Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

gnadfly · 03-09-2011, 09:12 PM

A few days ago President Obama signed another executive order this time resuming military trials at Gitmo for enemy combatants and holding combatants without charges. Finally. I fully agree with the former and believe trying terrorists in Federal court was ridiculous. What is even more ridiculous is the Obama apologists asserting that terrorists couldn't be tried because contamination by "Bush Torture." Wasn't it revealed that only TWO people were "water boarded?" 9/11 Mastermind Kalid Sheik Mohammed and one other person (if memory serves)? Also, was waterboarding ever "legally" declared torture? I remember BHO did not totally disavow using it.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...namo-bay-dete/

discreetgent · 03-09-2011, 09:18 PM

I was disappointed with both.

charlestudor2005 · 03-10-2011, 03:46 AM

+1

It seems like Obama is going to fail in these campaign promises.

Rudyard K · 03-10-2011, 08:57 AM

Being responsible for the well being of others has a funny way clouding up the answers that seem so obvious to the spectators.

Guest050715-1 · 03-10-2011, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

+1

It seems like Obama is going to fail in these campaign promises.

He's failed in a lot of campaign promises. It's just the way politics is.

RK is right in his comment above. It was painfully obvious to everyone but him it wasn't going to work.

discreetgent · 03-10-2011, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Being responsible for the well being of others has a funny way clouding up the answers that seem so obvious to the spectators.

No doubt, governing is way different than campaigning. Still doesn't mean I can't be disappointed.

Rudyard K · 03-10-2011, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by discreetgent

Still doesn't mean I can't be disappointed.

Of course not!! In this instance, you're a spectator...and the answers are painfully simple.

WTF · 03-10-2011, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Of course not!! In this instance, you're a spectator...and the answers are painfully simple.

Now that was funny , sorry dg!

discreetgent · 03-10-2011, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WTF

Now that was funny , sorry dg!

Doesn't mean RK's response was correct and that we didn't totally fuck up by setting up Guantanimo in the first place.

Sisyphus · 03-10-2011, 05:32 PM

It's a disappointing conclusion....Jimmy Carter....but with soul...

TexTushHog · 03-10-2011, 11:46 PM

Absolutely despicable. Sometimes I think that you could carve a President with more spine out of an over-ripe banana.

As usual, Glenn Greenwald is right on point:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/gl...amo/index.html

gnadfly · 03-11-2011, 08:24 AM

Sadly hilarious and telling. The Bush haters, progressives and media made this a central issue in 2006 all the way up until the election. This despite the Democratic Congress passing legislation to fund and legalize any military trials. Obama prioritizes closing Gitmo and turns a presidential order into a furious self-congratulating smoke and mirrors move that fails. Even the liberal Salon article agrees it was doomed to fail.

Where's the outrage from the MSM? The libs? dKos, HuffPo and DU? Obama, the law professor, said this was unjust yet he is not only continuing the policies of Bush but embracing them. Please don't say "He's forced to" because that simply isn't true.

Where was the outrage when BHO said that "The US doesn't engage in torture" then meekly added that he reserved the right to waterboard.

Disappointed? Yes, in the continuing double standard of the media. BTW, ready yourself for more disappointment, BHO's "signature piece of legislation" will either be axed or gutted.

Rudyard K · 03-11-2011, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by discreetgent

Doesn't mean RK's response was correct and that we didn't totally fuck up by setting up Guantanimo in the first place.

And the above doesn't make my response incorrect or that we did "F*ck up".

Porscheboy8888 · 03-11-2011, 09:37 AM

What were we thinking, close Gitmo?

Why is it every time the liberals assert their wrong thinking they try and use the Bill of Rights or the Constitution? That stuff was written 200 years ago, before terrorist! It doen't apply now.

I mean those furners are trying to throw us out of their countries. Hell we came there to help them get their useless oil out of the ground. We helped the Irquis get rid of those Weapons of Mass Destruction, just because we didn't find them doesn't mean they weren't there. And now they repay us by actually fighing our liberation forces in Afgan and Iraq. I say they accept freedom or we kill them or put them in Gitmo.

Trials, why waste money on trials, I say we take everyone who doesn't agree with us and ship them home. By the way would some of you smart people tell us what we agree on. Oh never mind I'll just turn on Rush and he'll tell me what to think. He's always right or so many people wouldn't call his show and agree with him.

Hell, if Rush says it, then it's OK with me. No I don't remember that he disagreed with Bush and wanted him out of office, I can only remember back to last thursday.

pjorourke · 03-11-2011, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Porscheboy8888

Why is it every time the liberals assert their wrong thinking they try and use the Bill of Rights or the Constitution? That stuff was written 200 years ago, before terrorist! It doen't apply now.

200 years ago, we were the terrorists. But back then, "terrorists" only attached military targets.