Obama wants to pretend he can close Guantanamo

[Oviorasi]

Yeah, it is a hope only. Most of them keep a copy in their pocket, they don't actually read it...

You may be confusing the US Constitution with the Law of Armed Conflict.

Obama has been wanting these terrorists to have their day in court to bash the US since before he took office. Now he can get it and not have to deal with the consequences of bringing these people into the US prison system.

[TexasRules]

I suppose it is foolhardy to expect this congress to get anything done. short of scratching thier own asses.

It's those damn republicans obstructing obama with their vote of 91-3 in the senate. How dare they vote against a man who picks and chooses which laws we should follow.

- - - Updated - - -

You may be confusing the US Constitution with the Law of Armed Combat.

Obama has been wanting these terrorists to have their day in court to bash the US since before he took office. Now he can get it and not have to deal with the consequences of bringing these people into the US prison system.

No, he knows it's not in the US Constitution. He just likes to throw arguments up that make no sense and then back off when called on it.

[TZucchini]

Rights aren't inalienable? You think rights should be gifted to us, the peasants, by our benevolent government overlords? (but only if we're good boys and girls, right?)

It's the government's job to recognize and protect our rights, not grant them.

And yet it's all just semantics, isn't it? By simply recognizing a right exists, they are in fact, granting us that right.

Who determines what is a right, and what isn't a right? Is it the same people that also protect that right? What if I think something is a right, and someone else thinks it's not a right? What then?

[Oviorasi]

It's those damn republicans obstructing obama with their vote of 91-3 in the senate. How dare they vote against a man who picks and chooses which laws we should follow.

- - - Updated - - -



No, he knows it's not in the US Constitution. He just likes to throw arguments up that make no sense and then back off when called on it.

Maybe but I am reluctant to underestimate the ignorance on this board.

[Sky High]

It's those damn republicans obstructing obama with their vote of 91-3 in the senate. How dare they vote against a man who picks and chooses which laws we should follow.

they can vote as they want, still makes them the most useless legislating body in years.

[IIamaKing]

The constitution is the most violated document in Washington. And the people have said more than once they want gitmo closed so it is up to congress to make sure the will of the people gets enacted upon. But with this do nothing congress that have been terrible since 2010 well we cant expect much good from unfortunately

When? Where? Pretty sure there has never been a national referendum on Gitmo.

- - - Updated - - -

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.

Or they are not criminals? But innocent?

Honest question, do those rights extend beyond citizenship?

[Oviorasi]

they can vote as they want, still makes them the most useless legislating body in years.

"That government is best which governs least." - TJ

Vote Gridlock in 2016

[Grapemask]

Honest question, do those rights extend beyond citizenship?

This is precisely the argument used to support Guantanamo, because everyone involved is aware that it sits in the ambiguous undefined zone of the constitution.

This is also where we enter upon the hypocrisy of the "OBAMA PICKS AND CHOOSES WHAT HE WANTS TO FOLLOW" crowd. Republican judicial hero Scalia believed the constitution should be interpreted as it was envisioned by the writers, and the writers put in the amendments and rights regarding the things happening at Gitmo specifically because they saw it as a violation of human rights, having suffered it themselves. And given that they suffered it at the hands of what became an outside government, it's clear they would be just as appalled by the notion of any government using it on any person of any citizen status.

[JohnBrown1917]

We've asked other countries to take these poor poor detainees, so far no takers. We have 100 or so left.

Some of the more tame detainees found homes outside the US but not all.

Yes, other countries should solve your problems.
Spoken like a true American.

[Skroe]

Isn't it adorable.

Here's hoping he doesn't pull a Jimmy Carter and had back territory when he visits.

[Sky High]

maybe when the terrorists turn out to be drug kingpins or communist sympathizers we will find it in our hearts to bring them to the US for trial. till then.

[-Nurot]

"That government is best which governs least." - Henry David Thoreau *FIXED

It wasn't "TJ". Makes a pretty big difference, considering, one was the third President of the United States, the other was a philosopher who was all about nature who had millions of musings on paper, some of which were even contradictory in view.

[Eliandal]

Honest question, do those rights extend beyond citizenship?

If they do not, then by what right do you hold them at all?

[ezgeze]

He should build the new prison to house these terrorists right next to the Obama presidential library

[TZucchini]

He should build the new prison to house these terrorists right next to the Obama presidential library

Good one. You sure zing'd him there!!!!!!!!!

[Felya]

Honest question, do those rights extend beyond citizenship?

Are you suggesting that the people holding these none citizens are not citizens? Because there are two parties involved, the rights of detainees and the rights of the detainers. The speedy trial does not mean that U.S. courts are to ignore the constitution, because they are dealing with none citizens. The constitution is not just about how citizens are to be treated, but what is permissible by law for citizens to do. You cannot kill a none citizen and then claim it's legal because the person you killed is not covered by U.S. law.

[Healing Rain]

This is why Obama lost control of Congress so quickly. There are some campaign promises that should NOT be kept.

[Oviorasi]

It wasn't "TJ". Makes a pretty big difference, considering, one was the third President of the United States, the other was a philosopher who was all about nature who had millions of musings on paper, some of which were even contradictory in view.

You may be right. I got it from the Monticello web site but it may just be a bunch of Jeffersonian propaganda.

https://www.monticello.org/site/jeff...east-quotation

[Felya]

If they do not, then by what right do you hold them at all?

The guy you are quoting is obfuscating the issue, by ignoring that these people are in custody of US citizens. That question implies that U.S. citizens can ignore the constitution, if the people they are dealing with are not citizens. It's absurd... You still read Miranda rights to none citizens... You still need a search warrant if you are entering the home of a none citizen...

[Oviorasi]

The guy you are quoting is obfuscating the issue, by ignoring that these people are in custody of US citizens. That question implies that U.S. citizens can ignore the constitution, if the people they are dealing with are not citizens. It's absurd... You still read Miranda rights to none citizens... You still need a search warrant if you are entering the home of a none citizen...

I thought these people were taken on the field of battle, i.e. Prisoners of War. You make it sound like they were arrested by the civilian authorities. Maybe some were? I don't know. But I'm pretty sure the vast majority were not.