So, Mr. President, how's that Guantanamo closing promise coming along? (legal, health care)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Today (Friday, 5/21/10) is the official one-year anniversary of President Barack Obama repeating why he signed the official closing order for the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility on his second day in office in January of 2009.
Promising to close the place -- the "mess" as the president called it -- was a very useful unifying metaphor for Obama's change-to-believe-in from eight years of you-know-who, who started up the place back before the global war on terrorism became a series of attempted man-caused disasters.
There's a saying going round on Facebook, like "Thit happens, but I wish it would happen to someone else." If obama was on FB today, I'm sure he would join the group that's promoting that saying.
obama's schtick to close the prison was good fodder for the campaign, as "I'll promise you everything you want, just get me in office," but politicians have perfected the art of lying, or at least stretching the truth so thin, yet leaving enough film to make rose-colored glasses, don't you think? And not just the Dems, either, but the Pubs, the Libs, the Commies, all of 'em, lock, stock, and barrel.
"The White House has ordered the purchase of the Thomson Correctional Centre, a state prison about 150 miles north-west of Chicago along the Mississippi river, to house the detainees as Obama seeks to fulfil a pledge to close the jail in Guantánamo, popularly known as Gitmo.
Of the 220 prisoners still held at Guantánamo, about 90 have been cleared for transfer to their own or third countries. Five are to be moved to New York for trial over the attacks on the World Trade Centre. Most of the remainder are likely to be sent to Illinois either for trial or to be held indefinitely as combatants in a continuing war, although that is likely to be open to legal challenge."
It will happen and conservatives will again have to remove foot from mouth for jumping to the gun. Obama is moving prudently which is a good thing.
That promise is still sitting in the Republican's lap with where to put them. Remember according to the Republican's NO ONE or NOTHING can hold them except for Gitmo. So, you don't want them tried, you don't want them moved, you don't want them held in a place that is a recruiting tool for terrorists. But you have no problem complaining that he hasn't done anything with them.
Yo: get something current, will ya? December 09 is so yesterday, you know what I mean, Yo?
Golfer: You said it all, except for the last statement. Tis not I who is complaining, far be it from me to complain that obama hasn't kept his promise on this one. It's been stated far and wide the best place to keep these slimes is at Gitmo, not some far-away place in Illinois, or any other facility within the borders (do we really have secure borders?) of the US. They can be tried right where they are, man, and you know it.
I am still wondering how keeping those people locked up (no matter where) without trial and conviction fits in with what the US claims to stand for
The best way to prevent a recurring attack, is to hold 'em till hell freezes over or they die of natural causes. That's a personal opinion, by the way. It's a known fact that some of the clowns who have been released, to be put through a repatriation kind of thing in a hosting country, doesn't work, that the detainees have "escaped" or have been turned loose, having been reprogrammed, only to show up in Yemen or some other little barbaric country, and have been lofted to high or higher positions than previously known, and are now in a position to re-launch plots against whoever - the US primarily - is perceived to be against them. Prevention is the key, and if incarcerating them in a military-styled camp works, it works well, wouldn't you agree? Freedom is not free, remember that, but I guess you're more or less "safe" and "free" in Portugal?
The best way to prevent a recurring attack, is to hold 'em till hell freezes over or they die of natural causes. That's a personal opinion, by the way. It's a known fact that some of the clowns who have been released, to be put through a repatriation kind of thing in a hosting country, doesn't work, that the detainees have "escaped" or have been turned loose, having been reprogrammed, only to show up in Yemen or some other little barbaric country, and have been lofted to high or higher positions than previously known, and are now in a position to re-launch plots against whoever - the US primarily - is perceived to be against them. Prevention is the key, and if incarcerating them in a military-styled camp works, it works well, wouldn't you agree? Freedom is not free, remember that, but I guess you're more or less "safe" and "free" in Portugal?
If they are convicted, OK, lock them up, but many of them are only suspects, right?
Yes, Portugal is pretty safe, nobody cares about it
I don't think many of you understand how our government works. As much as you would like it to be, we don't live in a dictatorship.
A president's promise is upheld if he does everything in his power to progress legislation through a very complicated body of opposing ideologies. If, for example, health care would have failed, it would not have been a broken promise, just a failed effort. Just the way the system works.
Fortunately for all of us, health care passed and it looks like Gitmo may probably still close. We shall see.
Yo: get something current, will ya? December 09 is so yesterday, you know what I mean, Yo?
Golfer: You said it all, except for the last statement. Tis not I who is complaining, far be it from me to complain that obama hasn't kept his promise on this one. It's been stated far and wide the best place to keep these slimes is at Gitmo, not some far-away place in Illinois, or any other facility within the borders (do we really have secure borders?) of the US. They can be tried right where they are, man, and you know it.
It's been stated far and wide by those who contrived and enjoined in the creation of the place, not by those who actually want to see the rule of law executed.
They can be tried where they are, but only by military tribunals, and that is not an actual execution of the rule of law, despite what some 3rd string neophyte says in a memo. And you know it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
