Wall Street Journal:
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration said Tuesday it may continue to imprison non-U.S. citizens indefinitely even if they have been acquitted of terrorism charges by a U.S. military commission.
The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times : Obama Stays the Course on Bagram
Lawyers for Gitmo detainees endorse Obama - 2008 Presidential ...
Siding with Bush, Obama says Afghan detainees have no U.S. rights ...
Obama Not Ruling Out Releasing Gitmo Detainees In U.S.
Obama may hold detainees indefinitely - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Everything Obama said he was going to do has gone back to what the previous president did. I'm v. disappointed in him.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.), who has scheduled a Wednesday hearing on military commissions before the House Judiciary subcommittee he heads, questioned the administration's plan to allot prisoners to federal courts, military commissions or indefinite detention.
"What bothers me is that they seem to be saying, 'Some people we have good enough evidence against, so we'll give them a fair trial. Some people the evidence is not so good, so we'll give them a less fair trial. We'll give them just enough due process to ensure a conviction because we know they're guilty. That's not a fair trial, that's a show trial," Mr. Nadler said.
---
Yeah.. that DUFUS Gerry Nadler... holding hearings on a PHONY story.
He conveniently forgets is the third option ... plenty of evidence that is not admissable and thus not conclusive by US civilian standards of evidentiary discovery.
We know that many of these guys are pure evil ... but they weren't Mirandized.
They were TORTURED.
Why do you HATE our system of justice?
OT
What ails HP? A moment ago there was a new main, the headline was: 'Massive Cyber Att@ck Knocks Out Government Wesites Starting On July 4'. It was about a purpoted cyber att@ck by either North Korea or supporters of North Korea, possibly China. Sc@riest thing I've read in months.
Now all of a sudden the headline has switched back to the one for this article (this thread we are on now). Either HP decided it wasn't quite comfortable with its source for the North Korea one, or it's doing revisions, or...
???
Lets face it: HP is unstable.
*purported*
*websites*
Thanks, BSM.
Does this same logic apply to "homegrown te rror ists"?
Ask Jose Padilla.
i'm not so sure he can answer anymore.
Of course not,else todd Palin will be in GITMO never to leave
Trampling with the law to to guarantee my security is not permissible ,I expect real changes.
What law was broken? be specific.
4th Amendment...
10th Amendment...
Hamdi v Ashcroft....
What was the quote from Condi Rice again...
"And so by definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations ..."
US may not release acquitted detainees,there,it that happens ,the law is broken.
Is it just a convention billybob that we don't lock up the acquitted?
I say trample away to guarantee mine, my family's, and yours, too.
"I say trample away to guarantee mine, my family's, and yours, too."
Yep the Republican motto, sacrifice liberty for security. Our founders are rolling in their graves.
i neither need nor want the "protection" of someone who takes away my rights and freedoms and then tells me "it's for my own good." that is the way of a C0WARD.
now, take your blankey, put on your superman jammies, and go back to hiding under the bed.
Forget his. He doesn't want any part of that. Cost savings baby.
Exactly what are you proudly conserving, your own southern orifice?
Oh, I get it now...
The United States used to be an exemplary, independent land of laws, with civil rights and liberties protected under the Constitution.
Now, it's just an ailing totalitarian empire, but with an attractive black president cast for the role following Hollywood's example over years of elaborate disaster movies we're not supposed to notice. Hey, I believed in Obama too. I thought my meager donations mattered. I was a fool. Goldman Sachs financed his campaign, and the return on investment for them has simply been fabulous.
The transition is going to hurt, so give the suckers an Obama balm.
What was once the essential core of democracy is now merely our surface "brand image." What was one an unprecedented republic is now a reprivate--bought up, controlled, and dismantled like a third world banana republic. In order to facilitate that process, the old safeguards must be quietly nullified under false pretenses, stuffed into the fine print of, say, The Patriot Act and assorted other legislative winners.
Yes, the transition has some awkward bumps, as when a few still-sentient citizens spit up their coffee over the morning paper upon realizing "the state" can keep anyone locked up, courts and Constitution be damned. But, in time, folks will adjust.
They always do.
Incremental powerlessness. Enjoy.
Good times!
if we "adjust" to such a ludicrous idea, then we deserve what we get.
the only people who seem to be willing to "adjust" are from the right.
The Dutch (Netherlanders) have a saying:
"You can get used to anything...even hanging!"
Show'n up here every day.
here's a radical idea......
let's REDO one of the things bill clinton did RIGHT and add our signature to the treaty ratifying our membership in the international criminal court.
then, since these people come from several different nations, why don't we present our case to that international panel of eighteen judges, and find out if these people are guilty of any crimes? if any of them are convicted, then so be it. but the innocent will be released immediately.
then, when we are done with them, we can get the REAL criminals in this mess in front of that SAME court, and try to regain some of our integrity as a nation, since we seem to be too chickensh*t to enforce our OWN laws on our OWN soil.
EXCELLENT!!!!
We can do the RIGHT thing by those whom we wronged.. & get BUSH, CHENEY, RUMSFELD, et al some justice of their OWN!
Why would America allow another court to have more authority within its borders than the Supreme Court? Good left wing thinking.
Why should we be immune to International Law?
because our signature on the geneva conventions and the nuremberg accords is still valid. contrary to bush"think" the president does NOT have to power to unilaterally rescind our signature from international laws.
many of these people in detention are from other countries, NOT this one.
and the international criminal court is located in ROME, ITALY. that is definitely not within our own borders.
For the same reason we want to impose in others.
what would you think if another country would detain american citizens assuming they're, or could be, a -potential- "threat", while publicly declaring they've done nothing they should be tried for?
How can people (let alone military) support such a shame?
Today Us drones killed many pakistani citizens in the pretext of killing talibans. How can obama justify this?
Yeah.... which one of your "cousins" was hit?
If those people trained in camps, carried AK's, RPG's, IED, claimed to want to do harm to the other country and was in that country to do that harm and the US was not at war with that country then they can have them. They would be terrorists.
PROVE it in a COURT of LAW.
Now that Obama has a war to call his own, he's really feeling his oats.
LOL - H P switched mains already.
Wonder if it was something I said. All I did was insinuate that they are compromising their principles for profits gained by recycling old news and fabricating overly dramatic headlines. Although I did shorten most of that down to one word.
Does that word start with a B and end with a T and does it have ullshi in the middle?
No - it was a hyphenated word. First part was 'click'. I don't think they had a problem with that.
Second part began with a 'w' and specifically referred to the compromising of principles for money. I think the kids now days have shortened it down to just 'ho'.
No - it was a hyphenated word. First part was 'cli,ck'. I don't think they had a problem with that.
Second part began with a 'w' and specifically referred to the compr,omising of princi,ples for money. I think the kids now days have shortened it down to just 'h o'.
They just switched back.
People...
STOW the "divide & conquer" crap... it's DEMEANING, it's PATRONIZING, & it BELITTLES us ALL.
It is our DUTY as AMERICANS & as LIBERALS to hold our leaderships FEET to the FIRE when we feel they are making a MISTAKE.
This is NOT a "phony story"..... that NONSENSE sounds like the tinfoil brigade is here.
Too many RELIABLE outlets are reporting the same story...
JONATHAN TURLEY is commenting on it.. I NONE of you can be SERIOUS in thinking that "A" he's "in on the subterfuge" or "B" gullible enough to swallow it as the truth.
GERALD NADLER is holding Committee Hearings TODAY addressing this VERY ISSUE..
Is he ALSO a dupe or complicit in the false story??
PLEASE...
President Obama is a GREAT man.. & will be one of our GREATEST Presidents.. but if he allows this to happen, he is making a TERRIBLE mistake.
The third category of detainees includes those who have been ordered released by the courts. Now, let me repeat what I said earlier: This has nothing to do with my decision to close Guantanamo. It has to do with the rule of law. The courts have spoken. They have found that there's no legitimate reason to hold 21 of the people currently held at Guantanamo. Nineteen of these findings took place before I was sworn into office. I cannot ignore these rulings because as President, I too am bound by the law. The United States is a nation of laws and so we must abide by these rulings.
I don't believe President Obama has turned to breaking the law by detaining people who have been found not guilty indefinitely as the article says, I do feel that he is between a rock and a hard place when trying to place some of the detainees, and when trying to have a fair trial for others because of the terrible way they were detained in the first place, I don't believe the article is false, I just believe that parts of it are misleading. here is the Presidents National Security speech...read it for yourselves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.text.html?pagewanted=5&_r=1
Agreed... yet listening to the JAG testimony... there is AMPLE room for genuine concern here.
Ok Obama BOtt, let me remind you, he is under the rules of law that pertain to the geneva convention. He as a lawyer knows the rules of law apply here and he has to release them, or be considered an accomplice. His excuses of we have nowhwere to put them is a crock. Hello, can you say Rikers, or any of the other major prisons in the USA that house prisoners with decent treatment? The excuses don't hold water. Who is he covering for and why? What do they have on him that is so bad he refuses to follow the geneva convention? We are talking serious violations here. I no longer buy into anything this man says or does. nada. He is clearly bought and owned by corporate America, the republicans and has no intention of repairing any of the damage Bush and Cheney caused this country and our people. Both politically, financially, ethiclly, morally. This proves it.
Divide and Conquer - Works only if you fall for it.
Oh.... STOP already...
You don't WANT to believe it... that's all you have.
He won't be one of our greatest Presidents. Honestly he looks like he will go down as a whichever way the wind blows type of President. Say 1 thing to 1 group of people and say something different to another.
Once he win re-election and no longer has to worry about winning a campaign then I suppose we'll see the change...
I believe that this WSJ article and anyone who believes it is full of it, especially considering that the same owner owns the network that hosts Bill0, H@nnity, and Glenn Beck.
If I am proven wrong on this, I'll enjoy eating my humble cr0w and join many of you expressing outrage over President Obama on Constitutional issues, but I believe it is too soon to be expecting our President to overturn eight years of Bush Constitutional messups in only six months.
In the end, we all want our President to succeed and do the right things, but we don't need to be crying wolf every single time it appears he is making decisions that are against our best interests... Rome wasn't built in a day, and didn't burn down in a day either.
Instead of raising the red flag in panic, we should be contacting and emailing the White House expressing concern... I plan to do that myself.
Let's work WITH the President, not AGAINST him... he has shown and proven that unlike his predecessor, he is a man of integrity, he is able to listen to both his supporters and critics, and wants to do the right things for we the people who voted him in... and as he stated before, if he himself is wrong, then in 2012 we'll have a new President, he seems pretty confident that he will succeed.
Sorry, RR, but you're wrong on this one.
While the WSJ might be slanting this a bit to suit their far-right owner, it is true---unfortunately.
You are one of many Obama supporters that will go down to the wire supporting this man and his policies even when copious amounts of contradiction are placed next to his campaign promises. Of course, calling the White House and calling Obama out on this stuff is the right thing to do, but the man is on a roll doing the opposite of what he ran on. That is not integrity.
Can somebody remind me again why we are closing Gitmo? Oh ... that's right. A naive campaign promise to the world.
Great job Barry ...
The fact that you use "Barry" makes everything else you say moot.
Why? He called himself that for twenty years. Until he got to Harvard and realized that Barrack was more "edgy".
The fact that its drbillybob makes everything else moot. :)
co sign
Yes! We need to call the propagandists on their bull every chance we get!
Does the "great job" apply as well to Defense Secretary Robert Gates when he endorsed it?
Because it was wrong to open in the first place.
Another thought has occurred on this matter ... perhaps, the powers to be think that these releasd terrorist ... but who have been determined to have been wronged by the US as in innocent of any crime or wrong doing. I suppose a world court investigation could help move things along in main-street thought. We really need to access these goings on!
It's clear that the administration is afraid of the propaganda value of these people. Boy ... do they have stories to tell ... that could be difficult for the public to swallow ... considering that these are innocent people! Now, here's the only solution for these people. The US guarantees to each of these individuals 5 million dollars and sends them to fum-buck America ... how about Alaska! Tell them they've got a new life and keep them quiet for as long as the possible ... that won't be long! You've screwed up boys!
Release all detainees to the care of:
S & T Palin Corp.
1234 Moose and Squirrel Ave.
Wasilla, Ak 65432
We have that thing about "cruel & unusual punishment"....remember?
I had some issues trying to get out of Costa Rica one time.
Loading comments…
Posted: 07- 7-09 09:18 PM