While this can be appealed, the ruling certainly does make sense. The detainees in Guantanamo should not be granted access to our courts. Our court system is busy enough as it is already.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
While this can be appealed, the ruling certainly does make sense. The detainees in Guantanamo should not be granted access to our courts. Our court system is busy enough as it is already.
What's the problem LR? Worried that some of them might have been acquitted?
'..."We're disappointed," said Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights. "The bottom line is that according to two of the federal judges, the president can do whatever he wants without any legal limitations as long as he does it offshore."..
...A spokeswoman for Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said he was accelerating efforts to pass a revision to the law that would restore detainees' legal rights, noting that some 12 million lawful permanent residents currently in the U.S. could also be stripped of rights..."apnews.myway.com
I guess it still has to go to the Supreme Court. Congratulation to LR on finding that fine print at the bottom of the US constition that everyone else missed - "Ignore any of this if you feel you're too busy".
We are talking about the enemy. Combatants who are fighting against our troops. We are certainly well within our Constitution by denying the enemy access to the court system.
If we really want to support our troops defending this country, we keep these animals in Guantanamo. When the war is over then send them back home. They have NO business tying up our court system.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
'Approximately 400 of these prisoners, characterised by the Bush administration as "the worst of the worst", have been released without charge, many directly back to their families. That any prisoners have been released is due almost entirely to the outrage of the civilised world. What most of the world does not yet realise is the extent of the misinformation disseminated by the Bush Administration and the US military: for example, American forces captured only 5% of all the prisoners at Guantánamo; 55% of the prisoners were found by the military never to have committed a hostile act against the United States or its coalition allies; the vast majority of the prisoners at Guantánamo were turned over to the Americans in exchange for large bounties paid for by the United States.'Guantánamo's lost souls
Of course, after being captured in their own country by an invading army and imprisoned half-way around the world by that amry's country, some of those 400 just might decide that fighting against that country is the right thing to do, and they just may adhere to international law regarding war crimes about as well as that country does. In many ways, we will be paying for this administration's blunders (and, yes, crimes) for a long time to come. Heck of a job, george. Give yourself a medal, too; you deserve it just as those other incompetents deserve it.
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by DorianGreyed: Of course, after being captured in their own country by an invading army and imprisoned half-way around the world by that amry's country, some of those 400 just might decide that fighting against that country is the right thing to do, and they just may adhere to international law regarding war crimes about as well as that country does. In many ways, we will be paying for this administration's blunders (and, yes, crimes) for a long time to come. Heck of a job, george. Give yourself a medal, too; you deserve it just as those other incompetents deserve it.
Well if we are going to hand out medals, let's not forget anybody.
How about the Democrat Party & their willing media accomplices who spin out misinformation on a daily basis. Misinformation for the sole purpose of weakening the public resolve on this war. Putting Democrat Party interest first, to hell with the good of the country.
The war in Iraq is minor compared to the war we are having in our own country right now. The misinformation put out by the Bush Administration doesn't hold a candle compared to what the Democrat & news media spin machine churn out. And the Islamic terrorist organizations are watching & loving every minute of it. They influenced the elections in Spain, then four months ago they influenced the elections in the U.S. And their party won
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
The war in Iraq is minor compared to the war we are having in our own country right now.
One of my students the other day said he didn't like the US because the people there are so insular. I said, come on, not all of them.
Isn't the US public's resolve on the invasion of Iraq shaky mostly because it's been an ill-planned failure based on lies and fantasies from the get-go? Surely it's not so much that resolve has been weakened as more eyes have been opened. Iraq was invaded for no good reason, with the invasion, and especially its aftermath, being handled with catastrophic incompetence and wishful thinking.
The useless jail at Guantanamo, and the unconstitutional (Habeus corpus? What's that?) laws rushed into effect to support it and save the administration's face, are just another example of the idiocy.
Please tell us what "misinformation" you are speaking of. Is it about WMDs? (Where oh where did they go?) Is it about Saddam having a link to al Qeada? (He had a much closer one to Rumsfeld.) Is it about the domestic spying on citizens that was denied by the White House? Tell us all about the "misinformation". Have the evil Democrats even convinced that growing number of retired and active officers that the war was a mistyake and was planned poorly and managed even more poorly? Have the evil Democrats even infiltrated the UK and made not only the populace but the government think that it is time to get out?
I just tell the truth on the opposition - and they think it's hell. - Harry Truman
I'm all for the truth, LR, so let's hear it. But please be able to back up your claim that it is the truth.
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by DorianGreyed: Have the evil Democrats even infiltrated the UK and made not only the populace but the government think that it is time to get out?
Yes and they are so good at it: British forces at invasion 45,000. Two years ago 9,000. Present 7,100. Blair has just said this will be cut by a further 1,600 by Summer.He has denied that all British forces there will be out by 2008, saying that he expects some troops to be there in 2008 (but he didn't say what 'some' meant ). And when our retiring chief general there says that we are not wanted and are now part of the problem it's evident that the Democrats have infiltrated our military as well as our government.
I voted for George W. Bush in both 2000 and again in 2004. I believed him when, as President, he reported in his State of Union Address that Iraq was actively seeking weapons of mass destruction. I believed him when he earlier stated that Iraq was at least partly responsible for the attack conducted upon us on 9/11/2001. I supported the war in Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq because I believed the information that I got from my government was correct.
The move into Afghanistan was correct in my view. I believe that we need to continue to fight against the Al-Qaeda there. I believe that we must continue to fight these terrorists that are a real danger to the world. But I believe that we made a mistake in taking our troops out of Afghanistan and using them to invade Iraq.
Now that I know that a great deal of this information about Iraq was not only "wrong" but in fact was largely made up by members of the Administration in order to create a need for us to invade, I would say that this "mis-information" is the most deadly blunder in US history. In the history of our country, citizens have willingly provided the blood and the treasure necessary to fight a war, but this time I think most citizens realize that we are wasting our most precious assets in this wrong-headed fight.
Further, this administration is openly supporting the use torture and secret prisons in countries around the world. They are holding people in Guantanamo Bay with little or no evidence that these people are guilty of any offense.
This administration is bleeding our country to death financially with these horrendous national debts. They are lying to the citizens about budgets designed to bring an end to deficit spending by seriously undercutting funding for long term medical care for our soldiers who are defending us around the world today. NPR - Bush Budget
I proudly served in the Army and my son is currently in the Army Reserve but this is not the kind of conduct that we signed on to help protect.
President Bush has done the impossible; he has made a democrat out of me.
Dwight
Posts: 4343 | Location: Anchorage, AK | Registered: 06-05-02
Well, thank god we have bribed convinced other members of the Coalition of the Willing so that they won't fall for the lies of the evil Democrats. I see that Macedonia has upped its contingent by over 10% (40 troops, up from 35!) and that Armenia has committed its 46 troops to another year. Moldava has only downsized it troop level by 12, going from 24 to 12, and Slovenia is apparently keeping all 4 of its commitment in Iraq as training officers. Estonia is keeping its 35 infantry troops in Iraq, and Kazakhstan its 27 military engineers. Lithuania has said its 53 troops (under Polish command) will stay through 2007, and Bosnia and Herzegovina's 36 man force to destroy explosives and clear mines is still there (and surely very busy). Azerbaijan has actually increaed its presence by 67% (from 150 to 250) and Albania's 120 troops are staying put. Staunch Australia, whose PM has taken issue with a leading US Democrat over his stance on Iraq, is standing tall with its 550 military personnel in and around Iraq.
So you see, Fred, bush doesn't need the UK's help. There are over ten times as many countries who haven't been infiltrated by the evil Democrats and remain willing to stand shoulder to shoulder* with the US in (or near) Iraq.
*Well, "shoulder to a whole lot of other shoulders" is more accurate.
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Dwight's post seems to indicate that it might be bush himself who is responsible for all the Democrats popping up all over the place. But, even as a Democrat, I can't thank bush. I'd rather have more Republicans and less national debt, less hate of the US in the world, and, most importantly, I'd rather have back the lives of our military people who died because of bush.
Posts: 17506 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Ssome time ago I made a posting in Current Events where I pleaded for everyone to give the President a chance. Because he is the President of the US, it is (I argued) in our own best interest that the President be successful. I agree with DG; I would rather see a successful Republican President than have to deal with a failure because our own best interests are damaged by failure. I fear we US citizens will be a long time trying to pay for all the damage the Bush Administration has done to this country.
Dwight
Posts: 4343 | Location: Anchorage, AK | Registered: 06-05-02
Actually, is Sada still claiming that? That link is a year old. I thought the last nail in the coffin of the WMD-to-Syria idea was when Sada was reduced to punting it on the Daily Show. The last time LR brought Sada up - answerpool.com - he was singing for his supper by telling credulous fundies how well Christianity is doing in Iraq.
January 28, 2007: Top 10 Myths of the Iraq War. In no particular order. There are more, but ten is a manageable number.
1-No Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Several hundred chemical weapons were found, and Saddam had all his WMD scientists and technicians ready. Just end the sanctions and add money, and the weapons would be back in production within a year. At the time of the invasion, all intelligence agencies, world-wide, believed Saddam still had a functioning WMD program. Saddam had shut them down because of the cost, but created the illusion that the program was still operating in order to fool the Iranians. The Iranians wanted revenge on Saddam because of the Iraq invasion of Iran in 1980, and the eight year war that followed.
2-The 2003 Invasion was Illegal. Only according to some in the UN. By that standard, the invasion of Kosovo and bombing of Serbia in 1999 was also illegal. Saddam was already at war with the U.S. and Britain, because Iraq had not carried out the terms of the 1991 ceasefire, and was trying to shoot down coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone.
3-Sanctions were working. The sanctions worked for Saddam, not for Iraq. Saddam used the sanctions as an excuse to punish the Shia majority for their 1991 uprising, and help prevent a new one. The "Oil For Food" program was corrupted with the help of bribed UN officials, and mass media outlets that believed Iraqi propaganda. Saddam was waiting out the sanctions, and bribing France, Russia and China, with promises of oil contracts and debt repayments, to convince the UN to lift the sanctions.
4-Overthrowing Saddam Only Helped Iran. Of course, and this was supposed to make Iran more approachable and open to negotiations. With the Iraqi "threat" gone, it was believed that Iran might lose its radical ways and behave. Iran got worse as a supporter of terrorism and developer of WMD. Irans clerical dictatorship did not want a democracy next door. The ancient struggle between the Iranians and Arabs was brought to the surface, and the UN became more active in dealing with problems caused by pro-terrorist government of Iran. As a result of this, the Iranian police state has faced more internal dissent. From inside Iran, Iraq does not look like an Iranian victory.
5-The Invasion Was a Failure. Saddam's police state was overthrown and a democracy established, which was the objective of the operation. Peace did not ensue because Saddam's supporters, the Sunni Arab minority, were not willing to deal with majority rule, and war crimes trials. A terror campaign followed. Few expected the Sunni Arabs to be so stupid. There's a lesson to be learned there.
6-The Invasion Helped Al Qaeda. Compared to what? Al Qaeda was a growing movement before 2003, and before 2001. But after the Iraq invasion, and especially the Sunni Arab terrorism, al Qaeda fell in popularity throughout the Moslem world. Arab countries cracked down on al Qaeda operations more than ever before. Without the Iraq invasion, al Qaeda would still have safe havens all over the Arab world.
7-Iraq Is In A State of Civil War. Then so was Britain when the IRA was active, and so is Spain today because ETA is still active. Both IRA and ETA are terrorist organizations based on ethnic identity. India also has tribal separatist rebels who are quite active. That's not considered a civil war. This is all about partisans playing with labels for political ends, not accurately describing a terror campaign.
8-Iraqis Were Better Off Under Saddam. Most Iraqis disagree. Check election results and opinion polls. Reporters tend to ask Iraqi Sunni Arabs this question, but they were the only ones who benefited from Saddams rule.
9-The Iraq War Caused Islamic Terrorism to Increase in Europe. The Moslem unrest in Europe was there before 2001, and 2003. Interviews of Islamic radicals in Europe reveals that the hatred is not motivated by Iraq, but by daily encounters with hostile natives. Blaming Islamic terrorism on Iraq is another attempt to avoid dealing with a homegrown problem.
10- The War in Iraq is Lost. By what measure? Saddam and his Baath party are out of power. There is a democratically elected government. Part of the Sunni Arab minority continues to support terror attacks, in an attempt to restore the Sunni Arab dictatorship. In response, extremist Shia Arabs formed vigilante death squads to expel all Sunni Arabs. Given the history of democracy in the Middle East, Iraq is working through its problems. Otherwise, one is to believe that the Arabs are incapable of democracy and only a tyrant like Saddam can make Iraqi "work." If democracy were easy, the Arab states would all have it. There are problems, and solutions have to be found and implemented. That takes time, but Americans have, since the 18th century, grown weary of wars after three years. If the war goes on longer, the politicians have to scramble to survive the bad press and opinion polls. Opposition politicians take advantage of the situation, but this has nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with local politics in the United States.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
). And when our retiring chief general there says that we are not wanted and are now part of the problem it's evident that the Democrats have infiltrated our military as well as our government. 
