Obama, In A Blow To Closing Guantanamo, Signs Law

Well...there you go...the idiot that is blinded by his own myopic hatred of republicans and cant see beyond his mindless 13 year old thought capacity refuses to accept that both parties were in on it from the beginning and that a democrat president has changed his mind on closing GITMO, expanded black ops prisons, and refused to grant constitutional rights to rterrorists because oh yeah...it was a pretty stupid thing to believe he should do from the get-go...

And BTW...when attacking others intelligence, you might want to actually spell 'idiot' correctly.

VanceMack said:

Well...there you go...the idiot that is blinded by his own myopic hatred of republicans and cant see beyond his mindless 13 year old thought capacity refuses to accept that both parties were in on it from the beginning and that a democrat president has changed his mind on closing GITMO, expanded black ops prisons, and refused to grant constitutional rights to rterrorists because oh yeah...it was a pretty stupid thing to believe he should do from the get-go...

And BTW...when attacking others intelligence, you might want to actually spell 'idiot' correctly.

Click to expand...

Just shows you're not paying attention and are simply looking for a way to excuse the president and his party. An the only intelligence I was questioning was that of the one who openned GITMO, which was far less intelligent than a typo. All I'm asking is for your side to take personal responsibility. Stop trying to pass the buck and blame others. no matter who was briefed, the responsibility falls on those who chose to open the palce and ignore rule of law.

ReverendHellh0und said:

How about the "idiot" who promised to close it? :ssst:

Click to expand...

And tried. Signed the order. Then, and as I said we ahve to ignore thier responsibility because they're republican, the fear mongering started. Only democrats can he held responsible. Republicans, it would seem, need to blame others for their actions, be it the democrats or the media or liberals. They seem incapable of being responsible for their own actions. :roll:

Boo Radley said:

And tried. Signed the order. Then, and as I said we ahve to ignore thier responsibility because they're republican, the fear mongering started. Only democrats can he held responsible. Republicans, it would seem, need to blame others for their actions, be it the democrats or the media or liberals. They seem incapable of being responsible for their own actions. :roll:

Click to expand...

I can't even fathom what excuse you are trying to make here. :shrug:

TOJ said:

I am aware of that but I don't see anything about a bill being veto proof. Liblady said the bill was veto proof.

.

Click to expand...

i'm sure you knew what i meant.

ReverendHellh0und said:

I can't even fathom what excuse you are trying to make here. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Excuse? none. It's disappointing Obama couldn't get it done. I'm merely saying you excuse repubglicans too quickly, never holding them responsible for their actions. The use the politics of fear to convince people we couldn't move them here or try them. And it was a republican administration and policy that led to making it difficult to prosecute as they violated rule of law, repeatedly. Again, everyone is responsible for what they ahve done and ahven't done. Just be honest about it.

Boo Radley said:

Just shows you're not paying attention and are simply looking for a way to excuse the president and his party. An the only intelligence I was questioning was that of the one who openned GITMO, which was far less intelligent than a typo. All I'm asking is for your side to take personal responsibility. Stop trying to pass the buck and blame others. no matter who was briefed, the responsibility falls on those who chose to open the palce and ignore rule of law.

Click to expand...

Thats your problem...you actually think Bush (or those that actually still support it) are shirking their responsibility in the process. Bush believed it was the right thing. So did all the democrats that now whine and cry about it even though they were briefed from the get go. The only people that are inconsistent are the idiots on the left that suddenly wanted to pretend they knew nothing about it...and the ones that blindly swallow everything they are fed. Oh...of course...and the chosen One who not only changed his stance but increased black ops prisons in other countries.

VanceMack said:

Thats your problem...you actually think Bush (or those that actually still support it) are shirking their responsibility in the process. Bush believed it was the right thing. So did all the democrats that now whine and cry about it even though they were briefed from the get go. The only people that are inconsistent are the idiots on the left that suddenly wanted to pretend they knew nothing about it...and the ones that blindly swallow everything they are fed. Oh...of course...and the chosen One who not only changed his stance but increased black ops prisons in other countries.

Click to expand...

Who has pretended they knew nothing about it? Who knew of the torture? Who knew of the secret prisons there?

But that was never the point. More than a few stupid people think they are right. But ignoring rule of law is not right, for either party. If we don't have the evidence, those people should be free no matter what you or I fear. Rule of law is depended on what we can prove and not what we fear.

And let's not ignore the role repulicans and congress played in preventing the closing from happening. All are responsible for their actions.

Boo Radley said:

Excuse? none. It's disappointing Obama couldn't get it done. I'm merely saying you excuse repubglicans too quickly, never holding them responsible for their actions. The use the politics of fear to convince people we couldn't move them here or try them. And it was a republican administration and policy that led to making it difficult to prosecute as they violated rule of law, repeatedly. Again, everyone is responsible for what they ahve done and ahven't done. Just be honest about it.

Click to expand...

So Bush is an "idiot" but Obama is only slightly "disapointing".....


Something wrong with your keyboard btw?

Boo Radley said:

Who has pretended they knew nothing about it? Who knew of the torture? Who knew of the secret prisons there?

But that was never the point. More than a few stupid people think they are right. But ignoring rule of law is not right, for either party. If we don't have the evidence, those people should be free no matter what you or I fear. Rule of law is depended on what we can prove and not what we fear.

And let's not ignore the role repulicans and congress played in preventing the closing from happening. All are responsible for their actions.

Click to expand...

The senior democrats were inbreifed on waterboarding procedures. Yes...the same ones that later expressed outrage (hint...Pelosi...Feinstein, etc). And since those secret prisons are so bad the chosen One shouldnt be expanding their use in Afghanistan...right?

It matters not...mindless ideologues see ONLY what they choose to see. And you know the drill...republicans and Bush BAD...evil...and responsible for all the ills of the world (the counter to that of course is "Democrats are ****ing stupid beyond words and so easily manipulated by Bush"). And I know that...why I bother to occasionally communicate with you is beyond me... :beatdeadhorse

republicans SUPPORT the capture of WAR CRIMINALS and holding them EXTRATERRITORIALLY until they are brought to JUSTICE before the appropriate TRIBUNAL

that's our RESPONSIBILITY, y'see

it's part of keeping the american people SAFE

FIFTY democrat senators AGREE

poor barry, he just doesn't know what he's doing

he's UNPROFESSIONAL

ReverendHellh0und said:

So Bush is an "idiot" but Obama is only slightly "disapointing".....


Something wrong with your keyboard btw?

Click to expand...

Nope. One is an idiot (Bush) and one is disappointing (Obama). They are not equal. They have not done the exact same things. You can't pretend unequal things are equal. That would eb the definition of bias.

VanceMack said:

The senior democrats were inbreifed on waterboarding procedures. Yes...the same ones that later expressed outrage (hint...Pelosi...Feinstein, etc). And since those secret prisons are so bad the chosen One shouldnt be expanding their use in Afghanistan...right?

It matters not...mindless ideologues see ONLY what they choose to see. And you know the drill...republicans and Bush BAD...evil...and responsible for all the ills of the world (the counter to that of course is "Democrats are ****ing stupid beyond words and so easily manipulated by Bush"). And I know that...why I bother to occasionally communicate with you is beyond me... :beatdeadhorse

Click to expand...

Again, how does this excuse Bush, who was responsible for giving the order? And no, we should not expand any such prisons. Again, it's called adhering to rule of law. If you do horrible things, you're horrible. It really is that simple. If you do stupid things, you're stupid. If you do illegal things, you're a criminal. There is nothing complicated here.

yup

it's simple

obama caved

50 dem senators told him to grow up

cheney's been vindicated

gitmo will never close

ksm will never go before judge judy or lance ito

obama's unprofessional

and there ya go

y'know what's really odd?

obtuse obama announced his SURRENDER on civil trials on the same day he LAUNCHED his reelection

the guy's just not very good at american politics

ask senator KERRY

yes, Obama caved. Congress effectively countered him. That does not excuse either Obama or congress, or republicans who were fear mongers.

And no, Cheney ahs not be vindicated. Because he made so many mistakes and broke so many laws that it is difficult to try people honestly now is not vindication. He should be scorned, as the entire administration should be. This part is not about republicans but about an administration who abused power and broke laws and hurt this country in many ways.

Boo Radley said:

Nope. One is an idiot (Bush) and one is disappointing (Obama). They are not equal. They have not done the exact same things. You can't pretend unequal things are equal. That would eb the definition of bias.

Click to expand...

I think it has more to do with one being an "r" and the other a "d" for you... He's had years to close it and an EO pen.


But your right they are not equal, one thought he was doing the right thing, the other thought it was akin to a war crime but did nothing... "disapointing". :roll:

ReverendHellh0und said:

I think it has more to do with one being an "r" and the other a "d" for you... He's had years to close it and an EO pen.


But your right they are not equal, one thought he was doing the right thing, the other thought it was akin to a war crime but did nothing... "disapointing". :roll:

Click to expand...

I can't control what you think, but you would still be wrong. The fact is Obama has not invaded a country outside the UN on a pretext. He did not open GITMO. He did not torture and defend torture as Bush did. These are real differences. Perhaps it is your bias that prevents you from seeing real differences.

Boo Radley said:

I can't control what you think, but you would still be wrong. The fact is Obama has not invaded a country outside the UN on a pretext. He did not open GITMO. He did not torture and defend torture as Bush did. These are real differences. Perhaps it is your bias that prevents you from seeing real differences.

Click to expand...

The UN is not the ruler of the US. sorry.

Didn't he bomb lybia for the rebelling jihadists?


He did not open GITMO, but when faced with what he considered a war crime, voted present instead of shutting it down.




My bias? Please, one guy bush opened gitmo because he thought it the right thing to do, your guy, kept it open even though he thought it was a war crime.


your guy is a ***** who votes present in the face of what he sees as human atrocities..... "disapointing" I know....

ReverendHellh0und said:

The UN is not the ruler of the US. sorry.

Didn't he bomb lybia for the rebelling jihadists?


He did not open GITMO, but when faced with what he considered a war crime, voted present instead of shutting it down.




My bias? Please, one guy bush opened gitmo because he thought it the right thing to do, your guy, kept it open even though he thought it was a war crime.


your guy is a ***** who votes present in the face of what he sees as human atrocities..... "disapointing" I know....

Click to expand...

Strawman. No one said the UN was the leader of the US.

Bombed, not invaded. No occupying. No overthrow at present. If he invades and takes over the government, he would then be as stupid as Bush.

Too many lack courage when Bush overstepped his bountries. But even lacking courage is not equal to committing the crime. If we could fire all of them at once and start with people of strong stock who had actual core values, I would prefer that. Until then, we ahve to take the lesser of two evils. Obama is not perfect, or even good, just better.

Boo Radley said:

Strawman. No one said the UN was the leader of the US.

Click to expand...

"The fact is Obama has not invaded a country outside the UN on a pretext."


What did you mean by "outside the UN"... we don't answer to the UN.

Bombed, not invaded. No occupying. No overthrow at present. If he invades and takes over the government, he would then be as stupid as Bush.

Click to expand...

Oh so bombing people is cooler than regieme change...... is this your position?

Too many lack courage when Bush overstepped his bountries. But even lacking courage is not equal to committing the crime.

Click to expand...

I, when I was a contractor, I saw a rape occuring, though it was not my job, and I could lose my contract over it, I stopped it from happening. Obama see's the equivelant of a rape in progress, and not only does nothing about it, but day after day, lets it continue...

Tell me, which indeed is worse, committing an atrocity, or standing by when you have the power to stop it, but just letting it go on, and on, and on....

In this case, there is nothing wrong with GITMO, Obama sees that, and thats why it's still open. but if he sees it as an atrocity as you think he does, yes, he's worse than bush for keeping it open.

If we could fire all of them at once and start with people of strong stock who had actual core values, I would prefer that. Until then, we ahve to take the lesser of two evils. Obama is not perfect, or even good, just better.

Click to expand...

No, he just has a "D" next to his name so he's judged lighter than an "R" with you. :shrug:

Boo Radley said:

Strawman. No one said the UN was the leader of the US.

Bombed, not invaded. No occupying. No overthrow at present. If he invades and takes over the government, he would then be as stupid as Bush.

Too many lack courage when Bush overstepped his bountries. But even lacking courage is not equal to committing the crime. If we could fire all of them at once and start with people of strong stock who had actual core values, I would prefer that. Until then, we ahve to take the lesser of two evils. Obama is not perfect, or even good, just better.

Click to expand...

Your strawman is better. Bush overstepped nothing, otherwise he would have been impeached; cause the Dems were sure aching to do it; and had both houses. History is showing that Bush did the right thing; go ahead and stay in denial. Obama should have stayed out of Libya, but he had to go ahead and say Khaddafi needs to go. Now that was dumb, because now he can't back out without losing face. What he should have conveyed through Hillary was that we support a republican form of govt, as we would anywhere. The EU, who has the most to lose in Libya, should have handled this on their own. Obama did this for 2012, and that's all.

ReverendHellh0und said:

"The fact is Obama has not invaded a country outside the UN on a pretext."


What did you mean by "outside the UN"... we don't answer to the UN.

Click to expand...

It's simple. We have signed and radified agreements with the UN. France led this effort, and we have a signed agreement to offer support with the UN. Bush had neither just cause to invade Iraq or a UN mission he was obligated to support. He acted outside any proper or legal rationale.

Oh so bombing people is cooler than regieme change...... is this your position?

Click to expand...

Cooler? Silly word choice. Only say it is not the same. As costly as it is, not as costly as invading and regime change. it is also important as to who started it. by this I mean the Lybian people. They started the uprising. Offering aid is different than imposing our will on them.

I, when I was a contractor, I saw a rape occuring, though it was not my job, and I could lose my contract over it, I stopped it from happening. Obama see's the equivelant of a rape in progress, and not only does nothing about it, but day after day, lets it continue...

Tell me, which indeed is worse, committing an atrocity, or standing by when you have the power to stop it, but just letting it go on, and on, and on....

In this case, there is nothing wrong with GITMO, Obama sees that, and thats why it's still open. but if he sees it as an atrocity as you think he does, yes, he's worse than bush for keeping it open.

Click to expand...

If I follow your reasoning your saying the rapist is guilt free because the by stander didn't act? Hardly. And this is hardly equal to rape for either. Obama is left with a dilema. The best answer is to try them in open court. Remeber the response to that? remember the fear mongering? Moving them here would be a good move as well. Remember the frear mongering with that? And let's not forget that Bush had people arrest and didn't have the evidence to hold them. He also used torture. Making up for those mistakes will be difficult.

An honest people who had respect for rule of law and human rights would simply try those we had evidence on and free those we don't. What's your feel for the good honest people here in the US? Would they accept this?

No, he just has a "D" next to his name so he's judged lighter than an "R" with you. :shrug:

Click to expand...

That makes things easy for you, and doesn't require you to actually think and acknowledge real differences. I understand. Sadly. :coffeepap

I never claimed the rapist was "guilt free", if he was guilt free I wouldn't have put a 1911 to his head, but when I told you that I "stopped him", you chose instead to make up a lie about me and once again when you get embarrassed you make your snippy little personal attacks.



bro, you give obama a pass as "disappointing" and Bush is an "idiot" because you simply a partisan hack. Simple as that.


And don't ask me about trials here, your Obama has accepted Military tribunals..... I know... it's "disapointing" and bush is a "War criminal". :roll:

Boo Radley said:

It's simple. We have signed and radified agreements with the UN. France led this effort, and we have a signed agreement to offer support with the UN. Bush had neither just cause to invade Iraq or a UN mission he was obligated to support. He acted outside any proper or legal rationale.

Click to expand...

Sources? I know you have none.

Cooler? Silly word choice. Only say it is not the same. As costly as it is, not as costly as invading and regime change. it is also important as to who started it. by this I mean the Lybian people. They started the uprising. Offering aid is different than imposing our will on them.






If I follow your reasoning your saying the rapist is guilt free because the by stander didn't act? Hardly. And this is hardly equal to rape for either. Obama is left with a dilema. The best answer is to try them in open court. Remeber the response to that? remember the fear mongering? Moving them here would be a good move as well. Remember the frear mongering with that? And let's not forget that Bush had people arrest and didn't have the evidence to hold them. He also used torture. Making up for those mistakes will be difficult.

An honest people who had respect for rule of law and human rights would simply try those we had evidence on and free those we don't. What's your feel for the good honest people here in the US? Would they accept this?




That makes things easy for you, and doesn't require you to actually think and acknowledge real differences. I understand. Sadly. :coffeepap

Click to expand...

American said:

Sources? I know you have none.

Click to expand...

What do you need? We were not being attacked, no attack was imminent. We can't use the UN as we were outisde the UN, which is what coalition of the willing means. It was an aggressive act with no legal jsutification. Is the reasoning any more valid if I quote someone? If you agree to accept it, I'll quote more than a few folks. :coffeepap