Scorpion89

Critics Bemoan Prospect of Obama Detaining Terror Suspects Indefinitely - Political News - FOXNews.com

The political battle over the fate of the detainees at Gunatanamo Bay just got more contentious.

The Obama administration is considering an executive order to indefinitely imprison a small number of Guantanamo Bay detainees, a move that would be in line with Bush administration policy but already has drawn scorn from civil liberties groups.

"This is not change -- this is more of the same," Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said in response to reports that surfaced Friday of the possible executive order. "If President Obama issues an executive order authorizing indefinite detention, he'll be repeating the same mistakes of George Bush, and his policies will be destined to fail as were his predecessor's."


So much for that promise by Cand. Obama I guess President Obama now is starting to understand jeeze took him long enough, oh and one other thing someone needs to go and tell the ACLU you shut the **** up and just go away their was a time they were need but now all they are is a ****ing joke.

RightinNYC

It was a good idea back when Bush did it, it remains a good idea now.

__________________
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

celticlord

I am curious: exactly how did President Bush's policies "fail"?

Laila

Who judges who is 'too dangerous'? Will the court decide?
Will these people have access to lawyers? Doctors? Have their rights upheld? Not be tortured?

Stupid idea.

__________________

celticlord

Why? And what rights do terrorists have?

Why must every difficult thing be a matter for courts to untangle? Some questions are not questions of law.

Laila

How do i know they are terrorists? I only have US's word for it [And it's not like they haven't been wrong before]
What if the person being held for life is innocent?

So we give the state the power and ability to hold someone for life without knowing the reasons and without a court?
No. This is something for the law.

__________________

celticlord

How do you know they are not? The United States is not the only nation to have been wrong about things.

It would be unfortunate if a non-terrorist were so detained. It would be a tragedy if an actual terrorist were released to slaughter a far greater number of innocents.

Whose law? Terrorists lay aside all pretense of law in their actions; how then can they claim defense of law then captured?

What nation's law can possibly have the competence to speak to such things?

Laila

No it is not only US who has been wrong, but it is only US that is trying to hold them for life.

__________________

celticlord

Is it wrong to detain a terrorist for life? (assume for the moment that the person is indeed a terrorist)

Laila

Assuming they have been charged and tried in a court and found guilty. Then yes, detain them for the rest of their pitiful life.

__________________