obama's cuba, going down to celebrate castros & to close gitmo

[Vandalshandle]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

Raise your hand if you bothered to read this....

 

[washamericom]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

Raise your hand if you bothered to read this....

it's a great post by AJ and a good article, no bother at all.... it all speaks to the ego of an incompetent, yet knowingly destructive president. i'll be glad when Trump takes over, 0bama is a dud.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

Raise your hand if you bothered to read this....

it's a great post by AJ and a good article, no bother at all.... it all speaks to the ego of an incompetent, yet knowingly destructive president. i'll be glad when Trump takes over, 0bama is a dud.

My best guess is that Trump will sue all those guys in Guantanamo....

 

[Moonglow]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

Raise your hand if you bothered to read this....

it's a great post by AJ and a good article, no bother at all.... it all speaks to the ego of an incompetent, yet knowingly destructive president. i'll be glad when Trump takes over, 0bama is a dud.

My best guess is that Trump will sue all those guys in Guantanamo....

For back rent?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Picky, picky, picky.......

 

[washamericom]

it's disgraceful to whom obama has cuddled up to in the past. chavez castros ahmadinejad assad
i will transmit this message to vladimir.

i'll be so reilived/glad when this entire fakey poser administration is gone forever,
we'll throw in reid and pelosi too... get off the effing stage....

 

[ogibillm]

it's disgraceful to whom obama has cuddled up to in the past. chavez castros ahmadinejad assad
i will transmit this message to vladimir.

i'll be so reilived/glad when this entire fakey poser administration is gone forever,
we'll throw in reid and pelosi too... get off the effing stage....

"fakey poser administration"

you have issues. just what exactly is that supposed to mean?

 

[Wry Catcher]

it's disgraceful to whom obama has cuddled up to in the past. chavez castros ahmadinejad assad
i will transmit this message to vladimir.

i'll be so reilived/glad when this entire fakey poser administration is gone forever,
we'll throw in reid and pelosi too... get off the effing stage....

"fakey poser administration"

you have issues. just what exactly is that supposed to mean?

She paid too little for her brainwash.

 

[washamericom]

it's disgraceful to whom obama has cuddled up to in the past. chavez castros ahmadinejad assad
i will transmit this message to vladimir.

i'll be so reilived/glad when this entire fakey poser administration is gone forever,
we'll throw in reid and pelosi too... get off the effing stage....

"fakey poser administration"

you have issues. just what exactly is that supposed to mean?

in the music business some people look great on stage, all the moves. but they either never bothered to learn how to play, or they just don't have talent.
called fake it till you make it. they are the posers, of which barck obama was one of the most successful at ever. (still is).

otherwise the cream rises to the top.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

 

[washamericom]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

 

[washamericom]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose
The president meets an insurmountable stumbling block.
February 25, 2016
Ari Lieberman

...

He claims that continued maintenance of Guantanamo harms partnerships with U.S. allies and that the issue of Guantanamo continuously arises in talks with world leaders who express angst over its existence. Obama was careful not to divulge which world leaders he was referring to but we can speculate. Perhaps the anguish came from the corrupt and tyrannical leaders of the House of Saud. That would be somewhat comical. Or maybe it was Obama’s good pal Erdogan of Turkey, whose nation has the dubious distinction of jailing and detaining more journalists than China or Iran. The United States does not need to be lectured by despots.

Lastly, Obama claims that Gitmo runs “contrary to our values” and, “is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of the rule of law.” I’m not really sure what he means by this argument. The detainees at Guantanamo are fed, clothed and otherwise treated humanely and to the extent possible, their religious beliefs are accommodated. Their treatment on U.S. soil would be no different.

Throughout his term of office, Obama has released or transferred nearly 150 Guantanamo detainees. Five high-level detainees were released in a blatantly illegal prisoner exchange for disgraced U.S. army deserter, Bowe Bergdahl. Of concern, is the rate of recidivism and many of those released have either joined or are suspected of joining entities that are hostile to the United States.

Moreover, transfer of high-level detainees to the U.S. mainland, even if legal would create additional security headaches and would impose an additional burden on the states that house them. Those facilities would also create an attractive target for terrorists. Guantanamo conversely, is on an island, completely secure from such threats.

Polls consistently show that the American people are dead-set against Obama’s plan to nix Guantanamo and by wide margins. But even if Obama could somehow sway the populace, he would still face significant legal hurdles to enforcing his convoluted agenda. Indeed, both Secretary of State Ash Carter and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have acknowledged that under current law, Obama’s plan could not be implemented without congressional approval.

But this president has demonstrated a penchant for conducting himself in the most unscrupulous manner. On everything ranging from the Affordable Care Act to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Obama has lied, cajoled, bullied and otherwise circumvented the law to ram his agenda down the America’s throat. With respect to Guantanamo, the White House has already refused to rule out unilateral action to enforce closure of the facility. But as indicated by Obama’s own high-level cabinet members, this is one showdown that the president cannot hope to win without congressional approval, and that prospect seems highly unlikely.

Gitmo Closure: One Battle Obama Will Lose

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

That you believe she is amazing is all I need to know that you're (maybe) a high school graduate, and a college dropout(if you ever attended school beyond the 12th grade.

 

[washamericom]

You support the Second A. without reservation, yet ignore and support the abuse of the Sixth A. to wit: "IN ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ENJOY THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL ...." a clear and unambiguous statement unlike the Second A.

GITMO violates not only the Sixth A. but the Magna Carta, nearly a thousand years of law and part of our Common Law. In short, Gitmo violates the ethos of real Americans.

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

That you believe she is amazing is all I need to know that you're (maybe) a high school graduate, and a college dropout(if you ever attended school beyond the 12th grade.

and all we need to know about how you base your arguments.
sounds as if you know as much about me as you do about politics, maybe try an easier forum.

i know it can't be easy for you being trounced every time by a really smart girl, which PC is.

bet you wish you had a really smart girl running for president, which hillary isn't.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Of course you'd find this "funny", the truth hurts striking you dumb, but your ego needs to be defended.

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

That you believe she is amazing is all I need to know that you're (maybe) a high school graduate, and a college dropout(if you ever attended school beyond the 12th grade.

and all we need to know about how you base your arguments.
sounds as if you know as much about me as you do about politics, maybe try an easier forum.

i know it can't be easy for you being trounced every time by a really smart girl, which PC is.

bet you wish you had a really smart girl running for president, which hillary isn't.

Proof that you and PC have much in common, that being a closed mind and an inability to offer anything of substance related to the reality of what the New Right (crazy right wing) has brought asunder.

 

[washamericom]

wouldn't ego and need defending be contradictory by nature ??

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

That you believe she is amazing is all I need to know that you're (maybe) a high school graduate, and a college dropout(if you ever attended school beyond the 12th grade.

and all we need to know about how you base your arguments.
sounds as if you know as much about me as you do about politics, maybe try an easier forum.

i know it can't be easy for you being trounced every time by a really smart girl, which PC is.

bet you wish you had a really smart girl running for president, which hillary isn't.

Proof that you and PC have much in common, that being a closed mind and an inability to offer anything of substance related to the reality of what the New Right (crazy right wing) has brought asunder.

well, you're the one complaining about other people's arguments. but that's what this is.
usually people behind the curve, say things like "well they are close minded" or
"you must not be educated". but those aren't substantive views.

what you mean is "i don't agree", which is fine, no one really cares.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No. See any thread by PoliticalChic for an example of a narcissistic personality defending attacks on her opinions. Her ego (I'm not using the term as it is understood in Freud's psychic apparatus) is huge, and yet she always defends it against those who refused to bow down to her.

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

That you believe she is amazing is all I need to know that you're (maybe) a high school graduate, and a college dropout(if you ever attended school beyond the 12th grade.

and all we need to know about how you base your arguments.
sounds as if you know as much about me as you do about politics, maybe try an easier forum.

i know it can't be easy for you being trounced every time by a really smart girl, which PC is.

bet you wish you had a really smart girl running for president, which hillary isn't.

Proof that you and PC have much in common, that being a closed mind and an inability to offer anything of substance related to the reality of what the New Right (crazy right wing) has brought asunder.

well, you're the one complaining about other people's arguments. but that's what this is.
usually people behind the curve, say things like "well they are close minded" or
"you must not be educated". but those aren't substantive views.

what you mean is "i don't agree", which is fine, no one really cares.

They are my opinions based on evidence, the evidence being your posts and the post of other members of the echo chamber. You and they do not think, you parrot and emote.

 

[washamericom]

she's pretty amazing all right. you guys need to sharpen your pencils, that's all.

That you believe she is amazing is all I need to know that you're (maybe) a high school graduate, and a college dropout(if you ever attended school beyond the 12th grade.

and all we need to know about how you base your arguments.
sounds as if you know as much about me as you do about politics, maybe try an easier forum.

i know it can't be easy for you being trounced every time by a really smart girl, which PC is.

bet you wish you had a really smart girl running for president, which hillary isn't.

Proof that you and PC have much in common, that being a closed mind and an inability to offer anything of substance related to the reality of what the New Right (crazy right wing) has brought asunder.

well, you're the one complaining about other people's arguments. but that's what this is.
usually people behind the curve, say things like "well they are close minded" or
"you must not be educated". but those aren't substantive views.

what you mean is "i don't agree", which is fine, no one really cares.

They are my opinions based on evidence, the evidence being your posts and the post of other members of the echo chamber. You and they do not think, you parrot and emote.

so you're saying i parrot and emote ?