Even a broken clock is right twice a day

Who knew fecklessness and cowardice could actually be a good quality in the worlds greatest deliberative body?

Because the MSM is not the people.

but but but he promised

i just want to say thanks to senate for this
so, i guess O will want to override this

I don't get it, how does one need funds for closure?

I thought closure was what you did, when the funds run out!

and BTW - Gitmo will still be open a year from now, Mr. President. But don't worry, we don't expect our politicians to keep thier promises. Now about all the socialism you are ramming down our throats...

re: #4 pegcity

but but but he promised

But the Senate didn't.

Be grateful.

re: #6 itellu3times

I don't get it, how does one need funds for closure?

I thought closure was what you did, when the funds run out!

well they need to transfer all prisoners to US prisons, etc...

When the liberal motto "not in our backyard" pays off- for once.

re: #6 itellu3times

I don't get it, how does one need funds for closure?

I thought closure was what you did, when the funds run out!

Bailout?

I think I hear the Fat Lady sing...it is predictable and will get even harder for BO...he has no clue

Who were the 10? (6 + 4 no-shows)

I suspect that most of Obama's other moonbat fantasies which he promised during the campaign (prosecuting Bush appointees, immediately withdrawing all troops from the Middle East, etc.) will crash and burn in reality.

Bush kickin' back in Texas with a cool drink, LHAO.

re: #15 zombie

I suspect that most of Obama's other moonbat fantasies which he promised during the campaign (prosecuting Bush appointees, immediately withdrawing all troops from the Middle East, etc.) will crash and burn in reality.

He may was well pack it in and go back to Indonesia Hawaii.

The 90-6 Senate vote — paired with similar House action last week — was a clear sign to Obama that he faces a tough fight getting the Democratic-controlled Congress to agree with his plans to shut down the detention center and move the 240 detainees.

That's quite a lopsided vote, huh?

It's important to remember that the Senate isn't saying they don't want to close Guantanamo. They're just saying they won't authorize closing it until they see the plan for what's going to be done with the detainees. It's quite a reasonable acknowledgement of reality, I think, in response to a president whose policies so far have mostly been a nonstop barrage of empty platitudes about hope, change, ridding the entire world of nuclear weapons, making everyone in the world love each other, without any details about what is actually to be done.

re: #17 The Other Les

He may was well pack it in and go back to Indonesia Hawaii.

Where did that "w" come from?

Change!

re: #15 zombie

I suspect that most of Obama's other moonbat fantasies which he promised during the campaign (prosecuting Bush appointees, immediately withdrawing all troops from the Middle East, etc.) will crash and burn in reality.

his is a house of cards...wait till he loses his choke hold on the media..his downfall will be epic

New at zomblog, quite relevant to this post:

Obama’s rejected campaign slogan: Alteration!

Kos goes berserk in 10..9..8..7..

I wrote this in the last thread and it's more relevant here:

Congress wants the President to come up with a place for the detainees as per his Executive Orders. They don't want to take the rap for detainees continuing to be held when the President opened this can of worms. Obama called for the closure by the end of the year, but didn't have any plan for what to do with the detainees.

They can't be released, so they have to be held somewhere - and Gitmo is as good a place as any, despite what the Democrats have demogogued.

It's the spineless leading the gutless.

Also, a judge ruled that the Administration can detain some of these people indefinitely.

A federal judge has ruled that the US government can detain terror suspects indefinitely, if they helped plan or carry out the 9/11 attacks.

Detainees who "substantially support" the Taliban or al-Qaeda but are not members cannot be held indefinitely, however, the judge decided.

Judge John Bates based his ruling on the authority granted to the president by Congress in 2002.

US President Barack Obama has pledged to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

So, when can they be released? When they no longer present a threat? That would mean indefinite detention since if you release an 80 year old jihadi, you've got yourself a terrorist who exhorts others to plot and plan additional attacks. They can't exactly do that easily while in prison (unless they have help from traitorous lawyers like Lynne Stewart).

This further points out the insanity of lawfare, and the limitations of law to deal with a military matter.

It seems that Barack Obama is even to the left of the vast majority of senators on this issue. That is quite a leftward stance!

This could be a side benefit of the endless election cycle. Voters are already thinking about 2010 and Senators and Representatives don't want to get on the wrong side of this issue.

re: #16 Russkilitlover

Bush kickin' back in Texas with a cool drink, LHAO.

And here's where he's doing it (with photo gallery!)

This is 100% the MSM led by the LLL living in a bubble and believing their own BS.

When the reality hit, they saw that the PEOPLE would have none of it.

re: #20 cannadian club akbar

Change!

Change from Change!

re: #30 Ward Cleaver

Change from Change!

few quarters and a dime?
///

The roll call vote is here.

NAYs ---6
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

I don't think 0bama will become Clinton 2.0, but the Congress, with help from screaming constituents, could definitely moderate things.

So "torture" was sanctioned by the left and it turns out that Gitmo was the right place to send terrorists... Can we redo the election?

I think this goes to show that Senators enjoy their jobs, and want to keep them. They knew there would be hell to pay from their constituents if any of these men were allowed to live in their areas. I don't think it's so much to do with closing the camp as much as it is "what to do with the prisoners?" They're not wanted here, or anywhere. Senators aren't that stupid as to foist these killers on their voters.

re: #14 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Who were the 10? (6 + 4 no-shows)

Here you go:

NAYs ---6
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)

Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

re: #32 lawhawk

The roll call vote is here.

NAYs ---6
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

The hardcore pinheads.

re: #30 Ward Cleaver

Change from Change!

Change for the Change God! Hope for the Hope Throne!

/with apologies to Khorne and the World Eaters

A pack pack full of cut up pinfish and point them north to Florida. If they make it, they stay. CHUM!

Perhaps senators are getting hip to what they need to do to be reelected?

Does this mean Akmed may not be getting his Section 8 apartment?

The MSM and the left are like the French. They live in a world of philosophy.

When the reality will cost them their seats, suddenly (when Bush is no longer Pres), they're pragmatists.

re: #41 unrealizedviewpoint

Does this mean Akmed may not be getting his Section 8 apartment?

And a human interest story in the local fishwrap?

#39 back pack
PIMF

re: #29 buzzsawmonkey

I can't understand why the detainees can't simply be released into the civilian population, as long as they register with the local authorities. It works so well for sex offenders.

///

I wish I could laugh at that.

re: #27 Ward Cleaver

And here's where he's doing it (with photo gallery!)

Hmmm so-so. A bit beige for my taste and room layouts look like warmed over 60's floorplans.

re: #37 Ward Cleaver

Does that mean even Nancy Pelosi voted to block this?

Now, if only Congress would adopt a similar attitude against rampant deficit spending, much would be well. Here's hoping the fiscal conservatives in both parties can put aside their partisan differences long enough to do what's right for the country.

It's just Darling!

Sorry KosKidz, no reprieve from seeing Dick Cheney's smiling face on your TVs again this week...

re: #38 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Change for the Change God! Hope for the Hope Throne!

/with apologies to Khorne and the World Eaters

Khorne is not happy you, minion.

/Rumble in the distance.

This is good news, because I can see the jail where Pres. Obama wants to put the GITMO Boyz from my house.

(It's a red brick jail about 7 stories high, just inside the Beltway's southernmost end in Alexandria, Va)

re: #23 Honorary Yooper

Kos goes berserk in 10..9..8..7..

I haven't quite figures out how, yet, but I'm certain this is somehow Bush's fault.

Or maybe Karl Rove's.

re: #37 Ward Cleaver

The hardcore pinheads.

UNpossible - where is California?

re: #47 Lawrence Schmerel

Does that mean even Nancy Pelosi voted to block this?

She's the Speaker of the House. She's not in the Senate.

Thank goodness, because Barbara Boxer is bad enough.

Maybe we should send them back to Afghanistan where they can help clear line mines they helped plant.

re: #51 CyanSnowHawk

Khorne is not happy with you, minion.

/Rumble in the distance.

PIMF. I hate it when I leave a key word out of comments.

re: #46 Russkilitlover

Hmmm so-so. A bit beige for my taste and room layouts look like warmed over 60's floorplans.

Well, it is a 1959 house (although it was doubled in size by the last owner). I like houses like that, because, 1) it's on a pier-and-beam foundation, so no walking on what are basically concrete floors, and, 2) one story, so no climbing up and down stairs all the time.

re: #32 lawhawk

The roll call vote is here.

NAYs ---6
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

* * * *
Thank you for posting this. Glad my two Democrat Senators Webb & Warner got the message and aren't on this list of losers.

re: #22 zombie

New at zomblog, quite relevant to this post:

Obama’s rejected campaign slogan: Alteration!

Cute! BTW, I had a thought about naming your ideology. What would you think of something playing on the name of Alexis de Tocqueville? He was an observer, not a political philosopher, and I think most of us support the positive values of America that he reported. The down side is, his name is hard to spell.

re: #47 Lawrence Schmerel

Does that mean even Nancy Pelosi voted to block this?

She's in the House, so, no.

re: #52 alegrias

This is good news, because I can see the jail where Pres. Obama wants to put the GITMO Boyz from my house.

(It's a red brick jail about 7 stories high, just inside the Beltway's southernmost end in Alexandria, Va)

You've got GITMO Boyz at your house?

re: #34 ointmentfly

So "torture" was sanctioned by the left and it turns out that Gitmo was the right place to send terrorists... Can we redo the election?

Sorry, no! Øbama's still passing out the hopeNchange. It'll be another year or so till the folks realize their unicorns arrived with no horns. Check back, will ya?

re: #57 CyanSnowHawk

PIMF. I hate it when I leave a key word out of comments.

Mmmm... popkhorne.

I think Charles Krauthammer predicted that Gitmo would not be closed in a year. If I remember correctly, he didn't believe that Obama actually wanted it to happen, he was just throwing a bone to the people that got him elected.

re: #59 alegrias

* * * *
Thank you for posting this. Glad my two Democrat Senators Webb & Warner got the message and aren't on this list of losers.

It's bizarre not seeing Sen. Boxer, D, CA listed.

re: #51 CyanSnowHawk

Khorne is not happy you, minion.

/Rumble in the distance.

re: #57 CyanSnowHawk

PIMF. I hate it when I leave a key word out of comments.

To be fair though, when has he ever really been happy?

re: #23 Honorary Yooper

Kos goes berserk in 10..9..8..7..

Starting at "10" was quite optimistic on your part.

re: #59 alegrias

* * * *
Thank you for posting this. Glad my two Democrat Senators Webb & Warner got the message and aren't on this list of losers.

Kind of surprising that JFK isn't on the loser list.

I can't believe that the Rush thread is still going strong. How many burn outs? 8 or 9?

re: #69 Beholden

Starting at "10" was quite optimistic on your part.

More like 1...0...

The solution is obvious. Give the detainees to posters of sites like MoveOn.org or DailyKos.

The MoveOner or Kossiak Kook can take care of the detainees, understand them, be tolerant of them, provide them with free food and health care, share Bush hatred stories, share 9/11 conspiracy theories and hate the Jooos together!

re: #60 doppelganglander

Cute! BTW, I had a thought about naming your ideology. What would you think of something playing on the name of Alexis de Tocqueville? He was an observer, not a political philosopher, and I think most of us support the positive values of America that he reported. The down side is, his name is hard to spell.

Those last three words are the biggest problem with that idea.

re: #71 Erik The Red

I can't believe that the Rush thread is still going strong. How many burn outs? 8 or 9?

It's like the Leonids meteor shower.

re: #58 Ward Cleaver

Well, it is a 1959 house (although it was doubled in size by the last owner). I like houses like that, because, 1) it's on a pier-and-beam foundation, so no walking on what are basically concrete floors, and, 2) one story, so no climbing up and down stairs all the time.

I've been in the homebuilding business for over 20 years here in California. For all that developers get branded as "evil," we sure as heck fire built some damn fine homes! To this home, we would say pfffttt.

re: #61 Ward Cleaver

That was a dumb question by me. Of course. Nancy is not in the Senate. But did this bill come through the House?

re: #49 Rednek

It's just Darling!

Sort of like those robot spiders in Minority Report.

I think the GITMO closure debacle is a smokescreen for this. So much for unclenching.

[Link: www.comcast.net...]

Great news, and I expect further smackdowns to overweening ambition. On the other hand the same congress has ambitions of their own that we need to watch.

re: #60 doppelganglander

Cute! BTW, The down side is, his name is hard to spell.

"And it's difficult enough to pronounce to keep out the riff-raff."
~ Les Freres heurieux - Fraser

re: #19 The Other Les

Where did that "w" come from?

Your ass, just like the rest of your post? Still hung up on the Obama birth certificate in May, that's just sad. My 8 year-old cousin has posted more substantive critiques of the Obama administration.

Seriously though, I still don't understand what the deal is with "closing" Gitmo. The sheer existence of the place is one giant PR masterpiece for terrorist recruitment. Take them from Gitmo, throw them into the new max security prison in Wyoming that is literally begging Congress for the right to hold them. It gives a few hundred Americans good jobs locking up scumbags, and closes the page on Gitmo so Al-Quaida recruiters can't hold it up as an example for justifying the slaughter of Americans.

I am sorry about this being Off Topic so early,but as a geology student with a bio minor I really really wanted to make a few things straight on the evolution trend about Rush.

It seems like being a supporter of evolution means you believe that we evolved from apes,monkeys,as we see them today. Please Charles correct me if I'm wrong or in the wrong context but I am not convinced Charles or Rush know entirely what they are talking about.(this is with the up most respect,don't just down ding).

Believing in evolution means you believe humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Not from one forming from the other. It seems with the discovery of Ida that we have finally found the splitting point on the evolutionary tree, we have finally found a fossil that is very likely the point we humanoids went one way, and apes/chimps went the other.

There were many types of Hominoids that have become extinct throughout the past, Neanderthals are the most commonly known, and we (by we,homo sapiens) may have had a role in that. We humans today have many characteristics of apes and chimps and such,but lets all face it, you can tell the difference quite easily, which is why a creationist can sound "rational" if they hold up a picture of a gorilla and say "Charles(or insert any rational blogger) thinks we came from this". That is not true,we didn't come from any chimp or gorilla on the planet,we came from a common ancestor, which appears to be Ida.

I mean no disrespect to people like Charles or Rush that are both more successful than I'll ever be, I would just wish that each would clarify distinctly what evolution means, what it doesn't mean,etc.

re: #76 Russkilitlover

I've been in the homebuilding business for over 20 years here in California. For all that developers get branded as "evil," we sure as heck fire built some damn fine homes! To this home, we would say pfffttt.

Sorry, I just prefer older homes to newer ones, except when it comes to energy efficiency. Give me a home with pier-and-beam, one story, and ICF insulation (conditioned attic) and other energy-saving features.

re: #74 zombie

Those last three words are the biggest problem with that idea.

I figured as much. Maybe a hip-hop variation, like Toke-ville? It would certainly attract the libertarians.

/back to the drawing board.

re: #77 Lawrence Schmerel

That was a dumb question by me. Of course. Nancy is not in the Senate. But did this bill come through the House?

Not yet (AFAIK).

re: #55 Dianna

Hello, Dianna. We lost all power here at work yesterday and barely had time to save my work before shutting down. I just wanted to reply to you (and Walter in a previous thread), bcz I had a feeling my post might be misinterpreted.

re: #61 Dianna

I heard him call the lemur fossil "a little monkey" and also call it "B.S."

I was merely pointing out that Rush calls himself the ‘leader of the GOP’, bcz that is what the MSM says and he’s pointing out that they all have the same talking points. The MSM has been playing the GOP against itself by asking whether Rush and Cheney are really the face they want to put on, yadda, yadda, yadda.
As for the fossil, as a listener of his program for many years, I had no doubt that he was a creationist although I do not recall him ever coming out and saying it. I certainly part company with him on that issue, as well as, many others.
I must credit him for steering me to this very blog years ago. The times I heard him reference LGF he had nothing but praise for Charles.

re: #61 Ward Cleaver

Okay. A similar bill came through the House. I missed that.

re: #85 doppelganglander

I figured as much. Maybe a hip-hop variation, like Toke-ville? It would certainly attract the libertarians.

/back to the drawing board.

Toke-ville would attract liberals almost as fast as free stuff.

re: #79 soxfan4life

I think the GITMO closure debacle is a smokescreen for this. So much for unclenching.

[Link: www.comcast.net...]

I'm surprised that Charles hasn't posted a thread on this yet.

re: #71 Erik The Red

I can't believe that the Rush thread is still going strong. How many burn outs? 8 or 9?

Heh, expect that to carry on through the weekend. Rush has a very diverse audience, but there are quite a few mush-head Rushbots who will melt down at any sign of criticism whatsoever.

re: #91 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

I'm surprised that Charles hasn't posted a thread on this yet.

I'm sure he will at some point.

re: #83 RockmanVermont

There's a whole thread on this topic downstairs. Why are you littering?

The Senators understood that "Close Gitmo", "Prosecute Bush", "Ban Torture" and "Stop the War" were all excellent slogans to get elected on. They just didn't think Obama was fool enough to actually do any of those things. They'll straighten out the little whipper-snapper.

Yea for the Senate! I am surprised and pleased. Finally a decision.

re: #84 Ward Cleaver

Sorry, I just prefer older homes to newer ones, except when it comes to energy efficiency. Give me a home with pier-and-beam, one story, and ICF insulation (conditioned attic) and other energy-saving features.

How about a Zero energy, solar panelled, single story slab on grade Mission style?

re: #83 RockmanVermont

There were many types of Hominoids that have become extinct throughout the past, Neanderthals are the most commonly known,

Really? Have you been over to Kos? Plenty of Neanderthals there!

re: #32 lawhawk

The roll call vote is here.

NAYs ---6
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)

At least the bleeding heart lefty-D jerks were honest and placed their moral code of ethics before the safety of this nation. As usual.

Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV) old dried up loser.
Kennedy (D-MA) he has a pretty good excuse.
Rockefeller (D-WV)

what's his excuse?

re: #95 Kenneth

The Senators understood that "Close Gitmo", "Prosecute Bush", "Ban Torture" and "Stop the War" were all excellent slogans to get elected on. They just didn't think Obama was fool enough to actually do any of those things. They'll straighten out the little whipper-snapper.

Funny how they all ranted about the failed policies of the last 8 years, but once Congress reconvened in January it has been business as usual.

re: #66 taxfreekiller

I hate to be cynical, but I wonder if you're on to something: Obama either never planned to close Gitmo (only using his position to energize the far left for the election) or he didn't anticipate the difficulties with closing it. Either way, once in office was able to count on Senate Democrats to block his "efforts" to close Gitmo...so at least he tried to fulfill his promise.

re: #96 bj

It's probably a good thing you don't have an avatar...lol

re: #68 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

To be fair though, when has he ever really been happy?

I think he was pleased when I raided a Slaanesh temple with Vomitus the Dward and chanted "Blood For the Blood God" while killing its followers until its followers managed to drive me and my friend out. Blood ran in the streets that day, and the DM was not too happy with us.

re: #70 soxfan4life

Kind of surprising that JFK isn't on the loser list.

Is John Kerry still a senator?

re: #83 RockmanVermont

I'm pretty sure Charles understands evolution.

May have been already posted, but who were the "6" that voted FOR the bill?

re: #84 Ward Cleaver

Sorry, I just prefer older homes to newer ones, except when it comes to energy efficiency. Give me a home with pier-and-beam, one story, and ICF insulation (conditioned attic) and other energy-saving features.

Older homes are more likely to be haunted, though.
/

re: #62 CyanSnowHawk

You've got GITMO Boyz at your house?

* * * *
Yes, my moronic democrat Representative Jim Moran (D-VA) offered up our city to house the GITMO Boyz. Moran told us to "do our duty...grit our teeth, stiffen our spine, carry the load" and welcome them!

As Pres. Obama said at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, making fun of black Republican Michael Steele--"Michael Steele is in the House, or as he says, in the Heezy."

Our black democrat mayor Bill Euille went on Fox News to say though he "delivered" our city & state to Pres. Obama, he didn't want the GITMO Boyz in our hood.

As I've mentioned, we've already had Zacharias Moussaoui the 20th hijacker of Sept. 11, Johny Walker Lindh, Beltway Sniper John Mohammed and spies Robert Hansen and Aldrich James tried in our 'hood. We've got tons of public housing, open air drug markets, good grief! How much more dysfunction can democrats dump on us to prove how "nice" they are to bad people?

re: #107 sattv4u2

May have been already posted, but who were the "6" that voted FOR the bill?

nevermind ,, LAWHAWK has it in 32 ,,

re: #100 FrogMarch

Rockefeller is recovering from knee surgery. Byrd was sick with a fever, and Kennedy is still dealing with cancer treatments.

re: #83 RockmanVermont

You're about six laps behind the main pack of the argument on this issue. Charles already knows that monkeys and humans both are descended from a now-extinct ancestor. As does everyone who knows the first thing about evolution. That's not the issue. The issue is that the leaders of the conservative/Republican movement are either sincerely or insincerely rejecting basic scientific principles and trying to push their anti-intellectualism on our children.

re: #105 FrogMarch

Is John Kerry still a senator?

Unfortunately.

[Link: kerry.senate.gov...]

Finally some sanity. Obama was statistically the most left wing senator so expect more disagreements between him and congress.

re: #104 CyanSnowHawk

I think he was pleased when I raided a Slaanesh temple with Vomitus the Dward and chanted "Blood For the Blood God" while killing its followers until its followers managed to drive me and my friend out. Blood ran in the streets that day, and the DM was not too happy with us.

Many Shubbs & Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Sloor that day, I can tell you.
/wha?

re: #95 Kenneth

The Senators understood that "Close Gitmo", "Prosecute Bush", "Ban Torture" and "Stop the War" were all excellent slogans to get elected on. They just didn't think Obama was fool enough to actually do any of those things. They'll straighten out the little whipper-snapper.

You think he'd have an idea having been in their company. Maybe he missed out on that part being so busy running for another office instead of learning about the one he had.

re: #97 buzzsawmonkey

"Alexism," adherents to which are "Alexists." It has the advantage of containing the word "lex," the Latin word for "law."

Yeah, but by that derivation, "Alex" means "lawless."

re: #116 Sharmuta

You think he'd have an idea having been in their company. Maybe he missed out on that part being so busy running for another office instead of learning about the one he had.

Can't expect a leopard to change its spots.

re: #100 FrogMarch

what's his excuse?

Rockefeller's excuse is that he is a coward. Was probably with the majority, but didn't want to offend the zero.

Peace and Love is a wonderful concept but the real world has Men and Women standing on the wall with rifles. The detainees are there for a reason and exhibit behavior not fit for release into a civilized society or any society for that matter. This is one of the better bipartisan acts this year.

re: #117 zombie

Yeah, but by that derivation, "Alex" means "lawless."

And Lex Luthor means "Law of The Lutherans."
/

re: #99 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Really? Have you been over to Kos? Plenty of Neanderthals there!

And here I thought they were howler monkeys.

Kudos to the Senate for this vote. Even Barbara Boxer voted yes and with the majority which is an astonishing act. Not a surprise to see Dick Durbin and Tom Harkin voting no.

re: #35 Sharmuta

Honestly, where has anyone said that we're going to RELEASE these terrorists into the United States. They are going to be thrown in the fucking clink, never to be seen or heard from again.

Anyone heard from Richard Reid lately? How about Omar-Abdul Rahman? What about Ted Kaczynski? Didn't think so. Because they're still rotting in jail. This whole issue is the biggest goddamn sideshow I've ever seen in my life.

re: #113 soxfan4life

Unfortunately.

[Link: kerry.senate.gov...]

that's right. I must be confused. and yes- a total surprise that he voted with the majority.

re: #104 CyanSnowHawk

I think he was pleased when I raided a Slaanesh temple with Vomitus the Dward and chanted "Blood For the Blood God" while killing its followers until its followers managed to drive me and my friend out. Blood ran in the streets that day, and the DM was not too happy with us.

To quote my old DM

"A Paladin does not adorn his armor with the skulls of his vaquished enemies as a warning to sinners!"

Crazy Pam is continuing her rabid attacks on moderate Muslim counterjihad activist Zuhdi Jasser for no other reason than he's Muslim and therefore must be lying to secretly advance Sharia and Jihad.

She just keeps getting crazier. I'm surprised Spencer hasn't told her to chill out on this yet.

re: #111 lawhawk

Rockefeller is recovering from knee surgery. Byrd was sick with a fever, and Kennedy is still dealing with cancer treatments.

ah.

re: #60 doppelganglander

Cute! BTW, I had a thought about naming your ideology. What would you think of something playing on the name of Alexis de Tocqueville? He was an observer, not a political philosopher, and I think most of us support the positive values of America that he reported. The down side is, his name is hard to spell.

I butchered the pronunciation.

re: #115 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Many Shubbs & Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Sloor that day, I can tell you.
/wha?

Ray, when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "Yes!"

re: #49 Rednek

It's just Darling!

Forget combat use. This little guy is the answer to the fantasies of pesky little brothers everywhere! When do they come out with the lego version?

re: #124 drcordell

Honestly, where has anyone said that we're going to RELEASE these terrorists into the United States. They are going to be thrown in the fucking clink, never to be seen or heard from again.

What about the ones who are found "not guilty" or had charges dismissed because waterboarding or loud noises were used in the interrogations? We can't send them back to their home countries where they'll really be tortured, our allies who love us so much now that Obama is President won't take them, they have to go somewhere.

re: #127 Killgore Trout

Crazy Pam is continuing her rabid attacks on moderate Muslim counterjihad activist Zuhdi Jasser for no other reason than he's Muslim and therefore must be lying to secretly advance Sharia and Jihad.

She just keeps getting crazier. I'm surprised Spencer hasn't told her to chill out on this yet.

I don't think Spencer will. As far as I have seen, he's never told Crazy Pam to back down on anything.

re: #124 drcordell

Honestly, where has anyone said that we're going to RELEASE these terrorists into the United States. They are going to be thrown in the fucking clink, never to be seen or heard from again.

Anyone heard from Richard Reid lately? How about Omar-Abdul Rahman? What about Ted Kaczynski? Didn't think so. Because they're still rotting in jail. This whole issue is the biggest goddamn sideshow I've ever seen in my life.

as they say ,,, read it and weep. From Eric Holder
[Link: www.reuters.com...]

re: #115 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Many Shubbs & Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Sloor that day, I can tell you.
/wha?

Warhammer 40K.

re: #124 drcordell

Honestly, where has anyone said that we're going to RELEASE these terrorists into the United States. They are going to be thrown in the fucking clink, never to be seen or heard from again.

Anyone heard from Richard Reid lately? How about Omar-Abdul Rahman? What about Ted Kaczynski? Didn't think so. Because they're still rotting in jail. This whole issue is the biggest goddamn sideshow I've ever seen in my life.

* * * *
Admiral Dennis Blair said within the last month that some of these guys would have to be released and provided with welfare. Look it up.

re: #126 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

To quote my old DM

"A Paladin does not adorn his armor with the skulls of his vaquished enemies as a warning to sinners!"

He does it because it looks cool.

Michael Steele said yesterday the GOP comeback "starts today"

He had it wrong by a day, but this is a major victory for the GOP.

They used Alinsky's "rules for radicals" and did to the Dems what they have been doing to the GOP.

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

They defined the terms of the debate, they put the Dems on the wrong side of it, they personalized it by making individual members say where they stood on detainees in their district and they made the alternative very very unpopular.

Good job GOP. Proud to be a Republican, today...

I supported the transfer of GITMO inmates to the White House to reside with the First Family.

Uh uh.

Rush just called The One, the "little boy president."

Maureen Dowd called him "Boy Wonder."

Which one will get in trouble for using "boy?"

re: #130 Honorary Yooper

Ray, when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "Yes!"

Since I've joined these men, I have seen shit that will turn you white!

re: #138 Raiderdan

Michael Steele said yesterday the GOP comeback "starts today"

He had it wrong by a day, but this is a major victory for the GOP.

They used Alinsky's "rules for radicals" and did to the Dems what they have been doing to the GOP.

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

They defined the terms of the debate, they put the Dems on the wrong side of it, they personalized it by making individual members say where they stood on detainees in their district and they made the alternative very very unpopular.

Good job GOP. Proud to be a Republican, today...

* * * *
Dick Cheney did it! Without the radical rules. Cheney just told them what he'd told them. And Obama agreed.

re: #83 RockmanVermont

Please Charles correct me if I'm wrong or in the wrong context but I am not convinced Charles or Rush know entirely what they are talking about.(this is with the up most respect,don't just down ding).

Yes, you are wrong. I do understand what evolution is -- but it's clear that Rush Limbaugh does not. If you have any doubt about my understanding, you could always read some of my previous posts on the subject.

re: #137 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

He does it because it looks cool.

True, but I think he was objecting to the fact the heads were still fresh.

Another DM quote

"Yes, Paladins are immune to disease, but this doesn't mean you're free to hit every brothel in town."

And this after the Dems whined endlessly about having Gitmo in the first place. They will pas 100 bills saying you can close it, but don't bring the detainees to my state.

Regardless of what we think about the policy overall, there were serious legal issues with the detentions that the Bush administration swept under the rug and then rather contemptuously ignored. Don't get me wrong, I am all for containing the bad guys, but I am also for doing it with my legal "t"s crossed and "i"s dotted. Now the Dems, are proving that they did not care about the law at all, they were just trying to score political points. Way to go. They are such whores.

We had a legal debacle followed by a political circus and a lack of will that is astonishing. If we looked arrogant and contemptuous of the law before, now, we look weak spineless, hypocritical and foolish.

re: #97 buzzsawmonkey

"Alexism," adherents to which are "Alexists." It has the advantage of containing the word "lex," the Latin word for "law."

Does this mean that Alex Jones is anti-law?

re: #140 Ben Hur

hmm, let me think...

re: #143 Charles

Yes, you are wrong. I do understand what evolution is -- but it's clear that Rush Limbaugh does not. If you have any doubt about my understanding, you could always read some of my previous posts on the subject.

Of course you know what evolution is.

I'm a bit surprised to see this kind of backbone from the Democrats in the Senate. Too bad they haven't shown any on all the reckless spending going on.

I'm sure a lot of this is the Democrats realizing it would be political suicide to release these thugs in the US given the widespread opposition of the public. Still, it's nice to see a lifeboat of sanity in this sea of insanity rolling over our country.

re: #117 zombie

Yeah, but by that derivation, "Alex" means "lawless."

That kind of works in the context of A Clockwork Orange.

re: #85 doppelganglander

Alexisism. Alexianism. Alexism. Hmmm.

re: #151 joncelli

Alexisism. Alexianism. Alexism. Hmmm.

I'm still not convinced.

re: #141 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

Damn, that's a big twinkie.

The sound of tiny, little, moonbat heads exploding everywhere is deafening.

re: #134 sattv4u2

Did you even read the link you sent me? The only detainees that even have a chance of being released are 16 ethnic Chinese Uighurs that turned out not to be terrorists. Surprisingly when we offered up $5,000 cash bounties for terrorists, no questions asked, we ended up with lots of people who simply had someone turn them in for the money.

So, no, terrorists are not going to be released in the US. Even detainees who we know are not terrorists won't be released in the US. Innocent Chinese Uighurs that we can't return to China because they would be tortured might possibly be released into the US. Get your facts straight

re: #151 joncelli

Alexisism. Alexianism. Alexism. Hmmm.

So anarchists are really dislexists.

Democrats refused to spend money on something?

I guess those were monkeys flying out of my butt, after all.

re: #124 drcordell

Honestly, where has anyone said that we're going to RELEASE these terrorists into the United States. They are going to be thrown in the fucking clink, never to be seen or heard from again.

Anyone heard from Richard Reid lately? How about Omar-Abdul Rahman? What about Ted Kaczynski? Didn't think so. Because they're still rotting in jail. This whole issue is the biggest goddamn sideshow I've ever seen in my life.

um Uighurs man. In Va.
its true. look it up.
And I generally LIKE uighurs, unlike most people i study their culture... so dont call me names.

re: #124 drcordell

Read Hannibal much?

re: #155 drcordell

The sixteen took training in camps from AQ to my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong there.

re: #121 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkey

And Lex Luthor means "Law of The Lutherans."
/

...Alexandria, VA is therefore 'the land of virgins who are without law'.
/h

re: #155 drcordell

Did you even read the link you sent me

Did you even read the QUETION you asked !?!?!?!
where has anyone said that we're going to RELEASE these terrorists into the United States.

Answer from Eric Holder (in the link)
""For those who are in that second category, who can be released, there are a variety of options that we have. Among them is the possibility that we could release them into this country," he said."

I don't give a rats ass what "category: they were in. 1st, 2nd, terrorist, picked up by mistake. They should NOT be given a freew pass to Manhatten!

re: #156 Thanos

No, then it would be Leaxism. COMPLETELY different.

re: #101 soxfan4life

You think the Dem,s who for 7 long years called for Gitmo to be closed, might have come up with an idea how to do that?

In one one of his first official acts, Obama announced he was closing Gitmo and that this would improve America's reputation in the world. In reality, he didn't actually close it, but he gave himself a year to figure out how to do it. Then he discovered the Europeans didn't want any prisoners. No US state governor is willing to take them. The Arab countries are willing to take them, but will either torture them or release them, depending. Now the senate won't even fund the process whereby Obama is supposed to figure what to do with them. Looks like Gitmo is here to stay.

I'm waiting for it.

I'm not holding my breath, but I'm waiting.

When will Obama admit George W. Bush had the right idea all along?

re: #162 sattv4u2

My first suggestion: learn how to spell Manhattan. My second suggestion, learn how to read.

Reid said POTUS needed a plan. He'll either come up with one, or this is a back door deal to cover his ass for being stupid about Gitmo.

re: #165 drcordell

My first suggestion: learn how to spell Manhattan. My second suggestion, learn how to read.

My one and only suggestion,

Work on your Karma!

re: #155 drcordell

Did you even read the link you sent me? The only detainees that even have a chance of being released are 16 ethnic Chinese Uighurs that turned out not to be terrorists. Surprisingly when we offered up $5,000 cash bounties for terrorists, no questions asked, we ended up with lots of people who simply had someone turn them in for the money.

So, no, terrorists are not going to be released in the US. Even detainees who we know are not terrorists won't be released in the US. Innocent Chinese Uighurs that we can't return to China because they would be tortured might possibly be released into the US. Get your facts straight

* * * *
Sec. of State Hillary Clinton told the Chinese that what they did inside their own country vis a vis HUMAN RIGHTS was their business, not ours.

You don't trust the Chinese?

How is this not just a great coup by 0bama, the Man Who Believes in Nothing? He wanted to win the election, so he said what he needed to, but he also wants to win the next one, so he doesn't want to look soft on terror. Now he can say he wanted to close GITMO, but Congress wouldn't let him. It's like his vote to fund the Iraq war while he was a Senator ("Well, I didn't want the war, but now that we're there, I have no choice but to vote for funding.")

Congress was b/w a rock and a hard place. They desperately want to do what 0bama did, but they didn't have the luxury of inaction: either they give the funding to close, or they don't.

0bama is brilliant. Hate him so much.

re: #156 Thanos

By the way, the obsessed stalkers at LGF2 think you are a "jihadi" spy or mole or something. I read that in a comment over there today. I hope that gives you a big laugh, because that crowd is not worth taking offense at.

re: #160 Thanos

They fled China and entered Afghanistan because of their oppression by the communist regime. The guys we picked up were in fact being trained to fight... the CHINESE. They're anti-communists. You know, the kind of people we gave millions of dollars to from the Korean War all the way through the Reagan administration.

to be honest, I have never heard of the term/word Uighers until this whole gitmo release thing...so for those more knowledgeable

How did they get captured and sent to gitmo, if they are from China? were they just visiting there?...living there? Speaking of "there" were they captured in Afghanistan or Iraq? What did they find that assured the US they were no threat and should be released?

re: #165 drcordell

My first suggestion: learn how to spell Manhattan. My second suggestion, learn how to read.

DrC, please refrain from insulting others as you are doing. I see that you recently registered. Let's not have a meltdown so early for you.

re: #172 kawfytawk

to be honest, I have never heard of the term/word Uighers until this whole gitmo release thing...so for those more knowledgeable

How did they get captured and sent to gitmo, if they are from China? were they just visiting there?...living there? Speaking of "there" were they captured in Afghanistan or Iraq? What did they find that assured the US they were no threat and should be released?

As Thanos pointed out, there were in an AQ training camp in Afghanistan.

re: #169 harrylook

Interesting insight!

re: #174 harrylook

well I saw what thanos wrote...but it was phrased as if he was unsure...do you have more info?

re: #167 sattv4u2

I didn't come on this website to troll, but I also didn't come on here to parrot retarded GOP talking points either. Down ding me all you want, but I just think this whole issue is a steaming pile of bullshit.

It's been acknowledged by our own military and intelligence services that Gitmo is a huge tool for terrorist recruitment. It's also a known fact that we have plenty of space in existing supermax prisons to hold every single one of the Gitmo detainees as long as we'd like.

Nobody is talking about releasing terrorists scott-free into American neighborhoods, and anyone who frames the issue otherwise is either ignorant or completely intellectually dishonest.

re: #172 kawfytawk

to be honest, I have never heard of the term/word Uighers until this whole gitmo release thing...so for those more knowledgeable

How did they get captured and sent to gitmo, if they are from China? were they just visiting there?...living there? Speaking of "there" were they captured in Afghanistan or Iraq? What did they find that assured the US they were no threat and should be released?

I love looking at pictures of Uighers. They are soo cute with their striped tails. I didn't know they were in China, though. I thought they were in Madagascar...
oh, wait, those are Lemurs.
/

re: #177 drcordell

Check before youy accuse. I never downdinged you, only suggested (as have others now) that your tone be a tad more ,,, well ,,, nice!

re: #155 drcordell

The only detainees that even have a chance of being released are 16 ethnic Chinese Uighurs that turned out not to be terrorists. ... Innocent Chinese Uighurs that we can't return to China because they would be tortured might possibly be released into the US. Get your facts straight

Actually, the 16 Uighurs claim not to be terrorists, but they did go to a jihadi training camp in Afghanistan run by Al Qaeda.

By their own admission, Uighurs being held at Guantanamo Bay are members of or associated with the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an al Qaeda-affiliated group designated as a terrorist organization under U.S law.

The goal of the ETIM is to establish a radical Islamist state in Asia. Last year, during the Beijing Olympics, the ETIM released a video in which an ETIM member stood in front of an al Qaeda flag and threatened anyone who attended the games.

In my books, that makes them terrorists and Gitmo is where they belong. Either that or send them back to China for handling.

re: #177 drcordell

SixDegrees, do you have the popcorn? I'll get the drinks.
/Meltdown comin'

re: #171 drcordell

Oh please. Not all anti-communists are pro-Western democrats. I recall one significant anticommunist who fought the Russians in Afghanistan. His name was Osama bin Laden. You want him in America?

re: #177 drcordell

I didn't come on this website to troll, but I also didn't come on here to parrot retarded GOP talking points either. Down ding me all you want, but I just think this whole issue is a steaming pile of bullshit.

It's been acknowledged by our own military and intelligence services that Gitmo is a huge tool for terrorist recruitment. It's also a known fact that we have plenty of space in existing supermax prisons to hold every single one of the Gitmo detainees as long as we'd like.

Nobody is talking about releasing terrorists scott-free into American neighborhoods, and anyone who frames the issue otherwise is either ignorant or completely intellectually dishonest.

* * * *
You are parroting retarted leftist talking points.

Abu Ghraib, GITMO, the very existence of Israel, really really create islamist terrorists/// Ahmedinejad told me so.

re: #181 NelsFree

SixDegrees, do you have the popcorn? I'll get the drinks.
/Meltdown comin'

I'll get some. Been quite the day for them, starting downstairs.

I like mine with lots of butter.

re: #177 drcordell

I predict the doc will melt before his 75th comment.

re: #176 kawfytawk

I was going to look for it, but looks like Kenneth had it as his fingertips.

re: #177 drcordell

Nobody is talking about releasing terrorists scott-free into American neighborhoods, and anyone who frames the issue otherwise is either ignorant or completely intellectually dishonest.

I'm glad to see that you're calling Eric Holder "either ignorant or completely intellectually dishonest".

re: #177 drcordell

I didn't come on this website to troll, but I also didn't come on here to parrot retarded GOP talking points either.

First of all, you will get no respect here using offensive slurs like that.

It's been acknowledged by our own military and intelligence services that Gitmo is a huge tool for terrorist recruitment.

If that is true, and I doubt it, it's because the terrorists know they will have a softer life in Gitmo than they ever had in Pakistan or Egypt.

Nobody is talking about releasing terrorists scott-free into American neighborhoods, and anyone who frames the issue otherwise is either ignorant or completely intellectually dishonest.

What jail are the Uighars supposed to be going to? There supporters in the US left want them to go free in America.

re: #181 NelsFree

re: #184 SixDegrees

re: #185 unrealizedviewpoint

re: #183 alegrias

I don't want to see anyone melt down. I also think it's healthy that opposing views are debated here, CIVILY

That said, what I won't abide is someone chiding me because of a fucking TYPO, as if thats the be all and end all of debating

"you spelled Manahattan wrong so that means I win!"

Geeezzz

re: #169 harrylook

While I think Obama is a sharp cookie politically, I also think he's benefited from various factors as well. For example:

- So many of his blind followers never researched the man, where he comes from, who his mentors are, etc.
- The MSM has covered up for him like it's never covered up for a politician in my memory.
- A cult of personality, fed by the MSM and many of our cultural elites.
- The fact that he's black, causing many to claim anyone who didn't vote for him was a racist, as well as many who voted for him (including some Republicans, Colin Powell and J.C. Watts, anyone?) simply because he's black
- The GOP abandoning fiscal restraint and limited government.
- A well crafted, brilliantly run campaign.

There's no question Obama is a smart man, but he had a lot of help and good fortune as events created a "Perfect Storm" for him to be elected. At least that how I see it.

re: #189 sattv4u2

You wouldn't want people who misspell Manhattan to get off scott-free, would you?

re: #189 sattv4u2

re: #184 SixDegrees

re: #185 unrealizedviewpoint

re: #183 alegrias

I don't want to see anyone melt down. I also think it's healthy that opposing views are debated here, CIVILY

That said, what I won't abide is someone chiding me because of a fucking TYPO, as if thats the be all and end all of debating

"you spelled Manahattan wrong so that means I win!"

Geeezzz

You can't count either, ya put comment comment 183 after 185. /

re: #177 drcordell

I didn't come on this website to troll, but I also didn't come on here to parrot retarded GOP talking points either. .

Did you come to parrot Kos talking points?

re: #191 jaunte

You wouldn't want people who misspell Manhattan to get off scott-free, would you?

Okay okay ,, you have a point. Next time I spell Manhattan incorrectly punish me by sending me a gift certificate to Tavern On The Green !

re: #192 unrealizedviewpoint

You can't count either, ya put comment comment 183 after 185. /

naaahhh , it's just because I like you more than I do Alegrias !

(but apparantly not as much as Nels and Six !)

//

The Koran is better recruiting tool than Gitmo. Gitmo is as close to paradise as those doucebags are ever going to get.

Obama & Gitmo:

Attorney General Eric Holder’s law firm, Covington and Burlington, represents 17 Yemenis and one Pakistani currently being held at Guantanamo. In all, about a dozen Obama Justice Department lawyers are from private law firms that represent terrorist detainees.

These are the same officials who, led by Holder, are charged with determining the future home of terrorist detainees after Guantanamo closes. As former Federal Prosecutor Andy McCarthy writes, “has it dawned on people yet that it's a huge problem to have a Justice Department stocked with lawyers who have spent (or whose firms have spent) the last eight years volunteering their services to America’s enemies?”

As you would expect, this army of leftwing activists and high-priced lawyers has led a public relations offense on behalf of the Uighurs to convince nervous suburbanites that the former terrorist detainees will make great neighbors. They claim that the Uighurs are harmless Chinese separatists who have been unjustly detained. Their real problem is with the repressive Chinese government, they claim, not us.

But as you can see, the truth about the Uighurs (which you definitely won’t hear from the anti-Guantanamo legal industry) is very different. Contrary to the claims of their defenders, the Guantanamo Uighurs are not pro-democracy activists unjustly held by American authorities.

Even if you accept the argument made by their defenders that the Uighurs’ true targets are Chinese, not Americans, it does nothing to change the fact that they are trained mass killers instructed by the same terrorists responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001.

They have no place in American communities.

re: #196 Leonidas Hoplite

The Koran is better recruiting tool than Gitmo. Gitmo is as close to paradise as those doucebags are ever going to get.

* * * *
Thank you. I'm pissed unless Fidel & Raul Castro die soon, Al Qaedans & leftist Europeans willing to do business with those two genociders, get to enjoy Club GITMO and Guantanameras before I do.

re: #188 Kenneth
The fact that Gitmo helps recruit terrorists isn't my opinion. It's the opinion of our intelligence agencies. We can agree to disagree.

My main point is this. Both GOP and Democratic opposition to finding a way to close Gitmo and transfer the detainees to US prisons has centered around the "NO TERRORISTS IN MY BACK YARD" rallying cry. When in reality, there is no question that all the hardcore terrorist detainees will simply move from one prison cell in Cuba to another in a US supermax prison.

The issue of the Chinese Uighurs is a complete clusterfuck, and your guess is as good as mine when it comes to what to do with them. But let's not delude ourselves by trying to claim that the Uighurs are central to the issue.

re: #200 buzzsawmonkey

"Gitmo is staying open? But we need closure!"

--the therapy-addled Left

With that, I'm headed to DU to witness the reaction. It feels just like Christmas morning!

re: #199 drcordell

So putting them in a supermax in the US would result in less terrorist recruitment? I'm not buying it.

re: #177 drcordell

... It's been acknowledged by our own military and intelligence services that Gitmo is a huge tool for terrorist recruitment. It's also a known fact that we have plenty of space in existing supermax prisons to hold every single one of the Gitmo detainees as long as we'd like.

It absolutely is NOT a known fact that Gitmo is huge tool for terrorists recruitment. That's an opinion (yours and moonbats) and is certainly not something that can be quantified.

One of the main reasons for not housing terrorists on US soil is so they are not afforded Constitutional rights. Bring them here and they get them touchdown.

re: #177 drcordell

It's been acknowledged by our own military and intelligence services that Gitmo is a huge tool for terrorist recruitment. It's also a known fact that we have plenty of space in existing supermax prisons to hold every single one of the Gitmo detainees as long as we'd like.

1. Short of mass conversion to Islam, there is absolutely nothing we do or say that can't be distorted into a recruiting tool in the twisted mind of a jihadi.

2. Even Supermax guards are not trained and equipped to deal with these thugs.

3. The second they set foot on American soil, an ACLU lawyer will be by their side demanding full Constitutional protections for them. They will file lawsuit after lawsuit, costing ridiculous amounts of taxpayer dollars to defend. The courts will rule that they cannot be held indefinitely without trail. We will be forced to try to convict them in federal court, preferably of something carrying a life sentence, or we will have to release them into the U.S., with welfare benefits, and they will immediately start plotting jihad once again.

Well, that is one area where he obviously reached too far. Will this rebuff give congress the political cover to pass Obama's domestic atrocities?

re: #35 Sharmuta

Correct thinking! Remember what the EU told AG Holder when he went shopping for a new home for Gitmo residents there recently? One minister mildly told him that if the "residents" were so well mannered, then the US should have no problem finding a home for them in the USA! HA. The US Senate, or most of them, got this message all to well, and won't make Holder's mistake and look stupid as well, trying to sell it to their constituents. You are right, Sharm. Will Slick squirm? US Senate 1, BHO/Holder 0.

re: #184 SixDegrees

I'll get some. Been quite the day for them, starting downstairs.

I like mine with lots of butter.

Got to run to the store. Sundrop, Cheerwine, or Mountain Dew?
/Southern Hospitality

re: #205 doppelganglander

1. Short of mass conversion to Islam, there is absolutely nothing we do or say that can't be distorted into a recruiting tool in the twisted mind of a jihadi.

Agreed. But that doesn't mean the most obvious symbols of Bush-era prisoner abuses shouldn't be closed down.

2. Even Supermax guards are not trained and equipped to deal with these thugs.

Now that's just ridiculous. Have you SEEN the freaks that are currently residing in the American prison system? You're telling me a former terrorist that has been routinely "enhanced interrogated" for several years is harder to contain than a 300-lb neo-Nazi gangmember who has been lifting weights in the prison yard for the past 20 years?

3. The second they set foot on American soil, an ACLU lawyer will be by their side demanding full Constitutional protections for them. They will file lawsuit after lawsuit, costing ridiculous amounts of taxpayer dollars to defend. The courts will rule that they cannot be held indefinitely without trail. We will be forced to try to convict them in federal court, preferably of something carrying a life sentence, or we will have to release them into the U.S., with welfare benefits, and they will immediately start plotting jihad once again.

Those ACLU lawyers have already filed lawsuits to that effect. It's costing you money right now. Keeping the prisoners at Gitmo doesn't do jack shit to prevent lawyers from filing lawsuits.

And FYI: the courts just ruled yesterday that detainees with links to terror CAN be held indefinitely.

re: #209 NelsFree

Got to run to the store. Sundrop, Cheerwine, or Mountain Dew?
/Southern Hospitality

Looks like this is gonna require Mountain Dew. Thanks.

re: #34 ointmentfly

So "torture" was sanctioned by the left and it turns out that Gitmo was the right place to send terrorists... Can we redo the election?

There's a cartoon in my local paper showing Pelosi at the podium defending herself against criticism of her knowledge of torture. She says:
-"We were not told about waterboarding."
-"Ok. They mentioned waterboarding was legal but weren't using it."
-"Ok. I knew about it but couldn't do anything about it."
-"The CIA lied! No, I mean the Bush Administration lied."

There are two government officials in the background, and one says to the other:
"See! When it comes to waterboarding, all intelligence is unreliable!"

Barack Obama and the Rats of NIMH NIMBY

/rated G

re: #204 unrealizedviewpoint

Constitutional rights don't mean anything if you're a convicted terrorist. Ask the blind sheikh how he's enjoying his second amendment rights. Or perhaps Richard Reid. Constitutional rights simply mean we actually have to prove these detainees are terrorists or cut them lose. If they are the big, bad killers we say they are, shouldn't be too hard. If they are innocent, they don't deserve to be in prison.

I used to believe that by belief in upholding the rule of law made me a conservative. I guess that's not the case anymore?

re: #207 drcordell

Agreed. So let's keep it civil. Claiming that the closure of Gitmo means hundreds of deadly terrorists just walking off a plane and into America is a gross oversimplification of the issue at hand. It doesn't mean they're just going to "get a free pass to Manhattan."

This is the problem with holding people indefinitely in a legal black hole. We can't prosecute them successfully because they've been treated extra-judicially. We can't release them because they are terrorists. We can't keep them in Gitmo because of the Bush legacy of torture. That's why Gitmo was a stupid fucking idea to begin with. Why didn't we just fucking shoot them once we "disappeared" them? That would have solved a lot of problems.

Waterboarding illegal combatants does not pull at my heart strings. Gitmo is our best solution for keeping those Al Qaeda trained terrorists off US soil and out of US courts. It's only Bush's Legacy of Torture because of political spin by the media and Democrats trying to score political points. The Democrats knew damn well what was going on with Gitmo and waterboarding and did nothing to stop it because it was shortly after Sept. 11, 2001. Only when things went to shit in Iraq did the Democrats start making headway politically to gain power in Congress and the Senate.

re: #207 drcordell

Agreed. So let's keep it civil. Claiming that the closure of Gitmo means hundreds of deadly terrorists just walking off a plane and into America is a gross oversimplification of the issue at hand. It doesn't mean they're just going to "get a free pass to Manhattan."

This is the problem with holding people indefinitely in a legal black hole. We can't prosecute them successfully because they've been treated extra-judicially. We can't release them because they are terrorists. We can't keep them in Gitmo because of the Bush legacy of torture. That's why Gitmo was a stupid fucking idea to begin with. Why didn't we just fucking shoot them once we "disappeared" them? That would have solved a lot of problems.

Or, people like you could get a grip on yourselves and realize, yeah, having Gitmo sucks but it's the least-worst option for everyone involved including, or rather especially, the assholes held there.

In a different time in our history they would have been disappeared. If they had been captured by oh, say, the Russians in similar circumstances they would have been subjected to actual torture before being pulverized. They put us in this position of having to figure out the best way to deal with them while protecting ourselves and I'm not sure who got the short-end of that stick.

This Douchebag was held in South Carolina and is a recruitment tool.
[Link: www.nydailynews.com...]

The administration put its Democratic allies in a difficult spot by requesting the Guantanamo closure money before developing a plan for what to do with its detainees.

Classic feel-good policy. Pass or propose legislation before thinking through the consequences. This is what Thomas Sowell calls Stage One thinking.

re: #210 drcordell

Those ACLU lawyers have already filed lawsuits to that effect. It's costing you money right now. Keeping the prisoners at Gitmo doesn't do jack shit to prevent lawyers from filing lawsuits.

And FYI: the courts just ruled yesterday that detainees with links to terror CAN be held indefinitely.

The ruling refers to detainees held at Gitmo, not detainees (to be held) within the US. As soon as they hit US soil the whole ballgame changes. The ACLU will file separate lawsuits for each of the 2000+ detainees. US tactics will then be on trial. It'll be a nightmare. These guys will never see a US prison. They'll be sent to SA before that happens.

re: #215 Idle Drifter

Read the whole article. Notice why he's a recruitment tool. Because we have held him indefinitely without charging him or proving he committed any crime. That is the key point here. If we hold these people without trial, in a prison outside our legal system, it makes it appear as if we are simply holding prisoners without cause. The lack of transparency creates the illusion we have something to hide.

Does anyone hold up the WTC Bombing blind sheikh as a recruitment tool for terrorism? No. Because he was captured and given a trial for the whole world to see. Now he's rotting in supermax for the rest of his life. How is that not as effective as Gitmo?

Hell just send them down here release them in the Everglades and put a bounty on them. If the problem is not solved in a day by the good old boys the Gators would have a nice snack. To much jabbering about these scum of the earth they should have been tried and executed by now. One more reason I have such respect for the greatest generation they knew how to deal with the enemy.

As far as the Senate they are just playing politics again. They want to keep there do nothing well paying jobs.

re: #220 unrealizedviewpoint

So your argument is: "we fucked up the handling and treatment of these detainees so badly that they can now never be properly prosecuted... so let's just keep them in a legal black hole indefinitely"

You'd prefer that Obama just keep kicking the can down the road and let another administration deal with it? Just like Bush did with every major issue that he faced during his Presidency. Brilliant.

re: #214 drcordell

Constitutional rights don't mean anything if you're a convicted terrorist. Ask the blind sheikh how he's enjoying his second amendment rights. Or perhaps Richard Reid. Constitutional rights simply mean we actually have to prove these detainees are terrorists or cut them lose. If they are the big, bad killers we say they are, shouldn't be too hard. If they are innocent, they don't deserve to be in prison.

I used to believe that by belief in upholding the rule of law made me a conservative. I guess that's not the case anymore?

The rules of evidence are considerably different for a US court trial as compared to a military tribunal. The laws and rules of war do not permit our soldiers opportunity to collect evidence nor prepare for a trial while fighting this war. Let's not forget this is war. These enemy combatants do not fight for any country therefore deserve no rights afforded prisoners of war.

re: #223 drcordell

So your argument is: "we fucked up the handling and treatment of these detainees so badly that they can now never be properly prosecuted... so let's just keep them in a legal black hole indefinitely"

You'd prefer that Obama just keep kicking the can down the road and let another administration deal with it? Just like Bush did with every major issue that he faced during his Presidency. Brilliant.

There's no legal blackhole. They are detainees. End of subject. We Americans are the good guys. you seem to forget that or never learned it.

re: #221 drcordell

Read the whole article. Notice why he's a recruitment tool. Because we have held him indefinitely without charging him or proving he committed any crime. That is the key point here. If we hold these people without trial, in a prison outside our legal system, it makes it appear as if we are simply holding prisoners without cause. The lack of transparency creates the illusion we have something to hide.

Does anyone hold up the WTC Bombing blind sheikh as a recruitment tool for terrorism? No. Because he was captured and given a trial for the whole world to see. Now he's rotting in supermax for the rest of his life. How is that not as effective as Gitmo?

I did read the whole article and he was captured on US soil which entitles him to a trail. Holding him without trial created the fiasco. The detainees at Gitmo are illegal combatants captured on foreign soil are only entitled to Military tribunals as far as I'm concerned and they can stay there in Cuba. What does it matter if they stay there?

Change!

"Graham noted that 400,000 German and Japanese prisoners were held during World War II. "The idea that we cannot find a place to securely house 250-plus detainees within the United States is not rational. We have done this before," Graham said. "But it is my belief that you need a plan before you close Gitmo."

Seriously, he doesn't get the difference?

re: #219 solomonpanting

Classic feel-good policy. Pass or propose legislation before thinking through the consequences. This is what Thomas Sowell calls Stage One thinking.

No the operative part is FUND for "something" and then craft plan based on whatever you could get. . .and use more than you got!

re: #221 drcordell

Read the whole article. Notice why he's a recruitment tool. Because we have held him indefinitely without charging him or proving he committed any crime. That is the key point here. If we hold these people without trial, in a prison outside our legal system, it makes it appear as if we are simply holding prisoners without cause. The lack of transparency creates the illusion we have something to hide.

Does anyone hold up the WTC Bombing blind sheikh as a recruitment tool for terrorism? No. Because he was captured and given a trial for the whole world to see. Now he's rotting in supermax for the rest of his life. How is that not as effective as Gitmo?

You keep saying recruitment tool. That's a moonbat line, a moonbat argument. It doesn't play within logical circles, places where folks really think.

re: #226 Idle Drifter

I did read the whole article and he was captured on US soil which entitles him to a trail. Holding him without trial created the fiasco. The detainees at Gitmo are illegal combatants captured on foreign soil are only entitled to Military tribunals as far as I'm concerned and they can stay there in Cuba. What does it matter if they stay there?

ExactaFookinMoondo. Who cares about a fucking terrorists? A moonbat, that's who.

re: #221 drcordell

The lack of transparency creates the illusion we have something to hide.

Your kimono is wide open.

Yes, you did call it "illusion".
However, only the extreme left-wing is concerned about it.

/strawman

re: #199 drcordell

If the "innocent Uighars" aren't central to the issue, why did you make them the center of your argument, up until they were shown to really be terrorists?

Don't you think the fact that 12 members of Obama's Justice Department worked for various law firms that defended many of the Gitmo detainees has some bearing on how the issue is being handled in Obama's Justice Department today?

Gitmo, where conditions are far better than in any given jail in the Muslim world, is not the problem. How many problems do you think we will have if & when the terrorists are transferred to SuperMax prisons? Do you really think these prisons won't serve as recruitment issues for the extremists? Of course they will. They will also serve as recruitment centers as the detainees turn to recruiting from the local US prisoner population.

The complaint against Gitmo was two fold: the critics claimed the conditions were inhuman and they complained the prisoners were held illegally. Transferring the detainees to SuperMax prisons in the US fails to address either of those issues to the satisfaction of the same critics. They will continue to condemn the US policy, because that has been their agenda all along.

re: #24 lawhawk

I wrote this in the last thread and it's more relevant here:

Congress wants the President to come up with a place for the detainees as per his Executive Orders. They don't want to take the rap for detainees continuing to be held when the President opened this can of worms. Obama called for the closure by the end of the year, but didn't have any plan for what to do with the detainees.

They can't be released, so they have to be held somewhere - and Gitmo is as good a place as any, despite what the Democrats have demogogued.

[snip]

Well, the government can always use Obama's vacant home in Chicago. Right next to someone else who should be in prison.

re: #207 drcordell

You missed the whole point of Gitmo: the Bush administration did not want to prosecute them in America. They wanted to hold the terrorists until the GWOT was over. They also wanted to extract any useful intelligence from them to help us fight the enemy. Criminal prosecutions are for criminals. Yes, many of them committed criminal acts, but that is not the most important characteristic about them. These people are not ordinary criminals, they are terrorists at war with America and most other countries in the world.

re: #225 unrealizedviewpoint

We Americans are the good guys. you seem to forget that or never learned it.

I believe we are a nation that upholds the rule of LAW. That's what makes us the good guys. Did you seem to forget that or never learn it? It's now a central tenet of American conservatism that the rule of law, previously upheld as the bedrock of our society, is only applied selectively.

re: #230 unrealizedviewpoint

You keep saying recruitment tool. That's a moonbat line, a moonbat argument. It doesn't play within logical circles, places where folks really think.

I'll bet you think it's quite logical to simply keep calling me a "moonbat" instead of saying anything substantive.

re: #221 drcordell

Does anyone hold up the WTC Bombing blind sheikh as a recruitment tool for terrorism? No. Because he was captured and given a trial for the whole world to see. Now he's rotting in supermax for the rest of his life. How is that not as effective as Gitmo?

Oh yeah, putting that terrorist on trial really deterred Al Qaeda from attacking the WTC again, didn't it?!

In fact, I have read of several terrorist groups including Al Qaeda praising the blind sheik as a hero and using his case as a recruitment cause.

That was your stupidest argument yet. Keep it up.

re: #231 Iron Fist

To me, that was the biggest fiasco of all, allowing them to morph into POW"S. Big mistake, and it happened simply because we treated them as POWS.
But we do shit like that, 'cause it's WHO we are.

re: #237 drcordell

I'll bet you think it's quite logical to simply keep calling me a "moonbat" instead of saying anything substantive.

I've said much and you know it. I'm done with you. You're a lost cause.

re: #236 Kenneth

Oh, we just have to hold them until the global war on terror is over? That's all? I'll let you in on a little secret, any time the U.S. declares war on anything vague it's probably not going away. War on poverty? War on drugs?

re: #237 drcordell

You keep repeating "recruitment tool" like it's a mantra.
In that context, "moonbat" fits.

I'm beginning to see a moonbat/paulian slant to docs comments.

re: #241 drcordell

Oh, we just have to hold them until the global war on terror is over? That's all? I'll let you in on a little secret, any time the U.S. declares war on anything vague it's probably not going away. War on poverty? War on drugs?

Let's keep it on the GWOT, shall we?
WTF does the War on Poverty have to do with the subject?

/you're getting the idea, aren't you - you're on the losing end of this one

re: #207 drcordell

This is the problem with holding people indefinitely in a legal black hole. We can't prosecute them successfully because they've been treated extra-judicially. We can't release them because they are terrorists. We can't keep them in Gitmo because of the Bush legacy of torture. That's why Gitmo was a stupid fucking idea to begin with. Why didn't we just fucking shoot them once we "disappeared" them? That would have solved a lot of problems.

So... you whine about the so-called "legal black hole" and the "Bush legacy of torture" ...(um, don't you mean the Pelosi legacy of torture, since she approved it, too)... but you think it would be ok to "just fucking shoot them"?

Heck of a moral code you got there, buddy.

By the way, here's the google hit list for the talking point phrase "Bush legacy of torture".

re: #243 unrealizedviewpoint

I'm beginning to see a moonbat/paulian slant to docs comments.

Absolutely.

re: #243 unrealizedviewpoint

I'm beginning to see a moonbat/paulian slant to docs comments.

Not to mention the snarkiness and lack of civility. He must be right at home at Dkos.

Absolutely hilarious.
So now along with wiretaps, unmanned drones, etc., the Dems are insisting on preserving more of the things that they claimed were the reasons that they hated Pres. Bush. Once again revealing that the basis of Obama's election was unadulterated hatred for anyone who didn't toe the Leftist line. Along with the moonbattiest of moonbat States, CA, rejecting the notion of spending billions of dollars of imaginary money, this has been a great week of repudiation for the Dems.
Also entertaining is watching the rending of garments and gnashing of teeth over the "fall" of the Republican Party while the Dems are imploding and backtracking on every major issue.
Vindication is never publicly granted to conservatives, but I think we all know the real score.

re: #241 drcordell

That was the reason given by the Bush admin when they captured them. I pointed this out to you to correct your misunderstanding as to why they were being held. You seem to forget what you wrote before.

But how long would you have the US hold the detainees when they are transferred to your SuperMax prisons?

re: #245 Kenneth

Believe it or not Kenneth, I find torturing and holding someone indefinitely without trial to be worse than simply shooting them. If these men are soldiers on the battlefield, I have no qualms with their deaths. But once we bring them off the battlefield and into the justice system, I believe they must be treated in accordance with the laws of our nation.

re: #246 pre-Boomer Marine brat

Ron Paul is a bigoted asshat. The only thing I have in common with him is that I believe the Iraq War was an illegal clusterfuck. I could give a fuck about Saddam Hussein, I want Osama bin Laden's head on a fucking pike. And we still don't have it, because Bush dropped the fucking ball and invaded Iraq.

Oh my, seems Dear Leader is a war criminal just like Bush. This does reflect our values.

/sarc

re: #250 drcordell

How many detainees do you think were allegedly tortured at Gitmo?

Only 3 were waterboarded, which is not torture when done in accordance with the carefully defined procedure the US interrogators followed.

If these men are soldiers on the battlefield, I have no qualms with their deaths. But once we bring them off the battlefield and into the justice system, I believe they must be treated in accordance with the laws of our nation.

You really should read the Geneva Conventions on War. If these men were "soldiers", the US cannot kill them, but must hold them as legal prisoners of war. The fact is they were not legal soldiers as defined by the Geneva Conventions. They are illegal combatants. They are not eligible to the same protections as prisoners of war. They should not be brought into the US criminal justice system. They should be dealt with as illegal detainees, ie. as terrorists. If they have information that could help us defeat Al Qaeda, we should do what is necessary to get it, short of true torture. (not the shifting, politically expedient definition of torture). They should be held until such time as they are of no threat to the US or our allies. Period.

I would have thought there would be more support here for the conservative legal view that upholding the law is what divides us from lesser nations. Guess not?

re: #250 drcordell

But once we bring them off the battlefield and into the justice system, I believe they must be treated in accordance with the laws of our nation.

I assume others on this thread have made the distinction between civil and military law? Do you not agree with the distinction and believe the prisoners should be tried under civil law?
The case has been made that these prisoners fall under the unlawful combatant designation and are therefore subject to certain rules not granted more traditional POW's.

re: #32 lawhawk

The roll call vote is here.

NAYs ---6
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Not Voting - 3
Byrd (D-WV)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

There's a rogue's gallery if I ever saw one.

re: #252 AmericanMe

Oh my, seems Dear Leader is a war criminal just like Bush. This does reflect our values.

/sarc

Meant, does not reflect our values.

Good for the vote, but I don't believe for a second that the honeymoon is over for Teh One... just a blip on the screen, caused by the intense fear of anti-relocation/NIMBY reaction from their individual districts.
They'll be back kissing his ring in no time...

re: #253 Kenneth

Either they are POW's and must be treated as such, or they are to be treated as civilian prisoners. The entire concept of "enemy combatants" is something that was wholly created by the Bush administration. Under the Geneva Convention if you are an "unlawful combatant" it means the nation that captures you must prosecute you under their domestic laws. I.E. they should end up in the American legal system. Where we entered the clusterfuck is when we created a new class of prisoners that exists outside of all established legal precedent. To claim that there was no other way of successfully detaining and prosecuting these terrorists is completely ridiculous.