Obama's Gitmo Plan Shot Down by Senate

Wanna talk about politics, your favorite hockey team... vegetarian recipes?
Post Reply
Cappster
cappster
cappster
Posts: 3014
youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:25 am
Location: Humanist, at your service.

Obama's Gitmo Plan Shot Down by Senate

Post by Cappster »

WASHINGTON (May 20) - In a rare, bipartisan defeat for President Barack Obama, the Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to keep the prison at Guantanamo Bay open for the foreseeable future and forbid the transfer of any detainees to facilities in the United States.
Democrats lined up with Republicans in the 90-6 vote that came on the heels of a similar move a week ago in the House, underscoring widespread apprehension among Obama's congressional allies over voters' strong feelings about bringing detainees to the U.S. from the prison in Cuba.

The president readied a speech for Thursday on the U.S. fight against terrorism, at a time when liberals have chafed at some of his decisions.
Obama has vowed to close the prison by January 2010, and the Senate's vote was not the final word on the matter. It will be next month at the earliest before Congress completes work on the legislation, giving the White House time pursue a compromise that would allow the president to fulfill his pledge.

But Obama's maneuvering room was further constrained during the day when FBI Director Robert Mueller told a congressional panel that he had concerns about bringing Guantanamo Bay detainees to prisons in the United States. Among the risks is "the potential for individuals undertaking attacks in the United States," said Mueller, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2001 and is serving a 10-year fixed term in office.

Additionally, U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled this week that some prisoners — but not all — can be held indefinitely at Guantanamo without being charged, thus increasing the pressure on the administration to develop a plan for the men held there.
After the Senate vote, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, "The president understands that his most important job is to keep the American people safe and that he is not going to make any decision or any judgment that imperils the safety of the American people."
Skip over this content

He added Obama has not yet decided where some of the detainees will be sent. A presidential commission is studying the issue.
There was no suspense in the moments leading to the Senate vote, although Democrats maneuvered to take political credit for denying Obama funds he sought to close the prison. They hoped to negate weeks of Republican warnings about the danger involved.
Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, favors closing Guantanamo, and the legislation his panel originally sent to the floor provided money for that purpose once the administration submitted a plan for the shutdown.
In changing course and seeking to delete the funds, he said, "The fact that the administration has not offered a workable plan at this point made that decision rather easy."
All six opponents of the proposal were Democrats, including Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Carl Levin of Michigan, and Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.

The administration asked for $80 million to close the facility. Obama promised repeatedly as a presidential candidate to shut down the prison, calling it a blot on the international image of the United States.
Even in voting to deny him the funds, Obama's Democratic allies insisted the president was fundamentally correct.

Our new toolbar integrates latest news into your Web browser and installs in seconds. Download It Now
"Guantanamo is used by al-Qaida as a symbol of American abuse of Muslims and is fanning the flames of anti-Americanism around the world," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California.
And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who had said on Tuesday he opposed allowing detainees to be transferred to U.S. prisons, signaled he might change his mind on that point. "If the administration proposes a plan that recommends the transfer of some detainees to American prisons, he will evaluate it carefully and make a judgment at that time," said spokesman Jim Manley.
The lopsided vote was a victory for the Senate Republicans, who have recently turned their attention to Obama's policies on foreign policy and terrorism after failing to make headway in criticizing his economic program.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has delivered numerous speeches in recent weeks raising pointed questions about Obama's plans to close the prison without first explaining where the men held there would be sent. "For months, we have been saying what Senate Democrats now acknowledge: that because the administration has no plan for what to do with the 240 detainees at Guantanamo, it would be irresponsible and dangerous for the Senate to appropriate the money to close it," McConnell said shortly before the vote.

The Republican leader also won approval for a separate terror-related provision later in the day. On a vote of 92-3, the Senate agreed to require the administration, before releasing any detainee, to inform Congress of the likelihood that he would return to terrorism. It also would report on any effort al-Qaida may be making to recruit detainees once they're released from U.S. custody.
Obama came to office pledging a dramatic change in George W. Bush's terrorism policy. In the months since, he has woven an uncertain course, occasionally angering liberals.

Maj. Lt. Cpl. Ryan Arthur of the Royal Welsh Regiment leads William Windsor, their regimental goat, through his retirement parade in northern England on May 20. After seven years of service, the 9-year-old will enjoy his retirement at a zoo outside of London.

He first backed the cancellation of military tribunals for prisoners, then announced he wanted them resumed with greater legal protections for the accused. Last week, he reversed course on another issue, deciding to appeal a court-ordered release of prisoner-abuse photos taken at Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

Several Republicans praised Obama for those very steps.
"I commend him for being very willing to change his opinion in light of having access to the intelligence he didn't have access to" as a candidate, said Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah.
FBI Director Mueller made his comments before the House Judiciary Committee.
Prodded by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., to agree that Guantanamo detainees could be kept safely in maximum security prisoners in the United States, Mueller declined. He noted that in some instances gang leaders have run their gangs from inside prisons.
If Reid has appeared equivocal on the possible transfer of prisoners, Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the second-in-command among Democrats, pointed out that no one has ever escaped from a federal "supermax" prison and that 347 convicted terrorists are among those held in them.

That drew some support from Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "The idea that we cannot find a place to securely house 250-plus detainees within the United States is not rational," he said.
Not all Republicans were thinking along the same lines.
"No good purpose is served by allowing known terrorists, who trained at terrorist training camps, to come to the U.S. and live among us," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas. "Guantanamo Bay was never meant to be an Ellis Island."


http://news.aol.com/main/politics/artic ... ure/481795

This is why I have learned to never believe a presidential candidate or any other politician for that matter. In the case of the President, the senate is the great equalizer. What is shocking is the overwhelming vote to not close Gitmo since the Dems have majority in the senate. He still has an opportunity to close Gitmo, but the signs aren't looking good. Could this be a promise that Obama ultimately cannot fulfill?

And why does it take $80 million to close a "base?"
Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 280x, FTW!

Hog Bowl II Champion (2010)
Kilmer72
Hog
Posts: 2543
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: Southerner in Yankee land :(

Post by Kilmer72 »

Of course Cappster. They are all full of it. I always support my troops and I love my country but it doesn't mean that I do not see all the bull. Gitmo will never shut down any time soon. If it does it will just get moved somewhere where else.
crazyhorse1
ch1
ch1
Posts: 3634
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Post by crazyhorse1 »

Kilmer72 wrote:Of course Cappster. They are all full of it. I always support my troops and I love my country but it doesn't mean that I do not see all the bull. Gitmo will never shut down any time soon. If it does it will just get moved somewhere where else.



We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we're stupid. We're stupid people because we're too stupid to care we're stupid and don't properly fund our schools. The lack of education is what is keeping us stupid. We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we're stupid.

In relation to Gitmo, all arguments to keep Gitmo open are stupid and are known to be stupid by educated people:

Gitmo's existence and polices and deeds are war crimes by international agreement and against American law, international law, and the Ten Commandments. They are also against American interests, financial and otherwise.

Particularly stupid views:

That Gitmo prisoners moved to high security prisons in the United States will escape and create havoc. The truth-- no one has ever escaped from a modern high securtiy prison in the United States.

That the Geneva Conventions agreement against the torture of all prisoners does not apply to Gitmo prisoners. The truth-- the Geneva Conventions agreement applies to all prisoners, everywhere.

That torture is permitted in certain cases by American law. The truth--the American government is a signer of and helped write the Geneva Conventions, which means that writing American laws in violation of the Geneva Conventions is itself against international law and the Constitution of the United States, which requires the government of the United States to abide by all international agreements.

There are many notions afoot in the United States as stupid as the ones listed above, including the legality of preventive detention, rendition, special trials, etc. All of them are violations of American and international law and are unconstitutional. This is not known by stupid people, who do not read. We, the American people, are stupid people. We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we are stupid, etc.

We are also stupid because we're afraid. People who are afraid and made stupid by fear are too stupid to realize that when international law, American law, and the Constitution break down, all the tactics used at Gitmo can be used against us.
crazyhorse1
ch1
ch1
Posts: 3634
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Post by crazyhorse1 »

Kilmer72 wrote:Of course Cappster. They are all full of it. I always support my troops and I love my country but it doesn't mean that I do not see all the bull. Gitmo will never shut down any time soon. If it does it will just get moved somewhere where else.



We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we're stupid. We're stupid people because we're too stupid to care we're stupid and don't properly fund our schools. The lack of education is what is keeping us stupid. We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we're stupid.

In relation to Gitmo, all arguments to keep Gitmo open are stupid and are known to be stupid by educated people:

Gitmo's existence and polices and deeds are war crimes by international agreement and against American law, international law, and the Ten Commandments. They are also against American interests, financial and otherwise.

Particularly stupid views:

That Gitmo prisoners moved to high security prisons in the United States will escape and create havoc. The truth-- no one has ever escaped from a modern high securtiy prison in the United States.

That the Geneva Conventions agreement against the torture of all prisoners does not apply to Gitmo prisoners. The truth-- the Geneva Conventions agreement applies to all prisoners, everywhere.

That torture is permitted in certain cases by American law. The truth--the American government is a signer of and helped write the Geneva Conventions, which means that writing American laws in violation of the Geneva Conventions is itself against international law and the Constitution of the United States, which requires the government of the United States to abide by all international agreements.

There are many notions afoot in the United States as stupid as the ones listed above, including the legality of preventive detention, rendition, special trials, etc. All of them are violations of American and international law and are unconstitutional. This is not known by stupid people, who do not read. We, the American people, are stupid people. We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we are stupid, etc.

We are also stupid because we're afraid. People who are afraid and made stupid by fear are too stupid to realize that when international law, American law, and the Constitution break down, all the tactics used at Gitmo can be used against us.
HEROHAMO
|||
|||
Posts: 4752
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA
Contact:

Post by HEROHAMO »

crazyhorse1 wrote:
Kilmer72 wrote:Of course Cappster. They are all full of it. I always support my troops and I love my country but it doesn't mean that I do not see all the bull. Gitmo will never shut down any time soon. If it does it will just get moved somewhere where else.



We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we're stupid. We're stupid people because we're too stupid to care we're stupid and don't properly fund our schools. The lack of education is what is keeping us stupid. We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we're stupid.

In relation to Gitmo, all arguments to keep Gitmo open are stupid and are known to be stupid by educated people:

Gitmo's existence and polices and deeds are war crimes by international agreement and against American law, international law, and the Ten Commandments. They are also against American interests, financial and otherwise.

Particularly stupid views:

That Gitmo prisoners moved to high security prisons in the United States will escape and create havoc. The truth-- no one has ever escaped from a modern high securtiy prison in the United States.

That the Geneva Conventions agreement against the torture of all prisoners does not apply to Gitmo prisoners. The truth-- the Geneva Conventions agreement applies to all prisoners, everywhere.

That torture is permitted in certain cases by American law. The truth--the American government is a signer of and helped write the Geneva Conventions, which means that writing American laws in violation of the Geneva Conventions is itself against international law and the Constitution of the United States, which requires the government of the United States to abide by all international agreements.

There are many notions afoot in the United States as stupid as the ones listed above, including the legality of preventive detention, rendition, special trials, etc. All of them are violations of American and international law and are unconstitutional. This is not known by stupid people, who do not read. We, the American people, are stupid people. We, the American people, don't want to shut down Gitmo because we are stupid, etc.

We are also stupid because we're afraid. People who are afraid and made stupid by fear are too stupid to realize that when international law, American law, and the Constitution break down, all the tactics used at Gitmo can be used against us.


You are missing alot of points.

Terrorists are exactly that. They cause terror. They harm and kill people. Especially Americans. They hate Americans with a passion and will not apologize for it.

When you bring terrorists into America they are now tried in an American court of law. They now have rights and the blanket of our constitution.

They do not deserve the right of our American Constitution. Why do you want to give terrorists who would harm you , your family or any American the right to our constitution our freedoms? They do not deserve to even breathe American air. Many American Soldiers have fought hard for that freedom. Our freedom was not free.

Quite frankly you need to punish evil. I could care less if we torture evil doers.It is not all flowers and cupcakes out there in this world.

World War 2 our country and many others had to go through hell to get to where we are now. We had to punish evil then and confront it. Hate to break it to you. But, this world if not kept in check can get real ugly fast. If we just let terrorists do what they want? We could have another Hitler hitting this earth in no time.
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."
Post Reply