If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Miami Herald)   Obama administration releases list of Guantanamo's 'indefinite detainees', 48 men who will never stand trial nor go free   (miamiherald.com) divider line 152
    More: Scary, Obama, Guantanamo, GUANTANAMO BAY NAVY BASE, Obama administration, Human Rights First, Nashiri, Yale Law School, indefinite detention  
•       •       •

1999 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Jun 2013 at 8:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



152 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-17 07:01:49 PM  
Send them home. If they try to attack us kill them, if not let them herd goats or whatever if is those people do.
 
2013-06-17 07:07:20 PM  
Dangerous people are released All The Goddamn Time.
 
2013-06-17 07:09:40 PM  
There was supposed to be a TFA quote, there.  Eh well.
 
2013-06-17 07:15:35 PM  
Yeah America! All those years of not making the "who tortures" list and the "keeps political prisioners" list are behind us!

/see haven't made the "people disappear" list, unless we are that good!
 
2013-06-17 07:16:24 PM  

whither_apophis: Yeah America! All those years of not making the "who tortures" list and the "keeps political prisioners" list are behind us!

/see haven't made the "people disappear" list, unless we are that good!


/still haven't...
 
2013-06-17 07:20:19 PM  
I assume the list includes Lex Luthor, General Zod and Braniac?

/I mean... these must be supercriminals, right?
 
2013-06-17 07:22:53 PM  
Terrorists should be executed instead of being given free cable.
 
2013-06-17 07:46:13 PM  
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss
 
2013-06-17 07:52:44 PM  
"Many of the detainees designated for prosecution can only be prosecuted in civilian court," she said. "So unless Congress lifts the restrictions banning their transfer they are effectively 'indefinite detainees.' "

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/17/3456267_p2/foia-suit-reveals-gu a ntanamos.html#storylink=cpy
Hmmm...
 
2013-06-17 07:54:16 PM  
because the evidence was too tainted.

Torture. Go America!
 
2013-06-17 08:01:47 PM  
johnbardi.edublogs.org
 
2013-06-17 08:12:02 PM  

flucto: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss


Ummm no. The administration has tried to bring them to NYC for trial and the House GOP keeps raping the chicken.
 
2013-06-17 08:12:39 PM  

cman: [johnbardi.edublogs.org image 525x301]


The names were assembled because the Obama administration was working to shut down GITMO and, of course, the Obama Administration actually released the names instead of hiding behind national security and ignoring it.

So, I would say this is most definitely change for good. Seeing as how the last Administration captured, tortured, and ignored the rights of these men which put us in this goddamn f*cked up situation to begin with.
 
2013-06-17 08:13:04 PM  
Guantánamo is the most farked up thing we've done against everything we claim to stand for since the Japanese internment camps.
 
2013-06-17 08:14:01 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: I assume the list includes Lex Luthor, General Zod and Braniac?

/I mean... these must be supercriminals, right?


Yup. Way too dangerous to be incarcerated on American soil, what with their scary Muslim supervillain powers.
 
2013-06-17 08:14:23 PM  

djkutch: "Many of the detainees designated for prosecution can only be prosecuted in civilian court," she said. "So unless Congress lifts the restrictions banning their transfer they are effectively 'indefinite detainees.' "

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/17/3456267_p2/foia-suit-reveals-gu a ntanamos.html#storylink=cpy
Hmmm...


Not to mention that their detention and conditions pretty much guarantee that they would be released by any civilian court. They can't be tried here, or rather, if we do attempt to try them here, we essentially just have wait for their attorney to file for their release, and then we send them off, and then let them open up a civil suit for damages.

THIS is what the rush to make these folks "enemy combatants" has done. Not really a legal term, since there is no state of war, no nation state involved, and pretty much, folks declared that jurisprudence and legality were moot, so we have folks in Gitmo, we can't try, we can't let go, and folks cheered when this idiocy was first proposed, and now that the fallout has come around, folks are breaking out their shocked faces.

Had we made this a criminal matter, years ago, we could have them in Florence ADX quietly sitting in cells and going mad, or serving lesser sentences elsewhere, without fanfare, or actually try them and come to the conclusion that they were maybe not horrible folks who thirsted for the blood of innocents, but that's the thing: these folks can't really have a day in court, because the special status and circumstances of their capture and detention violated every damn principle of our legal system, and some of you mouth breathing idiots are STILL cheering this situation on.

Easier to stay out, than get out. And in this case, we could have avoided getting into this mess fairly easily, by simply following our own mandates and procedures. But no, that was boring. That was not EXCITING enough for folks, it didn't sing that we were going to the DANGER ZONE!  Had we just done some halfway decent police work, these cases would be fairly easy to discern, but nope, we mucked it all up, and now we have folks who we can't try, we can't release, and we're on the hook for caring for, and hiding away for the rest of their mortal days, and even China and the former Soviet states must be laughing, because they never apologized for their treatment of dissidents, they never double talked their way into convincing the public that it was for their own good that they flouted their own laws. So, please, O Brave Pioneers, explain to us how this is going to work in our favor in any realm of fashion, and still retain any semblance of honor or dignity?

In order to take the moral high ground, you must actually occupy that territory first, and in this case, where honor and dignity might be preserved, we're pretty much down to ritual suicide, Lambytoes...
 
2013-06-17 08:17:39 PM  

Mugato: Guantánamo is the most farked up thing we've done against everything we claim to stand for since the Japanese internment camps.


I dunno...I'm sure  My Lai Massacre is up there somewhere.

fusillade762: Way too dangerous to be incarcerated on American soil, what with their scary Muslim supervillain powers.


This is the part that bothers me the most. ADX Florence has been used for terrorists for 20 years.
In fact, I'm pretty sure it has (and currently) housed foreign citizens captured on foreign soil that have been charged/convicted of terrorism.

The bedwetting terror that the GOP has displayed over bringing them to America is only laughable to the point where you realize the real reason is because we tortured these men and they would be released in our court of law.
 
2013-06-17 08:25:21 PM  
Just farking execute them if we're going to keep up with this farce of supposed justice.

This is the same thing only over decades.
 
2013-06-17 08:26:13 PM  

cman: [johnbardi.edublogs.org image 525x301]


Yes, because Obama should pull out his magical time machine and use his Jedi Mind Trick to cause Bush and Company to NOT use extraordinary rendition and ask for "enemy combatant" status be used on criminals?

It staggers the mind how obtuse and asinine one human can be, nearly 98% of the time. Please, let's make this partisan issue, because THIS list, it hasn't changed since the Bush years. And we've KNOWN that folks will never be able to be released, and have known this for some time, and oddly enough, some of us even realized this as soon as the "enemy combatant" tripe was bandied about, along with extraordinary rendition was used, that this was going to bite us on the ass. This is an issue that was created by a Congress and Administration that was afraid of due process, and now we are going to have to face that we've pooped in our own dog dish, but please, pass the buck along, because that will certainly help folks sleep better at night, instead of attempting to use some tiny modicum of thought.

What bothers me on this issue, is that for years, folks have been ignoring this very point. Again and again, but NOW it is suddenly an issue, and looking to blame someone, they turn to the guy who was left with this stinking pile of kuso, instead of the festering and diseased Shetland pony that shat it out, and left it in Gitmo all this time...
 
2013-06-17 08:29:13 PM  

hubiestubert: cman: [johnbardi.edublogs.org image 525x301]

Yes, because Obama should pull out his magical time machine and use his Jedi Mind Trick to cause Bush and Company to NOT use extraordinary rendition and ask for "enemy combatant" status be used on criminals?

It staggers the mind how obtuse and asinine one human can be, nearly 98% of the time. Please, let's make this partisan issue, because THIS list, it hasn't changed since the Bush years. And we've KNOWN that folks will never be able to be released, and have known this for some time, and oddly enough, some of us even realized this as soon as the "enemy combatant" tripe was bandied about, along with extraordinary rendition was used, that this was going to bite us on the ass. This is an issue that was created by a Congress and Administration that was afraid of due process, and now we are going to have to face that we've pooped in our own dog dish, but please, pass the buck along, because that will certainly help folks sleep better at night, instead of attempting to use some tiny modicum of thought.

What bothers me on this issue, is that for years, folks have been ignoring this very point. Again and again, but NOW it is suddenly an issue, and looking to blame someone, they turn to the guy who was left with this stinking pile of kuso, instead of the festering and diseased Shetland pony that shat it out, and left it in Gitmo all this time...


WOW what undue rage

Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.
 
2013-06-17 08:30:14 PM  

cman: WOW what undue rage

Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.


And yet here you are with an idiotic "haha Obama" post.
 
2013-06-17 08:31:36 PM  

bulldg4life: cman: WOW what undue rage

Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.

And yet here you are with an idiotic "haha Obama" post.


So that means I am automatically a Republican who believes that Obama has a time machine that he used to bring his mom for some unknown reason to Kenya to give birth to him?
 
2013-06-17 08:32:10 PM  

cman: Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.


How very rugged. Who'd you vote? Obama or Romney?
 
2013-06-17 08:35:19 PM  

djkutch: cman: Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.

How very rugged. Who'd you vote? Obama or Romney?


Gary Johnson

How about you?
 
2013-06-17 08:35:46 PM  
The fact that you people agree with eachother about this travesty, yet bicker at eachother in some retarded missing contest is how this kind of thing happens.
 
2013-06-17 08:38:01 PM  

cman: So that means I am automatically a Republican who believes that Obama has a time machine that he used to bring his mom for some unknown reason to Kenya to give birth to him?


No. It just means you are acting like an idiot looking to make a joke. So, you either have a ridiculously bad sense of humor or you are a silly partisan that knee jerks to blaming Obama for no apparent reason whatsoever.
 
2013-06-17 08:46:15 PM  

cman: hubiestubert: cman: [johnbardi.edublogs.org image 525x301]

Yes, because Obama should pull out his magical time machine and use his Jedi Mind Trick to cause Bush and Company to NOT use extraordinary rendition and ask for "enemy combatant" status be used on criminals?

It staggers the mind how obtuse and asinine one human can be, nearly 98% of the time. Please, let's make this partisan issue, because THIS list, it hasn't changed since the Bush years. And we've KNOWN that folks will never be able to be released, and have known this for some time, and oddly enough, some of us even realized this as soon as the "enemy combatant" tripe was bandied about, along with extraordinary rendition was used, that this was going to bite us on the ass. This is an issue that was created by a Congress and Administration that was afraid of due process, and now we are going to have to face that we've pooped in our own dog dish, but please, pass the buck along, because that will certainly help folks sleep better at night, instead of attempting to use some tiny modicum of thought.

What bothers me on this issue, is that for years, folks have been ignoring this very point. Again and again, but NOW it is suddenly an issue, and looking to blame someone, they turn to the guy who was left with this stinking pile of kuso, instead of the festering and diseased Shetland pony that shat it out, and left it in Gitmo all this time...

WOW what undue rage

Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.


Then you weren't paying attention when it was floated around, in pieces, long before then. PATRIOT was steaming pile. And that's the problem. It's not a Conservative or Liberal issue, it's the simple fact that blaming THIS President for the staggering stupidity of a Congress and Executive office that had NO idea how pursue folks that they'd gotten files upon and warnings about, time and again, is what is not not undue rage--it is illustrating the exact partisan bullsh*t that removed me from the GOP's ranks, because it's f*cking stupid. It has been about obstructionism for years, and GW's own idiocy and his own obstinacy about listening to anything said to him by anyone who had been appointed by Clinton got us into this mess, along with a terrified and cowed Congress that rubberstamped crap that had been circulating for years in pieces as authoritarian wet dreams, and folks said, "Yeah, let's DO THIS!"

And NOW they're upset about the NSA? NOW folks are upset about trying folks detained at Gitmo and realizing that they CAN'T be? You, simply put, in one single image, everything that has been wrong about this entire situation. From the start.

Had GW put down the partisan bullsh*t for a moment, and realized what he had been warned about, and oddly enough, Franks' policies were instituted a bit late to the game, since we had smoking rubble. I'm sorry, but in a bald faced move to shift attention away from the trainwreck that we've been facing with our justice system, not to mention the economic fallout, the privacy debacles, and the lives destroyed both here and abroad, you don't get to say, "Hey it was just a joke" because it only illustrates the culpability of citizens who've pretty much ignored this, and let it boil over on the backburner for years, and NOW folks want to point fingers? Just admit that you're a partisan hack who hasn't had the stones to think beyond the lines, and get it over with. Just admit that you haven't really thought about much other than My Side/Your Side.

And maybe if we'd been doing that more as a nation, we might not have gotten into this idiocy in the first place. WE did this. Not Obama. Not Bush. Not Cheney. Not Rumsfeld. WE ALL did this, and we are ALL culpable. We allowed this travesty to go forward, and now that we can't really deny what folks have been warning us about for over a f*cking decade, NOW folks want to point fingers?

Point them at yourselves. Point them at all of us, because we let it happened, and a LOT of folks cheered. Congrats. This is the result. Happy? We got EXACTLY what we wanted, and now we don't want it anymore, and we can't take it back.
 
2013-06-17 08:48:05 PM  

cman: djkutch: cman: Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally, but I turned against it in 2006 BEFORE Bush left office.

How very rugged. Who'd you vote? Obama or Romney?

Gary Johnson

How about you?


The rational choice without throwing my vote away. But, I live in Arizona, so really I threw my vote away.

How about the Republicans get behind someone like Gary Johnson? If you voted for him, you're saying the Republicans didn't offer anyone you could consider. He may be a Republican, but the party didn't take him seriously.
 
2013-06-17 09:00:49 PM  
You know it was just a couple of days ago that the House voted once again for not allowing the closure of GITMO.  Perhaps, if the members of the House - who, by virtue of shorter terms are more accessible to their constituents and thus more likely to push for what their constituents want - value fair trials for all, they should allow the facility to close and push for trials for every inmate.  I'm sure this legislation will be presented any minute now.  Yep, any minute now.  Huh.  I wonder if the problem is with the House or....the constituents.

Checks and balances are supposed to work.  Don't like indefinite detainees?  Push for change.  Don't stop until there is.  Or you can allow your representatives to keep ignoring you.
 
2013-06-17 09:00:59 PM  

cman: Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally...


I love how you act like that will surprise anyone.
 
2013-06-17 09:02:22 PM  
Guantanamo needs to go away, and soon.  Its very existence is an affront to America.
 
2013-06-17 09:02:33 PM  
Give them all cancer and send them home.
 
2013-06-17 09:04:40 PM  

bulldg4life: The names were assembled because the Obama administration was working to shut down GITMO and, of course, the Obama Administration actually released the names instead of hiding behind national security and ignoring it.


Let's be clear here - they were required to release the names, this wasn't some special act of transparency by Obama.

FTA:
The Miami Herald's Carol Rosenberg, with the assistance of the Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic at the Yale Law School, filed suit in federal court in Washington D.C., in March for the list under the Freedom of Information Act.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/17/3456267_p2/foia-suit-reveals-gu a ntanamos.html#storylink=cpy
 
2013-06-17 09:04:41 PM  

djkutch: The rational choice without throwing my vote away.




I don't understand why people do this.
You should vote for who you want to win, not who a political party says has a winning chance.
 
2013-06-17 09:05:12 PM  
Farking Bush!

/Oh wait...
 
2013-06-17 09:10:58 PM  

gadian: You know it was just a couple of days ago that the House voted once again for not allowing the closure of GITMO.  Perhaps, if the members of the House - who, by virtue of shorter terms are more accessible to their constituents and thus more likely to push for what their constituents want - value fair trials for all, they should allow the facility to close and push for trials for every inmate.  I'm sure this legislation will be presented any minute now.  Yep, any minute now.  Huh.  I wonder if the problem is with the House or....the constituents.

Checks and balances are supposed to work.  Don't like indefinite detainees?  Push for change.  Don't stop until there is.  Or you can allow your representatives to keep ignoring you.


I'm waiting for Obama to say "As Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces, I am ordering all military personnel to unlock the cells, and then get on a plane out of Guantanamo. I may not be able to close it, but I can make damn sure that there's nobody there to operate it. Now the base and prisoners are Cuba's problem. Good night, and God Bless America."
 
2013-06-17 09:13:36 PM  

Uzzah: I'm waiting for Obama to say "As Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces, I am ordering all military personnel to unlock the cells, and then get on a plane out of Guantanamo. I may not be able to close it, but I can make damn sure that there's nobody there to operate it. Now the base and prisoners are Cuba's problem. Good night, and God Bless America."


That would be awesome.  I can just imagine the heads exploding from that particular bit of trolling.
 
2013-06-17 09:15:14 PM  
Pardon and release. Obama has the power he has the touch
 
2013-06-17 09:15:53 PM  

Phony_Soldier: Farking Bush!

/Oh wait...


Nope, it's the recent congresses that have been too chickenshiat to sign off on moving the detainees to the US for trial.  The Obama administration has had a raging boner to try these guys in court, and congress gave them the finger.  Bush and the cowering post-9/11 congress started this ugly stone down the curling lane, true---but ever since then rightwing assholes have been out there with the little brooms making sure that the stone just keeps going and going because they know what we will find when we actually try these guys in court is going to be bad.  Like a finding a dead skunk under your porch bad.
 
2013-06-17 09:16:27 PM  

cman: I was for the Patriot act originally


Disgusting.
 
2013-06-17 09:16:28 PM  

The Why Not Guy: cman: Guess what? I was for the Patriot act originally...

I love how you act like that will surprise anyone.


Nice cherry pickings there
 
2013-06-17 09:17:52 PM  

way south: djkutch: The rational choice without throwing my vote away.

I don't understand why people do this.
You should vote for who you want to win, not who a political party says has a winning chance.


Unskewed polls called it for Romney. How'd that work out?

I voted for Obama because Romney would have been a disaster I didn't want to experience. Voting for Johnson would have been symbolic.
 
2013-06-17 09:18:35 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Terrorists should be executed instead of being given free cable.


You have evidence that they're terrorists beyond "They're in Gitmo, therefore they're guilty"?

Oh, wait, of course you don't. You're just a worthless shiat-and-quit troll.
 
2013-06-17 09:20:21 PM  

cman: [johnbardi.edublogs.org image 525x301]


Hey look! The guy who TRIED TO CLOSE GITMO IN HIS FIRST TERM.

But since this ISN'T a dictatorship, he needs the Legislative Branch to support it, and THAT'S when the narrative began that these men weren't "common" criminals (like the Unabomber, Jeffery Dahmer, Richard Ramirez, Timothy McVeigh et al), but some kind of SUPER TERROR CRIMINALS who would IMMEDIATELY break out and convert all our women to Islamo-Fascism!

/not to make this a partisan issue
 
2013-06-17 09:20:46 PM  

Hetfield: cman: I was for the Patriot act originally

Disgusting.


Look, he got better. Some people still haven't. Some people learn at a slower pace than others.

/Also, you're supposed to reward good behavior. Give him a treat when he does right. Don't yell at him for past mistakes, he doesn't understand why you're upset NOW.
 
2013-06-17 09:20:56 PM  

cman: [johnbardi.edublogs.org image 525x301]


what the fark is actually wrong with you
 
2013-06-17 09:21:46 PM  
Still can't find a tear in my beer
 
2013-06-17 09:23:21 PM  
Bonzo_1116
Nope, it's the recent congresses that have been too chickenshiat to sign off on moving the detainees to the US for trial. The Obama administration has had a raging boner to try these guys in court, and congress gave them the finger.

Then the only remotely Constitutional thing to do would be to release them. That's what happens when people that you just know must be guilty of something can't be brought to trial. They walk.
 
2013-06-17 09:24:30 PM  
So here's what I've heard:

Option 1: The War on Terror is actually "The Police Action on Terror".  These guys are criminals, who we have arrested.  Problem is that since we haven't been so hot about "proper chain of evidence" in the interests of preventing another 9/11, we can't win a trial.  They're (almost certainly) guilty, and we can prove it, but all the evidence we have to prove it is inadmissible or can't be stated publicly for fear of compromising intelligence operations.

Option 2: We're at war.  Under the Geneva Conventions, they're illegal combatants, and legally, we can give them a not-terribly fair trial, and legally shoot them as spies.  Also, legally, any civilian casualties are the fault of the unlawful combatants (see: francs-tireurs).*  Of course, this only tends to piss off EVERYONE, from the nearby civilians to the press at home.

Option 3: Wishy-washy.  We'd really prefer not to have the downsides of Option 1, and we REALLY want these guys locked up where they can't plot more attacks.  At the same time, just shooting them tends to be counter-productive.  So we capture the guys we can (and then give them not terribly fair and secret trials that don't end with us shooting them), drone the guys we can't in the interests of preventing another 9/11, and keep the guys we do capture in a deep, dark hole where they can't do us any harm.

We're pretty much doing Option 3.

*From wiki: The Geneva Conventions established new protocols, namely, according to Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949, francs-tireurs are entitled to prisoner-of-war status provided that they are commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates, have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry arms openly, and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
 
2013-06-17 09:24:44 PM  
djkutch
I voted for Obama because Romney would have been a disaster I didn't want to experience.

"All tactics and no strategy is noise before defeat" - Sun Tzu
 
Displayed 50 of 152 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report