Gitmo remains open

[AVGWarhawk]

Dems shot it down:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7633754&page=1

Obama needs to come up with a better plan then just closing Gitmo and hoping for the best.

[CaptainHaplo]

Well done to those Dems who opposed this without a process in place that retains those in custody in a safe manner. Yes - more Rep's against it as well, but it takes more cahoonas to stand against a leader in your own party than it does to stand against an ideological opponent. Give credit where credit is due, well done to those Dems.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Dems shot it down:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7633754&page=1

Obama needs to come up with a better plan then just closing Gitmo and hoping for the best.

Well it sounded good at the time and thats what counted.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Well it sounded good at the time and thats what counted.

Right now it would not sound so good after and the continuing Pelosi debacle with calling the CIA a bunch of liars.

Hi, the CIA is a bunch of liars who lied to Congress(not sure what the CIA would get out of lying) and we want to plant the terrorists in your backyard! Happy Wednesday!

[Skybird]

And more scratches in the varnish.

Now this no-win-situation is the result of trying to bypass the legal system during the Bush era.

The only thing that really angers me here is that there have been demands that european nations should take in these prisoners that america refuses to let onto its soil. Very nice, thank you but not thanks at all.

There have been prisoners who have been relased, and of these some obviously have been innocent. I expect that amongst those still there also are some innocent ones. A possible move will be to move the prisoners away from Guantanamo, to Baghram (Afghanistan), where again it wouldn't be needed to prove their guilt according to usual legal standards. Indeed, for these people, Baghram would be even worse.

If Obama does not solve this issue after all those promises, it will backfire against America's reputation again for a second time, and this time twice as hard than under Bush.

[AVGWarhawk]

And more scratches in the varnish.

Not at all, there needs to be a reasonable plan. There is no plan at all.

Now this no-win-situation is the result of trying to bypass the legal system during the Bush era.

Hardly, just stating to close it down without a plan was not to bright and from the looks of it...Congress agrees it was not to bright to state that.

The only thing that really angers me here is that there have been demands that european nations should take in these prisoners that america refuses to let onto its soil. Very nice, thank you but not thanks at all.

I missed that one...can you provide a link?

There have been prisoners who have been relased, and of these some obviously have been innocent. I expect that amongst those still there also are some innocent ones. A possible move will be to move the prisoners away from Guantanamo, to Baghram (Afghanistan), where again it wouldn't be needed to prove their guilt according to usual legal standards. Indeed, for these people, Baghram would be even worse.

If Obama does not solve this issue after all those promises, it will backfire against America's reputation again for a second time, and this time twice as hard than under Bush.

Some innocents still left? Perhaps. So instead of Baghram we should send them to say, the Bahamas? Much nicer there. Three hots and a cot near the beach? Sweet! Anything else?

[nikimcbee]

Hope...change....



I say we sell them to the Mossad. They would have fun with them.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Hardly, just stating to close it down without a plan was not to bright and from the looks of it...Congress agrees it was not to bright to state that.

It was not bright from the very beginning to create a legal vacuum.

I missed that one...can you provide a link?

Media and press throughout Europe. Germany. Britain. Italy. Spain. Don't tell me that US media ignored it that completely so that you never took note of it.

Some innocents still left? Perhaps. So instead of Baghram we should send them to say, the Bahamas? Much nicer there. Three hots and a cot near the beach? Sweet! Anything else?

Save your sarcasm for making yourself happy in lonely moments. It is a principle in any legal system worth the name that guilt must be proven instead of just being claimed, and that this must be acchieved within a reasonable timeframe and by procedural rules countercontrolled by independent and/or public institutions. If you will to skip that, you are not any better than the GeStapo, who acted the very same way like you, and even did so on basis of formally more valid laws than Bush did when chosing that mistaken path that now your country is rightfully attacked for. Not too mention that you open gate, door and window for a culture of diffamation replacing laws and justice, and a culture of mobs in the street lynching people arbitrarily. Evidence for guilt is no longer needed if the public accepts that just the claim for somebody being guilty is enough. that is totally unacceptable.

Bring the prisoners to court, and make them subject to your regular, publicly known laws. That alone is acceptable. anything else is in no way different than the legal system in the GDR, in Saddam's Iraq, or in any other tyranny on the planet - you are not any different to them.

Note that in earlier threads I did not oppose things like torture or imprisonment of terrorists in priciple. I just insist on this being done on basis of public consensus and according changes to existing laws being made, and this still being open to countercontrol by the system of checks and balance that are the very and totally indispensable basis of any national community worth to be desacribed as being just, and democratic.

And please nobody here now distracting again by telling me that America is not a democracy but a republic. It is a democratic republic - or is it a republic like North Korea? China? GDR? If america by design and intention was not meant to be a democratic state, then the term obviously has no more any meaning.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Well it sounded good at the time and thats what counted.