Daily Show: Guantanamo Baywatch and the SCOTUS Decision
By SilentPatriot Thursday Jun 19, 2008 1:02pm
Jon Stewart reports on the recent SCOTUS decision granting Gitmo detainees the right to contest their imprisonment in federal court, and in the process mocks all the outraged right-wing nut jobs. Bill Kristol gets it especially rough, considering he appears to have recently changed his opinion on due process.
Download | play 
Download | play
Doocy: "So with the recent Supreme Court decision saying that detainees down at Gitmo can wind up with habeas corpus and get legal rights and stuff like that"
Stewart: Legal rights and stuff. It's actually all been explained in Thomas Paine's 'A Treatise on the Rights of Man...and Sh*t'"
It's crazy to stop and think about how far we've come in just eight short years. It is now within "mainstream" right-wing discourse to condemn the Supreme Court for ruling that the President can't lock people up for life without a chance for them to prove their innocence. Is this even America anymore? Is there literally anything more un-American?
Login or Register to post comments.
It's official. This is bizarro world... at least until late January!
This country ceased being recognizable several years ago. Now, it's a hollow, declining shell of its former glorious self. The US has had a long run at the top...but its time as the lone superpower is just about over. And the world will probably be better for it. Evil, corrupt politicians, a lazy dumbed down media and a moronic population are not a recipe for success. The US is like a spoiled brat child that has gotten its way for far too long. Now, get in line with everyone else. Don't like that idea? Tough shit.
When did unalienable rights start applying only to americans. Aren't they rights that all humans enjoy. Are we so god like that we can sit in judgement of the rest of the world and decide who has right and who doesn't. All men are created equal unless our government decides otherwise? I don't think so! I think Jefferson just rolled over in his grave out of sheer embarasment.
Simon White-Thatch Potentloins @ 1:
.. just wait til the '06 elections ...we'll show em! ...ah...oh yeah.. never mind....
how about we do a little house democrat rendition to gitmo. the hoyer/pelosi express. lock them all up!!!
pelosi, you are going down in november. down. i will make it my life's mission to get you unseated, and not to a repub, but to any
worthy dem who can knock you out the box!!
WRG @ 3:
The US has been dictating the terms for the rest of the world for ages. And those terms always revolved around what was best for the US. And just like the school yard bully, watch other countries jump in to get their free shots now that the US is on its knees. Can't say that I blame them.
earl @ 4:
Yeah, here's another $160 billion for your invasion, George. But that's it...and this time we mean it.
LOL.
Bush Administration Sends Jon Stewart’s ‘Gitmo Puppet’ to Gitmo
Crap. Don't close Gitmo and promise Habeas Corpus yet. Where are we going to send all the repug criminals and fake democrat leaders after the election...? We don't have time and treasure for all those trials.
rights are for the rich; rules are for the rest of us.
It's absurd that right-wingers think being allowed to challenge their detention gives terrorism suspects all the rights of an American citizen. Talk about fear-mongering bullshit.
They are traitors to this country to even think that people can be lock up without habeus corpus! Our National guard replace with Blackwater troop and immunity to those that spy on Americans are all un-American behavior.
I think a revolution has begun, but it's going to be a long run.
WWJLD?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjdV4Z7DGms
Having five out of nine members of SCOTUS support the concept of habeas corpus is like having five out of nine top mathematicians agree that two plus two equals four.
habeus corpus supreme court ruling only gives the prisoners the right to request a hearing.nothing else....the executive branch cannot be the judge of it's own judgement....take a look at this short opinion
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/16/AR200806...
Why should detainees get to challenge their suspension in U.S. courts? According to the right-wingers, all of those who have ever been locked up indefinitely in Gitmo or Guantanamo are guilty-until-proven-guilty.
To those calling on the Democratic "yea"s "fake Deomocrats", please do realize that that's over FORTY-FIVE PERCENT of the party.
Republicans may be a bigger problem, but the problem is politicians in both parties.
marko @ 5:
SF Bay Area resident here.
Count me in!
She will not be representing California or The United States.
mudlock @ 17:
I agree 100%. Houston, we have a BIG problem...
Brendan @ 19:
The only way to change the Democratic Party -- and consequently the country -- is to vote for candidates with a spine and morals to defeat the current incumbents like Pelosi, Reid, Rodham-Clinton, Lieberman, etc.
What I love is that the right is criticizing THEIR conservative court for following the LAW. Assholes. I guess McCain thinks it was legal when he was a POW for his captors to treat him unjustly... actually, I don't think McCain even knows what he thinks.
And yes, there are politicians and then there are POLITICIANS.
The Truth Hurts @ 7:
marko @ 5:
pelosi, you are going down in november. down. i will make it my life’s mission to get you unseated, and not to a repub, but to any
worthy dem who can knock you out the box!!
_________________________________________________________________________
All that dirty talk is turning me on.
the very conservative judge antonin scalia will be on charlie rose tonight i'm curious to hear what he has to say about the ruling
napu @ 18:
P L E A S E do it!!
and stop electing the super rich ... they just dont care about you.
Oh look!!!
It's a torchlight parade!!!! Yeaaaaaaaaa!!!
Soon the goose stepping military parades will be coming to a town near you.
Get rid of the Facists. Please.
Cheers
No - it doesn't get any more Un-American - and we cannot let them get away with calling others unpatriotic. They're the radicals, they're the people who want to destroy the Constitution - and it needs to be poited out every friggin' day ...
Supreme Court Reichwing Of The United 'Merica's.
karl @ 24:
I can't watch anything with this fascist. He's as annoying and stupid to me as his boy-king wet dream, the Chimp. And he lost all credibility when he referred to Jack freakin' Baeur and "24."
I was having a rather heated debate with a conservative friend of mine yesterday about this decision and he told me plainly that he was sure everyone in guantanamo deserved to be there. When I pointed to the recent McClatchy article showing that at least 30 of prisoners were there wrongly he said the news organization was clearly biased. When I asked him if it was fair to imprison these people indefinitely he said it was not. Then he said they should never have made it to prison. They should have been killed on the batlefield where we captured them.
This is a microcosm of so many conservative arguments against the supreme court decision:
1) Everyone in Guantanamo is a known terrorist (untrue; McClatchy already disproved this myth)
2) Everyone in Guantanamo was captured fighting the US (untrue; many prisoners were apprehended in their homes based on false information given by their neighbors. The US pays Iraqis to inform on their fellow neighbor)
3) Therefore they don't deserve any rights and theyre lucky they aren't dead already.
Brady @ 30:
And neocons will argue that the prisoners are treated good and afforded ameneties (a Koran, food, recreation opportunities) that they do not deserve. Just forget the fact that some of those prisoners are innocent and would rather be home with their families.
Frybread @ 29:
I believe Scalia has already used his crystal ball to predict that this ruling will "cost us a city."
Marvin El Canucki @ 26:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.evilgeorge.net/Images/...
marko @ 5:
Do it, Marko. Do it.
That clip of Krauthammer is from last week's Inside Washington. On it, he also said, with a straight face, that if Osama surrendered, then all those at Gitmo would be released. His (and his ilk's) intellectual dishonesty is what is truly breathtaking.
karl @ 24:
Whatever he says, I'm sure it will be asshole-ish.
Man, new coke was pretty bad.
Astro @ 32:
Right. In his warped decision, Scalia wrote that many more Americans would be killed because of the Supreme Court's ruling. What a wuss. He, Roberts, Thomas, and Scalia make me regret that Justices are appointed for life.
don't you know 9/11 changed everything reight is left up is down human rights are so unamerican.
when chimpy and the rest thought up warrantless wire taps I wonder who they went after first those outside enemies or those within that might question their power grab that's why the sheep known as the demo leadership roll over so much maybe Hoyer is a closet toe tapper and pelosi likes relations with well..... can't have that getting out can we
Anyone know who I can contact to see there is any primary challenger candidate against Pelosi?
I would think another female will have better chance against Pelosi rather than male.
But I'll take a chance with anyone else at this point.
Howard Dean's email? I've just contributed to DNC for their convention fund. I can promise more given Howard Dean support for fair and equal support for primary challenge. And no interference favoring Pelosi from DNC or any other national organization. From what I read about and listened about Howard Dean is that he is fair. And above all, think of his country and people first before party.
Any information or contacts will be helpful.
I'm new to this political scene so I really don't know how things work and never worked on campaign or actively supported anyone other than little monetary contribution.
Frybread @ 38:
Yes, they are appointed for life but they can be impeached (if we really had a Congress).
to post 38 what has cost us more cities is the rethugs maybe they are the true problem ( there's an obvious answer) New orleans is still waiting for that much promised assistance now we have Des moines and all of those flooded towns along the Missouri river how much could have all that war profiteering bought us??
As for scalia (political hack and right leaning judges) get over it you'll still have your change to screw the constitition and change what it means to be american of course through your eyes a goose stepper would have been an ideal example
One Year Wonder @ 37:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4YvmN1hvNA
Albatross @ 14:
VERY well put, Albatross! Here's hoping for the madness to stop in January 2009!
Cindy @ 44:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytfmh_HpcjI
Funnny the clip ended BEFORE it ended!
Was it an editorial choice to omit Stewart's less than flattering comments about Obama's reaction??
[Really? Stewart said something less than flattering about Obama in that segment and we edited it? REALLLLLLY? Here's a link to the TDS page at Comedy Central. Click on the video titled "Guantanamo Baywatch". You'll see that their version of the segment contains a puppet show, and no mention of Obama WHATSOEVER. If you'd like to spread disinformation/misinformation, Spin Doctoring?/Morals gone?- yes, we know who you are- I suggest that you find someplace else to do it BECAUSE YOU'RE BANNED FROM THIS SITE. Thank you. Site Monitor]
I have the same dream as Jon Stewart.
napu @ 40:
can't help ya with Pelosi, but here's a chance to donate or otherwise help to defeat a bluedog in a Democratic Primary
Regina Thomas for Congress
ActBlue for Regina Thomas
kick a blue dog today, and tomorrow too
This is the single most dangerous ruling
the Supreme Court has handed down
... since ...
the Supreme Court gave
the election to Bush.
Who are you kidding?
McCarthyism. Slavery. Andrew Johnson. Douglas MacArthur ordering violence against the poor for protesting in Washington in 1932. And many others.
Violating the civil rights of the undefended and underclass is a US tradition, and the examples I gave are just the ones within the US borders. If you add in those that occured in other countries (imposing dictatorships, overthrowing governments, opposing democracies, etc.), one could honestly say the US has never done more than pay lip service to the idea.
"Freedom" and "privacy" have only existed in the US when everything is hunky-dory. "He who would give up freedom for security deserves neither" requires a courage that has never really existed in the US. It has really been all talk and no action for 230 years.
Albatross @ 14:
That is brilliant. Can I quote that?
Elsewhere I mean ...
Horror.
That is what every American lawyer feels, or will soon feel, or certainly should feel as they regard the unhinging of the justice system whose constancy is as fundamental to their intellectual grounding as the vestibular mechanics of the inner ear are to their ability to chase after speeding ambulances.
More...
Frybread @ 31:
Let's take this one further. Just looking at the innocent prisoners, I'm sure most of them already had all of this already and more, more = family members, friends and the right to actually travel places instead of being locked up in a jail cell on their own.
PAT ROBERSOn has volunteered to KEEP AMERICA SAFE
and use all his TAX FREE DONATIONS
to pay for the UPKEEP AT GITMO
what to go pat
Gotta love the Doocy bag.
Also, the desperate, discredited neo-cons showing respect for the law only when it suits them.
The Daily Show is a major gift to this country.
So let me see if I get this right; the nation with the most lawyers total (not per capita) and the most advanced police force & technology (plus 3 different CSI's weekly) plus over 200 years of judicial history can't allow itself to even explain what the charges are to 200 "enemy combatants" (a completely made-up term).
That's all habeus corpus is. It's latin for "show me the money" (well, actually, produce the body). It requires that within a specified period of time, a prisoner be advised of the charges against him and evidence of probable cause. Do you mean to tell me, that after 6 years of incarceration we can't even file charges?
"and stuff like that"
These morons in the morning are dumbing down America.
This really isn't anything new for them. The people defending Bush's claims of complete, unfettered powers of arrest for the presidency were the same ones defending Nixon's use of Executive Branch money and personnel to spy on and sabotage his democratic presidential opponent, bribe witnesses, obstruct and bully both federal and private investigators (and judges), hide, falsify, and destroy government documents, and generally suppress his detractors while trying to rule like a king. Heck, Bush even employed some of the same people involved in that underhanded nonsense. The last honest Republican administration was probably Eisenhower's.
Three strikes and your out. The Supreme Court told the BushCo administration in its second
Supreme Court argument NOT to return.
Why did they hear this third argument?
Indeed Albatross; it goes to show you how "impartial" and "discerning" those republican appointees are. Truly dedicated to the Sanctity of the Constitution, that bunch.
The Truth Hurts: Actually, it's long been the tradition of U.S. courts to grant foreigners the same rights as its citizens while they are in U.S. territory. Minus a request for extradition, foreign nationals are typically tried just as a U.S. citizen would be, though you're likely to see sentencing deport them instead of throwing them in a U.S. jail. We shouldn't focus on foreign nationals alone when discussing Guantanamo, however, remember that Bush has also declared he has the right to declare anyone an "enemy combatant", without review, and that the Justice Department had, by stating that they had no rights, declared "enemy combatants" to be legal nonpersons. So, according to their reasoning, they could have done what they did to those people to any U.S. citizen.
hr @ 56:
Goes right along with places like "such as".
Even Ross Perot points out that America has the worst education in the western world, and it shows : http://perotcharts.com/
Albatross @ 14:
Having five out of nine members of SCOTUS support the concept of habeas corpus is like having five out of nine top mathematicians agree that two plus two equals four.
Correct, and to take it one step further, the 4 dissenters, by their dissention, show that they actually know NOTHING of the constitution and should be IMPEACHED...and then tried for treason and hung.
Login or Register to post comments.