» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.
Subject: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: LyricBoy on 05/23/09 at 11:04 am
Just read in the news that President O'bama has said (words to the effect) that some of the Gitmo detainees "may never be convicted of anything, but they are too dangerous to release".
So... no need for those nasty military tribunals. Nope, we won't try 'em at all!
"There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced bye-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight"
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/23/09 at 1:51 pm
Well, you won't hear me defending Obama on this one. Maybe someday he'll decide I'm too dangerous too.
::)
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: Macphisto on 05/23/09 at 2:33 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uuWVHT1WUY
Maddow's right on this one.
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: Foo Bar on 05/23/09 at 8:36 pm
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/5741/20081116a.gif
Life imitates art.
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: Samwise on 05/24/09 at 10:24 am
Never fear - Glennzilla's on the case.
What Obama's doing - not just in terms of indefinite detention, but also expanding on Bush's state secrets thing, and continuing the warrantless wiretapping... it's so enraging. He promised to change all these things. One of the reasons I supported him as strongly as I did was because I was upset about our civil liberties getting taken away, and I thought he'd reverse that. Instead, he's actually worse than Bush on that issue - but he's lying to us, claiming to be doing the opposite of what he's really doing. Every time he opens his mouth, I think, "For the love of God, man, you're a former professor of constitutional law! You have to know you're spewing bull!" I feel like a total sucker, because I truly believed he was a good, honest person who believed in restoring our freedoms. Now he just seems like Bush v.2.0 - same program, slicker interface.
I've thought about writing him a letter, but I know the only person who'd ever read it would be an underpaid intern scanning for bomb threats. :-[
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: LyricBoy on 05/24/09 at 11:00 am
Never fear - Glennzilla's on the case.
What Obama's doing - not just in terms of indefinite detention, but also expanding on Bush's state secrets thing, and continuing the warrantless wiretapping... it's so enraging. He promised to change all these things. One of the reasons I supported him as strongly as I did was because I was upset about our civil liberties getting taken away, and I thought he'd reverse that. Instead, he's actually worse than Bush on that issue - but he's lying to us, claiming to be doing the opposite of what he's really doing. Every time he opens his mouth, I think, "For the love of God, man, you're a former professor of constitutional law! You have to know you're spewing bull!" I feel like a total sucker, because I truly believed he was a good, honest person who believed in restoring our freedoms. Now he just seems like Bush v.2.0 - same program, slicker interface.
I've thought about writing him a letter, but I know the only person who'd ever read it would be an underpaid intern scanning for bomb threats. :-bongbondholders at Chrysler, and he is ready to appoint a Supreme Court justice who will instead of APPLYING the Constitution, will legislate from the bench. He's already made statements that the CONUS is 200+ years old and may not be appropriate. (I am guessing he missed the class that talked about constitutional amendments.)
Looks like each party has plenty of ammo to accuse the other of using the CONUS when convenient.
Heck, at least Bush and company held foreign nationals in indefinite detention outside the United States, where one might find a gray area of the law. O'bama plans to being them within our borders and hold them indefinitely, where the law is pretty much established and clear. Maybe we will see Amurrican citizens next held in indefinite detention at Supermax.
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: Samwise on 05/24/09 at 11:10 am
Heck, at least Bush and company held foreign nationals in indefinite detention outside the United States, where one might find a gray area of the law. O'bama plans to being them within our borders and hold them indefinitely, where the law is pretty much established and clear. Maybe we will see Amurrican citizens next held in indefinite detention at Supermax.
Exactly. Bush was just flaunting the law - Obama's changing the law. He's granting Bush's violations greater legitimacy. He's setting everything up for some crazed authoritarian to come to power and completely topple our democracy. Lately I've been thinking I'd almost prefer it if McCain had been elected. He'd also be continuing Bush's policies, but under a Republican mantle so this dismantling of our freedoms wouldn't be presented as "bipartisan" and "centrist" like it's starting to under Obama. It looks like this is the new normal. :-\\
He's already made statements that the CONUS is 200+ years old and may not be appropriate. (I am guessing he missed the class that talked about constitutional amendments.)
Wait, when did he say that? From what I've seen, he's been pretty good about feeding us sweet-talk about protecting the constitution, freedom, etc.
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: Macphisto on 05/24/09 at 4:33 pm
I wouldn't write off Obama just yet. He is walking the line on a slippery slope, but consider the logistics here.
We currently have information gained through torture, some of which has likely been corroborated with other information in the field. Because this information was obtained via torture, it isn't normally permissible in court, but on the other hand, should it be entirely discarded if it could save lives?
It seems like maybe the answer is to prosecute the torturers while still holding those we know are guilty (due to the aforementioned corroboration) in custody until conviction. The ones we don't have anything on, we should simply release a la the Witness Protection Agency.
Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that those who have been wrongfully tortured will likely hold some strong resentment for us (to put it mildly) and should probably be watched from afar.
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/25/09 at 12:11 am
Well the "professor of constutional law" just got finished stepping on the rights of secured bongbondholders at Chrysler, and he is ready to appoint a Supreme Court justice who will instead of APPLYING the Constitution, will legislate from the bench.
Forgive me cynicism here, but methinks "applying the Constitution" is a euphemism for "doing stuff that favors gun-owning rich white males" and "legislating from the bench" is a euphemism for "doing stuff that does not favor gun-owning rich white males."
Other that, I'm with you and Samwise on the matter.
;)
Subject: Re: O'bama's New Gitmo
Written By: Don Carlos on 05/25/09 at 9:09 am
I wouldn't write off Obama just yet. He is walking the line on a slippery slope, but consider the logistics here.
We currently have information gained through torture, some of which has likely been corroborated with other information in the field. Because this information was obtained via torture, it isn't normally permissible in court, but on the other hand, should it be entirely discarded if it could save lives?
It seems like maybe the answer is to prosecute the torturers while still holding those we know are guilty (due to the aforementioned corroboration) in custody until conviction. The ones we don't have anything on, we should simply release a la the Witness Protection Agency.
Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that those who have been wrongfully tortured will likely hold some strong resentment for us (to put it mildly) and should probably be watched from afar.
Yeah, things just aren't as simple as black and white. So while I am discouraged, I will wait and see.
As to "legislating from the bench", they all do that to one extent or another. It comes down to being rigid as to the founders' intent or seeing the Const. as a living document.