OK Obama, you won reelection. Time to close Gitmo

[Procrustes Stretched]

pfft
He promised all of the above and didn't deliver any of it.

Not that enough Americans cared.

Time to wake up. It's not 2008 .. It's 2012

Running for reelection, the President didn't promise what you say he did

The is not the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

"I'm a die hard Yankees fan." < That is.

however

That is the dumbest counter argument ever made, by someone who is not truthmatters.

He lied, but they are old lies, so they don't count.

President Obama was reelected. He beat the Wingnut Noise Machine


case closed

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What????? *Gasp*
Almost 4 years later and it's not closed yet?
Obama vows to close Guantanamo Bay | NowPublic News Coverage

2008. and what happened? Why is it not closed?

Wait, there is more, Archives for classical music | Latest news, Breaking news, Pakistan News, World news, business, sport and multimedia | DAWN.COM
snip,

US President-elect Barack Obama vowed to pull troops out of Iraq, crush Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and shut down the Guantanamo Bay camp as part of a dramatic foreign policy break with George W. Bush, AFP reports.

Troops were pulled out of Iraq (on the George Bush established timeline).
Al-Qaeda is still alive and well in Afghanistan.
Guantanamo Bay is still open.
Seems that he fulfilled Bush's promise, but not his own when it comes to international affairs.

spin spin spin

 

[rightwinger]

He is. What has this to do with it? National security and the US Supreme Court has made some rulings.

Reasonable people can disagree, but you being unreasonable are lost here.

If he was a champion of civil rights he would have taken the argument to close Gitmo public and forced his won party to toe the line, he didn't. Unless you are willing to discuss this from a position that lays the blame where it belongs I will treat you like the troll you normally are from now on in this thread.

this thread is troll bait.

it's not serious and neither are you.

delirious is more like it

I am dead serious

If you don't have grounds to convict, you let them go

It's called the American justice system

 

[Two Thumbs]

Time to wake up. It's not 2008 .. It's 2012

Running for reelection, the President didn't promise what you say he did

The is not the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

"I'm a die hard Yankees fan." < That is.

however

That is the dumbest counter argument ever made, by someone who is not truthmatters.

He lied, but they are old lies, so they don't count.

President Obama was reelected. He beat the Wingnut Noise Machine


case closed

I know

The left wing noise machines were much louder and better able at lying.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If he was a champion of civil rights he would have taken the argument to close Gitmo public and forced his won party to toe the line, he didn't. Unless you are willing to discuss this from a position that lays the blame where it belongs I will treat you like the troll you normally are from now on in this thread.

this thread is troll bait.

it's not serious and neither are you.

delirious is more like it

I am dead serious

If you don't have grounds to convict, you let them go

It's called the American justice system

you misread...Quantum Blowhard's posts are troll bait. She is not serious, she is angry.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The is not the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

"I'm a die hard Yankees fan." < That is.

however

That is the dumbest counter argument ever made, by someone who is not truthmatters.

He lied, but they are old lies, so they don't count.

President Obama was reelected. He beat the Wingnut Noise Machine


case closed

I know

The left wing noise machines were much louder and better able at lying.

President Obama was reelected. He beat the right wing GOP


case closed

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

It comes as no surprise that conservatives are ignorant of the facts:

Criminal Courts Are Tougher on Terrorists than Military Detention

Intelligence Collection Is Not Impeded by Access to Attorneys

[T]he plain [fact is] that military commissions have never handled a single case of murder or attempted murder and have doled out shockingly short sentences to terrorists—even to a close associate of Osama bin Laden.

Criminal Courts Are Tougher on Terrorists than Military Detention | Center for American Progress

 

[Trajan]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

That is not the way we do things in this country. At least it is the way it used to be. If you have proof they are terrorists prove it in a court of law

No proof.....let them go

so where would you like to let them go? in their native countries? and if they won't accept them?


here?

 

[hjmick]

After ten years, nobody should be in Gitmo who has not been tried and convicted of a crime. If you have evidence against them, prove it in a court of law. If not, let them go

We are America, we used to set the moral high ground for other nations to follow. Holding men indefinitely without charges and without a fair trial is against our core values

I thought he said he was going to close that place four years ago? That didn't happen after he was elected the first time?

The hell...

 

[rightwinger]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

That is not the way we do things in this country. At least it is the way it used to be. If you have proof they are terrorists prove it in a court of law

No proof.....let them go

so where would you like to let them go? in their native countries? and if they won't accept them?


here?

What is the end game? Keep them in prison the rest of their lives for undisclosed charges? What would have happened if we tried them and sent them to prison for 20 years. What was the plan after 20 years?

By all means send them back to the countries they have citizenship in. What happens to other foreign prisoners after their terms are up? We deport them home

 

[Franticfrank]

Al Qaeda is in chaos and their leader is dead. That was the aim all along and they don't need to imprison these people anymore. I say let them go back to their countries.

 

[theHawk]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

Terrorists by definition are criminals. Criminals get lawyers. Why would you fear open trials?

Because these terrorists are caught overseas by the military. Not within jurisdiction of our courts, and not taken into custody by police. They are enemies in a war and should be treated as such.

I would fear open trials because it would lead to highly paid lawyers and ignorant juries which could lead to free terrorists.

 

[rightwinger]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

Terrorists by definition are criminals. Criminals get lawyers. Why would you fear open trials?

Because these terrorists are caught overseas by the military. Not within jurisdiction of our courts, and not taken into custody by police. They are enemies in a war and should be treated as such.

I would fear open trials because it would lead to highly paid lawyers and ignorant juries which could lead to free terrorists.

Isn't that the case with every trial? Sometimes the guilty go free. But better to set the guilty free than keep the innocent in prison without a trial

 

[theHawk]

Al Qaeda is in chaos and their leader is dead. That was the aim all along and they don't need to imprison these people anymore. I say let them go back to their countries.

Tell that to the four Americans that died in Libya.

 

[theHawk]

Terrorists by definition are criminals. Criminals get lawyers. Why would you fear open trials?

Because these terrorists are caught overseas by the military. Not within jurisdiction of our courts, and not taken into custody by police. They are enemies in a war and should be treated as such.

I would fear open trials because it would lead to highly paid lawyers and ignorant juries which could lead to free terrorists.

Isn't that the case with every trial? Sometimes the guilty go free. But better to set the guilty free than keep the innocent in prison without a trial

Why would you think that any of them are 'innocent'?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That is not the way we do things in this country. At least it is the way it used to be. If you have proof they are terrorists prove it in a court of law

No proof.....let them go

so where would you like to let them go? in their native countries? and if they won't accept them?


here?

What is the end game? Keep them in prison the rest of their lives for undisclosed charges? What would have happened if we tried them and sent them to prison for 20 years. What was the plan after 20 years?

By all means send them back to the countries they have citizenship in. What happens to other foreign prisoners after their terms are up? We deport them home

The Supreme Court has ruled the detainees are entitled to habeas and other due process rights, and initially many detainees were granted hearings. But recently the process has hit a logjam in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which has made a number of rulings on detainee cases which clearly conflict with the High Court’s intent:

Jonathan Hafetz, a professor at Seton Hall University School of Law who has represented a number of Guantanamo detainees including Salahi, said today’s [Court of Appeals] opinion significantly favors the government in ways the Supreme Court did not intend when it granted detainees the right to challenge detentions.

“The Uthman case cements the trend in the D.C. Circuit's decisions toward a broad and malleable definition of who can be considered ‘part of’ al Qaeda, combined with a highly deferential view of the government's interpretation of the facts,” Hafetz said, “In many cases, the result is indefinite detention based on suspicion or assumptions about a detainee's behavior.”

Appeals Court Makes It Easier for Gov&#8217;t to Hold Gitmo Detainees - ProPublica

Consequently, there’s little or nothing the president can do, as separation of powers doctrine allows the courts to address the issue as they see fit.

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

Terrorists by definition are criminals. Criminals get lawyers. Why would you fear open trials?

Because these terrorists are caught overseas by the military. Not within jurisdiction of our courts, and not taken into custody by police. They are enemies in a war and should be treated as such.

I would fear open trials because it would lead to highly paid lawyers and ignorant juries which could lead to free terrorists.

You’re still wrong; and post #47 is still there for you not to read again.

 

[rightwinger]

Because these terrorists are caught overseas by the military. Not within jurisdiction of our courts, and not taken into custody by police. They are enemies in a war and should be treated as such.

I would fear open trials because it would lead to highly paid lawyers and ignorant juries which could lead to free terrorists.

Isn't that the case with every trial? Sometimes the guilty go free. But better to set the guilty free than keep the innocent in prison without a trial

Why would you think that any of them are 'innocent'?

Our country is built on the premise you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If the government thinks them guilty, provide your evidence or set them free

That is the way the United States used to operate

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

Terrorists by definition are criminals. Criminals get lawyers. Why would you fear open trials?

Because these terrorists are caught overseas by the military. Not within jurisdiction of our courts, and not taken into custody by police. They are enemies in a war and should be treated as such.

I would fear open trials because it would lead to highly paid lawyers and ignorant juries which could lead to free terrorists.

There is no war. Rioters are caught by the military. Terrorists have been tried as common criminals before and it has worked out just fine.

You're a fear broker. A scaredy cat. A coward.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They have proven it, that's why they are there in the first place.

Doesn't surprise me though that you libs would love to see these terrorists get lawyers and show trials.

That is not the way we do things in this country. At least it is the way it used to be. If you have proof they are terrorists prove it in a court of law

No proof.....let them go

so where would you like to let them go? in their native countries? and if they won't accept them?


here?

stop trying to childproof the world mommie.

 

[AlexWA]

The Gitmo prison is an embarrassment and should have never been opened and used in the first place. You cannot arrest someone and hold them indefinitely as if they are some sort of property or prize. Either give them a fair trial in a U.S. court or release them.