RECENT POSTS
- Guests Begin to Arrive for White House State Dinner Festivities
- President Obama on Afghanistan Strategy: “It Is My Intention to Finish the Job”
- The Obamas Kick off their First State Visit, Welcome India's Prime Minister to the White House
- Obama’s Afghanistan Strategy To Include “Benchmarks” and “Off-Ramps,” Announcement Next Week
- The Presidential Planner
- VP Biden's Thanksgiving Dinner for the Troops
- Life and Debt
- Obama To Cabinet: “We Cannot Sit Back and Be Satisfied” With Some Progress Amid High Unemployment Rate
- Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 11/23/2009
- Obama Calls for Annual Science Fair: Achievement Should be Recognized like NCAA Championship Win
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Human Rights Activists Assail President Obama's Decision on Military Commissions
May 15, 2009 7:26 AM
Human rights activists expressed disappointment with President Obama's decision to restore revamped military commission trials for detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
"Everyone knows the military commissions have been a dismal failure," Gabor Rona, the international legal director of Human Rights First, tells the Los Angeles Times in what will no doubt be a harbinger of human rights groups reaction today. "The results of the cases will be suspect around the world. It is a tragic mistake to continue them."
"It's disappointing that Obama is seeking to revive rather than end this failed experiment," ACLU attorney Jonathan Hafetz told the London Guardian. "There's no detainee at Guantanamo who cannot be tried and shouldn't be tried in the regular federal courts system."
Human rights groups point out that in August 2008, then-Sen. Obama seemed to indicate he was leaning towards trying detainees in U.S. courts and through the court martial system. Responding to the Hamdan verdict, Mr. Obama's campaign issued a statement saying:
"I commend the military officers who presided over this trial and served on the hearing panel under difficult and unprecedented circumstances. They and all our Armed Forces continue to serve this country with valor in the fight against terrorism. That the Hamdan trial -- the first military commission trial with a guilty verdict since 9/11 -- took several years of legal challenges to secure a conviction for material support for terrorism underscores the dangerous flaws in the Administration's legal framework. It's time to better protect the American people and our values by bringing swift and sure justice to terrorists through our courts and our Uniform Code of Military Justice. And while it is important to convict anyone who provides material support for terrorism, it is long past time to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and the terrorists who murdered nearly 3000 Americans." (Emphasis added).
A White House official says that the president has "always envisioned a role for commissions, properly constituted," and that the August statement was not meant to preclude them.
The official points to President Obama's 2006 vote in favor of the commissions as proposed by GOP Sens. John Warner or Virginia, John McCain of Arizona, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, his statements during that debate, as well as work since November with Sen. Graham on re-creating the commissions in a way more likely to pass Supreme Court constitutional muster.
The reference then-Sen. Obama made to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (courts martial) last August, the official recalls, "was around the time of the debate with Sen. McCain that terrorism is not just a law enforcement matter but also a matter that is a question of the laws and rules of war."
-- jpt
May 15, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (55)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
mad:
re: 'referred to Miss California as a dog. '
it's worse than that,
-Obama puts funny 'un-american' mustard on his food,.
-he works in the oval office without a jacket on..
-he got a 'special' dog for his kids
-he actually went out for a burger, and paid for it.
-he laughs at jokes
next, god forbid, he'll be eating arugula and
start wind surfing,
i wish we would get back to the days when the president cleared brush on his phony ranch
Posted by: Geeter | May 18, 2009 3:05:36 AM
Also many of the reasons some of these detainees can't just be thrown on the federal docket is because of how long they've been there and technically they only SAY death to america but haven't actually DONE anything to advance that cause YET. But we suspect they will.
I just say like any other flips this administration has had to make because of the flawed ways the situation was handled in the previous administration, we'll have to wait and see how this plays out.
The devil is in the details.
Posted by: Joe G. | May 16, 2009 9:16:28 AM
Again, Obama now changes his mind because he sees that due to the fact of how these cases were handled before he got in office, in federal court alot of the worse ones would be released on technicalities. Some we know would instantly rejoin Al-Qaeda and commence with killing american troops.
This has happened before folks.
These are not easy issues which do not conform to idealogy. If we do what the far left wants and stick them in the federal court system, some of them are getting released. There's just no way around it. But we can't go back to how Bush did it either which was to bury them under the jail, forget about em until the war on terror is over. Whenever THAT will be...
Obama had to find a way where they have due process so their individual cases get looked at, finally let the ones go who shouldn't be there, but keep imprisoned the ones who we know will instantly be re-recruited by terrorist groups.
Far right likes to say that because Bush is out of office, why the far left keeps talking about him. Bush may be gone but Obama and the country will have to come to terms with some of his worst policy decisions for months and possibly years to come. Some of them not so easily reversed.
This is why elections matter. So many americans either weren't paying attention during the Bush years or outright didn't vote at all in those close elections. Those who are so enraged about torture now, how many of you spoke out about Gitmo, or treatment of terror suspects, or even voted in 2005 or 2000 even?
It's also true what they say that people usually get the gov't they deserve. At least people, especially younger voters are paying attention after the Obama candidacy and election.
Posted by: Joe G. | May 16, 2009 6:27:11 AM
Pam, I don't expect much from this administration in regard to woman. Chief of Staff, David Axelrod, referred to Miss California as a dog. Granted, it was in a joke, but can you image the uproar had Bush's chief of staff made the same remark.
The president frequently invokes his daughters as a reason that something should or shouldn't be done.
Don't expect him to rebuke Axelrod.
Posted by: mad | May 15, 2009 11:48:06 PM
Where are the human rights activists when women under Sharia Law are beaten, stoned, lashed, honor killed (real torture)? These groups have no credibility. I don't know why they are given so much press/power. Oh, that's right. They are anti-American.
Posted by: pam | May 15, 2009 8:44:32 PM
The problem with trying these cases in Federal Courts is that most of them would be thrown out due to lack of due process during the detainees' period of detention. A military tribunal could at least make some of the charges stick. Perhaps the President was not aware of how badly these cases had been mismanaged!
Posted by: Mary | May 15, 2009 3:30:13 PM
Cindy Shehan? where are you? We miss you? Obama needs you to camp out in front of his home to protest.
Posted by: Jim Rod | May 15, 2009 3:03:30 PM
This was entirely predictable. There are and were no other options. Obama was either flat out lying all along, or he was once again, too inexperienced and plainly stupid to understand that this was always the best solution to a difficult, modern problem.
In the past these folks may have simply been killed on the battlefield..
NOW Obama will posture and pretend that what he is doing is somehow different. That is what I believe is called a distinction without a difference.
He has a history of being abjectly stupid AND a liar.
Even today he makes speeches, like at his town hall yesterday where he proclaimed that we cannot continue this unsustainable debt.
HE CREATED 75% OF THE PROBLEM in just a few short months.
Even the democrats now call the porkulus bill the "EARMARK BILL" and they laugh and think it is funny that they put one over on all of us.
Obama is a self serving, power grabbing, CORRUPT, liar who needs to be in jail for all he has done to divert US assets into the pockets of his union and other supporters.
Posted by: MNM | May 15, 2009 2:35:15 PM
LEt these cry babies pay for these scum bags food and boarding then they will change their tune real quick
Posted by: mark | May 15, 2009 2:15:19 PM
thank you President Obama for taking us down the middle road and not to the Extreme Left like Bush went to the Extreme Right!
~~~
Yeah that's right. So what if President Obama is doing the same things President Bush did. When the latter did them it was "far right" but when the former does them it is "in the middle".
Great job Angie!
Posted by: Plumber | May 15, 2009 2:08:33 PM
I did not vote for President Obama but I must say that on issues of national security he has pleasantly surprised me.
Posted by: hkdakota | May 15, 2009 8:46:14 AM
----------------------------------------
dkdakota, I hate to admit it, but I agree with. At least on this issue I have to give POTUS props for doing the right thing.
Posted by: dragoon70056 | May 15, 2009 1:02:47 PM
Is it true that we actually beheaded some people, oh wait that was the terorists.
Posted by: DB | May 15, 2009 1:02:05 PM
Geez, didn't the media call these military tribunals when Bush was in charge? Why don't we just start calling them tupperware parties now that Obama's in charge. Hey media, your bias is showing!
Posted by: Daniel | May 15, 2009 1:00:09 PM
let us not forget
WE AT WAR
with an enemy that is crazy
no common sense, just hate!
please challenge newscasterS to mention every day,
JEHAD LOVES KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN
we are next any day now!!!
warning from an 82 year old veteran
Posted by: richard malisher | May 15, 2009 12:36:56 PM
jhw, how do you feel about the ACLU using your money to oppose the president on this issue?
Posted by: mad | May 15, 2009 12:06:34 PM
Obama is now killing civilians with Predator assassination strikes?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena
if Obama starts a needless war like Bush & Cheney, you'll have something to rag about,
I notive you didn't mention the Iraqi 'body count' of civilians.......
Posted by: H2O | May 15, 2009 11:56:41 AM
"Human Rights Groups" ? How about "Radical Leftist groups".
Posted by: Ron | May 15, 2009 11:53:56 AM
* In a March 19 speech, Obama said: “Let me be clear: Ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved—just as there would be dangers involved with staying indefinitely. We will have to make tactical adjustments, listening to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that our interests in a stable Iraq are met, and to make sure that our troops are secure.”
* During a March 2 Washington Post foreign policy “Q&A,” when asked what size his proposed “over-the-horizon” force in Iraq would be, Obama responded: “The precise size of the residual force will depend on consultations with our military commanders and will depend on the circumstances on the ground, including the willingness of the Iraqi government to move toward political accommodation.”
* During an interview on the February 5 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, when asked, “[I]s there anything that would change your position about pulling out troops … if he [Gen. David Petraeus] convinces you that we’re on the right track?” Obama began his response by saying, “Well, what I’ve been very clear about is that I will always listen to commanders on the ground.”
Posted by: O | May 15, 2009 11:51:14 AM
What they call now the 'hard left" is what he was courting back in the primaries, saying everything they wanted to hear to help him slain that 'terrible monster/racist/liar' Clinton.
Jon Stewart had him last night in video back then lying to our faces on every issue he has reversed now. A politician lying to get elected. What a novel concept.
Posted by: Zing | May 15, 2009 11:28:04 AM
"... the real perpetrator of 9/11"
Which was--Afghanistan? How many Afghans were among the nineteen?
Or was it Pakistan, where Obama is now killing civilians with Predator assassination strikes?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | May 15, 2009 11:22:24 AM
Post a comment


