Comments on: President Obama: Close Gitmo!

By: Obama Misses the Mark Again on Detainees « A Soldier's Perspective

Obama Misses the Mark Again on Detainees « A Soldier's Perspective — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:58:31 +0000

[...] Here's another problem: it's actually ILLEGAL to try the detainees at Gitmo in the United States. No one is talking about that. Article 84 of the third Geneva Convention specifically states that prisoners of war "shall be tried only by a military court." US courts are NOT military courts. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs tried to say today that it's no different trying Gitmo detainees than it is the four people arrested for plotting a Jewish center in New York. Again, completely different circumstances as those crimes occurred in the United States! It's really not rocket science, Robert. To learn more about the legalities of this issue, read what I wrote back on January 24th. [...]

By: CJ

CJ — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:00:24 +0000

But yet, that’s exactly what Obama did last week.

By: Critical Facts

Critical Facts — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 23:48:05 +0000

I don’t know of any country that gives away their interrogation methods (or at least exact details of their critical ones), and no, I don’t think it acceptable to let our enemies know exactly how we are going to get information from them.

By: CJ

CJ — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 23:05:08 +0000

I guess I only had one. The inquiry was above, but mentioned again below.

“You failed to answer my question about what other country gives away its interrogation methods.”

And I’ll add one here: Is it acceptable to let our enemies exactly how we’re going to get information from them?

Please forgive my snarky remarks. I had just finished “edumacating” Doug. That dude’s a true loony.

By: Critical Facts

Critical Facts — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 22:58:13 +0000

cj:

I’d be happy to answer your inquiries if there were any to answer – I read your comment below but see no questions.

By: CJ

CJ — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:59:45 +0000

Can you answer my inquiries now? See below.

By: Critical Facts

Critical Facts — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:49:02 +0000

“Since when is letting terrorist out of a prison a mole-hill.”

Geeze, Mickey, can you even read? No one, myself included, advocates letting terrorists out of prison.

By: MIckey

MIckey — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:01:51 +0000

CF stated:”that you are making a mountain out of a mole-hill that doesn’t even exist.”

Since when is letting terrorist out of a prison a mole-hill. Or maybe some will vote for CF to have them come live with him. Then we will see what a mole-hill really is.

By: CJ

CJ — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:38:24 +0000

Okay, CF, let me put this in ways that your liberal mind can understand. I’ll try to keep this at the 2nd grade level. Since you can’t make the connection without sports analogies, I’ll just have to be blunt. Allow to rephrase:
I said: “Obama has sided with terrorists by giving them our game plans.”
I meant: “Obama has sided with terrorists by giving them our interrogation plans.”

Hope that clears things up for you. I know that must have been a difficult connection to make. You failed to answer my question about what other country gives away its interrogation methods. Surely an innocent oversight.

All terrorists, insurgents, enemy troops, and other captured individuals care about how they are going to be treated. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be complaining at Gitmo! All combatants, legal or otherwise, try to prepare for possible capture. That’s why I subjected myself to SERE training. That’s why Al Qaeda actively trains against our interrogation methods. Surely this isn’t news to you!

As for the courts, I have full faith and confidence in the concept of habeas corpus to those in this country who fall within the confines of our Constitution. But, let me remind you of the people to whom that document applies: “WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES…secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” It doesn’t mention anywhere in here that this applies to illegal enemy combatants. The Constitution also makes law any treaties the United States signs into with other nations. Therefore, the Geneva Conventions become law, which DO NOT apply to unlawful enemy combatants. As a matter of FACT…let me say that again, FACT…it’s illegal to try enemy detainees in our courts. They are to be tried by military courts. Maybe you should read a little more and come back.

The mountain being made here is in the Executive Orders going against the same Geneva Conventions that EO is supposed proposes we uphold!! In other words, the EO contradicts itself.

By: Critical Facts

Critical Facts — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:34:56 +0000

Giving them our game plans? Come on, man, there you go with the nonsensical Super Bowl analogies, again. Moreover, since when did the terrorists ever give a hoot about how they are treated when captured? Further, since when did you lose faith in the concept of habeas (see my comment above) or our court’s ability to sift through or, God forbid even require, evidence of guilt? I fear, cj, that you are making a mountain out of a mole-hill that doesn’t even exist.