, guns against the occupier's trains and tanks, I can tell you that, while not advocating killing US soldiers, I do think the Iraqi insurgency agains US occupation is absolutely legitimate, just as legitimate as the Afghan resistance against soviet invaders.
And I do think the Iranian support of this insurgency is just as legitimate as the US support of the Afghan resistance.

Wretched Refuse wrote on June 14, 2007 11:07 PM:

Our constitution doesn't apply to outsiders.

But our constitution does apply to us and how we operate in the world. Snow has ceased to be a voice for our country just like his boss.
Posted by: bjobotts

Um... the Constitution only references "CITIZEN" once. All other references are to "PEOPLE" It is a document to free earthly beings, not just those within the borders at the time of its writing.

THe fore fathers knew that other peoples would want to adopt these same sentiments, so they did not use "Citizen" for fear of isolating others NOT in the United States.
Code word= "mine"