• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Gitmo Closing Laughable

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
The proggie (progressive) 180 on Gitmo is almost laughable. Consider the hate and derision that George Bush suffered because of Guantanamo Bay. Apparently some proggies referred to it as an “assault on American values and the shredding of our Constitution.” The lamestream media obsessed over it. According to a 2006 study by the Media Research Center, between September 11, 2001 and August 31, 2006, the nightly newscasts on the three networks devoted 277 stories to Guantanamo Bay. Not to mention that the closing of Guantanamo was one of Barack Obama’s main campaign platforms in 2008!

Fast-forward to the Obama presidency. Dear Ruler changes his mind, and Gitmo remains open to this day. The ObamaMedia coverage of this reversal is scant … almost completely ignored. And now, a recent poll found that 53 percent of self-identified liberal Democrats — and 67 percent of moderate or conservative Democrats — support keeping Guantanamo Bay open. Compare that statistic to those from February 2009, one month after Obama took office, and when it was still believed he would close Guantanamo, 64% of Democrats supported its closure.

In hindsight, the vehement oppositions seems a little transparent, don’t ya think?
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
Are you telling us it isn't closed. That was going to be one of the first things the changer was going to do. That dang Bush :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Soapweed said:
What sayeth you, Oldtimer?

It would have long ago been closed- and whatever remaining prisoners moved to max security prisons within the US (probably at quite a taxpayer savings) if it wasn't for such an uproar from the NIMBY's (mostly R's)....

You do remember what NIMBY's are don't you Soap- folks that scream for something the country badly needs, until it affects their backyard- and then scream to high heaven until it moves somewhere else...
But they are all good red blooded patriotic Americans- just ask them- they'll tell you... :wink: :lol:

I could care less if they are housed in Leavenworth or Gitmo...The only problem with Gitmo was under GW- and with the torture issue/ and courts (SCOTUS) ruling he was illegally detaining individuals without hearings- it became a rallying cry for the terrorists in their recruiting agenda...

With all the taxdollars put in it- maybe we should make it into another Federal Max Prison facility...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
"illegally detaining individuals without hearings"


3/8/2011 1:28:20 AM |

WASHINGTON — President Obama ended a two-year ban on military commission trials for detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention center Monday in the latest sign that he may not be able to shutter the prison in Cuba any time soon.

Obama imposed the ban when he took office in January 2009. At the same time, in an effort to fulfill a campaign promise, he issued an order to close the prison within a year

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-03-08-gitmo08_ST_N.htm


The move represents a defeat for Obama, who pledged to close the terrorist detention facility in Cuba within one year of taking office. The president had hoped to hold trials in federal court for many of the detainees, but ran into stiff opposition from both parties.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/147871-obama-military-commissions-to-resume-for-gitmo-detainees
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
Oldtimer said:
You do remember what NIMBY's are don't you Soap- folks that scream for something the country badly needs, until it affects their backyard- and then scream to high heaven until it moves somewhere else...

Oh now I get you. Like the leftwingernuts who complained about Bush's spending(rightly so) but are suddenly silent about obama outspending Bush hand over fist.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
Old timer has not been available to preside over them, it is his pay for the tap tap in the oval office restroom!
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
384399_10150459829197450_282849042449_8386786_686898128_n.jpg
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Soapweed said:
What sayeth you, Oldtimer?

It would have long ago been closed- and whatever remaining prisoners moved to max security prisons within the US (probably at quite a taxpayer savings) if it wasn't for such an uproar from the NIMBY's (mostly R's)....

You do remember what NIMBY's are don't you Soap- folks that scream for something the country badly needs, until it affects their backyard- and then scream to high heaven until it moves somewhere else...
But they are all good red blooded patriotic Americans- just ask them- they'll tell you... :wink: :lol:

I could care less if they are housed in Leavenworth or Gitmo...The only problem with Gitmo was under GW- and with the torture issue/ and courts (SCOTUS) ruling he was illegally detaining individuals without hearings- it became a rallying cry for the terrorists in their recruiting agenda...

With all the taxdollars put in it- maybe we should make it into another Federal Max Prison facility...

Senate to block Guantanamo transfers as well
posted at 10:55 am on December 15, 2010 by Ed MorrisseyLast week, House Democrats on the Appropriations Committee inserted a codicil into next year’s spending plan to prohibit federal funds to be used for the purpose of transferring detainees at Guantanamo Bay to the US for any purpose during FY2011. Whether this came as a slap from progressives angered over Barack Obama’s tax deal or from moderates angered at the response from progressives to it, the move certainly caught the attention of the White House. Eric Holder decried it as an unprecedented intrusion on executive authority and demanded its removal, apparently unaware of the Constitution and the House’s “power of the purse” to check the executive branch’s overreach.
Now the Senate has followed suit and included the same ban in its version of FY2011 funding:
The Senate is moving to block President Barack Obama from transferring Guantanamo Bay prisoners to the United States.
An unreleased draft of a bill expected to pass this month essentially puts a nine-month hold on Guantanamo transfers. That includes Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, who had been slotted for trial in New York before Obama bowed to political resistance and blocked the Justice Department’s plans.
The AP can’t resist adding an editorial comment at the end:
It already looked as if, in the decade after 9/11, no one would face trial for the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil. The Senate bill would make that a near certainty.
That decision has nothing to do with this defunding of detainee transfers. Congress has repeatedly authorized military commissions to adjudicate the 9/11 terrorists as well as other detainees captured abroad by military and intelligence assets during a time of war. This not only follows the precedents set over the entirety of our national history, it provides more safeguards and routes of appeal than we have allowed in any other commission system. Even the Obama administration apparently agrees, as it is processing some of Gitmo’s detainees through that system.
That seems to be one of the reasons that Congress is now stripping the executive branch of funds to move detainees to federal courts. The Obama administration has acted in defiance of multiple efforts by Congress — including a Democratic-led Congress — to establish the military commissions as the court of jurisdiction for terrorists captured outside the US by military and intelligence units. Elected officials from both parties have objected to trying these terrorists in federal court, especially in New York, where Denocrats like Senator Chuck Schumer and Governor Andrew Cuomo both demanded that Obama cancel the trial in Manhattan. On top of that, Holder’s DoJ suffered an embarrassing verdict in the Ahmed Ghailani trial in which the terrorist defendant won acquittals on all but one conspiracy charge after the presiding judge barred an important witness due to Ghailani’s interrogation by intelligence assets.
It seems we have reached consensus on the notion of civilian-court trials for Gitmo detainees — and the Obama White House is outside of it.

Seems to me Oldtimer it was Obama's own party THE DEMOCRATS that were the NIMBYers
:wink: Or were the House and Senate not controled by the Democrats when the funding to move the detainees was rejected by BOTH HOUSES.
 

Latest posts

Top