Political Forum
     

Go Back   Political Forum > General Political Chat > Current Events


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2009, 05:04 AM
MrRelevant's Avatar
MrRelevant MrRelevant is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Masschusetts
Posts: 5,967
usa us arizona
MrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond reputeMrRelevant has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 50,139
Default Obama appeals ruling granting Bagram detainees right to lawsuits..yea!

Obama to Appeal Detainee Ruling

THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: April 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Friday that it would appeal a district court ruling that granted some military prisoners in Afghanistan the right to file lawsuits seeking their release. The decision signaled that the administration was not backing down in its effort to maintain the power to imprison terrorism suspects for extended periods without judicial oversight.

In a court filing, the Justice Department also asked District Judge John D. Bates not to proceed with the habeas-corpus cases of three detainees at Bagram Air Base outside Kabul, Afghanistan. Judge Bates ruled last week that the three — each of whom says he was seized outside of Afghanistan — could challenge their detention in court.

Tina Foster, the executive director of the International Justice Network, which is representing the detainees, condemned the decision in a statement.

“Though he has made many promises regarding the need for our country to rejoin the world community of nations, by filing this appeal, President Obama has taken on the defense of one of the Bush administration’s unlawful policies founded on nothing more than the idea that might makes right,” she said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/wo...ef=global-home

I guess my only question is why? I mean on the campaign trail he hammered Bush and the GOP on such issues and here he is defending one of the so called 'Bush crimes'.Is it because Afghanistan is being molded into 'Obamas War' as its been clear for awhile NATO is going to be pushed aside and now in office hes finally beginning to understand how the game is played? Why these folks arent ordinary criminals? Hmmm
__________________
Code:
Wear the grudge like a crown of negativity. Calculate what we will or will not tolerate. Desperate to control all and everything. Unable to forgive your scarlet lettermen. 
Clutch it like a cornerstone. Otherwise it all comes down. Justify denials and grip 'em to the lonesome end. Clutch it like a cornerstone. Otherwise it all comes down. Terrified of being wrong. Ultimate prison cell.
-Maynard James Keenan
People must be responsible for their own actions.-Great Khan
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Red Cross - Donate Today    Save the Rainforest
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2009, 05:15 AM
bla-bla's Avatar
bla-bla bla-bla is offline
Commentator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: U.S.S.A
Posts: 1,330
usa us california
bla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond reputebla-bla has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 6,473
Default

We are still at war with fundamentalist Islamic terrorists, we suffered an attack
from them that can not be imagined away by rhetoric.

A prisoner of war is just that, it has nothing to do with American civil law.
Prisoners of war can be taken and are to be TREATED HUMANELY until the
war is over.
__________________
"The only thing our government hasn't put itself
in charge of is making intelligent decisions."

~ bla 2008

Last edited by bla-bla; 04-11-2009 at 05:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2009, 08:17 AM
Dieter Lumpin's Avatar
Dieter Lumpin Dieter Lumpin is offline
Sr. Correspondent
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New London, Wisconsin
Age: 42
Posts: 776
us wisconsin
Dieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 779
Default



One picture is worth a thousand words.

From MrRelevants' link :
Quote:
Judge Bates ruled last week that the three — each of whom says he was seized outside of Afghanistan — could challenge their detention in court.
From my understanding, no one is disputing the assertion that these three individuals were apprehended outside the theatre and brought in to Bagram.

That, to me, is the troubling aspect of this case.
It creates a mighty big umbrella under which to hide who knows how many suspected " terrorists " .

Yet another in the long list of failures which is becoming the one-and-done Obama Administration.
__________________
W. T. F.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2009, 10:09 AM
formerroadie's Avatar
formerroadie formerroadie is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 5,792
formerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond reputeformerroadie has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 19,384
Default

That's unfortunate. Obviously, if I were privy to more information, I would know better how to judge this, but I am all for giving people their day in court. His actions on the detainees needs to stop.

Now, as for him being Bush, that's ridiculous. He's by far a smarter, more thoughtful and incredibly more capable president than Bush ever was. Am I happy with everything he's doing? Hell no. The righties are the only ones that think the left is supposed to happy with EVERYTHING their nominee does. On this one, I won't defend him.
__________________
"Not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs."
~St. John Chrysostom

To Republicans: "You're in the minority now. You see, it's supposed to taste like a **** taco."
~ John Stewart

Concerning Beck's Alamo Tea Party: ""I certainly hope that this occupation of the Alamo most certainly goes as well as the last one."
~ Steve Colbert
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2009, 10:40 AM
Dieter Lumpin's Avatar
Dieter Lumpin Dieter Lumpin is offline
Sr. Correspondent
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New London, Wisconsin
Age: 42
Posts: 776
us wisconsin
Dieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond reputeDieter Lumpin has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 779
Default

Obamas' Bait-and-Switch
Quote:

The bottom line is this: Current procedures under the CSRT are such that a perfectly innocent individual could be held and could not rebut the Government's case and has no way of proving his innocence.

I would like somebody in this Chamber, somebody in this Government, to tell me why this is necessary. I do not want to hear that this is a new world and we face a new kind of enemy. I know that. . . . But as a parent, I can also imagine the terror I would feel if one of my family members were rounded up in the middle of the night and sent to Guantanamo without even getting one chance to ask why they were being held and being able to prove their innocence.

This is not just an entirely fictional scenario, by the way. We have already had reports by the CIA and various generals over the last few years saying that many of the detainees at Guantanamo should not have been there. As one U.S. commander of Guantanamo told the Wall Street Journal:

"Sometimes, we just didn't get the right folks."

We all know about the recent case of the Canadian man who was suspected of terrorist connections, detained in New York, sent to Syria--through a rendition agreement--tortured, only to find out later it was all a case of mistaken identity and poor information. . . .

This is an extraordinarily difficult war we are prosecuting against terrorists. There are going to be situations in which we cast too wide a net and capture the wrong person. . . .

But what is avoidable is refusing to ever allow our legal system to correct these mistakes. By giving suspects a chance--even one chance--to challenge the terms of their detention in court, to have a judge confirm that the Government has detained the right person for the right suspicions, we could solve this problem without harming our efforts in the war on terror one bit. . . .

Most of us have been willing to make some sacrifices because we know that, in the end, it helps to make us safer. But restricting somebody's right to challenge their imprisonment indefinitely is not going to make us safer. In fact, recent evidence shows it is probably making us less safe.

In Sunday's New York Times, it was reported that previous drafts of the recently released National Intelligence Estimate, a report of 16 different Government intelligence agencies, describe "actions by the United States Government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay."

This is not just unhelpful in our fight against terror, it is unnecessary. We don't need to imprison innocent people to win this war. For people who are guilty, we have the procedures in place to lock them up. That is who we are as a people. We do things right, and we do things fair.

Two days ago, every Member of this body received a letter, signed by 35 U.S. diplomats, many of whom served under Republican Presidents. They urged us to reconsider eliminating the rights of habeas corpus from this bill, saying:

"To deny habeas corpus to our detainees can be seen as a prescription for how the captured members of our own military, diplomatic, and NGO personnel stationed abroad may be treated. ..... The Congress has every duty to insure their protection, and to avoid anything which will be taken as a justification, even by the most disturbed minds, that arbitrary arrest is the acceptable norm of the day in the relations between nations, and that judicial inquiry is an antique, trivial and dispensable luxury."

The world is watching what we do today in America. They will know what we do here today, and they will treat all of us accordingly in the future--our soldiers, our diplomats, our journalists, anybody who travels beyond these borders. I hope we remember this as we go forward. I sincerely hope we can protect what has been called the "great writ" -- a writ that has been in place in the Anglo-American legal system for over 700 years.

Mr. President, this should not be a difficult vote. I hope we pass this amendment because I think it is the only way to make sure this underlying bill preserves all the great traditions of our legal system and our way of life.

I yield the floor.
Barack Obama - two-faced jackass.

I yield the forum.
__________________
W. T. F.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Obama backs Bush: No rights for Bagram prisoners BroncoBilly Latest World News 16 02-22-2009 02:01 PM
Obama BC lawsuits Alferd Conspiracy Theories 0 01-28-2009 05:19 PM
Prosecutors Focusing on Ohio "Fraud House"; Brunner Appeals Ruling Forcing Verificati DiscerningBlog Political Blogs 1 10-17-2008 12:21 PM
USSC Ruling Could Free Detainees in US JP5 Current Events 23 07-04-2008 09:09 PM
Military granting more waivers to recruits raytri Current Events 26 02-16-2007 04:34 PM

Sponsored Links

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0
Template-Modifikationen durch TMS
vBCredits v1.3 ©2007 by Darkwaltz4
Advertisement System V2.1 By   Branden