Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Some Guy)   New York Times, 6/30/2006: "Bush should try GitMo detainees." New York Times, 9/6/2006: "We're glad Bush is trying GitMo detainees, but it doesn't really count"   (opinionjournal.com) divider line
33
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

351 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Sep 2006 at 4:14 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



33 Comments     (+0 »)
 
xiaodown
2006-09-07 2:55:53 PM  
you have to admit, it is kind of a meaningless gesture when it only came about because

1.) the supreme court told him what he was doing he couldn't do.
2.) these people have been held without trial or bail or notice of infraction for months, or years.
3.) At the same time, he's trying to get congress to pass resolutions to ensure that he can do whatever he wants to the towel heads in the name of homeland su'curidy.
 
kronicfeld
2006-09-07 3:06:43 PM  
Yes, that tag accurately describes the increasingly-wingnuttish Opinion Journal's article.
 
Mosey
2006-09-07 3:27:41 PM  
xiaodown: you have to admit, it is kind of a meaningless gesture when it only came about because

Not meaningless, just forced hand. Doesn't make it wrong, or bad, and if they were calling for it, they should still be approving it, appluding it is happening (placing credit can be sperate if they like, I guess).
 
flaEsq
2006-09-07 3:35:25 PM  
It is phoney urgency. James Tarantula continues his breathless whinging (and still needs a diaper change)
 
hillbillypharmacist
2006-09-07 3:35:33 PM  
I don't see a problem here. The administration doesn't deserve praise for something they were forced to do.

It is good that the prisoners are going to get a taste of justice. It was not the administration's will.
 
SchlingFo
2006-09-07 3:36:47 PM  
Mosey,

Doesn't make it wrong, or bad, and if they were calling for it, they should still be approving it, appluding it is happening (placing credit can be sperate if they like, I guess).

Applaud?

Fark no. I don't applaud my friends for not breaking the law.

That's what they're supposed to do.
 
kmmontandon
2006-09-07 3:46:56 PM  
hillbillypharmacist: The administration doesn't deserve praise for something they were forced to do.


Especially since they're determined to essentially rig the trials - military tribunals have much laxer standards of evidence, and far fewer rights for the accused, than civil courts.
 
Fark It
2006-09-07 4:18:09 PM  
The current conservative court is not hostile to law enforcement or presidential power. But it is proving to be admirably protective of individual freedom and the rule of law. Rather than continue having his policies struck down, President Bush should find a way to prosecute the war on terror within the bounds of the law.

Yeah, those damn lieberals at the NYT are so goddamned unreasonable, it's a wonder Bush has been able to do his job as well as he has.
 
priestrape
2006-09-07 4:22:15 PM  
I only clicked on this thread to make that annoying, noise-making "ZAP" banner ad on the front page go away.

/please continue
 
dfenstrate
2006-09-07 4:24:58 PM  
Time and Time again, republicans are shown that it's pointless to try to please liberals.

They'll move the goalposts, every single time.
 
whidbey
2006-09-07 4:26:33 PM  
dfenstrate: Time and Time again, republicans are shown that it's pointless to try to please liberals.
 
A Dark Evil Omen
2006-09-07 4:26:36 PM  
Yes, they are apparently acknowledging that they've been violation US and international law for years and are starting to cut down and actually sort of kind of follow some laws after being forced, shoved, and threatened with losing their cushy jobs in November. What do they want, a farking cookie?
STFU and GBTW and call me when you're not crooked instead of just mostly crooked instead of completely crooked
 
Thrag
2006-09-07 4:30:51 PM  
dfenstrate: They'll move the goalposts, every single time.

That's just pathetic. The goal posts have not been moved, it's just that the administration is trying to make crossing their own 20 yard line seem like a goal.
 
kronicfeld
2006-09-07 4:43:34 PM  
"Clean your room."

"I refuse to clean my room."

"Clean your room or you're grounded."

"Okay, okay, I'll clean my room." [Throws baseball glove in closet] "Now give me a cookie for cleaning my room!"

"You don't get a cookie. You only cleaned your room because I forced you, and even then, you've done a piss-poor job of cleaning it."

"You keep shifting the goalposts!"
 
st_gulik
2006-09-07 4:44:41 PM  
Mosey: Not meaningless, just forced hand. Doesn't make it wrong, or bad, and if they were calling for it, they should still be approving it, appluding it is happening (placing credit can be sperate if they like, I guess).


Do you smile and applauded the asswipe doing 35 on the freeway who finally got out of your way in the eft lane!? NO, you call them an idiot for sitting there for so long. Same Here.
 
st_gulik
2006-09-07 4:45:49 PM  
dfenstrate: Time and Time again, republicans are shown that it's pointless to try to please liberals.

They'll move the goalposts, every single time.


The IRONY is that the SUPREME COURT Knocked Bush on His Ass in their Rulling because he was doing EXACTLY this in his keeping of said prisoners. Literally, the term Moving the Goalposts was used.
 
inFARKshun
2006-09-07 4:45:51 PM  
whinging

How is this word pronounced? Win-jing? Wing-ing? Or is it pronounced just like whining? Why-ning?

/no sarcasm, just curious
 
inFARKshun
2006-09-07 4:46:38 PM  
nevermind, I got off my lazy arse and checked
 
SacriliciousBeerSwiller
2006-09-07 4:48:09 PM  
It's a good thing that the administration was forced, kicking and screaming, to take these actions.

It's just silly that Bush is posturing and acting like he had a choice in the matter.
 
Gosling
2006-09-07 5:16:49 PM  
Exactly. If Bush wasn't being forced to comply, he wouldn't be doing this at all.
 
milk_plus
2006-09-07 5:26:35 PM  
If you try them in a court that isn't legal then why bother?

I want to see them punished after they are found guilt in a fair trial but we're doing this Alice in Wonderland style with the punishment first and then a joke of a trial.
 
Code_Archeologist
2006-09-07 5:47:34 PM  
dfenstrate
Time and Time again, republicans are shown that it's pointless to try to please liberals.

They'll move the goalposts, every single time.

The goalposts never moved. We just insist that the game be played by the farking rules.
 
LocalCynic
2006-09-07 6:02:18 PM  
You know that the conservative chattering class is wrong when they can only resort to bashing the New York Times.

I realize that conservatives have a hard on for going after symbolic things, but seriously. This is about as rational as writing an article blaming the American flag for failing to support tax cuts.
 
Executive Monkey
2006-09-07 6:09:03 PM  
I'm tired of Newsmax-reading chumps criticizing the New York Times. I would caution them that doing so only makes them look stupid, but I doubt they care. Stupidity is probably a badge of honor in their clique since it proves you aren't a university professor, a "Darwinist," or a member of the "cultural elite."

Ugh, I feel dirty just for using those quoted terms.
 
Executive Monkey
2006-09-07 6:16:07 PM  
dfenstrate

Time and Time again, republicans are shown that it's pointless to try to please liberals.

They'll move the goalposts, every single time.

I have one word for you: Iraq. The GOP has changed the goalposts for our war in Iraq so frequently that it doesn't even know how to score anymore. The best the GOP can cough up is "stay the course" until it's the problem of the upcoming Democratic president and Congress.
 
pvd021
2006-09-07 6:20:12 PM  
Its called Statutes of Limitation. These guys have been more than just violated. I'm pretty sure some or many of them are badasses trying to destroy american forces but I'm sure there's a couple guys who are more or less innocent.

Still you lock a guy up for 4-5yrs no trial, then say ok we can have a trial now.

Just think back to those days when Americans placed the Japanese American in those camps during the 2nd world war.
 
aquanaut
2006-09-07 7:55:54 PM  
It doesn't count in their military kagaroo court BS . . . Try the terrorists in a federal court and hold them in a prison in the USA, not Cuba or Bush's secret prisons. Wake up people, why do you think they are secret? What are they hiding if everythings on the up and up? Torture, my friend, torture.
 
aquanaut
2006-09-07 8:02:14 PM  
Bush wants his military trial to have the clause that the suspect charged may not see the evidence against him . . .
welcome to hell, Amerikka
 
Korovyov
2006-09-07 8:08:47 PM  
pvd021 --
Habeas corpus, methinks.
 
IlGreven
2006-09-07 10:28:46 PM  
kronicfeld is our Internet Winner of the moment!

/Here's yer tube!
 
RminusQ
2006-09-07 10:38:03 PM  
pvd021: Just think back to those days when Americans placed the Japanese American in those camps during the 2nd world war.

Some conservatives (Malkin comes to mind) still think those were the days.

kronicfeld: "You don't get a cookie. You only cleaned your room because I forced you, and even then, you've done a piss-poor job of cleaning it."

Ten points.
 
Mentat [TotalFark]
2006-09-07 10:47:00 PM  
"If you do the right thing for the wrong reasons, the work becomes corrupted, impure, and ultimately self-destructive."
 
Superjoe
2006-09-08 11:37:20 AM  
Please change "Some Guy" to "Opinion Journal" so I know not to bother in the future, subby

Why does Firefox not list the link source on scrollover?
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments


Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

More Fark for your buck

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.