• 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!

Holder: Some Gitmo prisoners to be held indefinitely

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Hold'em Forever Holder!

Way to go, Mr. Close Gitmo Now!

Holder: Some Gitmo prisoners to be held indefinitelyAttorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said Wednesday that even after the closing of the prison at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. will continue to hold indefinitely a number of terror suspects whose cases will never go to trial and who cannot be sent to any other country.

Mr. Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the detainees who cannot be released will have their cases periodically reviewed to determine whether they must continue to be held without trial. He did not specify how many of the roughly 230 detainees remaining at U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, would fall into this category.

President Obama has signed an executive order for the prison to close with a year and put in Mr. Holder in charge of a task force to make it happen. Critics say the prison has become a symbol of American excesses in the fight against terrorism, but closing it will apparently not change the reality that some detainees will continue to be held.


I'm betting that Holder, being a lawyer as he is, never saw this in print:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Yep, the Fourteenth Amendment.

It says "all persons".

It was definitely squirmy of Bush to claim that Gitmo was outside the jurisdiction of the Constitution.

Good old Hold'em Forever. If he puts them in the US, they're going to get lawyers some how. The prisons can't even keep drugs out, let alone cockroaches. But he can't put them elsewhere. And yet The Messiah promised to do something with these people.

Such gross incompetence.

So predictable.
 
Complete bull****. If their cases will never go to trial you obviously don't have a reasonable amount of evidence to hold the person indefinitely. If you do have evidence that is time sensitive then sure, hold them while you catch those who were involved or use the info to capture other badguys, but once that info is no longer relevant then you either try them or release them. That's how justice works. Yeah, Hitler didn't like it much either but we saw where that led him.
 
Complete bull****. If their cases will never go to trial you obviously don't have a reasonable amount of evidence to hold the person indefinitely.

Not true.

What you don't have is evidence admissable in a court of law, since the Eigth Amendment precludes the admission of statements taken under duress.
 
It was a fine idea back when Bush wanted to do it, and it's a fine idea now.

The hypocrisy is amusing, though.
 
So Much for another of Mr. Obama's promise like most of us knew GITMO wasn't/isn't going to be close not now not till the last scum pond magget kicks the bucket.

But Mr. Obama knew this and wanted to make cheap political gains and now is finding out damnit I can't shut the place down after all, oh well no one really care's anymore.
 
:lol:



Where is ADK? Slip slope? Will Rockwell? DD? and on and on and on...... :lol:
 
Hold'em Forever Holder!

Way to go, Mr. Close Gitmo Now!




I'm betting that Holder, being a lawyer as he is, never saw this in print:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Yep, the Fourteenth Amendment.

It says "all persons".

It was definitely squirmy of Bush to claim that Gitmo was outside the jurisdiction of the Constitution.

Good old Hold'em Forever. If he puts them in the US, they're going to get lawyers some how. The prisons can't even keep drugs out, let alone cockroaches. But he can't put them elsewhere. And yet The Messiah promised to do something with these people.

Such gross incompetence.

So predictable.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States......are citizens of the United States
This is really the key. These dudes aren't citizens, and therefore not entitled to
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
 
This is really the key. These dudes aren't citizens, and therefore not entitled to

You're referring to the wrong part:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

This isn't about privileges, it's about equal protection.
 
One of the reasons I voted for Obama was the promise to close Gitmo. I assumed that we would try these terror suspects in a court of law, then sentence them if they're guilty of free them if they're innocent. I guess Obama has different plans.

For someone who is supposedly a liberal like me, he and I sure do see things a lot more differently now than before the campaign. Maybe he isn't as liberal as I was hoping he'd be. :(
 
One of the reasons I voted for Obama was the promise to close Gitmo. I assumed that we would try these terror suspects in a court of law, then sentence them if they're guilty of free them if they're innocent. I guess Obama has different plans.

For someone who is supposedly a liberal like me, he and I sure do see things a lot more differently now than before the campaign. Maybe he isn't as liberal as I was hoping he'd be. :(

You sound like allot of folks I know who voted for Mr. Obama, you all thought he was going to ride into Washington on his White Horse with all of these promise he made as Cand.Obama and when he got here and became president Obama he realized ohh I guess I can't do allot of these thing I told evryone I would do. GITMO by far was his biggest gaft, untill he had the chance to sit down and really read everything he should have never signed the Exc. Order to close GITMO with out getting all of the facts.

Now allot of folks like yourself are asking themselves why did I vote for this person if he isn't going to do what he promise us he would.

Or another words we have a saying in DC welcome to DC where you can promise everything as a Cand. but once you arrive you will find that you can only do what has been done before tow the Partie's line.
 
You sound like allot of folks I know who voted for Mr. Obama, you all thought he was going to ride into Washington on his White Horse with all of these promise he made as Cand.Obama and when he got here and became president Obama he realized ohh I guess I can't do allot of these thing I told evryone I would do. GITMO by far was his biggest gaft, untill he had the chance to sit down and really read everything he should have never signed the Exc. Order to close GITMO with out getting all of the facts.

Well see that's the thing. He can certainly do the things he promised, but he isn't. I respect conservative beliefs, but I disagree with them, which is why I voted for Obama to begin with. You are certainly welcome to disagree, but I believe that not only should he have closed Gitmo, but he should put every one of those detainees on trial, or make 'em face a military tribunal. This whole "leave them without a trial indefinitely" is not what I voted for when I cast my vote for Obama. I disagreed with it under the Bush Administration, and I disagree with it under Obama's. But the thing is, I shouldn't have had to disagree with it under Obama's, because it shouldn't have even been an issue if he'd kept his campaign promise.

This isn't the only issue where he and I disagree, either. I was under the impression he and the Dems were gonna demolish "Don't Ask Don't Tell", and so far they haven't. I'm a pretty patient fella, but i'm starting to get a little disappointed. And i'm not alone in feeling this way.

I'd like to see a lot more of Obama's liberal side, and less of his conservative one. No offense to any conservatives on this board, of course.
 
For someone who is supposedly a liberal like me, he and I sure do see things a lot more differently now than before the campaign. Maybe he isn't as liberal as I was hoping he'd be. :(


Or maybe he just saw all of the facts and realized he was wrong about closing Gitmo (and many other things).

Facts have a way of changing the lens you use.
 
This is really the key. These dudes aren't citizens, and therefore not entitled to


No.

The 14th makes a distinction between "citizens" and "persons", then states all "persons" shall have equal protection under the law.
 
You sound like allot of folks I know who voted for Mr. Obama, you all thought he was going to ride into Washington on his White Horse

Racist.

They thought he was going to ride in on a rainbow unicorn.

The rest of us knew that wasn't going to happen. Unicorns don't like rats.
 
Or maybe he just saw all of the facts and realized he was wrong about closing Gitmo (and many other things).

Facts have a way of changing the lens you use.

Respectfully, I disagree. I think he is swinging towards the center and attempting to appeal to moderates, and perhaps even a few conservatives. I imagine there are a lot of folks with access to the same facts he has that are convinced these people should be tried by court of law or military tribunal.
 
Respectfully, I disagree. I think he is swinging towards the center and attempting to appeal to moderates, and perhaps even a few conservatives. I imagine there are a lot of folks with access to the same facts he has that are convinced these people should be tried by court of law or military tribunal.

As I said earlier, I suspect there a lot of people who can see the records of these things and know they're guilty as hell, and also know that because of the exigent circumstances they were questioned in way that would be considered a violation of the Eighth Amendment if brought to trial in the US, so that the evidence that does exist isn't admissible, and thus, as Bush already knew, and as The Messiah is discovering, they can't be put on trial, and their such murderous despicable scum, they can't be released.

Now, Bush wouldn't release them because of the national security threat. The Messiah doesn't care about national security, but it's sure bet that if he released any of those animals, they'd turn around, kill someone, and the Republicans would be all over the place demanding to know what kind of Messiah the Fly Catcher really is. The Insect Trap can't let them go because it will cost votes and tarnish his carefully groomed image.
 
As I said earlier, I suspect there a lot of people who can see the records of these things and know they're guilty as hell, and also know that because of the exigent circumstances they were questioned in way that would be considered a violation of the Eighth Amendment if brought to trial in the US, so that the evidence that does exist isn't admissible, and thus, as Bush already knew, and as The Messiah is discovering, they can't be put on trial, and their such murderous despicable scum, they can't be released.

That's a possibility. But if it's true, then we should be informed about it because there are questions that need to be answered. For instance, what evidence would be inadmissable? What aspects of a trial by jury in the US would be so bad? What types of questioning could violate the Eighth Amendment should these terrorists go to trial? And what about a military tribunal, couldn't we opt for that if a trial isn't feasible?

I wasn't satisfied with the answers I recieved from the Bush Administration over Gitmo, so if Obama really did change his mind based on evidence, let us know why. I suspect it isn't over evidence or fact, though. As I said, I think there are plenty of folks with access to the very same information that agree with my position, and disagree with Obama's.

What about you? What do you think about all this? Do you think there is any way we can bring these people to trial or make them face a tribunal? Or do you think letting them languish in prison is the only possible solution?

Interesting discussion, by the way. ;)
 
My views are very simple n GITMO none of them should have ever made it off the battle Field plan and simple. As for the 20 or so High Value Animals we have well we should have held Military Tribunals but because of some of your left Friends Mr. Bush was forced to give this up.

But then again it can be said that their are allot of things that Cand. ho every says before they get to Washington and when they become President find out **** I can't do that after all oh well.
 
Respectfully, I disagree. I think he is swinging towards the center and attempting to appeal to moderates, and perhaps even a few conservatives.

Based on the latest polls showing the erosion of indpendent support, it sure doesn't seem to be working, does it?

I imagine there are a lot of folks with access to the same facts he has that are convinced these people should be tried by court of law or military tribunal.

Or maybe your imagination is wrong. And if there are actually others that believe they should be tried that have seen all of the information Obama has, it would be just as easy for me to call their motivations into question as you did with Obama.

I.E. Maybe they just want to get re-elected and appeal to the base of the party.
 
Based on the latest polls showing the erosion of indpendent support, it sure doesn't seem to be working, does it?

I agree entirely. Which is why I think doing something simply to appeal to conservatives, moderates, or independents is a bad idea.



Or maybe your imagination is wrong. And if there are actually others that believe they should be tried that have seen all of the information Obama has, it would be just as easy for me to call their motivations into question as you did with Obama.

I.E. Maybe they just want to get re-elected and appeal to the base of the party.

Again, you may very well be correct regarding appeal to the base. But we see things very differently when it comes to the Gitmo issue. I certainly respect you view that Gitmo should remain open and that the prisoners should remain incarcerated without trial or tribunal indefinitely; however, I disagree with it.

As a liberal, I should always be open to the possibility that conservatives may be correct on whatever issue comes up, which is why I always give them a fair shake in any debate. Conservatives make great arguments, and we have plenty of conservatives on this board who are both passionate and intelligent. As liberals, we should listen and be respectful, and decide where we disagree. If a compromise can be reached, great! We may not see eye-to-eye on a lot of issues, but at the end of the day, we're all Americans, and we make our own informed decisions.
 
If any of them want to be shot and killed, let them.

I know if I were told I was going to be indefinitely held in a prison, I would much rather prefer a death sentence.
 
Back
Top Bottom