Obama mulls "indefinite" jailtime without trials or charges for suspected terrorists
 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090514...20090514105450

WASHINGTON (AFP) ? As part of its plans to close Guantanamo Bay, the Obama administration is considering holding some of the detainees indefinitely and without trial on US soil, US media reported Thursday.

President Barack Obama's "administration is weighing plans to detain some terror suspects on US soil -- indefinitely and without trial -- as part of a plan to retool military commission trials that were conducted for prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay," The Wall Street Journal said


-------------------------------------------------------

I dont get how any sane person could think this is right.

I'm not saying let these guys go , but why can't they just make a new law, try them and convict them.

They must have some actual reason to keep these people. If not then why are they so afraid of them. How is it possible they could be so dangerous they cant ever let them go yet no reason why they are so dangerous. If they are dangerous why not charge them with it.

reminds me of the "charge kids as adults" thing , that always pisses me off. Lets charge cats as dogs because cat laws are too leniant.. gee why not make cat laws more harsh.

there's that clause in the Constitution about ex post facto laws. We aren't supposed to make laws retroactive and prosecute people based on that laws when what they did was before the law was passed.

I saw drop them in the ocean midway between Cuba and Florida and let the sharks sort them out, but that's probably one of the reasons I'm not president, lol

Wasn't one of his selling points that keeping these people without a fair and expedient trial was illegal and wrong? What's the point of closing the Bay if you are simply moving it to another location?

I'm confused... I'm not seeing this great "change" everyone told me to believe in.

but... but.... but ... I thought black jesus was going to make everything fair in the world? I mean... we are talking about someone who practiced Constitutional Law.... who promised justice and to uphold the law. This was one of his biggest campaign promises to all us believers and non believers in the messiah.

without even knowing if they did anything wrong ?

i see no reason that couldn't be an appropriate punishment but only after we convict them.

as far as the Constitution, they are already in violation of it and any non trial indefinite punishment would definately be in violation of it.

Meet the new boss....same as the old boss :(

there is a massive difference in knowing what they did wrong and allowing them to have habeas corpus rights, and making any and all evidence a matter of public record which obviously includes militar intelligence, intelligence gathering techniques, interrogation techniques, who knows what, when they knew it and what they know and so on and so on and so on.

there is a reason that they were held at guantanamo to begin with and the issue is massively complex and certainly not as simple as Obama either believed it was or wrongly claimed it was during his campaign.

Yeah this sucks. There needs to be a way to let these people have their "day in court" as it were, and get it all over with.

Quit being such an asshole.

Don't want indefinate jail time? Don't do stupid shit...

I really think you guys should give black jesus... lecturer of Constitutional Law a chance. He's obviously going to protect everyone's rights under the Constitution. After all, he was just saying he was looking for empathetic Supreme Court nominees.


Change you can believe in!

Weird, when Oblabla does it, none of the in-house communists complain :2 cents:

would be nice to know WHAT they consider " stupid shit " :winkwink:

if one of your loved ones was arrested and whisked away to jail for the rest of their life, you would probably want a bit more of an answer than " they did some stupid shit"

They Violated sections of the patriot act..

If he's going to hold them like that, then why bother closing Guantanamo Bay?

You realize these people aren't American citizens right? They were snatched from other countries, mostly Afghanistan if I remember correctly.

Last time I checked citizens of other countries weren't subject to U.S. law.

because he put himself in this conundrum by also promising to close Guantanamo Bay as one of his first orders of business. he also acted on that once he got elected.

it was just one more campaign promise that was made without even beginning to think of the practical issues involved.

Amazing how you can be pissed off at him for being both too liberal, and too conservative, on the same issue.

Seems to me like you're going to bash Obama no matter what he does, which is pretty retarded.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:thumbsup

He is more mocking the liberal stance than he is the conservative stance.

One of his big campaign issues was closing Guantánamo because it was so terrible and basically illegal... was it not? Or am I making that up? Now he is essentially saying that "hey wait a minute... I guess that isn't as easy as I wanted it to be... let's back up and hold the people instead because I, like the prior idiot, can't figure out WTF to do with them."

I don't really care what happens to those people. Their home countries don't want them, they really should not be on our home soil because it basically is "illegal detention", nobody else wants them... WTF do we do with them? Nobody knows. He should not have made such outlandish promises when it was at that time already pretty clear that closing the base was not as simple as shutting doors.

No.. I don't care about Obama. I don't care about Bush. It's not that at all. It's the simple fact that they ARE ALL two sides of the same coin.. and they can only keep doing this stupid shit because people won't wake the fuck up.

It's not about who is President... its about the idiotic masses lining up like they are watching Jesus walk on water and ignoring the obvious facts to the contrary... that's quite the dilemma. Can't defend Bush... but of course, no one will criticize Obama for the same shit.


funny you're not offended that you were lied to about a key campaign promise.... and his continuation of Bush Administration practices and policies.

Change!

Perhaps you missed my other posts in this thread where I take issue with what he's doing.

You seem to have selective sight in these threads. Just like in my Wal-Mart thread where I was saying alot of good things about Wal-Mart, but, because you know I'm a liberal on most issues, you kept accusing me of hating Wal-Mart specifically and free markets in general, even though I said nothing of the sort. In fact, I said the exact opposite.

So now, again, you assume that I'm going to back Obama on this because I voted for him or whatever.....but the fact of the matter is I don't like this decision, and he's going to get alot of heat from liberal groups over this.

My problem with this kind of shit is people like you make it personal. With your retarded comments about black jesus and the messiah and shit like that. As if all 69 million people who voted for Obama agree with him 100% of the time on 100% of the issues and were in some sort of trance when they pulled the lever.

If pisses me off that you have to insult me every time the guy I voted for does something you don't like....and what's even worse, this time, you're insulting him and me for doing something YOU APPARENTLY AGREE WITH.
So why should anything you say matter, when no matter what the President does, you're going to talk shit about it?

Amen.... I would amend that to say don't do stupid shit when you don't have a government to back you up. If you do stupid shit in the name of the Saudi government, fuck yeah, they will back you up and do their best to make sure you don't get "indefinite jail time".... doing it on your own or in the name of your revolutionary group (i.e. al queda, islamic jihad, etc). Who's gonna cover your ass when you get caught?

I think the stupid shit in this case was taking on the American War machine in Afghanistan after we were attacked on our home soil. If you don't shoot at the Americans/coalition troops and you leave them alone, I am guessing they won't detain you and keep you for indefinite periods... <sarcasm>just my opinion on that one.. could be wrong of course</sarcasm>

Amen again... Bush was an idiot about many things and got totally skewered for it, however, current idiot in the post.... Hey.. let's give the guy a chance shall we? Sorry, President is a job that doesn't allow that kind of thinking. You campaign on what you will do. Follow through and take the heat or change your mind and take the heat, but WTF is with everyone giving out free passes cause the guy has only been in office for 4 months? Hell, he was a Senator for goodness sake. He actually had access to 99% of the things he is in charge of now. It's not like it's all new to him.

Does the Constitution apply to non-US citizens/residents?

That's the problem here. It doesn't, but the Bush administration also claimed the Geneva convention didn't apply to them because they're not calling them prisoners of war, but "enemy combatants"

So these guys are in a legal netherworld where there are no rules and no power they can appeal to. That's a big moral problem for America.
The law of averages and just large numbers says that at least some of these guys aren't guilty of anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, but they have never had their day in court.

I hope that some process is developed so that these guys can be tried, and then either sentenced or set free. :2 cents:

FWIW

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124223286506515765.html

It appears as though the WSJ used the word "indefinitely" not the administration. Apparently that word was used because no date was given by the administration for when the military commission trials will take place.

So you can read one paragraph and decide that he's locking them up and throwing away the key, or you can read the whole thing and realize that this move is part of a plan.

and that Yeah, how dare he consult congress and the military about what to do? If Bush taught us one thing it's that you fire generals that disagree with you and that congress doesn't matter. WTF is up with this Obama dude anyways? :1orglaugh

They're already training the Police how to deal with regular Americans like Terrorist. Who wants the Police to have the power to come grab you in the middle of the night and lock you away somewhere? Like they did to the 15y/o nerdy white kid. I mean whats next?

All this smells like Fascism to me. I don't like it.

Training Boy Scouts how to be little Fascist Pigs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us...s.html?_r=2&hp

You guys are really brain washed by this Obama character to see what America is turing into.:2 cents:

if thats what you call the fact that i don't read and re-read every reply in a thread.. uhmm.. ok. i have other things to do.


from my perspective thats very much what it is. as he was ramping up his campaign against hillary et al... his popularity was exploding... and he was saying nothing. he said literally nothing but "hope" and "change"... no one even know what that meant... all they knew is they wanted something that was the polar opposite of Bush... and that is how his popularity grew. If Hillary wasn't a mean, calculating, cold blooded shrew... she could have stood a chance. If McCain didn't look like a muppet from a star wars movie, he might have stood a chance. At the end of the day, the good looking guy with the best line of bullshit won.


get over it. its a message board called Go Fuck Yourself... not a message board called Hugs and Bunny Rabbits.

i don't agree with him at all. his mistake was making the promise to shut down Guantanamo simply because that was what his supporters wanted to hear and it was symbolic in "change" from Bush policies. But that promise was made with what seemed to be no consideration for the complexities of the situation, legal and otherwise.

his decisions today are due to the fact that now he has to confront those complexities in what he wanted everyone to believe was a simple black and white issue and is basically in a position where he has to continue policies and there is no outrage. There was a lot of outrage against Bush.. but no outrage at Obama for the same thing. At least Bush was just a retarded hick. Obama is a Constitutional Lawyer and has no excuse

1) i don't want other people telling me what they are entitled to
2) i don't want a government that reinforces the idea of entitlements
3) i don't want government taking more of my money
4) i want a government that is tough on terrorism and has a policy shaped by the realities on the ground rather than fantastic feel good campaign promises
5) i don't want a government that props up failing companies
6) i don't want a government that raises taxes.
7) i don't want stronger unions
8) i don't want more spending on eduction since parents don't care enough to get involved in their own child's education and teachers unions leave no incentive to teachers to perform
9) i don't want a government voting to spend trillions as if its monopoly money

Pretty much everything i dislike about government, Obama represents. But that's not his fault. That's Republicans fault. However hypocrisy and lies ARE his fault. Just as Bush's were his. I am a pretty conservative guy and its also worth pointing out that in spite of how you want to stereotype my views... Bush was FAR from conservative.

These are just my opinions... just as your opinions are yours. Some day, when you are the one actually creating these jobs, having your wealth taken and having employees constantly tell you what they deserve (which never stops no matter what you give) you will understand some of the other sides of these issues.

that yahoo article is completely misleading

Bravo!
:thumbsup

Sig.

Snake Doctor:

If you install that way-cool vbulletin plugin for firefox that StuartD wrote, you can make people that annoy you simply disappear.

You can make them evaporate... and never ever see them on your screen again. Its the best shit ever.

Step down, sir.

http://boost.files.wordpress.com/200...oapbox-pic.jpg

Yes he said that he would close GITMO but never did he say that upon closing GITMO all of the detainees would be released. It has never been the intention to release all of the detainees.

Then maybe you could go easier on the insulting people for positions they don't hold. Mmmmmkay



That's bullshit. If you think that's all he was saying, then you weren't listening, or you were getting a version that was filtered through a bullshit right wing source like Rush or Hannity.

At first, the dig on him was that he was too professorial, and too much of a policy wonk. Then later he started giving the "inspirational speeches" as a counterbalance.

He had a fuck of a lot to say about specific policies and proposals. From day 1 until the final day, you just weren't listening because you knew it was all liberal shit you wouldn't like anyways.

Hillary wasn't the only one in the race. There were like 14 friggin candidates early on, they had like 20 debates altogether. There were plenty of people to choose from for the democrats.

You act like the reason Obama won was because people had nobody else to choose from. This was the most crowded field I've ever seen, on both sides.


Tough shit, he won, live with it.

If you're going to bitch about everything he does that you don't like, maybe you could give your bitch bone the day off when he does something you actually agree with....but instead you bust his balls about that too.


There you go with your retarded fucking assumptions again. Any tax increase Obama levies will be felt by me the same as you. I am fortunate enough to be one of those top 2%. I own my own business, I have employees. I have also previously worked in a management position with a company that had union employees and had to follow union rules.

You're just as fucking pompous and retarded as 12clicks when you ASSume that everyone who votes democrat or supports unions "just doesn't get it" or must be a poor person looking for a handout, or whatever other bullshit you tell yourself so that you don't have to give the other side credit for having a valid argument for their position.

Thats like saying they broke the " dont break the law" law. Perhaps they could elaborate on what they actually did not what lawbook they may or may not be in violation of. And as far as i am aware most of them haven't been convicted of violating the patriot act only accused of violating the patriot act

then it should be an open and shut case , try them and convict them if crimes were comitted , and start by telling us what crimes were comitted. As far as i am aware no afghani's took part in 9/11 , they are the ones being "attacked on home soil"

Either or , detaining someone indefinately for defending their own country is kinda silly, we dont even treat murderers that harshly . Should all the american military be held indefinately in jail in afghanistan for the countless civilians that were "attacked on their home soil"

the long and the short of it is none of the people there have broken any law. If they have they should be tried and convicted of it.

These guys got caught up in it check out their story:
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/albania801/

There have been hundreds and hundreds released without trial...because it was determined that they were not a threat to the USA or any other country. Several of those in that group have been either killed or recaptured as they returned to battle/terrorist activities.

There are around fifty or sixty that are currently determined not to be a threat and we would like to release them but at this point in time no country (including their home country) will accept them.

The reason others have been held without trial is because there has been years of legal battles in the courts...up to and including the Supreme Court...as to the legality of trial by Military Tribunals as set up by the previous administration. Recently...due to Supreme Court rulings a few have been tried and convicted and I assume there will be others tried and convicted. The wheels of justice often turn slowly and there is nothing new about that.

There may be a few that will never be tried but still held indefinitely as apparently it has been determined that to give them a trial could affect our national security. At some point I expect that this will be given further consideration and all will either be tried or released without trial as hundreds of others have.

The law that has been violated is international in nature. The detainees at GITMO are not members of an organized military of any country and yet were on a field of battle and in theory engaged in/assiting battle which precludes them having the status of POW's. They are civilian "enemy combatants".

:2 cents::2 cents::2 cents:

This whole problem would have been avoided if they had shot the non-uniformed enemy combatants on sight like they have done in previous wars. Nevertheless Obama is doing the right thing detaining them so he should be applauded for that. Obviously it is very hypocritical of him considering all of his irresponsible campaign rhetoric but it is the right thing nonetheless.

this is an interesting part about all this and the overblown issue of "torture" - there is continually less and less incentive to capture someone on the battlefield and take them somewhere to be interrogated vs just putting a 9mm round through each knee cap and get what info you need and then putting a round in their head to avoid all the unpleasant headaches of actually taking them into custody.

Spoken like a true humanitarian.

Yeah, this whole "torture" thing is overblown. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

How dare the U.S. follow international law and abide by the treaties they've signed? We should just shoot people who are surrendering from now on.

Damn you're a tool.

I think when everything under the sun is being called "torture" like sleep deprivation or water boarding or any other totally harmless technique to get information - then we place ourselves at a further disadvantage.

The whole issue of "torture" is retarded and Obama releasing Bush memos to incriminate the Administration knowing damn well that no one can address anything because its classified was pretty low.

And you know what? Fuck the law. The law, as always is being used against us. this is not an issue of law enforcement... This is a war. The law did nothing to prevent this shit from happening. The law did not allow Clinton to arrest Osama after many repeated attempts to get other governments to hand him over. The law doesn't slow people down who are ready to die for what they believe in. In war, there is a winner and loser. That is all. I would rather be on the winning side than watch another 9/11 happen because you got your way and placed the entire government and our troops and the public at a major disadvantage.

The problem is not how the administration deals with these people, the secret CIA interrogation facilities etc.. the problem is that they allowed the public to know that they are doing the shit they do.

The ACLU is fighting for the release of more pics showing prisoners being treated badly... it was obviously wrong and shouldn't have happened.. however, the ACLU is doing it at the expense of US and NATO soldiers and all of the innocent people who will die as a direct result of placing a nice, new recruiting tool in the hands of Al Queda. The "Law" isn't always "whats right". This is something new that "the law" didn't foresee. and just as your messiah found out once he started getting top level briefings... its not so black and white and its not such an easy problem to deal with.

The biggest problem of the USA is that we love to go around preaching democracy and freedom and we should just shut the fuck up, take these people out and tell the world "hey, sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do"

You show me Al Queda and other terrorists/terrorist groups adhering to "the law" and i'll happily support the notion that we should do the same.

Anybody notice what happened to the Brits while they played by "The Rules" and the Colonists did whatever the fuck they wanted to try and ensure military wins?

Didn't work out so well for the Brits, did it? Feels like the good ol US of A is playing by The Rules a little too much and has forgotten that often times you have to play dirty to come out on the right side of the battle.

Just saw on the news that the President is reinstating trial by military tribunal for the detainees at GITMO. He had previously stopped the trials by military tribunal for review. They will begin again with certain changes in the trial procedures.

In other news the House passed a bill giving the administration 80 plus billion in supplemental funding to persue the conflict in Afganistan and Iraq. The Senate is working on its own supplemental bill for the same purpose.

Fuck the law? Well there you have it, your philosophy in a nutshell.

We don't mistreat prisoners, not just because it's the moral thing to do, but because mistreating prisoners puts our troops at risk.

We don't blow holes in the kneecaps of people who surrender. You know why? Because if we do, then nobody will surrender anymore, they'll fight to the death, and that will cost more American lives.

You are obviously an idiot when it comes to these matters, and you should stop talking about them because you're embarrassing yourself.

This macho cowboy bullshit of yours was the problem with the last President, and now we've got a fuck of a big mess to clean up because of it. How about you cowboys stay the fuck on the ranch from now on and we'll let the "elitist Harvard liberal snobs" deal with this shit from now on....mmmkay?

obviously i meant within the context of fighting terrorism.

Yeah right. Islamic fundamentalists would never hurt a captured US soldier. You're totally correct in your typical, feel good, out of touch with reality, liberal comment.

I'm happy we can now expect radical fundamentalists to stop cutting off the heads of soldiers and security and civilians and aid workers and truck drivers, since apparently we just cause them to do it.

uhmm.. .they are not only "fighting to the death" - they consider it their duty to do so.... so again, you further demonstrate how totally out of touch with REALITY you are on this issue.

how many Guantanamo Bay detainees were released and recaptured on the battlefield or became suicide bombers or carried out terrorist attacks?


Really? Bush made 9/11 happen? I'm pretty sure that was simply one of a series of terrorist attacks against the USA ... you might have quickly forgotten that since the bulk of them happened during a democratic presidency

and try to keep in mind that treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue is what enabled these people to continue attacking and planning attacks.

How about this... how about you wake the fuck up, get a grip on reality and simply admit that this issue is very complex, there is no easy answer and current law is not adequately equipped to deal with this ... AND OBAMA LIED TO YOU