Pelosi to terrorists: Democrats have your six

posted at 3:08 pm on June 29, 2006 by Bryan

Maybe the Hamdan decision is a major gift to President Bush. I was skeptical when I read that earlier, but the decision has gotten the Democrats to fly their true colors:

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today following the United States Supreme Court decision that trying Guantanamo detainees before military commissions violates U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions:

“Today’s Supreme Court decision reaffirms the American ideal that all are entitled to the basic guarantees of our justice system. This is a triumph for the rule of law.

“The rights of due process are among our most cherished liberties, and today’s decision is a rebuke of the Bush Administration’s detainee policies and a reminder of our responsibility to protect both the American people and our Constitutional rights. We cannot allow the values on which our country was founded to become a casualty in the war on terrorism.”

Pundit Guy reacts:

‘If you plan terrorist attacks against America, if you kill Americans in a successful terrorist attack, if you kill our troops in Iraq or on any battlefield, we, the Democratic Party, will defend your right to be defended.’

Yup. Pelosi is now on record granting Osama bin Laden the same Constitutional rights that US citizens who aren’t at war with the US enjoy. Hamdan has gotten Pelosi to put the Democrats’ real position on the table, giving the president a bright line to draw between himself and them for the mid-terms. When that happens and the topic is national security, the president wins every time.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

If they are not citizens of this great country, then they have NO rights under our consitution. How can you justify Rights when they don’t belong here?

We have the right to kill you??? WTF is Peloser talking about?

Kini on June 29, 2006 at 3:14 PM

I think it’s true that, if they have any drop of political acumen left, Bush and the Republicans should be able to make this help them, and rightfully so. But also, this should be another very strong nail in the coffin of the political tolerance for the Supreme Court’s imperialism…except that will require the Republicans to push that case, and they never seem to be willing to do that.

Alex K on June 29, 2006 at 3:15 PM

Democrats have a “one world view” – somehow they think that American laws and freedoms apply to foreigners. Why is this? go figure.

pullingmyhairout on June 29, 2006 at 3:16 PM

Alex K,
We’ll see if Bush uses this to his advantage. somehow I just don’t think he will.

pullingmyhairout on June 29, 2006 at 3:17 PM

Wow, I really didnt think Pelosi was that stttuppid. Everytime the gov fumbles the dems pick it up and run it to their own end zone. Pelosi should take some credit though, she has just made Rove’s job easier.

JVelez on June 29, 2006 at 3:20 PM

I don’t think Bush needs to take advantage of this misguided Democratic thinking. He’s out in 08 anyway.

It should be used by those seeking mid-term elections.

On one hand, we’ll protect and govern with conservative values

On the other, terrorist have right too!

Vote or die… sounds logical to me!

Kini on June 29, 2006 at 3:25 PM

Yup. Pelosi is now on record granting Osama bin Laden the same Constitutional rights that US citizens who aren’t at war with the US enjoy. Hamdan has gotten Pelosi to put the Democrats’ real position on the table, giving the president a bright line to draw between himself and them for the mid-terms. When that happens and the topic is national security, the president wins every time.

Bingo. And I hope Rove and Co. exploit this for every ounce its worth in the mid-terms. The deranged Democrats (but I repeat myself) are doing exactly that – bestowing the same rights on terrorists (citizen or not) as they would on law-abiding citizens, and they should be pounded with this unmercifully, every single day until election day.

thirteen28 on June 29, 2006 at 3:26 PM

This is going to be strong for midterms and whoever from the GOP is running for Prez, Milk that sucker for what its worth

JVelez on June 29, 2006 at 3:30 PM

Oh,yes,she is that stupid.Looking with glee at what seems to be a shot at GW she cannot look at the big picture,she has cake! with ice cream! eat it all now,don’t worry about the tummy ache.The inevitable gut-wrenching pain.Let us not forget that the collateral damage in their war against GW is us,the American people.

bbz123 on June 29, 2006 at 3:39 PM

This supreme (?) court decision will have an unintended consequence. Just how many Special Ops guys do you believe will bring in prisoners in order to let them take part in our court system? The answer is NONE. Since they’re (guys captured by our folks in the field) are out of uniform, making them spies, they’ll be shot.

MikeG on June 29, 2006 at 3:41 PM

JVelez,

Where have you been! Get out your handbook! Rove planned this all along and Nancy bit!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on June 29, 2006 at 3:42 PM

JV

I pray that someone has video of the renowned idiot Pelosi reading her joyful statement in defense of defending terrorists. It would be all over the television and internet from October 1st to election day.

Her stupidity is breathtaking…

Jaibones on June 29, 2006 at 3:43 PM

Dems want to infer rights on illegal aliens and now terrorists or those who take up arms against our country. It is kind of ironic in a way we are granting rights to a group whose sole purpose is to destroy our way of life because they believe it to be evil.

LakeRuins on June 29, 2006 at 3:49 PM

MikeG is right on. There is zero reason for our troops to take these scumbags alive now.

Abigail Adams on June 29, 2006 at 3:51 PM

Agree, MikeG, these guys fit the definition of a spy in the Geneva Convention. Bet those braindead liberals didn’t stop to think that through for even a microsecond. They were too busy trying to “slap down” Bu$hit1er! that they forgot that instead of granting these guys civilian trials they just granted them summary execution.

Not that I’m complaining, of course. At least, not about that part of things. The rest, however…

RH

RobertHuntingdon on June 29, 2006 at 4:01 PM

This is why the Dems keep losing elections. They don’t have America’s best interests at heart. They would rather protect the civil liberties of those that want to torture and kill them, than of those that protect their lives. You know you are a liberal when the first thing you think of when you see someone arrested for committing mass murder is whether the authorities are or have in some way violated the murderer’s rights.

Rick on June 29, 2006 at 4:09 PM

If we wait a little longer I’m sure Howard Dean will try to top her with something even worse for dems, but better for us.

darwin on June 29, 2006 at 4:20 PM

Don’t you all get it yet??? The Geneva convention, international laws, and indeed our nation’s laws, only apply to those trying to defend America.
Everyone else gets a free pass-especially those against the USA.

NTWR on June 29, 2006 at 4:25 PM

The punishment side of those laws, I meant.

NTWR on June 29, 2006 at 4:26 PM

Face it, liberal minded democrats are traitors, period. They are all for “rights” for people who are NOT EVEN Americans, such as these practicing Muslim terrorists and illegal Mexican Nationals who would like to vote. They find or manufacture all sorts of supposed rights that are not there and never were to there to begin with to bestow upon their kind, like the supposed right to pay someone to kill your unborn child or the supposed right to pack fudge in everyones faces. But they will fight tooth and nail against the real Constitutional rights of real Americans. They want freedom of speech for THEIR speech, but no one elses. They loathe the 2nd amendment, and all the rest of them they merely manipulate when it suits their fancy.

But it is just as much the GOP’s fault as it is theirs because when you stand by and just let them get away with all their crap, from their activist judges releasing criminals back on society to their seditious fat mouths, it only makes them think that they still have a ways to go before they actually cross the line, a line they don’t even think exists anyway. As long as the GOP controlled Congress sits by and does NOTHING AS USUAL, the liberal minds will just continue to run amuck.

Again, have you EVER seen a Nation so intent upon doing stupid things to actually TRY to lose a war? Well, besides Israel anyway.

NRA4Freedom on June 29, 2006 at 4:41 PM

This is wonderful. Al Gore is getting closer and closer to full committment in a mental hospital, Howard Dean wants us to relive the ’60′s, and now Ms. Pelosi is gushing about how wonderful it is that terrorists have all the rights of American citizens.

The only problem is you’ll never see any of this on the MSM.

darwin on June 29, 2006 at 5:03 PM

It looks as if this matter will be sent to Congress in order to make these trials legal. IMHO, that is where we will see liberals make their biggest mistakes.

Isn’t it refershing to not be listening to the liberals cry court activism for a change? That is just temporary of course.

DannoJyd on June 29, 2006 at 5:23 PM

Just to rebutt Pelousy…

The rights of due process are among our most cherished liberties, and today’s decision is proof of the Bush Administration’s responsibe actions to both protect the American people and our Constitution. We cannot allow the values on which our country was founded to become a weapon used against America in the war on terrorism thus we must reaffirm that its laws apply to Americans only.”

DannoJyd on June 29, 2006 at 5:33 PM

The dummy Pelosi (if quoted above correctly) has stated that these caught-on-the-battlefield-no-uniformed-no-state
jihadists have the same rights as U.S. citizens even if they are NOT U.S. citizens. The liberals still believe that we are not at war and that only George Bush is at war and that 9/11 was just a fluke and our soldiers and special ops that captured most of these terrorists were acting out of a hardcore military passion, capturing innocents that did no wrong. God grant me the serenity…..I think I need a drink.

gary on June 29, 2006 at 5:42 PM

Pelosi’s foolishness is exactly what I refer to when I say that the Republican congressional majority would be self-terminating in 2006 – but for the donks’ inability to shut their pie-holes and stop reminding the American people of how horrible the alternative would be.

At first, I was pretty upset with the Hamdan decision … but then I recalled an old saying: “Sometimes, ‘adversity’ is ‘opportunity’ dressed in rags.”

Check of proof: at the end of the day, despite Hamdan -

1. The two-legged animals we have caged up in Gitmo aren’t going anywhere. If we want to let them rot there until the end of the GWOT, or until they die, whichever comes first, the Supreme Court is OK with that.

2. If we want to try them via military tribunals, then again according to the Supreme Court all Congress has to do is draft appropriate legislation to that effect. So it’s justice delayed, not denied.

3. And as a bonus, we get to see the donks once again completely misapprehend the point of the decision as some kind of anti-Bush talking point, and start whooping it up in front of the American people just like the Palestinians did when they first learned about what happened on 9/11.

It’s a trifecta, if you ask me.

Spurius Ligustinus on June 29, 2006 at 6:31 PM

Rights pre-exist any government and are unalienable, so everyone should have them. With that I can agree. However, the trap here is that there is either a military or a law enforcement approach to terrorism. Terrorism breaks the mold of debate and diplomacy so why does our response have to conform to either the mold of law enforcement of strict force-on-force military doctrine?

Everyone is struggling here with making the fight fit the preconceptions.

Instead people should focus on what matters the most here. Targeting civilians and not wearing a uniform so you look like a civilian is a violation of the same rules of war that govern the military’s treatment of prisoners of war, sacred places, hospitals, etc..

The terrorists do not recognize this code and we compel ourselves to follow it anyway.

Is it worth it?

I knew a soldier that died in Iraq, so it makes it too personal for me to be objective about it. However, there’s nothing about the political debate over our response to terrorism that seems objective to me at all.

shirgall on June 29, 2006 at 7:17 PM

These are actually nationless mercenaries that now have the rights that citizens here have.WTF???

bbz123 on June 29, 2006 at 7:23 PM

Technically, this would mean terrorist captives now have more rights than the US soldiers fighting them.

B Moe on June 29, 2006 at 7:34 PM

Well folks, The US Constitution now applies to terrorists captured on the battlefield. Isn’t that nice? I wonder how illegal aliens feel now that someone else just got more rights than they did and didn’t even have to sneak into the country to do it. If any of you are expecting the administration to come out heavy handed on this ruling, then you are seriously misguided. Unless there are backroom dealings that are not going on right now, the administration is going to roll over again and do nothing. Again.

Asmodeus on June 29, 2006 at 8:28 PM

Asmodeus, I believe that the correct way to state this is that the US Constitution is laws pertaining to how we view certain rights and that is what the Supreme Court is guided by, but due to the fact that no law has been written which actually addresses such a situation the court gave it back to Bush and the Congress to deal with. A few tried to blast our President but in the end these detainees gained not a thing.

DannoJyd on June 29, 2006 at 8:47 PM

I don’t get the impression that Nancy Pelosi would recognize the values that this country was founded if they were stamped on her eyelids!

sMack on June 29, 2006 at 11:11 PM

2006 election – dumb vs dumber.

Republicans have been dumb on many issues.
Democrats have been dumber on all issues.

The MSM is losing viewership/readership to the internet daily, thank you, Al Gore for inventing the Internet.

Marvin on June 30, 2006 at 12:19 AM

Or as others have said: “The Democrats may not approve of the killings of Americans by terrorists, but by God, they will defend till the death their right to do it.”

Khyber Pass on June 30, 2006 at 12:55 AM

Let me see. They wear no uniform, represent no country and their only cause is to impose a radical view of their religion upon others, forcefully.

The Geneva Conventions require one wear a uniform of the country they represent.

I fail to understand how libbies can’t see this.

If the terrorists were actually US Marines, maybe the left would find it in their hearts to actually condemn them, especially Murtha.

LewWaters on June 30, 2006 at 3:31 AM

Color me confused.

Isn’t Hamdan pretty clear in that, while the military tribunals themselves may be unconstitutional – there is NO constitutional requirement to have any tribunal at all, and these unholy subhuman death cultists freedom fighters can be held indefinitely as hostile combatants – until hostilities cease?

In other words … aren’t these anti-American terrorist sympathizers brave Democrats in effect arguing against the only sort of ‘due process’ these sexually confused sheep lovers oppressed Jihadists going to get?

I mean … fine – just stop the tribunals. Let them rot. Problem solved, right?

Is that really what the ACLU had in mind?

Professor Blather on June 30, 2006 at 7:22 AM

PELOSI = DUMB STUPID CHICK….With a big Mouth that needs a freakin punch in the lips…….Toss the hoe out of the USA !!!

alyce on June 30, 2006 at 9:15 AM

There is neither anything confusing about this, nor is it related to Pelosi’s lack of intelligence. They just sinply have to be harboring a desire to see them win–or at any rate–see America lose a war they’ve already deemed unwinnable.

The left do have the unique ability to cheapen life in the name of improving it for the guilty, don’t they?

The Therapist on July 2, 2006 at 2:50 PM