Obama releases secret Bush anti-terror documents

They destroyed self incriminating evidence. I though there were only 4 times that they used waterboarding. They never tortured, remember?

Also destroying evidence before it can be used against george bush in upcoming charges of the use of torture and more charges of acts war crimes against mankind. < :-)

For all those fools who come on here claiming that Obama is turning the nation into a socialist or even fascist nation, you now have yet even MORE proof that you're being drawn AWAY from that kind of future. It was bush who demanded you suspend your liberties, including freedom of speech, etc., in exchange for 'democracy' and what not.

And Obama lives up to yet ANOTHER promise! Good job.

Well, now we just have to take the word of those who were interrogated for what happened to them, and take it for the absolute truth. I hope those who conducted the interrogations will be found out and tried totally on the basis of that. I also hope those who gave the orders to destroy the tapes will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and very publicly smeared for their crime.

The whole episode is completely un-American and very embarrassing. I hope measures are taken to make sure it never happens again.

And can anyone say they were surprised? The surprise would have been that Bush & Co. never tortured etc.

The CIA can't destroy everything. The new Justice Department won't hide behind dick cheney's wall of secrecy.

I said a long time ago, I don't want anything nhealthwise to affect dick cheney of george bush. I want them to be forever remembered as the traitors that they are.

I want them to live long lives and be shamed. < :-)

ha ha, another black mark against the Bush presidency and on the faces of all those who blinsly supported him.

It's tough being right, but it's becoming a stock regular habit now for Democrats and their supporters. :-)

This is a good move. What Bush and Co. failed to understand in all their secret actions was a very simple core argument. Namely, if the American way of life was forced to change when confronted with terrorism (suspension of civil liberties, etc.), then the war on terrorism is already lost. For America (and the West) to be successful in confronting terrorism (radical islam or whatever), it is vital that it maintain the moral high ground. Waterboarding suspects, renditioning people, and other such actions are not conducive with such a strategy. The constitution of the United States and its various institutions are in place to act as a system of checks and balances. With Bush and co., I think there was a very serious risk of the system breaking down as the walls of secrecy went up.

By the way, I heard that curious George was offered a part-time job at a hardware store in Armpit, Texas. Wonder what he was going to sell? Chains and things?

Yep, we are firmly back to the 9/10 mentality now. A serious threat from jihadist extremists? Lo and behold now, just a figment of the imagination.

It will be interesting to see the response of the Obama administration to the next terrorist attack on US soil.

It will be interesting to see the response of the Obama administration to the next terrorist attack on US soil.

He would probably retaliate against the people responsible rather than perverting the nation's foreign policy just because some tin-pot ARAB dictator had set an effigy of his father's face in the sidewalk.

May I ask You are not willing to let someone listen to your phone calls in order for the government to seek out enemies, but you are willing to allow the government to look into your private medical files, allow those who have been known to commit terrorist acts to re-settle next door to you...

You are all worried about what may have happened to your constitutional rights, yet you allow the government to stop anyone from buying protective measures?

You are willing to let people who cut off heads, killed kurds, kidnapping, blowing up bombs indiscriminately walk free but throw the book at GWB during a time of war. Yet, Obama voted with the patriot act.

That stance, in one form or another, became the foundation for many policies: holding detainees at Guantanamo Bay, eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without warrants, using tough new CIA interrogation tactics and locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges.

locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges.

locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges.

locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges.

This is something we should never forget. EVER.

Taka

Timorborder:

" He would probably retaliate against the people responsible "

And how do you "retaliate against the people responsible" without identifying them, including their networks inside the country?

" rather than perverting the nation's foreign policy just because some tin-pot ARAB dictator had set an effigy of his father's face in the sidewalk. "

I don´t know what you are prattling about, and neither do you, I suspect. But it sounds great... form over content!

Sounds like the liberal, just-skating-by posters didn't have any family members on the four planes that slammed into the WTC, Pentagon or the field in Pennsylvania. You must be the twinkle in the eye of Keith Obermann and Rachel L. Maddow....

Sounds like I should allow someone's perverted ideas of keeping me free to just thrive and grow.

You want to forget how that administration allowed these things to happen. You want to allow that adminiatration a clean slate to their non-actions to protect this country. The administration that put more effort to conceal their actions then protect our country.

Yeah, sounds like the right wing speaking. < :-)

Cheney has been a loud-mouthed ex-VP and has used his Faux News audience to attack the Obama administration. This guy just doesn't seem to handle himself well in any circumstance. Anyway, considering Cheney's activist approach to retirement, perhaps this is Obama's way of saying "Hey Dick, STFU."

And Tatanka, we did have friends and relatives whom we lost in that attack. We believe though that being American means being true to the principles of freedom and rule of law.

Tatanka: "Sounds like the liberal, just-skating-by posters didn't have any family members on the four planes that slammed into the WTC, Pentagon or the field in Pennsylvania. You must be the twinkle in the eye of Keith Obermann and Rachel L. Maddow...."

Sorry, bud, but you are dragging these names, and the names of all those who died in the terrorist attacks, through the man and spitting on their graves. The policies that bush and co. resorted to after the attacks in NO WAY would have helped prevent it. In fact, they ensured that the 'war on terror' was lost before it began, because suddenly what your country was fighting for were standards no better than those of the terrorists themselves. Obama is showing us the truth about the administration you so admire, and proving once and for all that they were corrupt, lied flat out, and were taking you guys on a path at the end of which you would have relinquished the freedoms and liberties that would have led you to a communist-like controlled state (ironically, you say that's what Obama's doing now! haha).

What's more, if bush and co. had only ever heeded all the warnings about 9/11 that crossed his desk instead of ignoring them, the names you mentioned would probably never be known, because those people would all still be alive. bush and co. rushing into Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, or AQ, and they posed no threat to the US BEFORE the invasion (they do now!). Once again, please don't drag those people through the mud.

Thank goodness Obama is restoring truth and dignity and cleaning up the mess at the White House left by his predecessor (who promised to the same but made things worse, and now we have the evidence that he lied about how bad it really was).

interesting to see the response of the Obama administration to the next terrorist attack It will be on US soil.

They'll probably put the terrorists' faces on U.S. postage stamps.

"They'll probably put the terrorists' faces on U.S. postage stamps."

I don't think a GWB Jr. is coming out soon, though, so you're wrong. I mean, the article is about how he in fact was no better than a terrorist, right? and lied to you guys straight out about it, so the joke's on you. Unfortunately, you guys can't acknowledge it and instead can only resort to the same old rhetoric to avoid addressing the issue.

Amazing, really... bush goes down a few more notches on the "Worst US President" list and all you guys can keep doing is defending him.

Maybe the interrogation vids had to be destroyed because they showed the bush family with all their know terrorist mates having a good ole time aroiund the BBQ. "Hey, remember all those guns you sold us real cheap?"

GITMO is still open. The detainee's are still in legal limbo. Obama is not going to let those that aren't of U.S citizenship held there anything close to what we would consider our normal legal system.

He's abandoned the Military Tribunal route and is currently "studying" the matter as to what Ad-Hoc legal system his administration is going to cobble together instead for these foriegn detainee's.

Whatever system he comes up with will be challenged in the courts as to whether it is really legal or not, and thats going to take a few years at least.Which means the detainee's will rot for at least another two to three years before any charges or court proceedings will occur.

So Folks.......Your 'Savior Obama' for these folks to restore our principles that Bush (forgive me I have to mention his name, please keep the frothing down to minimum at the mere reading of it and see if any of my points aren't factually correct)had so casually tossed away in fighting the war on terror is anything but.

Obama's policy is nothing more than Bush Lite and I have to wonder why the usuals aren't holding him accountable for letting these folks rot in legal limbo land while he also grapples with what to do these folks.

Maybe this is just a little more complex than you think after all?

WilliB: And how do you "retaliate against the people responsible" without identifying them, including their networks inside the country?

Uh, maybe you don't know, but some of the 9/11 terrorists were being investigated somewhat before 9/11. Things were known, but not pursued. It was not necessary to burn the constitution before nor has it become necessary after. The problem was not our system or our rules. It was a lack of will to conduct an investigation.

They knew who the 9/11 attackers were by name. They knew they were going through flight school. The FBI had been aware of it for a year. That administration had been discussing the chatter going around that planes would be used against us. They suppressed the information.

Like they were so concerned about our safety. < :-)

Won't release his own birth certificate

That is because President Obama was not born in the United States.

This release is also right out of Obama's trusty playbook; it's obvious they are desperate, hoping that some dirt about Bush or attacking talk radio jocks will distract 'folks' enough to keep them from noticing that since the so-called Stimulus Bill was passed the market has dropped 1400 points.

Likeitis:

" Uh, maybe you don't know, but some of the 9/11 terrorists were being investigated somewhat before 9/11. "

Lots of people are "being investigated". Right now, there are plenty of jihadists who are quite willing to commit the next terrorist act, many of them in Guantanamo (which the Obama admin wants to close). Are you saying they should all be jailed infinitely on the simple grounds that their faith calls for the jihad against that?

That takes "mixed message" to a whole new level...

since the so-called Stimulus Bill was passed the market has dropped 1400 points.

What market? And since you know so much about that, could you please tell us how much it dropped during any period in Bush's term?

If this doc release is an attempt at smokescreen, I think Bush and pals must be welcoming it.

"Maybe this is just a little more complex than you think after all?"

Wow... someone saying something is 'complex' as a means for undermining the arguments of others. I would say it's a rather poignant jab, save that it comes from someone who supported a man who said, and which MANY on the Right bought into, "You're either with us, or against us".

I wonder when Obama will release secret CIA reports listing the most vulnerable sites in America for terrorist attacks? That too would certainly be of value to the Jihadists.

That takes "mixed message" to a whole new level...

Just remember it is your message, and not mine.

Lots of people are "being investigated".

They sure are. Even if you make it easier to tap phones, etc., they STILL have to investigate. There is just no way around it. It is going to take time and effort, and THAT was more the problem than the system.

Are you saying they should all be jailed infinitely on the simple grounds that their faith calls for the jihad against that?

I can't even begin to fathom the relationship you are trying to form here. What ever are you talking about?

I wonder when Obama will release secret CIA reports listing the most vulnerable sites in America for terrorist attacks? That too would certainly be of value to the Jihadists.

You know what people do when they are desperate? Grab at straws. You seem to have quite a handful.

Going back to Obama's State of the Union address, note that he didn't list national security as one of his administration's top priorities.

The Jihadists and their supporters are high-fiving each other.

Wow... someone saying something is 'complex' as a means for undermining the arguments of others. I would say it's a rather poignant jab, save that it comes from someone who supported a man who said, and which MANY on the Right bought into, "You're either with us, or against us".

How about addressing the points I made instead? Obama's policy for all intensive purposes toward GITMO and the Detainee's held there is really nothing more than Bush's overall policy, except in a 'nicer' package.

They're still rotting in legal limbo land, but now it's cool cause Obama's in charge???????

Thanks in advance.

smithinjapan,it's not a joke.

sailwind: "How about addressing the points I made instead?"

You made a couple of points about one part of the overall package, while failing to acknowledge the remainder, and wrapping up your post with a comment hypocritical of your stances in the past. Your questions therefore do not really warrant any answering.

I WILL however touch on your snide question in your second comment: "...but now it's cool cause Obama's in charge??????"

Nope.

There you go. Of course, now that Obama's in charge and is TRYING to get the place closed and has already set the course for a good number of those being held there, it is someone like me, who was against Gitmo from the get-go, who can say it is 'more complicated'; someone like you, who supported a man who said 'you are with us or against us' cannot suddenly change tune and say it's not so black and white.

onedragon: "It's not a joke"

Where's the joke you are talking about?

sailwind: "How about addressing the points I made instead?"

One more question.... why are you suddenly so concerned about those in Gitmo? or is it simply that you have nothing at all to say in terms of the thread at hand, and cannot admit how wrong bush was to abuse his power with your liberties, and so instead are trying to deflect it by asking people against Gitmo why they are posting less about that than on how wrong bush was?

You hardly ever mentioned Gitmo in the past, and it's pretty clear you were not really concerned about those in there, except that they might (there's no proof for most) be criminals, so...?

I mean, next we're going to hear one of you guys who can't do anything but deflect come on and say, "bush is in the past. This is not related to the topic!"

TexasAggie: "Going back to Obama's State of the Union address, note that he didn't list national security as one of his administration's top priorities."

Better relations with other nations improves national security, bottom line. You don't get it by making much of the world into your enemy and increasing terrorism, as bush tried (and possibly this is the only area he succeeded in), and you support. This like this stand to reason, but then again we ARE talking to a Republican here... and they sometimes can't see that becoming friendlier with someone is a pretty good way of ensuring they are going to hit you -- at least as opposed to alienating yourself from them.

Of course, now that Obama's in charge and is TRYING to get the place closed

He's President he could close the place tomorrow with a stroke of his pen. He's not TRYING he's STUDYING the issue some more. No worries another three years or so and then maybe they'll finally get charged with something.

You hardly ever mentioned Gitmo in the past, and it's pretty clear you were not really concerned about those in there, except that they might (there's no proof for most) be criminals, so...?

I have had numerous discussions over the years on GITMO, most notably with Ms. Cleo, my views and opinion is quite well known but for your benefit I'll summarize it in a nutshell.

The detainee's in GITMO have abandoned all loyality to the laws of their respective states and have joined a stateless cause. Once they made that commitment to no longer follow the rules of law (all states considered terrorism as a crime) and became a law to themselves, they forfeited all rights that would normally be afforded to them. They aren't entitled to Geneva convention protections or any other protections that would be afforded an armed combatant from an actual Nation state. They are stateless and they choose to be that way. Also, it seems Obama and even the U.N agrees with me here, as no one has ever demanded they be given the same rights as say a capture Soldier engaged in a declared war with us.

I do not know exactly what to do with them, and I have stated as such on numerious occassions. The question is, and I posted it on this thread also, "What exactly do we do with these people?"...

I thought the Military Tribunal system as flawed as it is was about the best we could for people who could less about the law of man and are more concerned with the law of Jihad.

Obama thinks otherwise and will cobble some other Ad-Hoc legal system. Though again NOWHERE is he proposing anything like full rights. My point Smith your nothing like your old 'Bush Bashing' self on this issue anymore, when it comes to how Obama is for all intensive purposes, is screwing them over also in another two or three years in legal limboland.

TexasAggie: "Going back to Obama's State of the Union address, note that he didn't list national security as one of his administration's top priorities."

while neither a Bush supporter nor an Obama supporter, you need to remember that Bush's policies got walk all over on. It was his admin that tried to outsource our national security and went as far as allowing a heavily AQ country get a contract for ports.

Obama supporters need to remember that obama backed the Patriot act in its first stages.

Wow, GWB and co. perverted justice department regulations, stepped on Article 4 of the Constitution, implemented new intelligence gathering techniques that Amerian courts struck down not once but twice, and there's people out there who still say GWB was right.

Sailwind, I think you ned to re-think your thoughts.

"The detainee's in GITMO have abandoned all loyality to the laws of their respective states and have joined a stateless cause."

That is only partly true. I believe some, if not many of Gitmo detainees were simply the wrong me in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Your implication is that ALL Gitmo detainees consciously chose to become combatants. The problem with that argument is that you have no way to prove it.

Only a small number of Gitmo detainees have been charged with anything, which strongly implies your Government does not have a case against most of these people either.

That's your first point up in smoke.

"Once they made that commitment to no longer follow the rules of law (all states considered terrorism as a crime) and became a law to themselves, they forfeited all rights that would normally be afforded to them."

A moot point. See above.

"They aren't entitled to Geneva convention protections or any other protections that would be afforded an armed combatant from an actual Nation state. They are stateless and they choose to be that way."

Sailwind, your implication here is that because said combatants are 'stateless', there they are not entitled to Geneva convention protections or any other protections.

Whay law or statute do you have to back this up?

I hope you are not just following the bush administration 'guidelines' without having any basis in law.

sailwind said:

The detainee's in GITMO have abandoned all loyality to the laws of their respective states and have joined a stateless cause. Once they made that commitment to no longer follow the rules of law (all states considered terrorism as a crime) and became a law to themselves, they forfeited all rights that would normally be afforded to them. They aren't entitled to Geneva convention protections or any other protections that would be afforded an armed combatant from an actual Nation state. They are stateless and they choose to be that way.

How can he know what they did? Was he there? An eye witness? Or is he taking someone's word for it? If he could correctly assume that there were no mistakes made in choosing each detainee to go to GITMO then I think we should all also assume that no police officer that is at the detective level or higher has ever made an honest mistake in processing the wrong person for a criminal offense. I am not talking about dishonest mistakes here. Have police officers ever charged and tried the wrong person for a crime they did not commit and the officer did it in an honest manner?

Well I guess we will have to keep accepting sailwind's eyewitness accounts, "Once they made that commitment to no longer follow the rules of law (all states considered terrorism as a crime)[.]"

Sushi, goodDonkey,

Let me know when Obama quits "studying" the idea as to what he's going to do with guys and charges them with something. Seem's he's also an 'eyewitness' that they aren't entitled to anything yet either. At least for another three or four years from now.

Thanks

The CIA can now identify the number of videotapes that were destroyed

It does not say when the tape were destroyed and also remember that the CIA Director at that time was George Tenant. A Clinton hold over who was in on all of those discussions I bet. So, it was not just a “Republican Thing.” Also, look at the time frame. I seem to remember in my history class that at the beginning of WW2, the US under FDR (a Democrat) went around locking up people of Japanese ancestory and also had a few more measures in place to make sure that we would not come under a sneak attack again.

I am not sure why those in the media all blasting this the way that they are. I remember, that the argument then (in Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11) that classic scene of Bush in the class room with the children when he found out about the World Trade Center attacks and how he focused on the look on his face, and how other derided him for flying around the nation in Air Force One and not going back to the White House (by the way, that is what the plan is to get him to a remote place and out of the known target), so now that we find out that he was actually trying to do something, even if we don’t like it we vilify him. Also, Abe Lincoln suspended habeas corpus for the entire period of the Civil War, and FDR had Nazi spies and saboteurs executed (no Miranda rights for them since they weren't even thought of as an issue then).

Did Bush screw up in his 8 years, yes he did. But at least he kept the number of re-attacks on the U.S. down. After all, the first attack on the WTC came under Clinton. The bombing of the embassies in Africa came under Clinton’s watch. The bombing of the USS COLE came under Clinton. 9/11 under Bush, but I don’t seem to recall any other attacks on the U.S. since then.

I was in direct contact w/ US Intelligence personnel during the Bush Administration's first term, and I can state that many were not at all concerned about 9/11, and were concentrating on Japan. They were very shrewd and deceptively smart. We are talking about some very smart people w/ a complicated plan on the US West Coast. My take was they were engaged in a global strategy where 9/11 was the centerpiece attraction, but the goals were complex. The master planners are very sharp strategists and it reminded me of the Cold War's "Grand Strategy".

Torture was openly discussed by the Bush Administration and N sa, and there was a very good reason for it to be instituted, but the actual reason is not completely clear, nor do I wish to know. They may avoid legal problems b/c it was planned.

Excellent.

Alphaape,

I really don't think it is the point that Bush was trying to do the best thing for America. I don't think you want to go there lest you end up having to say things like "at least the trains ran on time".

I think most leaders try to do the things they think best for what they think their countries are. I think the point here is that Bush made a huge mistake in his way of thinking about what the United States is.

Once again sailwind begs us to clean up the mess that his leaders created and puts the burden of responsibility on the Democrats while expecting them to adhere to his timetable. I guess when you get used to the Republican way of rejecting thoughtful means of decision making then "studying" options for a serious matter becomes an anathema.

Rookie mistake.

You really can't defend a lot of Bush's actions but you also can't say that the government should go on with "business as usual" when dealing with terrorists. Something's got to give and there's no clear cut answer or path to point to. I think Obama is much smarter at selling it to the public, but I also think he'll continue some of Bush's policies that a lot of people didn't like.

Superlib,

People should be outaged that the CIA can simply destroy what can only be construed as the destruction of evidence of serious wrong-doing to other human beings, whatever they're suspected of doing...

...I imagine once again no-one will be held accountable here. It's a disgrace.

Open letter from Carlos the Jackal, a Muslim convert since his imprisonment in France, applauding Obama on his Gitmo policy, moves like this, and asking for his assistance.

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90398

sailwind: "My point Smith your nothing like your old 'Bush Bashing' self on this issue anymore, when it comes to how Obama is for all intensive purposes, is screwing them over also in another two or three years in legal limboland."

Wrong. Steps have already been made to close it, and it's in the works as we speak, which I have applauded. You'll also note (or not, if you choose to forget), that I lamented it was not according to his original schedule. Still, the main point of MY comments in return to yours was that you skip the entire issue of bush's wrong doings and try to twist this into some argument against Obama.

You seriously just cannot admit all this was wrong, from bush ignoring and stomping on your constitutional rights, to spying on you, to torturing your brethren (perhaps), and other people at a whim, and threatening to do it to you.

Instead, somehow, you feel that all this points to Obama's failures. Unbelievable! Now, if Obama reneges on his promise for Gitmo or other things, at that time I'll gladly bash him as I would anyone else. He does not deserve the bashing bush gets in this case because bush started all this crap to begin with!

rollo,

Wow, you've managed to introduce Islam, France, Carlos the Jackal and still not make a coherent point. Ah well....

Alphaape -- good points about how presidents handled pukes in the past. Lucky these "enemy combatants" weren't around during WWII or they would have been immediately shot upon capture.

Bush in 2001, and again in 2005, put up his hand and swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend, NOT the American people, but the Constitution of the United States, to the best of his ability. And then, for the most part, he had his legal experts attempt to tap every weakness, ambiguity and loophole in the Constitution in order to increase the power of the Executive Branch -- acts which can easily put the Constitutional balance and the enumerated rights within the document at great risk.

Now, there is the letter of the law, and then there is this thing called the spirit of the law. I believe the oath is there to attempt to remind the person taking the office of that. As well it should remind those of us citizens who are witnesses to that oath. Bush and his team responded to the attacks of 9/11 in a way that showed their true colors, and shows just how easily the US could slide away from being a democratic republic.

Now, maybe we should be grateful to Bush and his team for revealing this all to us. But, as far as I am concerned, Bush, in taking his oath, was a far bigger and more dangerous liar than Bill Clinton with his pants down.

What state secrets is Obama going to disclose when the market drops another 1400 points?

Considering Obama received the full endorsement of every major terrorist group in the world as leader of the free world it makes sense that he would release these state secrets.

Political payback comes in various currancies.

So can bush be tried and convicted as a war criminal and mass murderer?! I hope so.

and locking U.S. citizens in military brigs without charges.

Some of you don't seem to get it.

We cannot allow this to happen in America.

Taka

Obama and his party pushed through in four days, without allowing their opponents or the working public (okay, yeah, I guess I repeat myself there...) to even view its contents, the largest spending bill in the history of our republic.

Apparently, allowing our enemies insight into how we operate and the steps we will take to defend ourselves is what they meant by transparency.

Taka -

We cannot allow this to happen in America.

Don't worry; we're not going to.

rollonarte -

their opponents or the working public (okay, yeah, I guess I repeat myself there...)

Nope. The working public are the ones who elected Barack Hussein Obama President of the United States. You are the opposition, you are growing weaker by the day, and America has already defeated you as we do all our enemies.

"92 videotapes were destroyed"

Heck, over the years, my video decks have eaten nearly that many of my videotapes - grrrr! Everyone's telling me to get a DVD recorder...

"waterboarding was used on three suspects"

Those three monsters would have gleefully ripped off any of our heads and crapped down our necks.

" You are the opposition, you are growing weaker by the day"

Heh, you're telling me. After introducing as many topics as possible that have nothing to do with the thread in hand, it's back to shrieking about the state of the Dow Jones, which President Obama is obviously responible for, since President Bush left with his econimc legacy shining like a diamond....

All the Americans above are going on making the same mistake, you are taking extreme stances pro & against, blaming & defending. The way Bush & friends were going was little by little leading the US towards someplace nasty. They believed that what they were doing was & would protect the US from the “outsiders”, but failed to realise the degree that they were themselves becoming the American people’s worst enemy. They too were taking the same hard line for & against. Face the fact that Bush panicked & vested interest groups took him over, hence the pointless war in Iraq that has not made the US one iota safer, but has made it a lot more enemies & killed a lot of American soldiers that may well be needed in the future. (Not to mention a lot of Iraqis).

You all need to calm down a little & wait to see what all these revelations are going to amount to. News stories by the day are coming out of the white house, but are they going to lead anywhere, is this part of the Obama is wonderful campaign & nothing more than another smoke screen by yet an other government? The time to get excited &/or angry is when something is proved against someone & that hasn’t happened yet.

I heard that the police are digging up the back gardens of the white house looking for the bodies buried there. What bodies? Well not being an American I forget the names, but I am sure you can fill in all the blanks. See my point?

Sarge at 10:03 PM JST - 3rd March

“Those three monsters would have gleefully ripped off any of our heads and crapped down our necks.”

Sarge, you make this sound as though you know these guys, do you?

grafton: Best post I've ever seen you put up, by far, and my hats off to you!

"Sarge, you make this sound as though you know these guys, do you"

No, sarge doesn't know them. He doesn't know a thing about them besides the fact that they were put in their without cause, and were tortured. He knows his hero bush approved, so he therefore assumes bush was correct in doing so. sarge is a 'no questions asked' kind of guy, so long as it comes to his former president's terrorism and not someone else's.

There were supposedly only 4 cases of waterboarding used in interogations. But they needed to destroy 92 videos, seems suspect that they are hiding a lot of detrimental investigations.

The CIA and the FBI have been working under the rules that anything they wanted to do in investigations was legal. Nothing was off-limits.

Even in the investigations performed, nothing of substance was ever discovered. Nothing!!

Then there are those who believe that dick cheney was such a great American. B/S!! he did what ever he wanted to, legal or not. Then he invented new ways to mark them secret.

New people are in control now. Those secrets that dick cheney and george bush hid from the Americans will be released.

bush and cheney's lies will be revealed. < :-)

So Folks,

Still waiting for an answer......What are we going to do with these guys?

I think three hots and a cot is about the best we can do until we really come to some sort of real compromise on this.

And for the record...... I support Obama in making sure these folks are still locked up and have no civil rights. He's doing the right thing in that, any protests for his actions so far?

Sarge and Sailwind know stuff all about this.

I'm not even American and I find this destruction of evidence by the bush administration nothing short of a disgrace and find that the distinct lack of outrage among Americans - I'm talking the Sarge's and Sailwind's here - just goes to show how low some Americans have sunk thanks to the bush years.

I'm talking about the same Americans who jump and shout about freedom and liberty, etc. while thinking it's just fine to deny the same previledges to others without any credible evidence whatsoever.

bush and co. have created a whole new breed of American - Generation G, where 'G' stands for 'gutless.'

grafton: Best post I've ever seen you put up, by far, and my hats off to you!

"Sarge, you make this sound as though you know these guys, do you"

No, sarge doesn't know them. He doesn't know a thing about them besides the fact that they were put in their without cause, and were tortured. He knows his hero bush approved, so he therefore assumes bush was correct in doing so. sarge is a 'no questions asked' kind of guy, so long as it comes to his former president's terrorism and not someone else's.

Sailwind - "And for the record...... I support Obama in making sure these folks are still locked up and have no civil rights."

Why? You have no credible evidence.

Blindly believing what your government says is what got America into the failed war in Iraq in the first place.

Glad to see him keep his promises! He is doing a great job!

sailwind: "I support Obama in making sure these folks are still locked up and have no civil rights. He's doing the right thing in that, any protests for his actions so far?"

You're trying to make it sound as if he's put them there himself, whereas he's trying to find alternative places to put them. You know you're doing this, and I think you're even getting a thrill out of it.

Finally, as SushiSake said, you have ZERO evidence that these people did a thing, and they have had no trial to prove it either. I think your lack of patriotism and your anti-American attitude is just flat out wrong. Bush may have said the 'constitution is nothing but a worn out piece of paper', but I'm shocked that you, a person more than proud of saying you fought for your country, would blatantly agree with bush about it. At least, you have yet to comment on his ignoring and even going against the constitution, trying to deflect and talk about how Gitmo is apparently all Obama's fault, etc.

You have completely undermined your own arguments here.

As for me, I have flat out stated that if Obama doesn't live up to his word on Gitmo I'll gladly reprimand him and bash him for it. Until then, I see no reason to bash him further save for the previous posts in which I said I was disappointed it's not AS fast as he promised, only later.

Good Job Obama,

Keep em locked up with no charges while you 'study' the issue.

The left here has no problem with that at all.

sailwind: I guess you missed the dozens of posts on the actual thread. But hey... keep ignoring the facts, showing that you approve of spitting on the constitution as bush and co. did, and trying to somehow turn this into a post on how Obama is abusing human rights.

Man you dropped the ball today.

and trying to somehow turn this into a post on how Obama is abusing human rights.

He's not? Fair question Smith....Time you answered it.

We have several Federal Prisons that these guys can be sent to. We're not talking some 250 people, we're talking about just a few bad guys. If our federal prisons can't deal with them, then we really ahv e a worse problem them we mentioned.

I think that one big reason that people don't want Gitmo closed down is maybe the truths about torture will get out. Instead of this information being sequestered and kept on Gitmo will get out.

That's what they are scared of. < :-)

sailwind: He's decided that they all deserve fair trials and has decided to close Gitmo, which the former president refused to do, and cheney STILL says is a bad idea. He is looking into where the remaining -- as in those who have not yet been moved out of those Obama has already moved -- can be put and tried. They are getting more of the rights denied to them by bush and co., and they are clearly no longer being tortured like they were under... you guessed it... bush and co. What's more Obama has sworn that the US will NEVER use water boarding (unlike... ahem!), and has guaranteed the US will no longer reduce themselves to being like the terrorists.

No, you have stated flat out you are for suppression of their rights and for them remaining locked up without trial and what not, and with zero evidence that they have committed any wrong doing.

I notice you also could not refute the fact that you clearly don't care for the US constitution, nor for the rights and freedoms provided under it. You are, as such, no better than the enemy you pretend to be fighting, if you would gladly stoop to their level and call it 'democracy'.

Obama is taking you guys back from the edge of a very dark place -- which the previous government saw fit to leave you teetering on the edge of. Be it the economy, Gitmo, or just bush and co.'s torture in general, he is bringing it all to light and promising it won't be repeated, paving the way for improving on the situation and even making amends. Some of you may not like that he is against torture and wants the people in prison to have fair trials, but again those of you who honestly stand behind bush's abuse of power and his going against the constitution? well.... pretty hard to actually preach that you are Americans for a free and democratic country. Even harder to blab about how the constitution provides you with this and that right, since you so strongly believe those rights can be bypassed.

Come out and try again sometime, sailwind. Next time I recommend actually commenting on the thread, though.

adaydream: "I think that one big reason that people don't want Gitmo closed down is maybe the truths about torture will get out. Instead of this information being sequestered and kept on Gitmo will get out."

Bingo! And yet, not to worry... when what happened to these men comes to light sailwind, sarge, and others will find a way to say it's Obama's fault and completely avoid the fact that bush took away their rights and spit on the idea of democracy and freedom.

Sailwind - "Keep em locked up with no charges while you 'study' the issue. The left here has no problem with that at all."

Heck, I never thought you would sink as low as you have today, sorry, I'm really disappointed. I thought you were worthy of respect.

I think I will have to change my opinion as of today.

Here's a place thee Gitmo guys can be transferred to while justice is allowed to run its course -

A super-maximum prison in Florence, Colo., about 100 southwest of Denver.

www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5383628

"The supermax prison was designed to incapacitate dangerous criminals by locking them down in stark isolation, sometimes for years ..."

Sounds just likie Gitmo.

I will grant that not everybody posting here is American, but the issue really does concern us all, the shadow that is America really does fall over so many none Americans that it gives the world the right to comment.

I can’t bring my self to ignore the harm Bush has done to so many, that would be flying in the face of the obvious & as yet I think it far, far too soon to be talking about how wonderful Obama is, simply because we don’t know if that is going to be true.

People who write scripts for disaster films might have thought up a story line like the attack on the World Trade Centre & all else that went on that day, but no security service in the world would dream that such could happen. And maybe that was the mistake, nightmares can be warnings, & for so many people that day was a nightmare. To reason that Bush failed on that day is to say nothing, because in that we all failed, we all sat open mouthed not believing what we were watching. It is easy today with hindsight to say that America should have been better prepared. How, how can anybody ever be prepared for something so insane?

From that point on everything goes out of control, Bush could never have been master of the situation but others did see an opportunity to use what had happened to move forward their agendas. There was immense pressure to deal with what had happened, action, any action had to be seen to be taking place. This was a circus that had to put on a performance both for the domestic audience & the world audience, & for some running that circus there was a chance to make a serious profit. Sorry, but some Americans put profit before patriotism, & they did when AQ opened that window of opportunity for them.

The publicity game that followed was to keep the American people paranoid & angry so that they would agree to wars in places most didn’t even know existed. Bad guys had to be found & locked up, the boggy man needed to have some substance but he could never be brought into the US court system because then he would be see as a man & a man that has rights. Are these men in Gitmo innocent? 50/50 yes & no, but that is not the real issue, their innocence doesn’t matter, only what they have come to represent matters.

But this is where Obama comes along, to Bush these Gitmo bad guys where one thing, to Obama they are something different, they are the badge he wears to prove he really is a good man that can be trusted by all the people & he can best do that by pointing the finger of guilt at the last administration. THEY were bad & Obama is going to save America.

Let’s face a simple fact, Obama fought his way to the top of the heap & got elected, now that is not possible without a lot of pull in the right places. Getting elected can be done & stay clean, getting to the top of the heap is a really dirty game. Let’s not give that man too much of our trust until he has earned it & remember he is still a brand shiny new president who knows just the right words to say, because he has friends to help him say what they think needs to be heard.

This is not the time for Americans to be turning against other Americans in defence of their man. We have all seen what Bush did, more stupid than evil, but we haven’t yet seen what Obama can do or will do. WAIT.

Mr. Smith, thank you for your above comment. I now feel almost accepted, almost.

smithinjapan: "they were put in their ( there ) ( U.S. custody ) without cause"

LOL! Yes, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent! As innocent a little lamb!

Sarge at 07:01 AM JST - 4th March

“Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent! As innocent a little lamb!”

Sorry but until a legal constituted court of law says otherwise the very, very simple answer is “yes”.

You may not like it, I may not like it, but that is the law that protects you from being locked up without being found guilty. If you refuse that legal right to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed then you are taking it away from yourself. Are you so pure as the driven snow that no over zealous nutjob of a security man might not see you as being dangerous?

Sarge there are some 200 prisoners in Gitmo and there are a dozen possible bad guys. Keeping Gitmo open for a dozen bad guys is assinine.

You complain about earmarks this and wasting money there.

Gitmo is an embarrassment and a waste of money. < :-)

Too much torture occurred at Gitmo. Torture is not a reliable means of extracting information. Torture is not about extracting information then is it? It is about the pathetic person who gets their jollies from it.

sarge: “Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent! As innocent a little lamb!”

grafton touched well enough on this. You cannot condemn them until they are tried and convicted. It can be tempting to simply do otherwise, but then you would be even more hypocritical than you are normally.

So, yes, the answer is yes.... he is innocent until proven guilty.

goodDonkey: Torture is not about extracting information then is it? It is about the pathetic person who gets their jollies from it.

True dat. It is precisely why some people joined up for our clandestine services; their own personal twisted jollies. They should be sharing cells with their victims.

Obama's administration has already declared Gitmo is kosher.

Wash Times, Feb 2009 -

A Pentagon review of conditions in the Guantanamo Bay military prison has concluded that the treatment of detainees meets the requirements of the Geneva Convention but that prisoners in the highest-security camps should be allowed more religious and social interaction with each other, according to a government official who has read the 85-page document.

The shameless and stupid disclosure of these anti-terror docs however, mostly dating from the immediate aftermath of 9-11, was more about giving the media something with which to distract ordinary 'folks' attention, get them from dwelling on our imploding economy under our rookie president. And it was a sop to the radical, self-loathing far Left that helped put Obama in office. The Alinsky playbook worked to get Obama elected, but it doesn't outline how to rule...

Yes, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is innocent!

How common is the name, "Khalid" or "Khallid"? I was being followed just prior to the terrorist attempt in the late 1990's on the US West Coast, and the name came up during that period. Unexpected allies were involved.

republicans destroying recordings of illegal activities? unheard of?! preposterous!!! i joke. i joke. i keed. i keed .. ha ha ha.

rollanarte: "The shameless and stupid disclosure of these anti-terror docs..."

Is saving you and your country. You should be on your knees thanking a president who actually gives a damn about you and yours, instead of being an anti-patriot.