Obama Weighs Indefinite Detention Of Terror Suspects On U.S. Soil

Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is weighing plans to detain some terror suspects on U.S. soil -- indefinitely and without trial -- as part of a plan to retool military commission trials that were conducted for prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Read the whole story: Wall Street Journal

Comments

[fallout4U]

Obama Breaks Major Campaign Promise as Military Commissions Resume, Says Amnesty International

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20090515.DC17891&show_article=1

[Icomeinpeace]

Hey dittohead, how's that change thing going. Bwaaaahahahaha

[iSeeDumbPeople]

Little-known military thug squad still brutalizing prisoners at Gitmo under Obama:

http://www.alternet.org/rights/140022/little_known_military_thug_squad_still_brutalizing_prisoners_at_gitmo_under_obama/

[battlinbob]

I love it.... You all are finally seeing the light... Hes not in charge. Bush was never in charge, nor was Clinton... All puppets...

[Heyman]

Obama has let me down.
First of all...These "terror" suspects did NOT blow up the WTC towers. That was OUR government.
Secondly. The Pentagon was taken out by a cruise missile. Not no 757.
And last, but not least. A U.S. Fighter pilot got a medal for shooting down the jet over PA.
Obama is lying like the last administration.
He won't get my vote next election.
In fact? I may give up voting forever. And I've voted for over 30 years. Our democracy is a scam. Bought by bankers and corporations.
Screw both of them.

[thenorthshore]

aclu is drooling to set these guests at gitmo free.

barry didn't think too hard on this decision.

[mitsie]

I cannot believe that people actually believe this article, without thinking about the possibilty that these people are terror suspects, who have been abused or tortured, and their cases will be thrown out of federal court. Do you want them free in your town or city?

[mitsie]

Again, all you nay sayers are rushing to judgement about this President and his ideas to abide by the Constitution. You want everything done NOW, you can't WAIT. For God sakes, this man has been in office less then six months. His Attorney General had to represent cases in court, that were initiated BEFORE he took office. In these cases, he had to go along with what direction the legal system was going. SECOND, no one SAID that these terror subjects would not have legal representation or trials, he is only CONSIDERING military tribunals.

YOU seem to forget it takes TIME to review these laws, to change policies etc. DO YOU WANT THESE TERRORISTS LET OUT OF JAIL, BECAUSE THEY WERE TORTURED? Knowing that these same men will kill us without a second thought. Of course he has to think about all his options, and that's for our safety. IF YOU WANT TO BLAME ANYONE BLAME BUSH.

[mitsie]

You might know the WSJ, twists the headline and the article around. If there are war tribunals those terror suspects will have trials. I also don't believe that the President would do away with the promise he made to abide by the constitution. If this was true, you would be seeing this all over tv and in all the papers. Again, Murdock has his hands in this.

[Eidolas]

Right, because headlines and articles would never be twisted or misleading here.

[gino618]

I don’t want to make an apology for anybody, but in 2002, it wasn’t 2006, 07, 08 or 09. It was right after 9/11, and there were in fact discussions about a second wave of attacks.

[digeridoo]

What the what? Next thing you know he'll be okay with waterboarding...

[mitsie]

Consider the source of who wrote the article. It does not say, they won't be tried at all. Don't you think if he agreed to keep terror suspects forever, it would not be breaking news?

[digeridoo]

??? "Don't you think if he agreed to keep terro suspects forever, it would not be breaking news?" What the heck does that mean? I think it would be breaking news. I think it is breaking news. I think Obama is following the Bush methodology, with some minor tweaks. Lame.

[naschkatze]

I changed my voter registration from N/A to Democrat in 2008 in order to vote in the Democratic primary. Can any of you Democrats give me a good reason why I should not revert to N/A status? Obama has completely disappointed me on constitutional issues I expected him to weigh in on, I am very leery about what's going to happen on the war front, and the Democratic Congress, with a real majority now, cannot put an end to out of control credit card practice or help Main Street in this economic crisis rather than Wall Street. What difference is there between the wolf (GOP) and the wolf in sheep's clothing?

[Pinchy]

I guess when they took charge, they realized the war on terror really wasn't dreamed up by Bush/Cheney. Now they realize if they do everything they said they would do during the election, that they would be releasing terrorists into society that would just turn around and attack us again.

At least they have some sense to rethink their agenda.

[SammyD]

not seeing much difference myself. Nothing seems to be changing-at least for the good.

[mitsie]

These terrorists if tortured or abused, can walk. He has to consider all his options. These people want to kill us.

[miller4me09]

Atleast people are starting to see Obama as he really is, a smooth talking politician. He's an idealogue just like every other politician, its just a lot of people bought in on his ideology. Now that he see the reality of the situation, he's starting to understand his ideology isn't practical. Thats why he's doing a lot of things the exact same way as Bush, because it worked.

[mitsie]

No he's weighing his options because these are terror suspects.

[AnnArky]

HOPE?

NOPE!

[scooperss]

*adults in charge*
I've been hearing that for months.
Pfffft.
Change we can believe in.
Pfffft