Obama opponents NEVER satisfied

[blu]

The author of the stupid original post subscribes to the absurd notion that we "should" treat terrorism in the same way we treat mere criminality.

It was precisely that kind of mindless liberal "thinking" that led to the kinds of problems that made 9/11/2001 possible.

no that was intervention by neocons

 

[Liability]

the poor girlyman/boy brigade @ USMB has lost most of it's mojo if it ever truly had any to begn with.

sad, poor liability...hunting for a bit of recognition and validation from Dante. He has started humping the leg of anyone Dante replies to just so he'll maybe, possibly get noticed.

note: how very sad

The irony meter just exploded. DAINTY is worried that anybody is seeking recognition.

Bwahaha!

By the way, Dainty, Bobby Kennedy's ghost is furious with you for using HIS corporeal image as your avie.

RFK is quoted as saying (well his channeled ghost has been heard to say), "Erah Erah, somebody needs to kneecap that erah erah ratfuck Dainty. I say, erah erah, sue that dickless quiff!"

Another ghost was overheard telling Bobby not to lose his head over it, though, and that seems to have simmered Bobby down.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

poor liability, so worried about Dante paying attention to others...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

and what happened to Trajan? Did he forget sock puppets are not supposed to fall out of character?

 

[Liability]

poor liability, so worried about Dante paying attention to others...

Poor Dainty, still reveling in his fantasy of going down on President Kennedy.



What an attention whore Dainty is. Even in his fevered imagination, he is afraid to spit OR swallow.

 

[Jroc]

You can thank your god the Shrub for opening the door on this, genius. Look up Hamdan Vs. Rumsfeld...and get an adult to explain to you the history.

And for the record, Gitmo had Ghailani for YEARS on the taxpayers dollar. Neocon Parrots and pundits like you swore he couldn't be tried in a US court for all types of Chicken Little reasons. Well, THEY WERE WRONG....YOU WERE WRONG....and like all intellectual cowardly neocons, you'll change the subject at the drop of a hat rather than deal with the truth.

You idiot do you want to pay tens of millions of dollars, Give these people Constitutional rights and try them here? All the while they spew thier anti American rhetoric here in this country. …Yeah you’d probably soak all that shit up, you and you’re anti American leftist buddies. We’ll get the ACLU to sue on behalf of the terrorist. You libs are a joke

 

[Jroc]

Justice, CIA clash over probe of interrogator IDs


The CIA and Justice Department are fighting over a secret investigation into a controversial program by legal supporters of Islamist terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay that involved photographing CIA interrogators and showing the pictures to prisoners, an effort CIA officials say threatens the officers' lives.

The dispute prompted a meeting Tuesday at CIA headquarters between U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald and senior CIA counterintelligence officials. It is the latest battle between the agency and the department over detainees and interrogations of terrorists.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. angered many CIA officials and Republicans in Congress by reopening an investigation last August into whether CIA interrogators acted illegally in questioning senior al Qaeda detainees.

According to U.S. officials familiar with the issue, the current dispute involves Justice Department officials who support an effort led by the American Civil Liberties Union to provide legal aid to military lawyers for the Guantanamo inmates. CIA counterintelligence officials oppose the effort and say giving terrorists photographs of interrogators has exposed CIA personnel and their families to possible terrorist attacks.

As part of the disagreement, a senior Justice Department national security official removed himself from the counterintelligence probe last week after opposing CIA security worries.

Donald Vieira, a former Democratic counsel on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence who in September became chief of staff at the Justice Department's National Security Division, recused himself from the counterintelligence investigation into the recent discovery of photographs of CIA interrogators in the possession of defense lawyers at the prison in Cuba.

The investigation has been under way for many months, but was given new urgency after the discovery last month of additional photographs of interrogators at Guantanamo showing CIA officers and contractors who have carried out interrogations of detainees, according to three officials familiar with the investigation. They spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Findings of the investigation to date produced some signs that the senior al Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo gained intelligence on CIA interrogators through their lawyers that could be used in future legal proceedings.

CIA counterintelligence officials have "serious concerns" that the information will leak out and lead to the terrorists targeting the officers and their families, if the identities are disseminated to terrorists or sympathizers still at large, said one official.

"They have put the lives of CIA officers and their families in danger," said a senior U.S. official about the detainees' lawyers.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/15/justice-cia-clash-over-probe-of-interrogator-ids/

 

[Jroc]

Holder's Former Law Firm Representing 'High Value' Detainees


Justice Delayed
Holder's friends in the al-Qaeda bar caused the trial delays he now criticizes.



Of all the infuriating aspects of the decision to transfer five 9/11 war criminals to civilian federal court, the one that grates most is the contention that the Obama administration is finally moving forward after “eight years of delay” — as Attorney General Eric Holder put it at his Friday press conference — during which the Bush administration managed to complete only three military-commission trials.

This is chutzpah writ large. The principal reason there were so few military trials is the tireless campaign conducted by leftist lawyers to derail military tribunals by challenging them in the courts. Many of those lawyers are now working for the Obama Justice Department. That includes Holder, whose firm, Covington & Burling, volunteered its services to at least 18 of America’s enemies in lawsuits they brought against the American people. (During 2007 alone, Covington contributed more than 3,000 hours of free, top-flight legal assistance to our enemy detainees.)

Almost from the moment President Bush authorized military commissions in 2001, this legion of litigators flooded the courts with habeas corpus petitions, contending that military detention and trials violated the Constitution, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions. In 2004, the al-Qaeda bar induced the Supreme Court, in Rasul v. Bush, to grant enemies a statutory habeas corpus right to challenge their military detention in civilian court. Congress tried to stop them by amending the habeas statute to divest the lower federal courts of jurisdiction in these lawsuits, but the al-Qaeda bar later persuaded the liberal bloc on the Court to ignore that amendment.

Justice Delayed - Andrew C. McCarthy - National Review Online

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Holder's Former Law Firm Representing 'High Value' Detainees

gawd forbid an American be principled and go with the rule of law vs mob rule.

But it's okay little girlyman/boy --- the grownups will protect you. now go back to slinging mud and picking your nose and eating your snots

 

[HUGGY]

You can thank your god the Shrub for opening the door on this, genius. Look up Hamdan Vs. Rumsfeld...and get an adult to explain to you the history.

And for the record, Gitmo had Ghailani for YEARS on the taxpayers dollar. Neocon Parrots and pundits like you swore he couldn't be tried in a US court for all types of Chicken Little reasons. Well, THEY WERE WRONG....YOU WERE WRONG....and like all intellectual cowardly neocons, you'll change the subject at the drop of a hat rather than deal with the truth.

You idiot do you want to pay tens of millions of dollars, Give these people Constitutional rights and try them here? All the while they spew thier anti American rhetoric here in this country. …Yeah you’d probably soak all that shit up, you and you’re anti American leftist buddies. We’ll get the ACLU to sue on behalf of the terrorist. You libs are a joke

I'll yell "Fuck America!!!".. just to watch you pee on yourself!!!

 

[daveman]

Holder's Former Law Firm Representing 'High Value' Detainees

gawd forbid an American be principled and go with the rule of law vs mob rule.

But it's okay little girlyman/boy --- the grownups will protect you. now go back to slinging mud and picking your nose and eating your snots

You can't see the conflict of interest here?

No. I bet you can't.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Holder's Former Law Firm Representing 'High Value' Detainees

gawd forbid an American be principled and go with the rule of law vs mob rule.

But it's okay little girlyman/boy --- the grownups will protect you. now go back to slinging mud and picking your nose and eating your snots

You can't see the conflict of interest here?

First: Holder does not have a law firm.

Second: Holder does not have a law firm.

Third: Holder does not have a law firm.
---

Fourth: definition of a conflict of interest.

your point?

 

[daveman]

gawd forbid an American be principled and go with the rule of law vs mob rule.

But it's okay little girlyman/boy --- the grownups will protect you. now go back to slinging mud and picking your nose and eating your snots

You can't see the conflict of interest here?

First: Holder does not have a law firm.

Second: Holder does not have a law firm.

Third: Holder does not have a law firm.
---

Fourth: definition of a conflict of interest.

your point?

"Democrats can do no wrong." Just type that next time and save keystrokes.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

You can't see the conflict of interest here?

First: Holder does not have a law firm.

Second: Holder does not have a law firm.

Third: Holder does not have a law firm.
---

Fourth: definition of a conflict of interest.

your point?

"Democrats can do no wrong." Just type that next time and save keystrokes.

I'm not a Democrat. I am a liberal. I did not vote for Obama in 2008 in either the primary or the general, and I voted in each

 

[taichiliberal]

The funny thing is that the people who think that way voted for Obama based on his campaign rhetoric to the same. Sorta different now that he has to actually do the job now huh?

What would be funny if it weren't so tragic, is how jokers like YOU and Liability are so against the simple idea of Obama in the Oval office that you are against the FACT that a terrorist was successfully tried and convicted in a US court of law and duly sentenced. This is a win for the USA on the international stage, but you don't/won't see it.

You're insipid stubborness regarding Obama's achievment on any level borders the irrational. Hell, he compromises to the GOP to the point that pisses of his supporters, and YOU are still railing against him. You're pathetic.

Well then it appears you and Keef have your minds made up. I tried. Iggy for you.

And there you have it folks, another anti-Obama bullhorn shut down by the simple facts of the situation. But Asterism doesn't have the guts or maturity to concede a point, so he tries to BS his way out.....a pity he doesn't realize how transparent he is. Adios for now, Asterism.

 

[taichiliberal]

You're full of it dude.

Translation: the neocon Libability (in every sense of the word) was faced with a few FACTS that he couldn't BS away with his rhetoric....hence his pathetic response.

Guys like Liability just can't handle the FACT that this case is a win for the USA on the international stage...our justice system works, so we don't have to sandbag arabs & muslims like some gulag toting 3rd world nation or old style Soviet bloc nation.

Nope, Libability isn't about the country, isn't about Americas future....Liability's all about getting OBAMA, getting the LIBBIES, getting those muslims, getting those arabs.....truth, justice and the American way be damned.

Tackylib is responding to the post of another member, erroneously thinks he's responding to me, then makes a complete fool of himself. Again.

Classic liberoidal douche bag.

And, tackylib, you moron, I am not a neocon. I am a conservative. Thee's a big difference, there, but schmucks like you who can't even understand who you are talking to have no chance to understand those differences, sadly.

You Marxists/socialist/leftists/liberals/"progressives" need to work on your ability to comprehend the words you bandy about.

Once again, this mental Liability demonstrates how dense he is. Post #45 shows mudwhistle's reponse, which was to my last post. If Mudwhistle was responding to Libability, then he posted in the wrong place, and I will apologize accordingly.

But as you can see, our intellectually impotent Liability is more hyped about a simple response posting error than the actual content of the discussion. He cannot deal with the FACTS of this case...because to do so would mean acknowledging that ALL the neocon driven GOP pundits and partisans were WRONG. So he just avoids it at any point.

Liability claims he's a conservative and not a neocon....someone needs to clue the dumb bunny in that a true conservative does NOT support the Constitution bending/law breaking/dishonest BS that the Shrub and company pulled for 8 years. But as this and past posts have shown, Liability has been a staunch supporter of every neocon, anti-Obama bullhorn that has come down the pike. His denial of such a mindset in leiu of the record is absurd, but what can one expect from someone who thinks "liberoidal", and "Tackylib" are rational, comparative counters to being called a new conservative (or neocon for short).

 

[taichiliberal]

Well, the first civilian trial of an Al Qaeda affiliate suspect in the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Nairobi, Tanzania and Kenya is over. And out of 280 charges, Mr. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, 36, was found guilty of one. Conspiracy to destroy government property and buildings.

Outrageous, you say? Well, he's in for 20 years to life.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/nyregion/18ghailani.html

Now I know that emotions run high regarding all things related to Al Qaeda, but keep this in mind: This guy is going to do 20 YEARS before being considered for parole....how much you want to bet he's NOT going to get it?

A witness for the prosecution who says Ghailani received explosives and was more involved in the plot to attack the embassies was never heard by the jury because his testimomy was coerced (i.e., tortured), which is inadmissable in American court.

Now to prevent such things in the future...don't torture prisoners, and you have a better shot of faster trials with better sentencing because people wanted an execution sentence. So now the anti-Obama politicians and pundits are all screaming "Obama's civilian trials are a failure! He shames America's 9/11 victims, diminishes us in th eworld's eyes!"....which is interesesting being that the same detractors claimed that such trials could not happen on US soil due to the security risk. Welll, local residents and commuters were mostly unawares that such a trial was taking place in New York City!

So, we have a SAFE trial with a conviction....a hell of a lot more than Bush did for 8 years with all his Constitution/Bill of Rights bending actions. More to come, I'm sure.

You are an Asshole. The best thing you can do for Us is join the other side. Fuck You and your lecture.

Ahhhh, the pinnacle of intellectual neocon response via our blowhole Intense.

Evidently, the FACTS were too much for the hinges of Intense feeble mind to handle.

 

[taichiliberal]

You can thank your god the Shrub for opening the door on this, genius. Look up Hamdan Vs. Rumsfeld...and get an adult to explain to you the history.

And for the record, Gitmo had Ghailani for YEARS on the taxpayers dollar. Neocon Parrots and pundits like you swore he couldn't be tried in a US court for all types of Chicken Little reasons. Well, THEY WERE WRONG....YOU WERE WRONG....and like all intellectual cowardly neocons, you'll change the subject at the drop of a hat rather than deal with the truth.

You idiot do you want to pay tens of millions of dollars, Give these people Constitutional rights and try them here? All the while they spew thier anti American rhetoric here in this country. …Yeah you’d probably soak all that shit up, you and you’re anti American leftist buddies. We’ll get the ACLU to sue on behalf of the terrorist. You libs are a joke

Stop babbling, you foolish Roc.....because only a fool would compare the cost of Ghailani's trial to that of having him locked up and interrogated for YEARS in Gitmo. Do the research, if you dare, and then post the results....because quite frankly I'm sick and tired of doing the homework for willyfully ignorant jokers like you.

You and your ilk were WRONG....the trial happened, security was intact, NYC didn't grind to a halt...AND WE GOT A CONVICTION! Deal with it.

 

[taichiliberal]

JRoc posts two articles from right wing/neocon publications that are whirling like dervishes to try and sully the FACT that you had a Gitmo detainee tried and convicted and sentenced on US soil in a US court.

Nothing changes that fact....so JRoc and his ilk STILL yell that the fix is in for the Taliban/Al Qaeda operatives to get off scott free.

The Washington Times (Rev. Sun Yung Moon's rag) article is hysterical.....no named sources of all the accusations, but a named Dem who recuses himself (and rightly so) because of inter-departmental conflict of interest. The moonies at the WT just throw in supposition and conjecture to make their "case"...which amounts to a lot of unsubstantiated accusations.

As for the article on Holder....since he's not active in any cases and does hold a law firm in his name....it's just a lot of sour grapes about Gitmo folk getting representation in a court of law.

Well, Ghailani had a lawyer....he got convicted. That's the system, neocons...and it worked under Obama no matter how much you bitch and moan about it.

 

[jeffrockit]

Do some here really think that torture should be OK? Would it be OK for other countries to Torture our soldiers to get the information they want if were capture because its their service instead of their courts and that makes it OK.

Were America, not the talaban or Alkaida or Iran or Saddam, we actually want people to look up to us because we are better than they are.

What part of all this is GOD's plan anyway.

This is not God's plan, this is God's judgement!

Really? I had no idea America was a theocracy! You'd better hop right over to the nearest Fox News affiliate and spread the word.

Where did I state that we were a theocracy? I see you use the well worn Fox News is bad argument.