Gitmo stuff...where's the outrage from Obama?

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

the issue in regard to al queda and the geneva convention on treatment of prisioners was a result of the bush administration decision to not apply those standards to al queda. if the bush administration followed the convention and applied the rules to al queda there isn't any argument.

didn't some judge say that geneva conventions should apply to al qaeda, then another judge overturned that, saying that they don't? The problem with just saying, "it's so clear to just follow the law" is that we are actually creating law as we go along.

the issue is how these people are handled, keeping them for years and years without any charges nor trials is what causes the "outrage" you speak of.

uh, right. And other things like access to lawyers and viewing evidence and allowing evidence that comes from torture and all that other stuff. And Obama's pushing back against US court rulings, trying to do these things at one place, while closing down another place in a big public show about how bad it is to do these things.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

didn't some judge say that geneva conventions should apply to al qaeda, then another judge overturned that, saying that they don't? The problem with just saying, "it's so clear to just follow the law" is that we are actually creating law as we go along.

if the decision was made from the beginning to treat the prisioners according to the geneva covention, there would not have been any need to get a judge's decision, and no need to attempt to "create law".

uh, right. And other things like access to lawyers and viewing evidence and allowing evidence that comes from torture and all that other stuff. And Obama's pushing back against US court rulings, trying to do these things at one place, while closing down another place in a big public show about how bad it is to do these things.

again, if the decision was made to follow the rules of the geneva convention, if the bush administration had not created the rationale of using what had previously been agreed was torture against the prisioners, these questions would not exist.

obama is not trying to use the torture against the prisioners, so the comment that "obama's...trying to do these things at one place" is wrong.

the issue isn't that people have been "arrested" so to speak for their acts, the issue is these people have been locked up for years and years without due process, and these prisioners had what is commonly viewed as torture done to them. don't lock them up without due process, don't torture them, and there isn't any problem....

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

if the decision was made from the beginning to treat the prisioners according to the geneva covention, there would not have been any need to get a judge's decision, and no need to attempt to "create law".

but if the geneva conventions don't apply (and that's what the final judge said) (I think it was the final judge, anyway), then it's perfectly legal (ie, we are following the law) in not applying those conventions.

obama is not trying to use the torture against the prisioners, so the comment that "obama's...trying to do these things at one place" is wrong.

the issue isn't that people have been "arrested" so to speak for their acts, the issue is these people have been locked up for years and years without due process, and these prisioners had what is commonly viewed as torture done to them. don't lock them up without due process, don't torture them, and there isn't any problem....

"Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed “Obama’s Guantanamo”."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...l-1628958.html