Obama revives terror tribunals, dismaying liberals

[redrumloa]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090516/ap_ ... amo_trials

However, his action was almost instantly denounced by a host of liberal-leaning groups that championed his presidential campaign last year.

"In one swift move, Obama both backtracks on a major campaign promise to change the way the United States fights terrorism and undermines the nation's core respect for the rule of law," said Amnesty International executive director Larry Cox.

"There is no such thing as 'due process light,'" said American Civil Liberties Union executive director Anthony D. Romero.

"As a constitutional lawyer, Obama must know that he can put lipstick on this pig — but it will always be a pig," said Zachary Katznelson, legal director of Reprieve, a London-based legal action charity that represents 33 Guantanamo detainees.

Change you can believe in :roll:

 

[faethor]

Creating better due process seems like a change I can believe in. Disallowing evidence from torture. Allowing choice and better legal consul. Disallowing heresay. These seem to be good things. These people should be fairly tried or let go.

IMO people are too tied up in the date deadline. Instead they should be looking at the positive change while moving forward to shut it down. If it's a few months later, we provide a fairer trial, and can hold our heads more high extending rights to the people (even if they don't deserve them) is what will help restore this country to the world wide luster that has been drawn in the mud and tarnished as a result of the last 8 years.

 

[cecilia]

Develop an alternative to President Bush's Military Commissions Act on handling detainees

I agree - this is a difficult issue that has to be done right. A trial. Leaving things in limbo is not Constitutional

 

[redrumloa]

I actually agree with both of you on this mostly, I just find the shock to Obama's flip-flop on these matters hilarious.

 

[cecilia]

only idiots are "shocked"

you don't see me hanging around such people :roll:

 

[Glaucus]

Technically I don't think he flip flopped as he simply suspended them for revue. They're now back, but in a different form and affect a smaller group of prisoners. Don't know all the details, not sure if I agree with him either, however, one thing is for certain - they will get processed one way or another. The real problem was that these people were imprisoned in a state of limbo. Now at least they'll have their day.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

To be right about it - the people being held should be put into the regular criminal system. That's what Obama should have done. Anything else is a tacit admission that the criminal system can't deal with criminals and conversely that the military should. Both, and particularly the latter, are bad things.

Obama is just playing politics here and doing favours and not rocking the boat so he can leverage his social agenda. Even there he seems to be giving too much away. He seems to be looking to those who gave the big cheques but is forgetting about all the people that went out and did the actual voting.

I'd be amazed if his healthcare plan amounted to anything given the way he's going about it, and the folks he's got dealing with the financial crisis considering they are all the guys who enabled and/or participated in the massive fraud that got everyone into the mess.

Can't really give a pass on this.

 

[ltstanfo]

To be right about it - the people being held should be put into the regular criminal system. That's what Obama should have done. Anything else is a tacit admission that the criminal system can't deal with criminals and conversely that the military should. Both, and particularly the latter, are bad things.

Obama is just playing politics here and doing favours and not rocking the boat so he can leverage his social agenda. Even there he seems to be giving too much away. He seems to be looking to those who gave the big cheques but is forgetting about all the people that went out and did the actual voting.

I'd be amazed if his healthcare plan amounted to anything given the way he's going about it, and the folks he's got dealing with the financial crisis considering they are all the guys who enabled and/or participated in the massive fraud that got everyone into the mess.

Can't really give a pass on this.

I'm with you on this one Fluffy. Surprised? :wink:

Obama may (as the press would have us believe) be learning from classified materials just what is and is not realistic with regards to certain topics but if he is indeed the great "changer" that was burned into the collective public during the last campaign then one would think he would have at least considered such rather than making promises that he now *appears* to be breaking. After all, isn't he supposed to be this great intellect? :wink:

Don't misunderstand me, I'm glad that Obama may actually be gaining some insight into being president. I just wonder if his adoring masses will continue to revere him so if he has to do a few more of these *apparent* flip-flops.

And as for his healthcare, if it is anything like his efforts to "save" the auto industry then I will definitely stick with my private insurance (unless of course he tries to tax that out of existence to pay for his health care program).

Yep, change you can believe in... :wink:

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Don't misunderstand me, I'm glad that Obama may actually be gaining some insight into being president.

On your first day as President they take you into the White House bunker and show you a film of the Kennedy assassination from an angle the public's never seen before. Things usually go smoothly after that.

 

[ltstanfo]

Don't misunderstand me, I'm glad that Obama may actually be gaining some insight into being president.

On your first day as President they take you into the White House bunker and show you a film of the Kennedy assassination from an angle the public's never seen before. Things usually go smoothly after that.

Wow! Wouldn't that be something if the "invisible government" that the conspiracy theorists always talk about really had that much power / control? :wink:

Looks like the subject for Dan Brown's next movie.

Regards,
Ltstanfo

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Wow! Wouldn't that be something if the "invisible government"

It's not really invisible except in the way that most people either choose not to see it because it is upsetting, don't know to look for it because it is "not relevant" to their daily lives or they are too busy or distracted. In England we were always aware of the class system. In India they have their caste system which is pretty much the same thing. Europe in general has been classist and ruled by kings and their nobles and lords and though we like to think that much of that has gone away, it hasn't. Certainly some money has climbed the ranks, but old families still retain power too. American's like to believe in the myth that they don't have a class system, but they do.

Unfortunately most people do not seem to be aware of the power structures in their own societies which is quite odd to me since humans have evolved all the abilities of introspection, alliance making, deception, etc that make the power structures of human societies possible but can't seem to see it once it becomes large enough to become part of the environment.

that the conspiracy theorists always talk about really had that much power / control?

In European courts the crime that English and US law describe as "conspiracy" is called "common plan". When the perfectly reasonable word "conspiracy" is turned into a pejorative by the people who are accused of "conspiracy" it's kind of indicative of guilt, as is secrecy and cover-up.

However, there is not A conspiracy, there are many often competing conspiracies. If you suspect aliens are broadcasting instructions to your teeth that is likely NOT a conspiracy theory, but a delusion. If you think that powerful people lie about what they are doing to line their own pockets and you can see circumstantial evidence for such a belief then you may have a conspiracy theory - the more evidence that backs it up, the better the theory is - just as in science. A theory is a strong explanation for an observed phenomenon.

One impediment to serious pursuit of conspiracies is peoples lack of knowledge of history, experience of the range of human behaviours and personalities especially at the upper levels of society closer to real power though we can see it in microcosm in small power situations such as small town politics, the mafia, school boards, strata councils etc.

Not only do many fail to see that there are structures and that they may be used by those who understand them, they also fail to see that there are people who are ruthless enough to do things we imagine no-one could do because we cannot imagine ourselves doing them. Who would imagine that a boy could push his brother from a barn roof with the intent of killing him so that he could have his bike. Or how about a man who could rape and murder a three year old girl? Or how about the kind of people who make snuff films? But these people exist, many are attracted to power and a few of them are politically clever enough to get very high up the ladder. They are charming enough that people will even vote for them.

Another property of our society is that we gladly keep secrets under certain circumstances such as if revealing the secret would draw unwelcome attention (the Emperors New clothes is an old tale that never goes out of date because it tells us something about how that kind of power works, and yet despite the tale the power still works because we know that in reality the crowd would have kept their mouths shut in a shocked hush while the guards waded into the crowd to chop the little boy's head off).

Two simple examples of how we keep secrets for other reasons are surprise parties (which involve hundreds of people in on a secret so therefore are theoretically impossible ) and our salaries. For the party we will keep the secret for "the greater good" and as to salaries - well, we don't want to really find out where on the wage hierarchy we are, or rather, we don't want to reveal where we are because it may rock the boat and unsettle our standing/relationships in the office.

Looks like the subject for Dan Brown's next movie.

I hear that it may include the Kryptos sculpture at the CIA.

 

[Glaucus]

However, there is not A conspiracy, there are many often competing conspiracies. If you suspect aliens are broadcasting instructions to your teeth that is likely NOT a conspiracy theory, but a delusion. If you think that powerful people lie about what they are doing to line their own pockets and you can see circumstantial evidence for such a belief then you may have a conspiracy theory - the more evidence that backs it up, the better the theory is - just as in science. A theory is a strong explanation for an observed phenomenon.

But evidence can be cherry picked to support any agenda. Example: Intelligent design. choose from the evidence gathered by your opponents and use it against them. And if evidence doesn't exist, or is poorly understood, just make it up or twist it around. The 9/11 conspiracy theories that provide a long list of such evidence would not exist if the evidence was properly fact checked by everyone. People need to sort out the theories based on evidence from the evidence based on theory.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

But evidence can be cherry picked to support any agenda.

Indeed it can. However, what knocks a theory down is evidence AGAINST the proposition.

The 9/11 conspiracy theories that provide a long list of such evidence would not exist if the evidence was properly fact checked by everyone. People need to sort out the theories based on evidence from the evidence based on theory.

There are poor theories and better theories. Sometimes it is useful to keep the silly theories alive so that you can ridicule them. Well, I mean useful to those who benefit from such misdirection. Poor theories get the most airplay for that reason. This isn't "conspiracy", merely basic public relations.