• 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, In A Blow To Closing Guantanamo, Signs Law

Half the Guantanamo inmates have been cleared for release... chirp chirp.....
 
VanceMack said:
People that were picked up were interviewed, interviewed again, and interviewed yet again. The only people sent to Guantanimo Bay are the ones that were believed to have been of real intel value. You know...like the ones we are still picking up these days and sending to Bagram. And yet...the sounds of crickets chirping...
Click to expand...

Yeah...they were "interviewed". I'm sure it was fair and impartial and built only on information gathering. I mean, the government wouldn't lie to us to cover up their misdeeds, right?

There are more Bagram's out there than we care to admit, but until we can know about it and control the government, they will persist. Why do we need secret prisons? How do we have the authority to arrest citizens of other countries in other countries and hold them in jails in various places around the world? Where did that power come from? Because we call someone a "terrorist"? Please, government is not acting properly right now and it's going to bite us in the ass; it always does.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Since half the inmates have been found not to be a threat, but none of their countries will take them back, and most of any evidence against the rest is inadmissible in a civilian court, President Obama has very few options.
Click to expand...

He seemed to have quite a few options during the election campaign.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Half the Guantanamo inmates have been cleared for release... chirp chirp.....
Click to expand...

BELIEVED to be of intel value. Who is chirping? Ive given the solution several times. Send the poor dears back to their home country. Or Afghanistan. Or hell...let em move in with you.
 
Ikari said:
Yeah...they were "interviewed". I'm sure it was fair and impartial and built only on information gathering. I mean, the government wouldn't lie to us to cover up their misdeeds, right?

There are more Bagram's out there than we care to admit, but until we can know about it and control the government, they will persist. Why do we need secret prisons? How do we have the authority to arrest citizens of other countries in other countries and hold them in jails in various places around the world? Where did that power come from? Because we call someone a "terrorist"? Please, government is not acting properly right now and it's going to bite us in the ass; it always does.
Click to expand...

You need them for the same reason you need the soldiers out there doing the job they are doing. Because there are evil ****s out there that dont play by the rules and will kill as many people as they can in the name of their glorious cause. And I dont see too many gentle folks in this country rushing over to try to 'reason' with them. I guess those folks recognize that twisted ****s that rape and behead 12 year old schoolgirls in India in the glorious name of Jihad might not be receptive. Far better to take that little impotent moral superiority stance...slap on another COEXIST bumper sticker...and leave the heavy lifting to the big kids. Until you are part of a better solution...you arent even a part of the equation.
 
VanceMack said:
You need them for the same reason you need the soldiers out there doing the job they are doing. Because there are evil ****s out there that dont play by the rules and will kill as many people as they can in the name of their glorious cause. And I dont see too many gentle folks in this country rushing over to try to 'reason' with them. I guess those folks recognize that twisted ****s that rape and behead 12 year old schoolgirls in India in the glorious name of Jihad might not be receptive. Far better to take that little impotent moral superiority stance...slap on another COEXIST bumper sticker...and leave the heavy lifting to the big kids. Until you are part of a better solution...you arent even a part of the equation.
Click to expand...

But we play by the rules or else what is the point? We have all of these people in custody around the world with proof of their guilt (apparently). Why, then, can we not try them?
 
whysoserious said:
But we play by the rules or else what is the point? We have all of these people in custody around the world with proof of their guilt (apparently). Why, then, can we not try them?
Click to expand...

Because we didnt have cute little agents in sterile suits collecting evidence, mirandizing them, and getting warrants. They arent American felons they are suspected of being war criminals. They should have military tribunals. Obama has seen the light of reality over rhetoric. Probably a bi-product of actually having to DEAL with reality rather than bleat on about an ideology.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Since half the inmates have been found not to be a threat, but none of their countries will take them back, and most of any evidence against the rest is inadmissible in a civilian court, President Obama has very few options.
Click to expand...
Their own countries won't have them back. Why is that, you think? What should we do with them?
 
Thus either the evidence could not be disclosed without revealing classified material or it would be inadmissible under the evidentiary rules at the heart of traditional Anglo-American jurisprudence. The first problem could be remedied with closed court sessions, as it has been many times in the past. As for the second, why would evidence against a prisoner be inadmissible? Among the likely reasons is that it was obtained by torture inflicted by the CIA or one of the CIA’s outsourced torturers under the program known as “extraordinary rendition.”

Traditionally in the United States, when the government cannot bear its burden of proof before a court, it must set a suspect free. But the so-called “war on terror” changed all that for people arbitrarily branded terrorist suspects or enemy combatants. Carrying on the policy established by Bush, the Obama administration takes the position that someone felt to be a threat to national security can be denied a trial and held prisoner indefinitely. Nothing is more un-American.

Naturally, Republican hawks love Obama’s order. Rep. Peter T. King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, who held hearings on domestic Islamic radicalism, praised him for ratifying Bush’s policy: “I commend the Obama Administration for issuing this Executive Order. The bottom line is that it affirms the Bush Administration policy that our government has the right to detain dangerous terrorists until the cessation of hostilities.”
Click to expand...


Obama's Disgrace by Sheldon Richman
 
Wouldn't it be nice if multiple rules weren't pushed through in the same bill and we got to actually debate and vote on each separate action?

""Despite my strong objection to these provisions, which my administration has consistently opposed, I have signed this act because of the importance of authorizing appropriations for, among other things, our military activities in 2011," Obama said in a statement."

So, he couldn't veto this bill because so many other things were wrapped up in it. The discussion of whether or not torture is moral and constitutional has been downgraded to being pork in a budget bill.
 
in may of two thousand NINE, obama's request for funds to close gitmo was SLAMMED by exactly NINETY senators of the us, including FIFTY dems

Senate Votes To Block Funds For Guantanamo Closure

such as---john KERRY, barbara BOXER, diane DIFI, combat boots WEBB, one armed daniel INOUYE the venerable and all powerful CHAIR of senate APPROPRIATIONS, miserable claire MCCASKILL, bobby kkk BYRD, socialist bernie SANDERS, ultra progressive health care warrior ron WYDEN, his public-option pushing partner jay ROCKEFELLER (who, by the way, wants to emascualte the epa)...

why did FIFTY dems DENY?

obama doesn't know what he's doing
 
Should I now be thanking the previous WH Republicans for the mess we are in ?

Close it and we are damned and leave it open we are damned, Thanks Mr President!
 
Last edited:
I know the person who opened this travesty holds no respsonsibility. And certainly, republicans whop fear mongered concerning moving prisoners here and trying these people hold no blame. And those in the last adminstration who broke laws and inprisoned people without adequate evidence hold no blame. But one thing we agree on is Obama failed to overcome these obsticles and failed to do the right and moral thing and adhere to rule of law and our ideals and guidng principles.
 
Boo Radley said:
Obama failed to overcome these obsticles (sic) and failed to do the right and moral thing and adhere to rule of law and our ideals and guidng principles.
Click to expand...

that's what it looks like

ask KERRY, DIFI, BOXER, SANDERS, WEBB, WYDEN, ROCKEFELLER, CARPER, INOUYE...
 
Boo Radley said:
I know the person who opened this travesty holds no respsonsibility. And certainly, republicans whop fear mongered concerning moving prisoners here and trying these people hold no blame
Click to expand...

the fear mongering seemed to be pretty bi-partison
 
ManofthPeephole said:
the fear mongering seemed to be pretty bi-partison
Click to expand...

Yes, both parties use the politics of fear. I have never claimed otherwise. I was speaking to responsibility to one single issue. Even there, both parties hold blame, but that is my point I think.
 
The Prof said:
that's what it looks like

ask KERRY, DIFI, BOXER, SANDERS, WEBB, WYDEN, ROCKEFELLER, CARPER, INOUYE...
Click to expand...

Wait...you arent implying these democrats all knew and were briefed about the goings on at GITMO all along are you??? Or that some of them actually asked if there wasnt MORE that they could do to make them talk? Why...thats...thats...just...impossible... and CERTAINLY doesnt at all fit with now stated stance on GITMO and terrorists. Why...if that were true it would show them all to be liars and their outrage to be pure faux! :shock:
 
VanceMack said:
Wait...you arent implying these democrats all knew and were briefed about the goings on at GITMO all along are you??? Or that some of them actually asked if there wasnt MORE that they could do to make them talk? Why...thats...thats...just...impossible... and CERTAINLY doesnt at all fit with now stated stance on GITMO and terrorists. Why...if that were true it would show them all to be liars and their outrage to be pure faux! :shock:
Click to expand...

Well, there you go, the idoit who onpened has no responsibility. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom