Obama's newest executive order.

[Halifirien]

How do you reason with people who have sworn to kill you and everyone who is of your country?

Except not everyone we've imprisoned falls into that category. Plenty of the prisoners Bush and Cheney were touting as the "worst of the worst" were random schmucks scooped up during sweeps, having no ties to terrorism, and were later successfully released with no problems. They were sent to Guantanamo Bay to keep them out of the U.S. legal system, which has successfully prosecuted terrorists before.

Hearing someone argue with a straight face that the government should keep someone locked up forever because they're not sure we can get a conviction should be the scariest fucking thing you've ever heard. Is it suddenly okay just because they're suspected of being terrorists? Not in my book. It was morally represhensible when Bush was doing it, and wasn't any better when Obama started considering it.

 

[Valandil]

I think people are forgetting that there are exceptions to even our constitution. Freedom of speech, but you can not yell fire in a crowded room just to see what would happen. Right to bear arms, but you can not just shoot whom ever you wish. Look at the right to vote. It took over a hundred years just for everyone to get the right to. How do you reason with people who have sworn to kill you and everyone who is of your country? Anything you do is seen as a lie no matter what it is. Be nice to them, and you are trying to trick them. Be mean to them and you are proving how evil you are. It is no no win situation. Keep in mind Obama told these terroists exactly what his plan was back during the election. They have had a full year to plan attacks and set everything up for our troops arrival. Every US solider that dies, died because the President iwas a noob and told the enemy what to expect.

So what if they want to kill you? Do you have such little conviction in your principles that you're not willing to die for them?

 

[Halifirien]

It's different when they're Muslim, I guess. The Phelps clan from Westboro Baptist Church is just as eager for God to smite the nation and see everything turned to ash. They're as impossible to reason with as any al-Qaida suicide bomber, but if you put the Phelps people in prison without charges and no hint of a court date in sight, you'd have scores of protests and would probably see Pat Robertson and James Dobson working arm-in-arm with the ACLU on that one.

You could argue it's a simple matter of citizenship, but that doesn't make it any less immoral.

I'm still waiting for the right-wingers in Congress to speak out against the Chinese crackdown on the Muslim Uighurs and demand Obama do something (what they'd want him to do, I don't know, but it never seems to stop them when it comes to Iran). If it was a Christian minority being targeted, whole new ballgame.

 

[Thelona]

It's different when they're Muslim, I guess. The Phelps clan from Westboro Baptist Church is just as eager for God to smite the nation and see everything turned to ash. They're as impossible to reason with as any al-Qaida suicide bomber, but if you put the Phelps people in prison without charges and no hint of a court date in sight, you'd have scores of protests and would probably see Pat Robertson and James Dobson working arm-in-arm with the ACLU on that one.

You could argue it's a simple matter of citizenship, but that doesn't make it any less immoral.

I'm still waiting for the right-wingers in Congress to speak out against the Chinese crackdown on the Muslim Uighurs and demand Obama do something (what they'd want him to do, I don't know, but it never seems to stop them when it comes to Iran). If it was a Christian minority being targeted, whole new ballgame.

or i could be the fact that, as fucked up as the westboro baptist church crazys are, they haven't blown anything up yet. theres a big difference between a suicide bomber and a westboro baptist church member, the suicide bomber has a BOMB strapped to him.

it hardly because they are Muslim. be reasonable, this isn't about some crusade against non Christians or any of that bullshit, if these people weren't Muslims and were blowing up shit just for the lulz they'd still be in the same place.
and besides its obama running things now, it CANT be racism right? I thought it was a left wing rule that minority's are incapable of racism. (kinda joking but I've actually had left wingers throw that argument in my face, lmfao)

as to the right-wingers in congress part, OFCOURSE they are going to act like they give 2 shits about something that actually has something to do with their constituency, and not give 2 shits about something thats not, they're POLITICIANS. Don't try and act like the "left-wingers" don't do the same kind of shit. as a left winger in congress recently said "If I'm guilty of corruption it was only for my constituency" I hate BOTH sides when it come to the politicians, they're ALL full of shit. hell the republicans haven't been real conservatives in years.

 

[Halifirien]

or i could be the fact that, as fucked up as the westboro baptist church crazys are, they haven't blown anything up yet. theres a big difference between a suicide bomber and a westboro baptist church member, the suicide bomber has a BOMB strapped to him.

True, but people would still go out of their way to make sure the system wasn't suspended for Westboro. Eric Rudolph had a bombing campaign here in the United States, targeting gay bars and abortion clinics, and he found plenty of support from Christians who thought he was doing a good thing.

Racism may or may not be playing into the government's actions on the detentions, but I think it's a major factor in why more people aren't beating down the doors and demanding the government charge the suspects at Gitmo or turn them loose.

 

[Skaw]

I think people are forgetting that there are exceptions to even our constitution. Freedom of speech, but you can not yell fire in a crowded room just to see what would happen.

Because people seem to think freedom of speech means freedom to say whatever you want. It's the freedom to speak out against your government and express your ideals civilly - not the freedom to yell fire, shout racial slurs, or threaten people.

Right to bear arms, but you can not just shoot whom ever you wish. Look at the right to vote.

Because people seem to think the right to bear arms means the right to use them in any situation. The right to bear arms is the right to assemble militia to protect the security of a free state. Not the right to use hand cannons for popping off random peoples heads.

 

[Halifirien]

Jeebus, it's getting even worse than I thought. Now they're actually arguing they have the right to hold suspects even after they've been acquitted. Bush did that, too. /sigh

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration said Tuesday it could continue to imprison non-U.S. citizens indefinitely even if they have been acquitted of terrorism charges by a U.S. military commission.

Jeh Johnson, the Defense Department's chief lawyer, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that releasing a detainee who has been tried and found not guilty was a policy decision that officials would make based on their estimate of whether the prisoner posed a future threat.

Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration argues that the legal basis for indefinite detention of aliens it considers dangerous is separate from war-crimes prosecutions. Officials say that the laws of war allow indefinite detention to prevent aliens from committing warlike acts in future, while prosecution by military commission aims to punish them for war crimes committed in the past.

I didn't vote for Bush 2.0.

 

[Thelona]

wow, that kind of wording kinda reminds me of that movie minority report.

pretty scary really, not just because our governments holding someone found NOT-Guilty[wtf], for a crime they are GOING to commit. but also because it makes you think, if Obama is capable of this extreme of a change of colors, what else is he capable of? also I'm wondering how msnbc is going to sweep this doozy under the rug.

edit:: i didn't vote for him either, but you prob coulda guessed that =P

 

[Skaw]

or i could be the fact that, as fucked up as the westboro baptist church crazys are, they haven't blown anything up yet. theres a big difference between a suicide bomber and a westboro baptist church member, the suicide bomber has a BOMB strapped to him.

I dunno, I think interrupting funerals just because "THAT SOLDIER IS A FAG!" is a pretty terrible fucking thing to do the mourning family. Worse than actually having killed the person they're mourning. I mean, it's one level of bad to kill a person. It's another level of bad to make a mockery out of them and their family when they're at peace just because you don't like the thought of two men loving each other.

it hardly because they are Muslim. be reasonable, this isn't about some crusade against non Christians or any of that bullshit, if these people weren't Muslims and were blowing up shit just for the lulz they'd still be in the same place.
and besides its obama running things now, it CANT be racism right? I thought it was a left wing rule that minority's are incapable of racism. (kinda joking but I've actually had left wingers throw that argument in my face, lmfao)

I agree it's hardly because they're Muslim. Radicals aren't normal people. Regular practicioners of Islam are very nice, humble folks.

 

[Thelona]

I dunno, I think interrupting funerals just because "THAT SOLDIER IS A FAG!" is a pretty terrible fucking thing to do the mourning family. Worse than actually having killed the person they're mourning. I mean, it's one level of bad to kill a person. It's another level of bad to make a mockery out of them and their family when they're at peace just because you don't like the thought of two men loving each other.

I never said they weren't horrible people, i agree 100%. except for the part of it being worse then killing them. I don't think them spewing their hate speech is worse then the person who actually killed the soldier. how are words the same as taking someones life?

But what they are doing isnt illegal, for the most part(they have been charged with going places they were told not to go, like getting to close to the funeral)

you can't really compare being a crazy and shouting "god hates fags", and "thank god for dead soldiers". with being a crazy and blowing yourself up in the middle of a crowded street, killing who knows how many innocent people.

and also in my eyes there's a HUGE difference between someone who tries to kill a soldier over there and someone who's a suicide bomber.
You try and kill a soldier, ok w/e we are over there fighting a war and your fighting back, for whatever reason. atleast you have the balls to aim for the people who are over there to fight you.
I can understand how someone could be misguided enough, and brainwashed enough, to get it in their head to pickup and gun and go looking for an American soldier. those people don't have American TV, or American newspaper, all they know is what the people in power have been feeding them, about how America is the great satan and there to rage war on their religion.

A suicide bomber/terrorist is a different kind of scum, that's killing scores of completely INNOCENT bystanders just to prove your mindfucked point. NO amount of believing what your told is an excuse to kill completely innocent people, women and children included, just to get your point across.

 

[Halifirien]

you can't really compare being a crazy and shouting "god hates fags", and "thank god for dead soldiers". with being a crazy and blowing yourself up in the middle of a crowded street, killing who knows how many innocent people.

I think you're missing my point. Saying Group X is unreasonable and wants to kill us -- the way Keryan did -- is not a reason to suspend due process. A religious zealot is a religious zealot.

 

[Thelona]

I think you're missing my point. Saying Group X is unreasonable and wants to kill us -- the way Keryan did -- is not a reason to suspend due process. A religious zealot is a religious zealot.

yeah i can agree with that, the point i was making was to skaw, i just meant i don't think the ones shouting hate speech are Worse then the ones killing people.

 

[Skaw]

But what they are doing isnt illegal, for the most part(they have been charged with going places they were told not to go, like getting to close to the funeral)

A hate crime is a hate crime. Westboro shitting up a gay soldiers funeral is in the same vein as the KKK burning a cross on a black or jewish families lawn. I find what they do worse than terrorism, because at least the victims of terrorism can fight back. Taking the offensive against a dead person is the absolute shittiest thing someone can do.

you can't really compare being a crazy and shouting "god hates fags", and "thank god for dead soldiers". with being a crazy and blowing yourself up in the middle of a crowded street, killing who knows how many innocent people.

I can compare "God wants fags dead" with "God wants Americans dead." Two groups hating another group.

A suicide bomber/terrorist is a different kind of scum, that's killing scores of completely INNOCENT bystanders just to prove your mindfucked point. NO amount of believing what your told is an excuse to kill completely innocent people, women and children included, just to get your point across.

Not everyone linked with Al Qaeda(And other terrorist networks, obviously) are suicide bombers though.

 

[Thelona]

A hate crime is a hate crime. Westboro shitting up a gay soldiers funeral is in the same vein as the KKK burning a cross on a black or jewish families lawn. I find what they do worse than terrorism, because at least the victims of terrorism can fight back. Taking the offensive against a dead person is the absolute shittiest thing someone can do.

I can compare "God wants fags dead" with "God wants Americans dead." Two groups hating another group.

the way i see it Taking someones life is forever, you KILL someone, a son/daughter, maybe a father/mother. what the westboro assholes do is fucked up beyond reason yeah, but its still not taking a life, or lives. thats just how i feel anyways

Not everyone linked with Al Qaeda(And other terrorist networks, obviously) are suicide bombers though.

by suicide bomber/terrorist i mean in general the people who use the tactic of killing random innocent civilians, often civilians of their own country, just to prove a point or to make everyone to scared to stand up.

 

[Halifirien]

Here's a good article to balance the one Celvantes posted: someone the Pentagon says went back to terrorism after being released from Guantanamo. The only problem is the Pentagon is completely full of shit.

KABUL, Afghanistan — Haji Sahib Rohullah Wakil spends his days going from one high-level official meeting to another with the swagger of a tribal elder, advocating for the needs of Kunar province, his home region.

Each encounter — with President Hamid Karzai, with Karzai's chief of staff or with one of Afghanistan's other presidential candidates — begins the same: They thank him for his honorable service to the people of Kunar.

Despite those endorsements, the Pentagon says that Wakil is among 74 former Guantanamo Bay detainees who've returned to or are suspected of returning to terrorism after their release from the island prison camp.

Wakil scoffs at the suggestion. So do those who know him.

"How could he be a terrorist? He is never far off the government's radar," leading Afghan presidential candidate Mirwise Yaseeni said. "His family is here. I have never known him to do anything criminal."

Pentagon officials didn't respond to a request for comment on why Wakil was included in a report that was leaked in May. The report itself says only that Wakil has "associations with terrorist groups."

The discovery that Wakil, far from being in hiding, operates openly among officials of Afghanistan's U.S.-allied government raises questions about the report's credibility, however. Despite his bravado, Wakil acknowledges that the report has him worried that he'll be detained again.

Never out of his reach are a stack of legal documents, letters signed by scores of high-ranking officials and frayed newspaper clippings that he believes prove that he isn't — and never has been — a terrorist. Documents in hand, he's always prepared to make the case he was never given the opportunity to make at Guantanamo.

"For six years, I was ready to go to court and defend myself. They should show the world their proof against me," Wakil said. "I am ready to answer any question."

Unknown officials leaked the Pentagon report naming Wakil to The New York Times just as debate was peaking over President Barack Obama's plans to shutter Guantanamo. On the same day that The Times published its story, former Vice President Dick Cheney cited the report in a speech blasting the idea of closing Guantanamo; that same day, Obama made his own presentation defending his plans.

In subsequent weeks, Congress rejected Obama's request for $80 million to pay for the closure and restricted his ability to relocate Guantanamo detainees to the United States.

Since then, The New York Times has said that its initial news story made a crucial error, lumping together 27 former detainees who the Pentagon said were confirmed as having returned to terrorism — including several who were dead or in prison — with 47 others, including Wakil, who were suspected terrorists, defined in part as those whose activities were "unverified or single-source but plausible."

Wakil's case adds more questions about just what's meant by "returning to terrorism."

It's worth reading the entire thing. Just because the government says someone is guilty, it doesn't mean they are.

 

[Trippyhippy]

Soooo...

If they are a terrorist and we know they have harmed or mean to harm people, why don't we try them and prove that in a court of law?

 

[Excim]

Soooo...

If they are a terrorist and we know they have harmed or mean to harm people, why don't we try them and prove that in a court of law?

This.

Try them and then deal with them accordingly. Otherwise, our country is just looking even more hypocritical in the eyes of others. The schoolyard bully doesn't have many friends, and neither does the know-it-all who tells other people that they know whats best for them. :hiding:

 

[Strid]

Soooo...

If they are a terrorist and we know they have harmed or mean to harm people, why don't we try them and prove that in a court of law?

With what though? Hearsay? A brown guy in Mid-East wear could be a completely harmless guy with an AK, for personal protection, and be branded a terrorist. Likewise a terrorist could say he did nothin', knows no one, and is just lookin' to live a peaceful life. It's hard to gain firm evidence in war. I'm not tryin' to debate what we should do nor what is right, what I'm curious to know is how do you convict a tight lipped liar over a guy with nothin' to hide sought to be a liar all because someone saw him with a gun. I know this is all a bit slim on my end, but I'd imagine not all bad guys go around makin' evidence and spillin' beans. Furthermore, it's not like our justice system is all it could be either. Tie that in with the probably piss poor evidence they get, most of which is probably hearsay, and you have yourself a nice juicy pickle.

So far the majority of the people who could actually be held down are the high ranks in which we have a lot, a lot of intel on and even intel is hearsay from someone. Hearsay is dangerous, no matter who it comes from. I think that's the trouble Obama is havin' now. How do you try all these people properly? It just can't be done. However, I will say this though in regards from my personal opinion, there are also people in our prisons, American citizens, who are innocent. Though it may not be the majority, there are those people there. It's just simply to hard and somethin' he shouldn't have campaigned on. It's borderline stupid really. The man over spoke himself throughout his entire campaign now it's commin' back on him. Even though I'm pretty much against him, he has potential to be a great President. He just should have never promised Eden durin' his campaign. He will probably pay for that come re-election time unless he does somethin' big to make Democrats and Republicans a like forget his lengthy list of "I cans".