Obama and Terrorist Rights

[Kiwon]

Hope and Change? - Strike 1. Improving America's image in the world? - Strike 2.

The Bush Administration had the War on Terror all wrong according to Obama and crew.

Therefore, Obama's first executive order was the closing of Gitmo in preparing to move the detainees ("enemy combatants") to the United States to ensure that they will enjoy the legal protections afforded to U.S. citizens and get a fair trial. This move outraged some 9/11 family members who have been waiting over 7 years for justice, especially since several of the 9/11 plotters have admitted their role and want to be executed.

The message: Terrorist rights trump the rights of American citizens for justice?

That same day, and then yesterday, Obama apparently okayed drone strikes on targets in Pakistan.

18 people were killed.... without a trial. Were they terrorists? We can't know for sure because they never had a trial. Their crimes were never proved in a court of law. Where was their due process?

The confessed 9/11 plotters could be found innocent in the U.S. courts while possibly innocent muslims are being wantonly killed on President Obama's orders.

And what about the death of innocent bystanders? What harm had villagers done to the U.S.?

("The first attack Friday took place in the village of Zharki in North Waziristan, when a single drone fired three missiles in the space of 10 minutes, the security officials said. The missiles destroyed two buildings, killing 10 people, at least five of whom were foreign militants, the officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. Hours later, a second missile struck a house in South Waziristan, killing eight people, the officials said, giving no more details." http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090123/D95T436O0.html)

Wouldn't Senator Obama have opposed such military tactics just a short time ago if carried out under President Bush? How does killing muslim innocents improve America's image in the world?

The Pakistanis aren't too thrilled. They responded with protests. Hope and Change? What Hope? What Change?

Obama has criticized Israel for the death of civilians in Gaza. Is it okay now for the Israelis to criticize President Obama for the death of innocents in Pakistan?

[SkinBasket]

Looks kind of like a return to the good ol' Clinton days of fighting terrorists by blowing up milk warehouses with cruise missiles based on months old, poorly collected intelligence. Take that Usama!

[Kiwon]

Make that 21 shamelessly murdered by President Bush, er....President Obama, without a trial.

CodePink is not going to be happy!

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f0535773d1a3f8152cda2b8c05239f06.571&show_article=1

It's ironic that those in Gitmo who have confessed and want to die are forced to undergo an unwanted elongated trial process courtesy of Obama and the ACLU.

Obama protects their rights at all costs while arbitrarily blowing others to smithereens.

[texaspackerbacker]

I hope you guys are being sarcastic--if so, it wasn't obvious.

Damn Obama is screwed up enough on so many things--like terrorist "rights"--which I will get to in a minute. When he does something right, give the man some credit. These aren't just blind missile strikes. They are precision guided, possibly with eyes on the ground, certainly with eyes in the sky, on good intelligence that terrorist targets are being hit. If there is collateral damage, you can chalk that up to the fact that these enemies, like every enemy we and the Israelis have fought for several generations now, exhibit the pure dastardly evil and gall to locate high value targets as close as possible to civilians--hiding like the dirty little cowards they are behind women and children, just daring us to risk blowing away a few innocents to get to the bad guys. To his credit, Obama did what needed to be done--either that, or he just hasn't gotten around to changing the good and effective Bush policy on this yet.

Now for the title of the thread, clearly, these God damned evil beings held at Guantanamo and elsewhere do NOT have the rights we, as Americans, have. Habeus Corpus, due process in general, counsel, discovery, speedy trial, ALL of these things do NOT apply--even if some of those "rights" have been given to the terrorists. Similarly, they do not apply to illegal aliens and probably not even to legal aliens in this country on non-terrorist matters. Just because we are magnanimous enough to afford those "rights" to non-terrorist aliens does NOT mean we are Constitutionally required to do so. The Constitution clearly applies those rights only to American citizens. Therefore, it absolutely is not legally necessary to apply any of that to the terrorists. Is there any moral or public relations reason to give that scum any "rights"? I would say a resounding HELL NO!

The bigger question is: Why are some Americans--mainly the leftist base of Obama and probably Obama himself--so obsessed with handicapping ourselves in this area by UNNECESSARILY taking these terrorists out of the military tribunals or no trials at all, and placing them in OUR judicial system? Doing so gives these vile killers of Americans a public forum--bad enough, a slim chance of getting off on a technicality--bad, but not very likely, but worst of all IMO, the right of discovery. This means that the defense gets to see the details of our intelligence on them, the identities of people who informed on them, etc.--all things which severely undermine our ability to catch or kill other terrorists and stop terrorist plots.

You add this crap to the stopping of harsh interrogation, and you make the job of our people who have successfully stifled terrorist hits since 9/11 a whole lot more difficult.

[bobblehead]

Yes, give him a little credit. The man is dead wrong on closing Gitmo, but he has to pay back the political backers who put him there and that is a big part of it.

Just today there was an article in the paper about a former Gitmo prisoner heading the yemen branch of al qaida. This is a bad move that he owes to some america haters.

But the missile strike....that is just fine. We have been knocking off al qaida and taliban in pakistan for months now, this is nothing new. He has a goal, which might be right or wrong, of getting away from Iraq and finishing what we started in Afghanistan. We have sunk a lot of money in Iraq and I have always felt that nation building wasn't a wise idea. Time to finish Afghan and go from there.

Lets criticize him where its deserved, but not get carried away.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Obama is dead right to close Gitmo...just like Mac wanted as well.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Obama is dead right to close Gitmo...just like Mac wanted as well.

In theory, we are getting some positive PR benefits out of this around the world. I hope it works out that way.

[Kiwon]

Lets criticize him where its deserved, but not get carried away.

And it's perfectly deserved right now.

You guys have memory loss, I guess. Do you remember how Nobama was elected, the darling of CodePink, the Daily Kos, and MoveOn, etc.? Do you remember the endless criticism of Bush and the War on Terror? Do you remember the "No" vote on Iraq, the "Yes" votes on defunding troops in the field?

I guess who've forgotten that Obama was THE most liberal senator in the whole Senate. His main campaign plank WAS basically anti-war at the beginning. The success of the Surge forced him to change.

According to him, America was engaging in "torture" and had brought unprecedented shame on the country. He promised that Gitmo would be closed, secret prisons and third country renditions ended and the War on Terror would be waged with diplomacy and international cooperation. The U.S. had to clean up it's own house first and earn the respect of the world before we would have any credibility.

Well, he was good to his word on Gitmo. His FIRST move as president was to protect the rights of the worst of the worst of those still remaining in Gitmo, including those who confessed to 9/11, because he has to ensure that they receive fair trials (which is something that the Bush Administration painstakingly already had done). Only the "fair trial" won't be in a military court, it will be in the American justice system.

Do you get it? Once the enemy combatants set foot on U.S. soil, they AUTOMATICALLY are afforded the same rights as U.S. citizens and the rules of evidence and disclosure are completely different. It's the first time in history that enemy combatants, even those not recognized by the Geneva Convention, are given this level of protection. Bend over backwards to protect the rights of terrorists just as the ACLU demands.

Oh, but wait, on the other hand, Mr. "America Sucks and I have to Fix It" Obama then continues the same strategy that he criticized Bush for employing in Afghanistan. Why shouldn't President Obama be criticized for blowing "suspected terrorists" to Hell, killing innocent muslim civilians thereby prompting protests in Pakistan and ruining America's image in the world?

Senator Obama used these instances to build his campaign so why should I praise President Obama now? I'm not going to praise him because he stumbled into the right decision. He's a hypocrite and doing the very same thing that Bush was doing.

Closing Gitmo is a ridiculous decision on so many levels. Forget this nonsense about repaying his supporters. A president should lead and make decisions because they are correct, not whether they are popular or not. National security trumps politics as usual. Bush kept Gitmo open for serious and legitimate reasons.

Think guys. Learn to argue from principles.

[Kiwon]

Tsk, tsk. tsk. Civilians being killed. Where's the anti-war "Hope and Change" campaign now?

"Obama has not commented on the missile strikes." - Big surprise.

.................................................. ..............

Pakistan urges Obama to halt suspected missile attacks

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan has urged Barack Obama to halt U.S. missile strikes on al-Qaeda strongholds near the Afghan border, saying civilians have been killed in attacks since the new American president's inauguration.

Pakistani security officials said eight suspected foreign militants, including an Egyptian al-Qaeda operative, were among 22 people killed in Friday's twin strikes in the Waziristan region.

But the Foreign Ministry said Saturday that the attacks by unmanned aircraft also killed an unspecified number of civilians and that it had informed U.S. officials of its "great concern."

"With the advent of the new U.S. administration, it is Pakistan's sincere hope that the United States will review its policy and adopt a more holistic and integrated approach toward dealing with the issue of terrorism and extremism," the ministry said in a statement.

The United States does not directly acknowledge firing the missiles, which are believed to be mostly fired from drones operated by the CIA and launched from neighboring Afghanistan.

Obama has not commented on the missile strikes.

However, he has made the war in Afghanistan and the intertwined al-Qaeda fight in Pakistan a foreign policy priority. Few observers expect him to ditch a tactic that U.S. officials say has killed a string of militant leaders behind the insurgency in Afghanistan — and who had perhaps been plotting terrorist attacks in the West.

Pakistani leaders complain that the more than 30 missile strikes since August have fanned anti-American sentiment and undermined the government's own efforts to counter Islamic militants.

But their protests have had few practical consequences, fueling speculation that Islamabad's cash-strapped, pro-U.S. government has given tacit approval in return for political and financial support from Washington.

Pakistan's government has little control over the border region, which is considered a likely hiding place for al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders.

Three intelligence officials told The Associated Press that funerals were held Saturday for nine Pakistanis killed a day earlier in Zharki, a village in North Waziristan.

The officials, citing reports from field agents and residents, said Taliban fighters had removed the bodies of five suspected foreign militants who also died in the first missile strike. Initial reports put the death toll from that attack at 10.

A senior security official in the capital, Islamabad, identified one of the slain men as Mustafa al-Misri, a suspected al-Qaeda operative. He said it was unclear if the man was a significant figure.

The second strike hit a house in South Waziristan. Residents and security officials say eight people died in the village of Gangi Khel.

The security officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-01-23-pakistan_N.htm

[mraynrand]

Obama is dead right to close Gitmo...just like Mac wanted as well.

Why?

[Kiwon]

Close Gitmo. Yeah, great idea.


Two ex-Guantanamo inmates appear in Al-Qaeda video - http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...R90lC_pXaHeW4Q

[digitaldean]

What are you worried about?? Our friends in the EU will take them off our hands, right??

Oh, I forgot, one Irish official said the EU would only take the non-combatants, people who "clearly have no terrorist history".

Thanks, guys, thanks a lot! Proof again, that a lot of countries, ESPECIALLY those in the EU aren't really serious about dealng with terrorism.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-01-23-gitmo-EU_N.htm

[texaspackerbacker]

Obama is dead right to close Gitmo...just like Mac wanted as well.

Invoking McCain is just ludicrous. He was the Dem/libs' best friend among Republicans before taking a brief hiatus to lose the election. Now, "Mac" is back--cozying up to the leftists like he never left.

It is dangerous leftist idiocy to close Guantanamo--at best, Obama giving in to the most extremist America-haters among his base, at worst, Obama's true nature coming to the surface--exposing him as an America-hater--would that raally surprise anybody considering his political roots with the weather underground leadership, his mentoring by Jeremiah Wright, virtually all of his votes and public statements before running for president?

[Harlan Huckleby]

It's the new Cheech and Chong!

[Harlan Huckleby]

Thanks, guys, thanks a lot! Proof again, that a lot of countries, ESPECIALLY those in the EU aren't really serious about dealng with terrorism.

They are for fighting terrorism. They have been at it longer and more energetically than the U.S. But they also are for letting the U.S. carry the load when possible. And they are always for criticizing the U.S.

Our relations with the Europeans and other countries do matter a great deal. Iraq was so miserably difficult precisely because much of the world wanted us to fail out of spite. Bush was terrible at diplomacy. Maybe Obama can be better.