Obama's First Idiot Order

[Winehole23]

Also, by declaring war on terrorism, we have raised it to a level of historical importance it does not deserve.

[Lebowski Brickowski]

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our founding fathers ... our found fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake

Didn't he vote for warrantless wiretapping and telecom immunity? During his campaign?

annnnnnd here come Obamamites' justifications for choosing "safety" over "ideals"...............

[baseline bum]

We all know there's a HUGE difference between the philosophies and ideals of liberals and conservatives. You libs have been moaning, ing and screaming for the past 8 years - now it's the conservatives' time.

So you've all given up draping yourselves in the flag? When you and your kind called us un-American for not supporting our president Bush, it was really just bull name-calling?

[Lebowski Brickowski]

Oh -- and if Gitmo is uncons utional (I believe it so) , it seems like he's ordering it to remain open for another year. Another year of unjust imprisonment. Another year of denying human rights.

[SnakeBoy]

And that was wrong. Or do you think the Japanese internment camps were a particular noble precedent in America's history? An example to be followed?

I was thinking more along the lines of deliberately targeting the japanese and german civilian population but the internment of japanese americans is another good example.

It really doesn't matter if you or I think it was right or wrong. The point was, history shows Obama's statement to be false. When Americans truely believe their safety is at stake our ideals go right out the ing window. Unless you've only read rats history books and think the US was nothing but noble during wwii.

I would argue that the only reason that gitmo became an issue is that Americans no longer feared for their safety. If they did, nobody would give a about the prisoners at gitmo.

Anyway, the point was if we are faced with choosing our safety or our ideals we'll pick safety every ing time. But it sounded nice in his speech.

[FromWayDowntown]

Oh -- and if Gitmo is uncons utional (I believe it so) , it seems like he's ordering it to remain open for another year. Another year of unjust imprisonment. Another year of denying human rights.

For no more than another year. I think the plan is to move as quickly as possible to dispositions of those detained there. I guess another year of unjust imprisonment and denying human rights is preferrable to interminably doing those things; and a prudent alternative to simply closing the camp without a clear plan for disposition of the detainees.

[FromWayDowntown]

It really doesn't matter if you or I think it was right or wrong. The point was, history shows Obama's statement to be false. When Americans truely believe their safety is at stake our ideals go right out the ing window. Unless you've only read rats history books and think the US was nothing but noble during wwii.

Actually, I take Obama's statement to be one of his own principle and one that sets forth a forward-going policy rather than a comprehensive statement of past practices. That is, when Americans truly believe their safety is at stake, our Cons utional ideals should remain the baseline for deciding how best to allay those fears.

[ChumpDumper]

so where exactly is Obama going to put these guys? isn't KSM in there?

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is in the middle of a trial that that began last June and has at times become a circus.

if their native country doesn't want them they're dumped here. i don't see this accomplishing anything except to pacify the obamaniacs.

If we try them and convict them, we either kill them or keep them in prison. Ramzi Yousef is in a supermax prison in Colorado after being convicted in a US District court. You need to tell us how his case is different from everyone else's in Gitmo if you want to justify a different method for detaining, trying and imprisoning them.

[SnakeBoy]

For no more than another year. I think the plan is to move as quickly as possible to dispositions of those detained there. I guess another year of unjust imprisonment and denying human rights is preferrable to interminably doing those things; and a prudent alternative to simply closing the camp without a clear plan for disposition of the detainees.

At this mornings press conference when a reporter questioned along the same lines as Lebowski's point the press secretary responded "The president believes that there's no more important job that he has than to keep the American people safe". Sounds Bushy to me.

[balli]

Anyway, the point was if we are faced with choosing our safety or our ideals we'll pick safety every ing time. But it sounded nice in his speech.

Probably, if we're talking about really hitting the fan, plenty of people are dumb sheep. I'm not an idealist that would expect otherwise. But that doesn't mean we (the rest of us) should just assume some defeatist, complacency in which we just willingly sacrifice human rights so as to create the illusion of safety for the paranoid masses.

On safety and history: Were we any safer as a nation during WWII as a consequence of locking up Japanese men, women and children... American civilians? And even if we were safer, was it in anyway worth it compared to the cost/loss in Human Rights/American resources? I would say not. More importantly and unequivocally, HISTORY WOULD SAY NOT.

Considering other detention centers exist, or could exist, are we any safer for having a world wide eyesore and neo-con spectacle of a prison on the shores of some twisted Cuban bay? I would say not. And so leaving it open is basically just a measure to appease the dumb ing sheep who want the illusion of safety (the 22 percenters, as I think of them). And that's dumb and it's a policy I personally... and most of the nation, wouldn't subscribe to.

[FromWayDowntown]

Sounds Bushy to me.

Evidenced, of course, by the fact that the President has signed an order to close Gitmo

[ratm1221]

II just wish you guys wouldn't be so mean, hateful and profane in your responses to and about me.

You are mental. You start a thread with the word "idiot" in it, and then cry because people are mean to you. Typical conservative. They are the only ones that can play on the offensive and play the victim at the exact same time. Boo-freaking-hoo....

[RandomGuy]

Today Obama signed an executive order to close Gitmo within a year. He doesn't have a clue what to do with the terrorists detained there - but, by golly, in the interest of national security we're closing it anyway!

Maybe Pelosi and Reed can sponsor a terrorist or two and let them come live with them...

1) There are a couple of dozen detainees there NOW that the Bush administration pretty much admitted were innocent.

2) Every day this stays open is a PR weapon that is used to recruit new people to the al Qaeda cause.

Why do people like you support the terrorists and want it open?

Do you hate America that badly?

[LnGrrrR]

So what? 61 detainees who were released went right back to the terrorist camps and continued right where they left off! Those who were "innocent" probably weren't - they just didn't have enough evidence against them.

So human rights take precedence over national security - makes me feel all warm and fuzzy!

Right! And in America, if you're only POSSIBLY guilty, then we should be able to detain you forever! We shouldn't have to PROVE guilt!

[ChumpDumper]

Seriously crooks, what can be done in Gitmo that can't be done elsewhere?

Again I use the Ramzi Yousef example.

[RandomGuy]

So human rights take precedence over national security - makes me feel all warm and fuzzy!

False choice.

Human rights = national security

We will never be secure when our enemies can use our own hypocrisy to spread the idea that we are evil in order to convince people to kill us.

I am sorry if you don't understand the underlying nature of the conflict, but this is really a good move for many reasons.

[Blake]

Obama's First Idiot Order

.....I think the libs suffer from a mental disorder........

I just wish you guys wouldn't be so mean, hateful and profane in your responses to and about me. Can't we have civil discourse without the obscenities and profanities? I find it very offensive - and it lowers my opinion of you even further.

you want my opinion of you?

[Crookshanks]

Right! And in America, if you're only POSSIBLY guilty, then we should be able to detain you forever! We shouldn't have to PROVE guilt!

These are NOT American citizens! They are not en led to the same protections afforded us under the cons ution.

They're terrorists who would slit your throat just as quickly as mine - they don't care about your political views. I don't care what they do to them - I wouldn't be sad if an "accident" happened at Gitmo and all of the detainees died. Send them to their 72 virgins!

Let the insults and criticisms commence...

[RandomGuy]

Anyway, the point was if we are faced with choosing our safety or our ideals we'll pick safety every ing time.

Moral authority is a very strong tool in fighting the idea that we are evil and deserve to die.

Moral authority was used to win India's independence. It was kind of hard to portray Ghandi as a terrorist that deserved to be jailed.

If the US could really demonstrate once again to the world that we are committed to the ideals that founded our nation and are inherent in our cons ution, then we finally start winning our "war" on the idea that we are evil.

[Crookshanks]

you want my opinion of you?

NOPE! I already know it. I'm talking strictly about obscenities and profanities - that's what I find offensive. It's not the name calling - that's to be expected in the political arena.

[RandomGuy]

These are NOT American citizens! They are not en led to the same protections afforded us under the cons ution.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The rights in our cons ution are only worthwhile if they are, AS THEY WERE INTENDED BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS, applicable and good things for everybody.

If you say that they don't deserve rights because they aren't citizens then you are spitting on the founding fathers, because they believed that the rights we were fighting for were universal ones.

Why do you hate our country?

[Blake]

NOPE! I already know it. I'm talking strictly about obscenities and profanities - that's what I find offensive. It's not the name calling - that's to be expected in the political arena.

so it's ok if I call you stupid......just not a stupid focking b1tch....

got it.

[Blake]

The rights in our cons ution are only worthwhile if they are, AS THEY WERE INTENDED BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS, applicable and good things for everybody.

If you say that they don't deserve rights because they aren't citizens then you are spitting on the founding fathers, because they believed that the rights we were fighting for were universal ones.

Why do you hate our country?

good to see the declaration of independence posting here.

welcome to the board, D.

[ratm1221]

These are NOT American citizens! They are not en led to the same protections afforded us under the cons ution.

They're terrorists who would slit your throat just as quickly as mine - they don't care about your political views. I don't care what they do to them - I wouldn't be sad if an "accident" happened at Gitmo and all of the detainees died. Send them to their 72 virgins!

Let the insults and criticisms commence...

So because someone isn't an American Citizen, they don't have rights? You have a very twisted view.

[Winehole23]

They're terrorists who would slit your throat just as quickly as mine - they don't care about your political views. I don't care what they do to them - I wouldn't be sad if an "accident" happened at Gitmo and all of the detainees died. Send them to their 72 virgins!.

What about the 500 or so we already sent home without charges of any kind?

Isn't it possible a few of them weren't really terrorists? Or is it your position that Bush has already turned loose 500 dangerous terrorists?