Americans voted for Change

[TCO]

That's the giant bald spot, Kirk.

[Drake Tungsten]

I've got a full head of hair, sailor. Your moms commented on how she likes to run her hands through it.

[TCO]

Let's ****.

[Drake Tungsten]

I'm buying my bus ticket right now.

[SpencerH]

Sluts

[Drake Tungsten]

Obama

The Obama administration is preparing to revive the system of military commissions established at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, under new rules that would offer terrorism suspects greater legal protections, government officials said.

The rules would block the use of evidence obtained from coercive interrogations, tighten the admissibility of hearsay testimony and allow detainees greater freedom to choose their attorneys, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

The military commissions have allowed the trial of terrorism suspects in a setting that favors the government and protects classified information, but they were sharply criticized during the administration of President George W. Bush. "By any measure, our system of trying detainees has been an enormous failure," then-candidate Barack Obama said in June 2008.

In one of its first acts, the Obama administration obtained a 120-day suspension of the military commissions; that will expire May 20. Human rights groups had interpreted the suspension as the death knell for military commissions and expected the transfer of cases to military courts martial or federal courts.

Officials said yesterday that the Obama administration will seek a 90-day extension of the suspension as early as next week. It would subsequently restart the commissions on American soil, probably at military bases, according to a lawyer briefed on the plan.

"This is an extraordinary development, and it's going to tarnish the image of American justice again," said Tom Parker, a counterterrorism specialist at Amnesty International.

A White House official said no final decision has been made, and one source involved in the discussions said the plan awaits Obama's approval.

The administration's extension would allow it to meet a requirement to provide Congress with 60 days' notice of any rule changes in the way the commissions function, officials said. Congress established the commissions in 2006 after the Supreme Court struck down a system of military tribunals created by the Bush administration.
ad_icon

The Obama administration's plan to reinstate the commissions with modifications reflects the fear that some cases would fail in federal courts or in standard military legal settings.

"It looks a lot more difficult now than it did on Jan. 20," said one government official.

Civil liberties advocates, who insist that federal courts can handle terrorism cases, vowed to challenge any new process.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/08/AR2009050804228.html

How long until he re-opens Gitmo?

[Drake Tungsten]

Looks like he might never close Gitmo...

On Wednesday, while Mr. Obama was holding a photo op at the White House with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, quietly deleted funds for closing Gitmo from the fiscal year 2009 supplemental spending bill. The O-Team had requested $80 million for this fiscal year and an equal amount for next year to cover the expense of shuttering the detention facility and relocating the terrorists housed there. Obey, one of the most powerful Democrats on Capitol Hill, justified eliminating the FY '09 funds by noting, "I personally favor what the administration is talking about doing, but so far as we can tell, there is yet no concrete program for that." Just in case the nice folks at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. didn't get the message, Obey added, "While I don't mind defending a concrete program, I'm not much interested in wasting my energy defending a theoretical program."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/09/gitmo_quagmire_96416.html

Obama
Obey

[TCO]

But Drake, stpe back for a second. The whole GWOT has been an abortion. We have not hanged a single terrorist. Don't have Bin Ladin's head. Are enmeshed in two failed states and may destabilize the region more than stabilize it in the end. Have these dudes in shackles that we don't know what to do with. the whole thing is a mess.

[Drake Tungsten]

But Drake, stpe back for a second. The whole GWOT has been an abortion.

True, but not because the U.S. has been too harsh and cold-blooded.

[Drake Tungsten]

Obama's Military Tribunals
Another Friday, another bow to Bush's antiterror legacy.

President Obama's endorsements of Bush-Cheney antiterror policies are by now routine: for example, opposing the release of prisoner abuse photographs and support for indefinite detention for some detainees, and that's just this week. More remarkable is White House creativity in portraying these U-turns as epic change. Witness yesterday's announcement endorsing military commissions.

White House officials insist that their tribunals will be kinder and gentler, stressing additional due-process safeguards for terrorists on trial for war crimes. But the debate that has convulsed the political system since 9/11 isn't about procedural nuances. It has been over core principles, with Democrats decrying a "shadow justice system" and claiming that "Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists."

The latter quote is from a speech by Senator Obama in 2007 denouncing "a legal framework that does not work." He also referred to the civilian criminal justice system and courts martial that Democrats then claimed, and many still claim, are the right venues for antiterror prosecutions. After the Supreme Court's Boumediene decision gave terrorists habeas rights, Mr. Obama again laid into the Bush Administration's "legal black hole" and "dangerously flawed legal approach," which "undermines the very values we are fighting to defend."

At least some people in the White House must now be embarrassed by their boss's switcheroo, though you can't tell from Friday's declaration. Part of the tribunal face-lift is that "the accused will have greater latitude in selecting their counsel." Say what? Enemy combatants already have better access to attorneys -- white shoe and pro bono, no less -- than nearly every criminal defendant in America. Perhaps this means Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, 90 Yemenis and the rest will now be able to choose lawyers from both Shearman & Sterling and Covington & Burling, instead of one or the other.

Another red herring is supposedly tightening the admissibility of hearsay evidence. Tribunal judges already have discretion to limit such evidence, and the current rules are nearly indistinguishable from those of the International Criminal Court. The sensible exceptions involve evidence obtained under combat conditions or from foreign intelligence services, which are left untouched by Mr. Obama's nips and tucks.

In any event, Mr. Obama deserves credit for accepting that the civilian courts are largely unsuited for the realities of the war on terror. He has now decided to preserve a tribunal process that will be identical in every material way to the one favored by Dick Cheney -- and which, contrary to the narrative that Democrats promulgated for years, will be the fairest and most open war-crimes trials in U.S. history. Meanwhile, friends should keep certain newspaper editors away from sharp objects. Their champion has repudiated them once again.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124242595415225131.html

Obama

[SpencerH]

Dont you mean Obama ?

On second thought, I guess that would depend on viewpoint.

[Ramo]

Drake doesn't give a **** about civil liberties, and is happy whenever Obama takes that position.

[Traianvs]

But Drake, stpe back for a second. The whole GWOT has been an abortion.

True, but not because the U.S. has been too harsh and cold-blooded.

But it hasn't helped either, so why continue these practices? There are no hard convincing arguments to keep Gitmo up and running in addition to the special commissions.

Like Amnesty said it's going to tarnish US & Obama's reputation tremendously, which I don't understand since Obama's entire foreign policy behaviour depends on goodwill and common ground with other countries and cultures.

Whatever your personal opinions about the matter, this is hugely counterproductive for Obama's foreign policy strategy.

[Drake Tungsten]

Drake doesn't give a **** about civil liberties

Certainly not for non-U.S. citizen enemy combatants.

There are no hard convincing arguments to keep Gitmo up and running in addition to the special commissions.

There's no better alternative to Gitmo and military commissions, which is what Obama is discovering and why he's quietly adopting most of the Bush administration policies for dealing with enemy combatants.

[Traianvs]

Problem is that most of the 'torture' or 'harsh interrogation techniques' were performed on the few Gitmo prisoners that actually can be classified as high profile enemies. However the information extracted while using those methods can't be used in a civil court.

So their dilemma is that they can't release the prisoners because it would seriously jeopardize this administrations political future. Obama therefore needs to keep the commissions & tribunals because else they have few charges on these guys.

It's still mostly because of Bush & Cheney's policy that Obama is in trouble here. It's certainly not a voluntary 'bow' to Bush's antiterror legacy.