• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama administration said Tuesday it could continue to imprison non-U.S. citizens

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration said Tuesday it could continue to imprison non-U.S. citizens indefinitely even if they have been acquitted of terrorism charges by a U.S. military commission.

Jeh Johnson, the Defense Department's chief lawyer, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that releasing a detainee who has been tried and found not guilty was a policy decision that officials would make based on their estimate of whether the prisoner posed a future threat.

Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration argues that the legal basis for indefinite detention of aliens it considers dangerous is separate from war-crimes prosecutions. Officials say that the laws of war allow indefinite detention to prevent aliens from committing warlike acts in future, while prosecution by military commission aims to punish them for war crimes committed in the past.
Detainees, Even if Acquitted, Might Not Go Free - Political News - FOXNews.com

So kiddies, was Bush the evil bastard the media portrayed him to be, or has Obama grown up just a bit and is facing the truth of the war on terror?
 
CHANGE!!!!!1!!!ONE!!!

Why do you hate black people?
 
Detainees, Even if Acquitted, Might Not Go Free - Political News - FOXNews.com

So kiddies, was Bush the evil bastard the media portrayed him to be, or has Obama grown up just a bit and is facing the truth of the war on terror?

I think the point is that while it will seek trials for all those apprehended in combat situations, the government will not allow itself to be painted into a legal corner where it must release terrorists from custody. You disagree with that?
 
I think the point is that the government will not allow itself to be painted into a legal corner where it must release terrorists from custody. You disagree with that?

But, these are innocent people found not guilty by a court. You support a President that would deny basic human rights to innocent men and women and keep them imprisoned Will?
 
Last edited:
But, these are innocent people found not guilty by a court. You support a President that would deny basic human rights to innocent men and women and keep them imprisoned Will?

Of course he will, cause he supports the democraptic party wholeheartedly.


Stuff that Bush did, that now Obama is doing.. is okay.. cause Obama is doing it.. and he's black! We've progressed and we're making change!
 
I think the point is that while it will seek trials for all those apprehended in combat situations, the government will not allow itself to be painted into a legal corner where it must release terrorists from custody. You disagree with that?





:lol: I am sure this is the same opinion you held of Bush, and can link us to where you presented it.....
 
I think the point is that while it will seek trials for all those apprehended in combat situations, the government will not allow itself to be painted into a legal corner where it must release terrorists from custody. You disagree with that?

I sure as hell do. In this country, not guilty means that the government has no right to lock you in prison. Being "painted into a legal corner" is pretty much the whole damn point of having civil liberties. Or would you prefer if the government decided that it didn't have to release you from jail after you were found not guilty? Why even have a trial if you can deliver sentence no matter what the outcome? Destroying the foundations of a legal system is more damaging to our country than any terrorist attack could hope to be.
 
I sure as hell do. In this country, not guilty means that the government has no right to lock you in prison. Being "painted into a legal corner" is pretty much the whole damn point of having civil liberties. Or would you prefer if the government decided that it didn't have to release you from jail after you were found not guilty? Why even have a trial if you can deliver sentence no matter what the outcome? Destroying the foundations of a legal system is more damaging to our country than any terrorist attack could hope to be.

While the military and patriot acts are still around, that's exactly what this government can do to it's own citizens.. as long as they call you a terrorist.

We won't ever see those repealed though.. way too much power for the government to let go of.
 
Isn't it interesting that before the election, the people at Gitmo were "detainees," but now they are "terrorists"?

What a difference a day makes ...
 
Ugh - if you don't listen to the courts, why give trials at all? Just be honest about it and imprison who you want to imprison
 
Ugh - if you don't listen to the courts, why give trials at all? Just be honest about it and imprison who you want to imprison

So you can appease the people in your party who are dissenting against their being held without trial?
 
Detainees, Even if Acquitted, Might Not Go Free - Political News - FOXNews.com

So kiddies, was Bush the evil bastard the media portrayed him to be, or has Obama grown up just a bit and is facing the truth of the war on terror?
Neither.

What Dear Leader is several orders of magnitude worse than anything Bush did.

Guantanamo is a challenge to this country's system of laws because of its extra-judicial nature. Those imprisoned are not held as punishment, but as pre-emption of future attack--something not contemplated in this country outside of a declared war against a foreign nation.

In many respects, Guantanamo was a bad idea--bad because it does not resolve the underlying challenges of confronting international terrorism, merely kicks that can down the road. No problem can languish forever; eventually a permanent solution must be found, and eventually the detention camps at Guantanamo must be closed. President Bush, we should remember, worked for nearly his entire second term to find permanent dispositions for the detainees, with little success; such is the challenge of Guantanamo.

However, Dear Leader has neither closed the camps nor resolved the questions. Rather, he has attempted to paper over the questions with a veneer of judicial process that does more violence to the rule of law than indefinite detentions ever could. He has given detainees the mechanics of trial, with none of the benefits of a favorable ruling; by proposing to continue to detain persons despite acquittal before a magistrate, he has bled all substance from the trials, rendering them mere show trials. Show trials are infinitely worse than no trials. Show trials make a mockery of the judicial process and undermine the credibility of the courts; not having trials at all merely asserts a particular limitation to the competencies of the courts--a proposal that terrorists are not an issue the federal judiciary is constructed to confront.

If we are going to use the courts to resolve matters of international terrorism, then we must accept the consequences of all verdicts, even when the United States does not prevail. If those consequences are not acceptable, if those risks are simply too great, then the proper conclusion is that international terrorism is not a matter the court system is equipped to resolve, and we should pursue alternate solutions.
 
Yea 'bama!
Doing something right!
Woohoooo!
:applaud:2dance::rock

Hey -- give credit where it's due, right?
Even if it is of the 'broken clock' variety...
 
I think the point is that while it will seek trials for all those apprehended in combat situations, the government will not allow itself to be painted into a legal corner where it must release terrorists from custody. You disagree with that?
You missed something. I'm sure ti was on purpose.

The Obama administration said Tuesday it could continue to imprison non-U.S. citizens indefinitely even if they have been acquitted of terrorism charges by a U.S. military commission.

Now, you villified Bush for doing this.
Where is your similar criticism of your Messiah?
 
I think the point is that while it will seek trials for all those apprehended in combat situations, the government will not allow itself to be painted into a legal corner where it must release terrorists from custody. You disagree with that?

Oh, so NOW they're terrorists. They were just innocent prisoners being tortured on an hourly basis last December if I recall.
 
Oh, so NOW they're terrorists. They were just innocent prisoners being tortured on an hourly basis last December if I recall.
Tortured on an hourly basis -for fun- as everyone knows that torture never produces anything useful.
 
c) We have a one party system of liars and crooks that have you totally fooled.

Don't have me fooled, we have a system of government that the people allow, I don't blame the politicians, I blame the people who have the real power, the voters.
 
So, where are our resident Bush Bashers now? Where is their anger? Their outrage?

It's amazing how if you change teh -R to a -D they clam up.
 
So, where are our resident Bush Bashers now? Where is their anger? Their outrage?

It's amazing how if you change teh -R to a -D they clam up.

We're still here.

The difference is we were also bashing Bush for his stimulus plans, for his foray in large government disguised as "compassion", and for his meddling in international affairs, while you ignored it because of the R behind his name.
 
We're still here.

The difference is we were also bashing Bush for his stimulus plans, for his foray in large government disguised as "compassion", and for his meddling in international affairs, while you ignored it because of the R behind his name.

Not really. I was more looking for ADK and a few other... froth at the mouth types.
 
A quick look at the "Currently Active Users" list says that the forum is pretty conservative ATM
 
Back
Top Bottom