Obama plans US terror trials to replace Guantanamo

To bushs screw ups ,thats the iceing on the cake only

Sorry Danny,

but if you think Al-Qaeda is going to have a recruitment reduction because of this action, you sir are naive and not aware of their purpose.

I suggest you do some study on this subject.

*Insert Republican talking point.*

"OMGZ THEY H8 OUR FREEDUMZ"

*Insert Republican talking point.*

"OMGZ THEY H8 OUR FREEDUMZ"

Hahaha, that's great.

but if you think Al-Qaeda is going to have a recruitment reduction because of this action, you sir are naive and not aware of their purpose.

I suggest you do some study on this subject.

And pray tell, what is their purpose?

Torabu; 

And pray tell, what is their purpose? 

Are you really that naive?

I'm not even going to try and tell you "their purpose". Because you wouldn't believe me if I told you.

I'm going to let someone else give it a shot.

Anyone care to give Torabu an ephiphany?

I'm not even going to try and tell you "their purpose". Because you wouldn't believe me if I told you.

Hahaha.

You don't need to tell anyone anything. Osama bin Laden has told America many a time: al-Qaeda dislikes the U.S.'s unabashed partisanship towards Israel and acceptance of Arab oppression throughout the Middle-East.

It's really quite simple. No one hates someone because of their particular country's social systems. That's garbarge perpetuated by the Bush administration and by the Republican sheep who gobble up every ounce of bull@!$%# they spew.

but if you think Al-Qaeda is going to have a recruitment reduction because of this action, you sir are naive and not aware of their purpose.

I'm fully aware of their "purpose." I'm not saying they're suddenly going to have a change of heart, I'm saying they're going to have more difficulty recruiting young people to their cause when they don't have Guantanamo to point to anymore and say, "Look how the Americans treat us."

Are you really that naive?

I'm not even going to try and tell you "their purpose". Because you wouldn't believe me if I told you.

Thanks, marked as inflammatory. Next time, try not making personal comments against me.

What I wanted was what you thought Al-Qaeda's purpose was. Your refusal to answer the question gives me all I need to know.

You don't need to tell anyone anything. Osama bin Laden has told America many a time: al-Qaeda dislikes the U.S.'s unabashed partisanship towards Israel and acceptance of Arab oppression throughout the Middle-East.

It's really quite simple. No one hates someone because of their particular country's social systems. That's garbarge perpetuated by the Bush administration and by the Republican sheep who gobble up every ounce of bull@!$%# they spew.

Thank you, that was the point I was going to try to make.

The Islamic extremists, (not all of Islam), have one specific goal and that is to convert everyone to Islam or more so, their version of it.

If you are not one of them, you are the enemy, up to and including killing fellow Muslims. These are all facts sir, not Bush rhetoric. All this garbage started decades ago, well before Bush even thought of running for office. I can use Munich 1972 as a starting point for modern history, but this Holy war dates back to the 7th century.

If you are so convinced this is not their motive, then why don't you head over to the Middle East and try to "negotiate". For some reason I think you will be on "video" in a not so comfortable position.

However, I will chalk these answers of denial to Liberal ignorance, carried by Liberal cowardice. But don't worry, some American military personnel will save your hide.

The Islamic extremists, (not all of Islam), have one specific goal and that is to convert everyone to Islam or more so, their version of it.

Woops, see #2.5 for the actual reason for al-Qaeda's existence.

Woops, see history for extreme Islam's existance. Nothing to do with Bush.  This is a Holy War and has been for centuries.

Woops, Clinton and Bush1 had the chance to kill him.

Woops, Oliver North warned of OBL's intentions in 1986

Anymore "woops'' you want to bring out?  Want to debate the facts and history?  I am ready to do so.

There will always be extremist groups out there. Hell, America, throughout much of it's history, has been a thinly-veiled Christian extremist "group".

If you think al-Qaeda's purpose is to turn everyone Islam, you're simply being ignorant of the facts.

edit: Oh, and if you don't believe me about the partisanship and the staying on the sidelines when it comes to the Arab world's oppression, you should probably take a look at bin Laden's videos. Because that's what he keeps @!$%#ing saying.

If you think al-Qaeda's purpose is to turn everyone Islam, you're simply being ignorant of the facts.

Please tell me you don't think they will " go away" if we stop supporting Israel?  I have studied at length about these people, so I do have a clue. 

I have a great idea, why don't you go volunteer to be Obama's diplomat to Al-Qaeda, I'm sure you can change their minds.

Considering the Arab world is only suppressing itself, I wonder who's fault it is?

Please tell me you don't think they will " go away" if we stop supporting Israel?

Of course they won't "go away". Maybe they'll stop "@!$%#ing you over so much" if you stop blatantly disregarding them in favour of Israel. Maybe.

I have studied at length about these people

Is that so? I'll make sure to file that under "c" for "completely improvable, meaningless internet posturing".

Considering the Arab world is only suppressing itself, I wonder who's fault it is?

Yeah that's it. For a supposed Middle-East scholar, you certainly oversimplify.

to think they will stop *^%(*^ over so much is completely naive. Once again, this is a Holy war, always has been always will be. 

Internet posturing, that's good. However any educated individual can read sir and decipher what is accurate about any society. Not really that hard to do.

Arab countries have been under some form of dictatorship or monarchy for centuries, constant divide and conquer.   The Middle East quite simply has the worlds most valuable resource, oil.   While the ruling families rake in BILLIONS, they impoverish their citizens. In the Saudis case, all because of the proper family bloodline.   The Islamic faith, or the extreme side of it suppresses its' people to complete submission and through this they maintain order and control. Women are regarded, treated and USED like property. 

I am an educated person, because I take the time to read and better myself.  For the record though, yes I have a slight advantage with Middle East affairs.

Torabu;

Thanks, marked as inflammatory. Next time, try not making personal comments against me.

I asked you a simple question (Are you that naive?) even a six year old could understand. In no way was it a personal attack on you or in the least inflammatory. By the way, you failed to answer the simple question. I won't ask you again as you are apparently incapable of answering without going into a rant of how I'm attacking you personally.

What I wanted was what you thought Al-Qaeda's purpose was. Your refusal to answer the question gives me all I need to know.

I didn't "refuse" to answer your question at all, I merely stated "You wouldn't believe me if I told you". The reason for that is, you already have your own opinion formed and you aren't going to listen to ANYTHING anyone else tells you anyway, so, why should I waste my time with an answer you are unwilling to hear in the first place? Redundant, 'eh?

Mike Sifeldeen;

You don't need to tell anyone anything. Osama bin Laden has told America many a time: al-Qaeda dislikes the U.S.'s unabashed partisanship towards Israel and acceptance of Arab oppression throughout the Middle-East.

Funny, I don't see Israel going to the U.N. or anywhere and telling the world they are dedicated to wiping Iran or any other Middle East country off the map.

The fighting in the Middle east has been going on for close to two thousand years.

Sunni and Shia have been at each others throats for centuries.  

There will always be extremist groups out there. Hell, America, throughout much of it's history, has been a thinly-veiled Christian extremist "group".

Wrong, America was founded on "freedom of religion" I'll bet you can find many mosques in America, as well as CHristian churches.

If you think al-Qaeda's purpose is to turn everyone Islam, you're simply being ignorant of the facts.

Al-Queda states very simply, if you are not Muslim and do not believe as they do, you're an infidel and if you don't convert to Islam then you must be killed.

So, now who's being ignorant?

The Middle East quite simply has the worlds most valuable resource, oil. While the ruling families rake in BILLIONS, they impoverish their citizens. In the Saudis case, all because of the proper family bloodline.

Remind me again, who are the guys that are buddy-buddy with the Saudi oil tycoons and keep the Saudi royal family in power?...

The Islamic faith, or the extreme side of it suppresses its' people to complete submission and through this they maintain order and control. Women are regarded, treated and USED like property.

Replace "Islamic" with "Christian", and the sentences remain true.

Funny, I don't see Israel going to the U.N. or anywhere and telling the world they are dedicated to wiping Iran or any other Middle East country off the map.

Woops, Ahmadinejad never said he wants "Israel wiped off the map."

Wrong, America was founded on "freedom of religion"

America has also been largely dominated, unconstitutionally, by backwards Christian ideology for most of it's existence. It's founding principles seem to have held little sway.

Al-Queda states very simply, if you are not Muslim and do not believe as they do, you're an infidel and if you don't convert to Islam then you must be killed.

Actually,

"The principal stated aims of al-Qaeda are to drive Americans and American influence out of all Muslim nations, especially Saudi Arabia; destroy Israel; and topple pro-Western dictatorships around the Middle East."

Source

I asked you a simple question (Are you that naive?) even a six year old could understand. In no way was it a personal attack on you or in the least inflammatory. By the way, you failed to answer the simple question. I won't ask you again as you are apparently incapable of answering without going into a rant of how I'm attacking you personally.

The question (which was entirely unnecessary, by the way) is historically a rhetorical one to imply someone is naive. The way the question is formed even implies the one asking believes the other to be as such. Weaselling your way out like that doesn't change anything. You lose to common sense this time, and I'm sure anyone with an objective view would agree.

Oh, and by the way, that whole "even a six year old could understand" bit? Easily implicative of my intelligence, which compounds on the naive statement. Won't mark you this time, however, since I'm sure you'd do another side-step and ignore my question once again. I'm trying to get an answer, so it'd be counter-productive.

I didn't "refuse" to answer your question at all, I merely stated "You wouldn't believe me if I told you". The reason for that is, you already have your own opinion formed and you aren't going to listen to ANYTHING anyone else tells you anyway, so, why should I waste my time with an answer you are unwilling to hear in the first place? Redundant, 'eh?

No, you're assuming I wouldn't believe you if you told me, using that as a scapegoat to refuse answering the question. Unlike some people, I actually like to hear the opposing viewpoint, even if I already have a view of my own. It helps me gain a more rounded understanding of a situation. That's a little something called pursuit of knowledge, which I pride myself in.

That being said, seriously, what do you think their purpose is?

That's really the best part of it. If you can get the far wings of each party mad, you know you are doing what most people think is right.

Imagine Rush and Michale Moore on the same side of ANY argument!

Thank you for clarifying that Obama has a sign that says Office of the President -Elect, because that's such a big exaggeration of what he really is. (sarcasm)

These people may be dangerous, but eventually you have to try them in court. Even if they aren't American citizens, they deserve to be treated as human beings and given fair trials. It's not like they were illegals found here, most were transported from Afghanistan and Iraq. Plus, we can secure them on our soil, just as much as we can secure them in Cuba.

I'm just ready for this whole Gitmo farce to be over. The entire ordeal is un-American, because it treats people as sub-human and has them in prison for 7 years with no trial. I thought we were trying to rid the world of fanatical, unlawful governments. Saddam would jail people for years with no trial, why should we stoop to his level?

The prisoners at Gitmo are not US citizens, therefore are not entitled to trial under US law

Citation? Because the Supreme Court doesn't seem to agree that you have to be a citizen to be entitled to a speedy trial under the 6th Amendment, nor is citizenship required to exercise the right against self-incrimination embodied in the Fifth.

On a more practical note, we try non-citizens all of the time. Just because your Maximum Leader tells you that someone has no rights in a given case, doesn't make it so, I am afraid.

Steve

What would happen if you were incarcerated and told that you were not an American citizen? without Habeus Corpus you would not have the ability to prove your citizenship in court.  This has already happened to an American who was recently released after 2 months in jail.  2 months because of the rule of law was overlooked in order to protect us.

@Acid. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction. Period. Sorry but this is a fact, that's why nothing was done to expedite their trials after the Liberals cried foul play. But I bet none of you would volunteer to go attend to their needs and ensure their "rights" are not violated.

It simply amazes me, how people ( mostly on the left) are so willing to give criminals / terrorists more rights than the people of this country. No one is brushing the Constitution aside, it simply doesn't exist in this case. You cannot try Enemy Combatants or Uniformed personnel during time of war, in the act of war in the courts of the United States, hence the Geneva Convention which we are not in violation of. ( yet)

We try non-citizens for crimes committed in the United States, however the battlefield is a far different theater and the same rules do not apply. Now don't forget Mr.Obama voted AGAINST the Military Commissions Act ( surprise, surprise), which in fact was a part of the continued delay to trial.

@Keav, I agree with you that they need to be treated as human beings, even though they would treat you and your children ( if you have any) like animals, up to the in-humane way of killing you and your loved ones.

All in all, none of you and including me, knows how they are truly treated. I'm willing to bet the cell they are in is more comfortable than they caves they came from.

@ wwolf, you forget the Liberals forgot 9.11 already, until it happens again in the next few months. And Im willing to bet it will. If these terrorists are sent to the US for imprisonment, then you can bet they will have cable tv, weight rooms and heck, even earn a college degree! Which I am sure the Liberals will want us to learn their different languages so we don't "offend" them.

No, here's what's REALLY amazing to me... that there are still, in this day and age, citizens of the United States that would advocate imprisoning people, torturing them, denying them access to lawyers or the evidence against them, denying them fair trials, and labeling them criminals and terrorists without any evidence whatsoever that that is true, and then support skating around the legal issues by bickering about semantics and actually changing the definitions to suit their own defense. I find that unconscionable and dishonorable to the image and reputation of the United States of America.

I hope that people that think like that would one day recall the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

To date, hundreds of detainees have been released because they were, after all, rounded up randomly and there is no evidence to charge them with any wrongdoing. We are, right now, holding 20,000 Iraqis in Iraq on nothing more than suspicion... based on paranoia.

Several detainees over the course of this war have also been beaten to death without ever going to trial or being presented with an opportunity to legally defend themselves.

This is not a liberal v. conservative issue. This is not a Democrat v. Republican issue. This is a matter of law. This is a matter of human rights.

Human rights?  tell that to Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg, US AID workers ( burned alive), 3000 Americans and non-US citizens on 9.11.  Tell that to the 17 sailors of the USS Cole, tell that to the victims of Lockerbie, tell that to the children on the planes that struck the towers and Pentagon, tell that to the 100's of thousands of innocent people around the world who were murdered brutally, by the extremists.  Tell that to the 220 people killed in the Jakarta Bombings, Tell that to the Sailors in 1983 who were beaten and tortured on a Israeli flight by Terrorists, just for being American. Tell that to the children who have their hands crushed for stealing food to eat because they are hungry, tell that to the women who were raped by Muslim men, then convicted of Adultery, only to be murdered for a crime they did not commit. Tell that to the teenage girl, just last week, who was STONED to death after SHE was raped by 3 Muslim men....tried for adultery..........and you support RIGHTS for these Animals?

Religion of peace my ass. Why don't you join them and try to "educate" them on Human Rights.  I will look for your beheading on the net.

The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. ... Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

You can be as nice as you want to these animals Aine, they are not going to change. And if you are going to let them continue to slaughter our people, because you don' t have the fortitude to fight for the right thing, then you are no better than they.

I'm a disabled veteran, Steve W in MD. Knowing the difference between right and wrong gives a country the moral high ground to stand on when judging other nations or peoples. Slithering in the lawless gutter with them, makes our nation no better than them.

Detracking. I've said what I wanted to say.

Disabled or not Aine, these people don't belong in the US justice system. There are prisoners of the US Military and you know how this works. 

I respect your service to our country sir, but I am a bit lost why you think these people deserve the Taj Mahal

We are far from stooping to their level sir, far far from it. ( At least officially)

Aine;

Knowing the difference between right and wrong gives a country the moral high ground to stand on when judging other nations or peoples.

Hmmmmmm, could be one very good reason we went to Iraq and captured and HUNG Saddam Hussein. Ya think?

You're not the ONE and ONLY disabled Veteran out there.

How long would you like to remain in prison without a trial? You don't mind if we torture you for the duration, do you? Oh, of course not, torture on suspicion is the status quo these days.

wwolf;

Trouble is, there are people in this country who would, for some strange reason, let a man go free, unpunished, even after that man had murdered, in cold blood, their spouse, brother, sister, parents, children. All because, the murderer was abused as a child, or some other idiotic reason.

It's my opinion, we need Gitmo, don't even think about bringing one terrorist to U.S. soil.

How do you know any of these people are terrorists or even accessories? Because Big Brother told you so? I would advise you to read the Constitution sometime. Maybe you'll get a good, hearty chuckle out of it. If you want to live in a country where guilt is presumed and trials are unnecessary to condemn someone, try moving to Iran or Pakistan. I hear the whether is great this time of year.

If they were terrorists, we would have PROOF.  If we had PROOF, they would be charged already.

Danny

I will challenge you on the Constitution anytime my friend. I suggest you join the Peace Corps, head to the Middle East and "negotiate".

Gee Danny McGee;

How do you know any of these people are terrorists or even accessories?

Maybe because they were captured as "enemy combatants?". I'd say if the sucker is shooting at me with an AK-47 or otherwise trying to kill any of our military personnel while engaged in a firefight or setting a roadside bomb or plotting to fly an airplane into the WTC, then DUH, I'd pretty much call those people a terrorist.

You are aware that at least 50 of the (non)terrorists we released from Gitmo have been re-arrested or killed because they were right back at it committing terrorist attacks or fighting and trying to kill our military personnel? 

I would advise you to read the Constitution sometime. Maybe you'll get a good, hearty chuckle out of it.

I took it seriously when I read it. But, I'm glad you were able to get a good laugh from it. Maybe you should stick to the comic books, you'll get an even better laugh.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime...simple concept isn't it?

Hey, you know... innocent until proven guilty... right to confront your accusers... right to see the evidence against you... jury of your peers... habeas corpus... and all that. Simple concepts, aren't they?

We are signators to several UN treaties that cover all of those concepts, they are not US-centric ideas, although they are also covered by US law. Are you seriously proposing the US go down the lawless nation road?

Color it anyway you like, if it makes you sleep better at nights protecting the rights of terrorists while this country suffers attack after attack or while American citizins are being tortured and killed abroad.  Thats the important thing right?  You gotta have those eight hours.  Again, these are not people arbitrarily snatched off of the streets at random.  What I am proposing is regardless of your continued flip-flopping tactics is that the safety and well being of this country and its citizins is priority.  We did not ask to be attacked, we did not humbly request that our people be slaughtered.  They came "here"!  So you want to know where my sympathy lies?  Look in the dictionary it resides between s**t and syphilis.

And that's what I'd expect you to say when you, your family, and/or friends are screaming from their cells once detained anywhere in the world on your travels.

Fortunately, actual law does not agree with your opinion.

Aine MacDermot;

Are you seriously proposing the US go down the lawless nation road?

Hey, if it's good enough for "lawless terrorist nations" and Muslim jihadists to make an unprovoked attack on us, you fight fire with fire.

Guess it's ok for 3,000 innocent Americans to die, as long as not one of them are related to you. What are you going to do? Wait until one of them beheads your wife, son, daughter, father, mother solely because they are American.

You'd be the first one screaming for blood, when it deals directly with you.

Again, these are not people arbitrarily snatched off of the streets at random.

I'm sorry, forgive my arrogance, I was unaware that you were familiar with the criteria and evidence behind the detainment of all these individuals.

You do realize our government provides a very steep monetary reward for anyone reported for terrorist suspicions, right? But no, of course not, there's no way any innocent individual could have been reported just so someone could claim a small fortune out of it. It's impossible. They all must be terrorists.

Hey, if it's good enough for "lawless terrorist nations" and Muslim jihadists to make an unprovoked attack on us, you fight fire with fire.

a) Two wrongs don't make a right.

b) We've more than avenged those deaths, unfortunately our targeting was quite a bit off.

c) Iraq is not al Qaeda. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. President Bush has already publicly admitted the truth of this.

d) Osama bin Laden, if still living, is still at large. Mission not accomplished.

e) There were no WMDs in Iraq, Iraq did not pose a threat to the U.S., and the pre-emptive strike on a sovereign country which did not attack us is itself a violation of international law.

Hey, if it's good enough for "lawless terrorist nations" and Muslim jihadists to make an unprovoked attack on us, you fight fire with fire.

That's possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Even the metaphor doesn't make sense. Fire + Fire =/= No more fire.

Guess it's ok for 3,000 innocent Americans to die, as long as not one of them are related to you.

Guess it's okay for 4,190 American soldiers to die in Iraq as long as it satisfies your blood lust.

That response was dead on wwolf, nice one. I saw recently on BBC the terrorist organizations celebrating Obama's win and it's not because they want peace.

We just became an easier target.

You still laboring under the misconception that Obama was a "professor?'.

A "lecturer" yeah, a professor?, LOL !!! 

Too bad we couldn't have gotten the journalist

Hey, AF Veteran, since I have you talking, I need to ask you something about your line of thought above.  You're siding with wwolf up there and bashing Obama's law credentials, so I must assume you don't think the people at Gitmo should be tried.

Is this correct?

If it is correct, do you realize if there's someone in Gitmo who isn't supposed to be there, then that means there's someone running around free to plot against us who shouldn't be free, right?  Wouldn't it be a damned good idea to have some trials and make sure we got the right people for the right crimes and that if we got it wrong we're looking for people?

I mean, how can you live with yourself arguing that we shouldn't investigate and find out if someone pulled a switch on us?  Without finding out if someone pulled a frameup?  How can you argue for terrorists to REMAIN free while someone else sits in their place and NOTHING IS DONE to make sure the right people are in there?

How can someone argue so vehemently against the safety of our nation like this?

AF, Obama has a law degree, and he taught classes on a college level.

Any other ridiculous remarks that mean nothing you would like to make?  Would you prefer it if Obama like to pretend to be a cowboy, instead?  It could be fun.  He could try to talk in a Texan twang, and own a ranch, but never, EVER be photographed on a horse b/c he's afraid of them.

No, wait.  We've done that.

biggerthebetter;

Obama may have a law degree, but, the FACT remains he was NEVER a law PROFESSOR, merely a lecturer. Pinch your self, you're still dreaming. I bet you, like Chrissy Matthews, get a tingle up your leg when you hear Obamassiah speak.

Ragnell;

so I must assume you don't think the people at Gitmo should be tried.

Never said they shouldn't be tried. Just stated "Keep 'em in Gitmo and off U.S. Soil. They'll hang just as easily at Gitmo as in the USA. Yeah, I only said that so all you bleedin heart liberal weenies would clutch your chest and feign a heart attack.

Man, I'm just having way too much fun annoying all these liberals. Is this a great country or what? 

You make no sense, then.  Shouldn't this article be good news?  Trials, a whole court system (and all the jobs that come with a court system) working this out.

Instead, you just want to annoy the "liberals" and get into fights we don't need to be having.

oh that's right he used them

That's right, he did... back when Donald Rumsfeld was shaking his hand, remember? And Ronald Reagan was president.

Yes I do remember quite well and not much has changed since then  1998 was the last confirmed usage of Chemical Weapons by Saddam, so what are the chances he got rid of them?  Pretty slim to none.

I think they need to add a mandate to the education system to include " Studies of the Obvious"

Now for my cheap shot of the day:  So I suppose supporting the extreme side of Islam, where women are 2nd class is what you want.  Gee, some high "human rights" standards you have.

Some argument you have. When you resort, again and again, to personal attacks on other Newsviners, you simply show that you have no argument or ideas of your own. When your ideas can stand on their own merits, when you can defend them with cited sources and without resorting to ad hominem, ... when you have done this over and over again for more than two and a half years on this site, without losing your temper more than once... then you will have earned a measure of credibility here.

It doesn't look like you are even on that path. Likely, you won't last more than a few months the way you're going.

Aine and when you have dealt with these terrorists in the real world, you will have a sense of what reality is with them.

Shame that people in this country are so blind to reality, blind enough it places us in severe danger.

wwolf, you are argueing with people who are clueless to the realities of who these terrorists are and what they firmly, without yield, believe in.

You will never change their minds my friend, unfortunately the only thing that will is when it's their family or loved ones that become the victims, but without reservation they will forget in a few months and start this garbage again.

Liberals put forth their tough attitude, but hide when the wolf shows up.

How Do We Know They Are Terrorists?

The answer is, we don't. Nobody does.

You see, that's what habeas corpus is for. You can't drag someone off the street proclaim them to be a Bad Person and then take them away and lock them up for ever. We've been assured that Guantanamo is reserved for the "worst of the worst."

The question is, how do we know they are the worst? We don't.

Without lawyers, a trial, evidence, a judge and a jury, there's no way to figure it out. Yeah, it's true that sometimes bad guys go free, and it's true that sometimes innocent people go to jail. But the thing is, our system of American justice works most of the time and we haven't been able to figure out how to make it better... yet.

Suspension of habeas corpus is the most terrifying thing Bush & Co. has done with our rights and freedoms. And if you think they have only done it to foreign nationals, guess again.

Keep defending that crap. I hope you do. It'll keep costing the Republicans elections, and I don't mind that. I'm not a Democrat either.

I know Steve, I still am wondering what and who they will blame when this bites them in the proverbial arse.  Funny how they can throw out there names like Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld, yet conveniently leave out names like Bill Clinton a man who actually had Osama bin Laden in his sites, yet decided to not pull the trigger prior to 9/11.  You know why they do not bring up names like that?  Because its the truth and does nothing to help convince anyone of the lies and manure they spread to justify in their own minds the msitakes they are more than willing to make at the sacrifice of more American lives.  Its funny you know, but since last tuesday I actually believe that they did not vote for Obama because of anything that they believe in or what he plans to do.  They ignored those little issues.  If they would have actually listened to what he had to say and listened to this mans history there is no way in hells creation that anyone with half a mind would have voted this man into office.  They quite simply just voted against Republicans, nothing more, nothing less.

Aine we will have to agree to disagree on many issues relevant to our national security.

I spent 8 years in the USMC defending your rights and those of fellow Americans.  I am a humanitarian too, but I am not a fool.  When enemy looks you in the eye, you kill him before he kills you or your "family".

wwolf......yup on all points.

Steve, wwolf,

I agree with you both.

you are argueing with people who are clueless to the realities of who these terrorists are and what they firmly, without yield, believe in.

You will never change their minds my friend, unfortunately the only thing that will is when it's their family or loved ones that become the victims, but without reservation they will forget in a few months and start this garbage again.

Liberals put forth their tough attitude, but hide when the wolf shows up.

That's the exact reason I'm not going to reply to any of these post turtles. I will, however, keep my weapons locked and loaded and "bitterly cling to my guns and religion".

Semper Fi !!!

Aine - "Keep defending that crap. I hope you do. It'll keep costing the Republicans elections, and I don't mind that. I'm not a Democrat either."

No what will keep costing the Republicans elections are the same things that got Obama elected.  The ignorant not researching their candidate and instead voting against one party rather than voting for the United States and its people.  Secondly its why the polls were and never will be accurate, there is no logical way to factor in stupidity.

That pretty much sums it up. 

Semper Fi