Gitmo is FUNDAMENTALLY UNAMERICAN Update @ 178 (1 Viewer)

[Mello]

We are a nation of cowards

We are for 10 years, a nation of cowards

What are we suppose to do release a bunch of people because they were not Mirandadized on the battlefield? Lots of these crimes were committed overseas. We have no evidence that is submittable in a civilian trial. The guy the masterminded the Cole plot, what are you going to do, release him because our laws don't allow the kind of evidence collected by CIA working with foreign governments. We have the 20th 9-11 bomber. Let him go too? Our courts and rules were not made to cover situation of international terrorism.

Thats the 2 choices either let them free or keep them detained in Cuba? No other options exist?Oh and btw there was no 20th 9/11 bomber. It does, however, seem that 1/2 dozen or so people are called that.

Do tell.

We stop acting like scared girls and give them a public trial like every other person we accuse of a crime?

 

[StrikeS2k]

Obama at least has the right idea. Don't capture guys, just kill them. Gotta give the Obama Doctrine some props!

Yup. Just kill them. Even if they're American citizens.

 

[Sarnoff]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-finds-broad-support-for-obamas-counterterrorism-policies/2012/02/07/gIQAFrSEyQ_story.html?hpid=z4

Poll finds broad support for Obama’s counterterrorism policies

By Scott Wilson and Jon Cohen, Published: February 7

The sharpest edges of President Obama’s counterterrorism policy, including the use of drone aircraft to kill suspected terrorists abroad and keeping open the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, have broad public support, including from the left wing of the Democratic Party.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that Obama, who campaigned on a pledge to close the brig in Cuba and to change national security policies he criticized as inconsistent with U.S. law and values, has little to fear politically for failing to live up to all of those promises.

The findings also highlight the quandary for Mitt Romney and other Republican candidates, who have portrayed Obama as weak abroad and politically motivated in moving to end America’s two long wars.

Attacking Obama’s national security policies, the poll suggests, may do GOP challengers more harm than good when many Americans favor a national security approach that relies more on technology than troops. By a margin of more than 2 to 1, Americans say the president’s handling of terrorism is a major reason to support rather than oppose his bid for reelection.

The survey shows that 70 percent of respondents approve of Obama’s decision to keep open the prison at Guantanamo Bay. He pledged during his first week in office to close the prison within a year, but he has not done so.

Even the party base appears willing to forgive that failure.

The poll shows that 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats — and 67 percent of moderate or conservative Democrats — support keeping Guantanamo Bay open, even though it emerged as a symbol of the post-Sept. 11 national security policies of President George W. Bush, which many liberals bitterly opposed.

Obama has also relied on armed drones far more than Bush did, and he has expanded their use beyond America’s defined war zones. The Post-ABC News poll found that 83 percent of Americans approve of Obama’s drone policy, which administration officials refuse to discuss, citing security concerns.

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

 

[the moops]

a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party.

Shocking

 

[ren hoek]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-finds-broad-support-for-obamas-counterterrorism-policies/2012/02/07/gIQAFrSEyQ_story.html?hpid=z4

Poll finds broad support for Obama’s counterterrorism policies

By Scott Wilson and Jon Cohen, Published: February 7

The sharpest edges of President Obama’s counterterrorism policy, including the use of drone aircraft to kill suspected terrorists abroad and keeping open the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, have broad public support, including from the left wing of the Democratic Party.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that Obama, who campaigned on a pledge to close the brig in Cuba and to change national security policies he criticized as inconsistent with U.S. law and values, has little to fear politically for failing to live up to all of those promises.

The findings also highlight the quandary for Mitt Romney and other Republican candidates, who have portrayed Obama as weak abroad and politically motivated in moving to end America’s two long wars.

Attacking Obama’s national security policies, the poll suggests, may do GOP challengers more harm than good when many Americans favor a national security approach that relies more on technology than troops. By a margin of more than 2 to 1, Americans say the president’s handling of terrorism is a major reason to support rather than oppose his bid for reelection.

The survey shows that 70 percent of respondents approve of Obama’s decision to keep open the prison at Guantanamo Bay. He pledged during his first week in office to close the prison within a year, but he has not done so.

Even the party base appears willing to forgive that failure.

The poll shows that 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats — and 67 percent of moderate or conservative Democrats — support keeping Guantanamo Bay open, even though it emerged as a symbol of the post-Sept. 11 national security policies of President George W. Bush, which many liberals bitterly opposed.

Obama has also relied on armed drones far more than Bush did, and he has expanded their use beyond America’s defined war zones. The Post-ABC News poll found that 83 percent of Americans approve of Obama’s drone policy, which administration officials refuse to discuss, citing security concerns.

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

I'm not sure what's scarier, that the president has so easily assumed dictatorial power and invades other countries with killing machine robots (unchecked by congress of course), or how gleefully his own political party has accepted it. You guys realize that the stuff they're doing in the Middle East is a warmup for the stuff they're gonna do to us right? Population control.

 

[Fennis]

I'm not sure what's scarier, that the president has so easily assumed dictatorial power and invades other countries with killing machine robots (unchecked by congress of course), or how gleefully his own political party has accepted it. You guys realize that the stuff they're doing in the Middle East is a warmup for the stuff they're gonna do to us right? Population control.

tell us more

 

[Slapdash]

We are a nation of cowards

We are for 10 years, a nation of cowards

What are we suppose to do release a bunch of people because they were not Mirandadized on the battlefield? Lots of these crimes were committed overseas. We have no evidence that is submittable in a civilian trial. The guy the masterminded the Cole plot, what are you going to do, release him because our laws don't allow the kind of evidence collected by CIA working with foreign governments. We have the 20th 9-11 bomber. Let him go too? Our courts and rules were not made to cover situation of international terrorism.

 

[Sam Quentin]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-finds-broad-support-for-obamas-counterterrorism-policies/2012/02/07/gIQAFrSEyQ_story.html?hpid=z4

Poll finds broad support for Obama’s counterterrorism policies

By Scott Wilson and Jon Cohen, Published: February 7

The sharpest edges of President Obama’s counterterrorism policy, including the use of drone aircraft to kill suspected terrorists abroad and keeping open the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, have broad public support, including from the left wing of the Democratic Party.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that Obama, who campaigned on a pledge to close the brig in Cuba and to change national security policies he criticized as inconsistent with U.S. law and values, has little to fear politically for failing to live up to all of those promises.

The findings also highlight the quandary for Mitt Romney and other Republican candidates, who have portrayed Obama as weak abroad and politically motivated in moving to end America’s two long wars.

Attacking Obama’s national security policies, the poll suggests, may do GOP challengers more harm than good when many Americans favor a national security approach that relies more on technology than troops. By a margin of more than 2 to 1, Americans say the president’s handling of terrorism is a major reason to support rather than oppose his bid for reelection.

The survey shows that 70 percent of respondents approve of Obama’s decision to keep open the prison at Guantanamo Bay. He pledged during his first week in office to close the prison within a year, but he has not done so.

Even the party base appears willing to forgive that failure.

The poll shows that 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats — and 67 percent of moderate or conservative Democrats — support keeping Guantanamo Bay open, even though it emerged as a symbol of the post-Sept. 11 national security policies of President George W. Bush, which many liberals bitterly opposed.

Obama has also relied on armed drones far more than Bush did, and he has expanded their use beyond America’s defined war zones. The Post-ABC News poll found that 83 percent of Americans approve of Obama’s drone policy, which administration officials refuse to discuss, citing security concerns.

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

just goes to show that even liberals don't believe their own crap that they spew all over

 

[Sarnoff]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

just goes to show that even liberals don't believe their own crap that they spew all over

Modern American politics has devolved to nothing more than sports. For both sides, it's just Red Sox vs. Yankees. One side spews hate at Gitmo, the Patriot Act, the handling of the economy, cozying up to Wall Street, Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, and Johnny Damon for years. Then dress them up in pinstripes and they'll cheer them as loud as they can as soon as they walk on the field for their side.

Actually, it's nothing really new--"We've always been at war with Eastasia."

 

[Sam Quentin]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

just goes to show that even liberals don't believe their own crap that they spew all over

Modern American politics has devolved to nothing more than sports. For both sides, it's just Red Sox vs. Yankees. One side spews hate at Gitmo, the Patriot Act, the handling of the economy, cozying up to Wall Street, Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, and Johnny Damon for years. Then dress them up in pinstripes and they'll cheer them as loud as they can as soon as they walk on the field for their side.

Actually, it's nothing really new--"We've always been at war with Eastasia."

How many "conservatives" are upset about Guantanoamo now?

A whole lot a faux outrage from the left so that they could get their trillion dollar payout from Obama and the taxpayers.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

I think Glenn Greenwald has it right:
The Democratic Party owes a sincere apology to George Bush, **** Cheney and company for enthusiastically embracing many of the very Terrorism policies which caused them to hurl such vehement invective at the GOP for all those years. And progressives who support the views of the majority as expressed by this poll should never be listened to again the next time they want to pretend to oppose civilian slaughter and civil liberties assaults when perpetrated by the next Republican President (it should be noted that roughly 35% of liberals, a non-trivial amount, say they oppose these Obama policies).

One final point: I’ve often made the case that one of the most consequential aspects of the Obama legacy is that he has transformed what was once known as “right-wing shredding of the Constitution” into bipartisan consensus, and this is exactly what I mean. When one of the two major parties supports a certain policy and the other party pretends to oppose it — as happened with these radical War on Terror policies during the Bush years — then public opinion is divisive on the question, sharply split. But once the policy becomes the hallmark of both political parties, then public opinion becomes robust in support of it. That’s because people assume that if both political parties support a certain policy that it must be wise, and because policies that enjoy the status of bipartisan consensus are removed from the realm of mainstream challenge. That’s what Barack Obama has done to these Bush/Cheney policies: he has, as Jack Goldsmith predicted he would back in 2009, shielded and entrenched them as standard U.S. policy for at least a generation, and (by leading his supporters to embrace these policies as their own) has done so with far more success than any GOP President ever could have dreamed of achieving.

 

[Sarnoff]

Been two years since the last bump. Haven't been paying attention. This all got settled & closed up, right?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

I think Glenn Greenwald has it right:
The Democratic Party owes a sincere apology to George Bush, **** Cheney and company for enthusiastically embracing many of the very Terrorism policies which caused them to hurl such vehement invective at the GOP for all those years. And progressives who support the views of the majority as expressed by this poll should never be listened to again the next time they want to pretend to oppose civilian slaughter and civil liberties assaults when perpetrated by the next Republican President (it should be noted that roughly 35% of liberals, a non-trivial amount, say they oppose these Obama policies).

One final point: I’ve often made the case that one of the most consequential aspects of the Obama legacy is that he has transformed what was once known as “right-wing shredding of the Constitution” into bipartisan consensus, and this is exactly what I mean. When one of the two major parties supports a certain policy and the other party pretends to oppose it — as happened with these radical War on Terror policies during the Bush years — then public opinion is divisive on the question, sharply split. But once the policy becomes the hallmark of both political parties, then public opinion becomes robust in support of it. That’s because people assume that if both political parties support a certain policy that it must be wise, and because policies that enjoy the status of bipartisan consensus are removed from the realm of mainstream challenge. That’s what Barack Obama has done to these Bush/Cheney policies: he has, as Jack Goldsmith predicted he would back in 2009, shielded and entrenched them as standard U.S. policy for at least a generation, and (by leading his supporters to embrace these policies as their own) has done so with far more success than any GOP President ever could have dreamed of achieving.

Worth noting.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizens role in a democracy.

I think Glenn Greenwald has it right:
The Democratic Party owes a sincere apology to George Bush, **** Cheney and company for enthusiastically embracing many of the very Terrorism policies which caused them to hurl such vehement invective at the GOP for all those years. And progressives who support the views of the majority as expressed by this poll should never be listened to again the next time they want to pretend to oppose civilian slaughter and civil liberties assaults when perpetrated by the next Republican President (it should be noted that roughly 35% of liberals, a non-trivial amount, say they oppose these Obama policies).

One final point: Ive often made the case that one of the most consequential aspects of the Obama legacy is that he has transformed what was once known as right-wing shredding of the Constitution into bipartisan consensus, and this is exactly what I mean. When one of the two major parties supports a certain policy and the other party pretends to oppose it as happened with these radical War on Terror policies during the Bush years then public opinion is divisive on the question, sharply split. But once the policy becomes the hallmark of both political parties, then public opinion becomes robust in support of it. Thats because people assume that if both political parties support a certain policy that it must be wise, and because policies that enjoy the status of bipartisan consensus are removed from the realm of mainstream challenge. Thats what Barack Obama has done to these Bush/Cheney policies: he has, as Jack Goldsmith predicted he would back in 2009, shielded and entrenched them as standard U.S. policy for at least a generation, and (by leading his supporters to embrace these policies as their own) has done so with far more success than any GOP President ever could have dreamed of achieving.

I agree with Greenwald some of the time and disagree with him some of the time, but he seems like a good all-around guy. I'm completely fine with Gitmo so I know we differ there, but he's absolutely right in his interpretation of the Obama years.

 

[Fennis]

Been two years since the last bump. Haven't been paying attention. This all got settled & closed up, right?

Nope, no one has the political backbone to take on a losing issue. Instead, yet again, the country suffers.

 

[Sarnoff]

Modern American politics has devolved to nothing more than sports. For both sides, it's just Red Sox vs. Yankees. One side spews hate at Gitmo, the Patriot Act, the handling of the economy, cozying up to Wall Street, Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, and Johnny Damon for years. Then dress them up in pinstripes and they'll cheer them as loud as they can as soon as they walk on the field for their side.Actually, it's nothing really new--"We've always been at war with Eastasia."

Still as right as ever.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Modern American politics has devolved to nothing more than sports. For both sides, it's just Red Sox vs. Yankees. One side spews hate at Gitmo, the Patriot Act, the handling of the economy, cozying up to Wall Street, Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, and Johnny Damon for years. Then dress them up in pinstripes and they'll cheer them as loud as they can as soon as they walk on the field for their side.Actually, it's nothing really new--"We've always been at war with Eastasia."

Still as right as ever.

Actually it's occurred to me for some time the network news and news networks sound a lot like ESPN's patter.

 

[cstu]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

I think Glenn Greenwald has it right:
The Democratic Party owes a sincere apology to George Bush, **** Cheney and company for enthusiastically embracing many of the very Terrorism policies which caused them to hurl such vehement invective at the GOP for all those years. And progressives who support the views of the majority as expressed by this poll should never be listened to again the next time they want to pretend to oppose civilian slaughter and civil liberties assaults when perpetrated by the next Republican President (it should be noted that roughly 35% of liberals, a non-trivial amount, say they oppose these Obama policies).

One final point: I’ve often made the case that one of the most consequential aspects of the Obama legacy is that he has transformed what was once known as “right-wing shredding of the Constitution” into bipartisan consensus, and this is exactly what I mean. When one of the two major parties supports a certain policy and the other party pretends to oppose it — as happened with these radical War on Terror policies during the Bush years — then public opinion is divisive on the question, sharply split. But once the policy becomes the hallmark of both political parties, then public opinion becomes robust in support of it. That’s because people assume that if both political parties support a certain policy that it must be wise, and because policies that enjoy the status of bipartisan consensus are removed from the realm of mainstream challenge. That’s what Barack Obama has done to these Bush/Cheney policies: he has, as Jack Goldsmith predicted he would back in 2009, shielded and entrenched them as standard U.S. policy for at least a generation, and (by leading his supporters to embrace these policies as their own) has done so with far more success than any GOP President ever could have dreamed of achieving.

I disagree with the idea that people 'change their values' as much as they want to trust the President they voted for and distrust the one they voted against. Since I agree with so many of Obama's policy it's easy for me to make excuses for things I disagree with. As stated, 35% of liberals disagree with Obama's policies - that's shows that a lot of his supporters think he's making mistakes. The rest think he's doing the best under the circumstances.

 

[E Street Brat]

Analysis:

the polling data suggests that a significant number of people who identify as belonging to a political party (a) change their values to conform to the policies of their party, and/or (b) change their values to oppose the leader of the other party. Either is totally inconsistent with a citizen’s role in a democracy.

I think Glenn Greenwald has it right:
The Democratic Party owes a sincere apology to George Bush, **** Cheney and company for enthusiastically embracing many of the very Terrorism policies which caused them to hurl such vehement invective at the GOP for all those years. And progressives who support the views of the majority as expressed by this poll should never be listened to again the next time they want to pretend to oppose civilian slaughter and civil liberties assaults when perpetrated by the next Republican President (it should be noted that roughly 35% of liberals, a non-trivial amount, say they oppose these Obama policies).

One final point: I’ve often made the case that one of the most consequential aspects of the Obama legacy is that he has transformed what was once known as “right-wing shredding of the Constitution” into bipartisan consensus, and this is exactly what I mean. When one of the two major parties supports a certain policy and the other party pretends to oppose it — as happened with these radical War on Terror policies during the Bush years — then public opinion is divisive on the question, sharply split. But once the policy becomes the hallmark of both political parties, then public opinion becomes robust in support of it. That’s because people assume that if both political parties support a certain policy that it must be wise, and because policies that enjoy the status of bipartisan consensus are removed from the realm of mainstream challenge. That’s what Barack Obama has done to these Bush/Cheney policies: he has, as Jack Goldsmith predicted he would back in 2009, shielded and entrenched them as standard U.S. policy for at least a generation, and (by leading his supporters to embrace these policies as their own) has done so with far more success than any GOP President ever could have dreamed of achieving.

I disagree with the idea that people 'change their values' as much as they want to trust the President they voted for and distrust the one they voted against. Since I agree with so many of Obama's policy it's easy for me to make excuses for things I disagree with. As stated, 35% of liberals disagree with Obama's policies - that's shows that a lot of his supporters think he's making mistakes. The rest think he's doing the best under the circumstances.

I think it was the immigration issue in GWB's second term that I finally realized what a rube I had been,

I made so many excuses for things I knew were wrong...

DHS

TSA

Patriot Act

RX Plan,

NCLB

 

[Cjw_55106]

Obama sounds really serious this time, guys.

Well duh. You have to get those campaign promises in before its too late. 

 

[cstu]

Well duh. You have to get those campaign promises in before its too late. 

"The plan we're putting forward today isn't just about closing the facility at Guantanamo. It's not just about dealing with the current group of detainees, which is a complex piece of business because of the manner in which they were originally apprehended and what happened. This is about closing a chapter in our history," he said during short remarks at the White House.

"Keeping this facility open is contrary to our values," Obama said. "It undermines our standing in the world. It is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of rule of law."

 

[cstu]

Obama sounds really serious this time, guys.

Be honest - you're mad he's fulfilling yet another campaign promise.

 

[Gr00vus]

'Bout ####### time. This is the guy I voted for.

 

[whoknew]

Be honest - you're mad he's fulfilling yet another campaign promise.

In fairness, he promised to close Guantanamo within a year. He failed at that. 

Don't get me wrong - I'm glad he's finally doing it. Its just 7 years too late.

 

[cstu]

I'm just relieved that his supporters finally realize, after 7 years, that promises made are no reason to vote for a candidate. Because the reality is far more difficult than making the promise. Because all this #### was pointed out in '08 and guys like you had the blinders on and drank the kool-aid.

Heh, who am I kidding, guys like you and Tim are falling for the same #### all over again with Hillary.

Doesn't matter to me when it got done as long as it gets done. Never would have happened under McCain or Romney.

 

[Juxtatarot]

We spend $5 million annually per detainee.  Absolutely ridiculous to keep it open.