Obama creates another Guantanamo in Afghanistan

tasco66 says on Apr 4, 2009, 10:00:

Vlad I think you are a bit slow at understanding the meaning of “change” for Obama...

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

sloopskipper says on Apr 4, 2009, 17:01:

Vladimiro Said:

Obama creates another Guantanamo in Afghanistan

See below, the Obama regime is moving suspects from all over the world to Afghanistan and then arguing that they don't have the right to defend themselves in court because they are in war zone.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/02/AR2009....

"A federal judge ruled yesterday that three detainees at a U.S. military prison in Afghanistan may challenge their confinement before a U.S. court, handing the Obama administration one of its first legal defeats on a claim of executive power.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates rejected the government's argument, first made by the Bush administration and later adopted by the Obama Justice Department, that it could detain prisoners indefinitely in a war zone."

How did those three detainees get to Afghanistan? The US took them there!
By vladimiro on Apr 4, 2009, 09:47 (today) in Off Topic.

Obama regime is moving the suspects? (from the same article):

“Bates emphasized that his decision to grant habeas rights to those at Bagram is limited and that it applies only to prisoners captured outside Afghanistan. The detainees' attorneys say the three men were picked up outside the country and later imprisoned at Bagram. They have been held there since at least 2003.”

0 funny, 0 helpful.

vladimiro says on Apr 5, 2009, 00:34:

yes, the sentence you quote "The detainees' attorneys say the three men were picked up outside the country and later imprisoned in Bagram (afghanistan) " means the US detained them in some other country and moved them to afghanistan :)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

sloopskipper says on Apr 5, 2009, 03:42:

"See below, the Obama regime is moving suspects from all over the world to Afghanistan and then arguing that they don't have the right to defend themselves in court because they are in war zone."

“Bates emphasized that his decision to grant habeas rights to those at Bagram is limited and that it applies only to prisoners captured outside Afghanistan. The detainees' attorneys say the three men were picked up outside the country and later imprisoned at Bagram. They have been held there since at least 2003.”

There seems to be some sort of disconnect there.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

aztec says on May 2, 2009, 11:25:

Condi Rice sticks it to the Stanford bleeding hearts
Posted By: James Delingpole at May 2, 2009 at 16:50:15 [General]
Posted in: Politics


"Let me tell you something: unless you were there in a position of responsibility after September 11 you cannot possibly imagine the dilemmas that we faced in trying to protect Americans," she says.

"A lot of people are second guessing now but let me tell you the second guessing that would have hurt me more is if there had been 3,000 more Americans dying because we didn't do everything we could to protect them."

"If you were in a position of authority and watched Americans jumping out of 80-storey buildings because these murderous tyrants go after innocent people then you would have determined to do anything you could that was legal to prevent that happening."

She is similarly robust when rebutting the suggestion that the US has no place dealing with regimes like Saudi Arabia: "You don't have the luxury in foreign policy of not dealing with a country because you don't like its human rights practices."

And she is quite withering when the pallid leftie student tries having a go at her about supposed torture at Guantanamo. "Did you know that Guantanamo was called a 'model medium security prison' by representatives of the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe?" The student reluctantly concedes he hasn't.

"Maybe before you make allegations about Guantanamo, you should READ," says Condi, with exquisitely measured scorn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijEED_iviTA

0 funny, 0 helpful.