What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
181 Comments
- Unreal030, on 05/17/2009, -18/+70Frankly, if you paid any real attention to, or did any proper research on the man during the campaign there was no reason to suspect him to keep to his promises. This is exactly what I expected and you should have to. His voting record, his past ties, his lack of experience, his war hawkish attitude, the pretty speeches that lacked any true content past emotional appeals, severely lacking on the details of his plans, I mean honestly did you just purposely try not to pay attention?
- MercyPolitics, on 05/16/2009, -7/+57To read Amnesty International's reaction go to:
http://digg.com/politics/Amnesty_Int_Obama_Breaks_ ... - Lederhosed, on 05/16/2009, -4/+46He is revamping the military commissions, FWIW. But I do think it's a huge mistake to say he's going to get rid of them and then not.
- ikeeel4money, on 05/17/2009, -7/+49So Obama lied?
- sheeplescareme, on 05/16/2009, -21/+48"Critics representing both the Left and the Right said Obama’s decision was an unnecessary compromise of American values."
what american values are these? aggression, arrogance, imperialism, theft, and war? this development seems to fit in perfectly with american history - real history, not the white-washed crap so many of us are fed in gov't run schools. the us loves to invade other countries, install their favourite dictators until they find a need to remove them and put in place a new puppet, press for global economic sanctions against any country that does not fall in line with demands which has resulted in the deaths of millions across the globe, and considers most people, even her own, to be little more than cannon fodder for their various schemes.
anyone who really thought that this admin was going to be different from the last simply was not paying attention. he was generally quite clear regarding all of his intentions and when he was not very clear, the people surrounding him were.
you don't get a one-eighty for the better in how a country conducts itself simply because a new person occupies its big house - real change comes from the actions of the common man and woman. - Echota, on 05/16/2009, -10/+36I don't know who Obama is listening to but he should get rid of them fast!
This is not what he said he would do! - inactive, on 05/16/2009, -15/+40I think Obama is being co-opted by the National Security bureaucracy. It was a mistake for him to have so many Bush holdovers. Maybe this will be different than the way Bush handled it but I am sure people still have memories of what he said on the campaign trail and what he's doing now and that's what is most disappointing to me.
- Dennisisok, on 05/17/2009, -5/+25A politician lied during an election campaign and failed to keep his promises? SHOCKING!
- halo3d, on 05/17/2009, -2/+21*surprised face*
- pigfister, on 05/17/2009, -13/+29From saviour to war criminal in just over 100 days, what a surprise that the elected party really has little power.
who will be the next USA puppet? wake up America reclaim your country. - toconnor, on 05/17/2009, -10/+26Change you can believe in?
- 1smartguy, on 05/17/2009, -3/+18Yea but he's MY party, and that's how I roll. Now what's this stuff about commission military whatever? Ahh who cares, as long as it's my party in power.
- AlterLite, on 05/17/2009, -6/+20Wow... someone figured out a way to blame Bush for this... just... wow..
- poxonyou, on 05/17/2009, -1/+14The problem was he left too much to people's imaginations. Without being so detailed, many had "hoped" he was secretly more progressive. I imagine he, or whoever designed his campaign, knew this was better than laying out a lot of concrete positions. It's really quite amazing how he coopted grassroots and indie-themes, and went with a positive campaign. I imagine the campaign was influenced by study published shortly before that showed people responded far better to consistently positive campaigns than negative ones, like telling people "we" can be better rather than drawing attention to what's wrong specifically (think Kucinich, Nader, Edwards).
- 13ohemian, on 05/17/2009, -4/+16I don't know why the news of Guantanamo Bay has been reopened hasn't been on diggs front page, or this either.
- o76923, on 05/17/2009, -2/+13And still, nobody will get elected on a third party ticket.
- xman8, on 05/17/2009, -6/+17Remember all the "Bush Lied" comments from the Liberals?
How come I don't see "Obama Lied" comments?
Hypocritical! - omenmedia, on 05/17/2009, -1/+11Obama is listening to the same people Bush listened to, and the same people their predecessors have listened to since JFK.
- warsongs7, on 05/17/2009, -2/+11Yet their right to a trial in a proper civil court is denied?
- yutt, on 05/17/2009, -0/+8That is exactly what Lederhosed said. How can you quote someone who said the same thing as you and then say that isn't the point?
- 3The3Dude3, on 05/17/2009, -1/+9Very well stated. But I'd like to add that aside from the loopholes. the GC indicates very clearly that it simply doesn't protect stateless militants. For all intensive purposes, if we do not bring these men on American soil they technically have no legal protections by our Constitution and International law has provided them none as stated above. To clarify, there is a legal difference between a soldier (eg Iraq/Afghanistan military) and a militant (Taliban/Al Q.).
- Lightstab, on 05/17/2009, -1/+9These articles don't give the entire picture. Here's a quote from another article:
"the legal system that is expected to try fewer than 20 of the 241 detainees at the U.S. naval detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Thirteen detainees, including five charged with helping orchestrate the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, are already in the tribunal system."
And then there are restrictions in order:
_Restrictions on hearsay evidence that can be used in court against the detainees.
_A ban on all evidence obtained through cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. This would include statements given from detainees who were subjected to waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning.
_Giving detainees greater leeway in choosing their own military counsel.
_Protecting detainees who refuse to testify from legal sanctions or other court prejudices. - seanayb, on 05/17/2009, -0/+7That is the lamest cop-out I've ever heard.
"X is a prick"
"oh yeah? well so are W, Y, and Z, so why complain?" - Karmashock, on 05/17/2009, -9/+16It's very easy to complain about this practice but no one has proposed a reasonable alternative. The dems enjoyed using this as a political weapon against the republicans but when push came to shove they've got nothing better and will just continue the practice.
And before you get all upset about holding them, quite a few of them are lucky to be alive... we're well within our rights to just off the little turds on sight. They're not criminals, they're not insane, they're a hostile political faction that thrives of fear and chaos. They're pretty much the embodiment of barbarism (defined as anti civilization) and evil (defined as against the short and long term health of humanity in general).
If they're US citizens, then they deserve a trial and due process. If they're captured on a battlefield or in the midst of other activities then it just doesn't apply. If they wore uniforms and acted like soldiers then the Geneva convention would have some relevance here. But there are some loop holes in the convention that these clowns make very easy to use. The convention doesn't protect spies or sappers. These characters are the closest analog to that. - tomasII, on 05/17/2009, -23/+30Well that's what happens when you campaign and have no clue what you are talking about. Now that he has a better understanding of the circumstances he is continuing the Bush policy of Military tribunals.....
- 1smartguy, on 05/17/2009, -2/+9Stupid partisans who can't think past a party affiliation.
- Waiting2awake, on 05/17/2009, -1/+8Yes you do know, because while the "neo-cons" may be gone, their spirit of burying anything that doesn't strictly approve of the current admin lives on....
- Hardataq, on 05/17/2009, -0/+6Actions like...continuing illegal wiretapping? Spending trillions? Constantly backing out of campaign promises?
Ok. Consider him judged. - inactive, on 05/17/2009, -6/+12Can someone name anything good this lying ***** has done?
He talks a lot but he hasn't done jack sh*t!!
Fvck this *****! - warsongs7, on 05/17/2009, -0/+6Quoting Amnesty Int's Larry Cox: "President Obama is reinstating the same deeply-flawed military commissions that in June 2008 he called an 'enormous failure.' 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 by sacrificing due process for political expediency.
“Whatever revisions the Obama administration has made to the commissions do not change the fact that the commissions do not provide an adequate standard of justice for the detainees nor the victims of terrorism--they merely mock the U.S. Constitution, international laws and undermine fundamental human rights standards.
“What happened to President Obama's confidence in the U.S. justice system's ability to try detainees? He himself said that 'we need not throw away 200 years of American jurisprudence while we fight terrorism.'
"U.S. federal courts are a perfectly sound system to try any and all detainees. They have brought other terror suspects to justice, and there is no reason why these courts cannot continue to do the same." - shupy, on 05/17/2009, -18/+24The people at Guantanamo need to finally have their day in court. What do you expect them to do? Hold trials in New Jersey?
Military court is where these cases should be handled and Obama is making some important changes to give the accused rights to defense. We can't just open the doors and let them out. Under Bush these people would be stuck there indefinately. To close Guantanamo, we need to sort through those remaining and make a determination on guilt or innocence and find some way to repatriot them to their countries.
The crime has been committed and these people were in legal limbo for years. It is a lot harder to clean up a mess than make it. Shame on the Bush administration for their complete mishandling of the situation. - Waiting2awake, on 05/17/2009, -1/+7 Stop thinking of it as Leftist Vs Rightist. That is BS - take a look at the policies every politician enacts and goes along with once they are in power. Regardless of the voting, the same policies are done.
This left Vs right, Liberal Vs Conservative, Republican Vs Democrat is all just a movie. It is a show, to gather your attention. They pick a few divisive topics where there is no clear favortism and the media hypes these issues up beyond all importance; while the issues where 70+ percent of the people agree are marginalized. Label both sides, and then use blanket statements referring to the labels only. Now all you have to do is pick an issue and set each side against the other, with the powers that by standing by as defenders of respective sides against the other side - those heathen/liberal/capitalists/etc.
While both sides are busy hurling insults and watching each other, neither side sees the outright theft from the powers that be.
BTW - Clinton provided the same public pressure release valve that Obama is supposed to be. - epicstruggle, on 05/17/2009, -3/+8http://althouse.blogspot.com/2009/05/obama-is-like ...
Yeah, sure he is. - toconnor, on 05/17/2009, -1/+6How is he cleaning up if his policies are the same?
- Justin676, on 05/17/2009, -1/+6Sorry, but anyone who actually bought into that "hope and change" garbage and thought he would do 1/10th of what he actually said he would, is naive and ignorant.
- ejeckert, on 05/17/2009, -1/+6Hes a mistake! Inexperienced, unprepared, and corrupt! The first 100 days have shown us he cant seem to do a little research on appointee, has back pedaled on his pre-election promises, and is not "going through the budget line by line"...the list goes on and on!! His support for the union in california at the cost of bail out money for the entire state is terrible! Everyone else is going to take a pay cut in the state to help balance the budget...the union state employees shouldnt get special treatment when all have agreed to take these cuts across the board...what the hell makes them so special and why is the obama administration involved in this after state dems and reps agreed to these cuts? Lobbyist and campaign contributors have far too much influence and control over this administration at the cost of the people and the tax payers!
- inactive, on 05/16/2009, -11/+16I wonder how that on the job training is working out in spite of Biden's warning.
- AlterLite, on 05/17/2009, -4/+9Change You can believe In? This is what happens when you (and I am talking to you people on the left) put your faith in a politician, when you fall for some chant (Yes we Can (continue Bush's policies)) . The only thing that changes in Washington is the name at the top. Bush=McSame=Barack
- CanadianCheese, on 05/17/2009, -0/+4I don't get it, it's the trials he promised. Why is it bad?
Honest question. - inactive, on 05/17/2009, -11/+15ARREST OBAMA FOR BEING A WAR CRIMINAL!
TRY HIM FOR TREASON! THE OBAMA CABAL ARE WAR CRIMINALS! - inactive, on 05/17/2009, -9/+13Please, judge the man on his actions and not his words.
Words can be deceptive and lull you into a false sense of security. Don't be exploited emotionally. - jsffive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+4Funny how Obama-speak is no different than Clinton-speak... or even Bush-speak.
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+4Wasn't he elected on the platform of Change?
- aijazbaig1, on 05/17/2009, -2/+6It isn't just bush or cheney or clinton or obama or pelosi..they are just pawns in a vast puzzle...America's political elite or the power that be..whoever they are, has been playing with other countries' lives since the past six decades. As an example consider Iraq. Washington spawned Saddam knowing he was such a maniac as long he was willing to their bastard. He assasinated Abdul kareem kassim who was a popular leader although he was anti-western which irked washington.
If u want a quick glimpse into Washington's dirty games in this country should read and digg this:
"A tyrant 40 years in the making" from the NYT
http://digg.com/political_opinion/A_Tyrant_40_Year ...
FTA:
"The United States also sent arms to the new regime, weapons later used against the same Kurdish insurgents the United States had backed against Kassem and then abandoned. Soon, Western corporations like Mobil, Bechtel and British Petroleum were doing business with Baghdad -- for American firms, their first major involvement in Iraq."
Also FTA:
"As its instrument the C.I.A. had chosen the authoritarian and anti-Communist Baath Party, in 1963 still a relatively small political faction influential in the Iraqi Army. According to the former Baathist leader Hani Fkaiki, among party members colluding with the C.I.A. in 1962 and 1963 was Saddam Hussein, then a 25-year-old who had fled to Cairo after taking part in a failed assassination of
Kassem in 1958. According to Western scholars, as well as Iraqi refugees and a British human rights organization, the 1963 coup was accompanied by a bloodbath. Using lists of suspected Communists and other leftists provided by the C.I.A., the Baathists systematically murdered untold numbers of Iraq's educated elite -- killings in which Saddam Hussein himself is said to have participated. No one knows the exact toll, but accounts agree that the victims included hundreds of doctors, teachers, technicians, lawyers and other professionals as well as military and political figures".
Other than that some the other 'leaders' that the US has backed previously are:
Shah Rezah Palavi
Agusto Pinochet Ugarte
Rafael Videla
Ngo Dinh Diem
Carlos Castillo Armas
Joaquín Balaguer
Wow such champions of Human rights and liberty nah?
if democracy meets Washington's requirements than here it comes...else if the populace is irking them...they just install a brutal dictator to take care of things...its as simple as that
And people wonder why is there no love lost for the US in these nations... - jsffive, on 05/17/2009, -0/+4"Some" rights?
If they had rights at all, they would be tried in a civilian court. But the burden of proof is far less stringent in a military court. - cyberprunes, on 05/17/2009, -2/+6I've got news for you. That "on the job training" line is pure B.S. You can not have presidential experience unless you have already been president. History shows that the standard measure of presidential experience used through history has never accurately predicted the success of a president. Stop falling for stupid one liners. Every president has "on the job" training. This is why strong intellect,good judgement,diverse life experience and education are paramount.
- kanojo1969, on 05/17/2009, -0/+4As far as I'm concerned, the guilty parties can be shot, I don't care, they have no rights. The problem is with the hundreds of people who have been dumped into gitmo who are completely innocent. There are a lot of them, and with the military tribunal,s these people had no opportunity to even ask what they were supposed to have done.
it's the innocent people who need the protections of the court system, not the guilty ones. - scoottie, on 05/17/2009, -1/+5It is scary, but its completely expected they way MSNBC, CNN, etc continue to blow him on a daily basis.
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -2/+6Maybe, just maybe, Obama is now privy to information he wasn't aware of during the campaign? Leadership requires one to constantly evaluate situations and change.
- inactive, on 05/17/2009, -1/+4Then follow your own advice and get a real job nit wit. Collect garbage from Bombay and turn it into fuel and fertilizer.
You can make the equipment with garbage,, -
Show 51 - 100 of 183 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is