October 31, 2014

20-30 Released Gitmo Prisoners Are Now Slaughtering People with ISIS, Sources Say
— Ace

As the Joker observed, people will accept horrors so long as those horrors are all part of the plan.

As many as 20 to 30 former Guantanamo Bay detainees -- some of whom were released within the last three years -- are suspected by intelligence and Defense officials of having joined forces with the Islamic State and other militant groups inside Syria, Fox News has learned.

...

Senior Defense and intelligence officials say the vast majority of detainees released from Guantanamo don't return to the fight -- and of those who do, relatively few have made it to Syria.

Of the 620 detainees released from Guantanamo Bay, 180 have returned or are suspected to have returned to the battlefield.

Oh. Only 180.


Posted by: Ace at 06:52 AM | Comments (289)
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Huh. Terrorists return to terrorism. Who could have seen that coming?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 06:55 AM (g1DWB)

2 I want to know what the 5 we traded for Bergdahl are up to... Where are they.... what are THEY doing... and is anyone checking?

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 06:55 AM (f0pWu)

3 I do blame Bush for this.  He should have executed all these dregs before he turned it over to Obama.   he had already released all the low value scum.  There wasn't anyone left but the worst of the worst.

Posted by: Vic[/i] at October 31, 2014 06:55 AM (u9gzs)

4 Can we kill them now?

Posted by: Blanco Basura at October 31, 2014 06:55 AM (4WhSY)

5 I must say, I'm gobsmacked.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at October 31, 2014 06:55 AM (zF6Iw)

6 Delightful.

Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 06:55 AM (rwI+c)

7 Under international law these scum could have been executed already.

Posted by: Vic[/i] at October 31, 2014 06:56 AM (u9gzs)

8 *180*

That we know of.

Posted by: John YaYa at October 31, 2014 06:56 AM (NUCTk)

9 how unexpectedly!

Posted by: Adriane the Meme Critic ... at October 31, 2014 06:56 AM (P+IZm)

10 Can I go back, too?

Posted by: Bowe Bergdahl at October 31, 2014 06:57 AM (6um35)

11 Someday, maybe, we'll have adults running the government again. Maybe... and yes, I am including our "intelligence and Defense officials" among those who seem to need adult supervision.

Posted by: BurtTC at October 31, 2014 06:57 AM (+yDt6)

12 4 Can we kill them now? Posted by: Blanco Basura at October 31, 2014 11:55 AM No, as we are only in the degrading operational phase of Operation Sand Trap.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, let's bungle in the jungle at October 31, 2014 06:57 AM (2Aj5D)

13 -- some of whom were released within the last three years --

Huh.

Posted by: HR at October 31, 2014 06:58 AM (/kI1Q)

14 The fergutards chant ISIS at the cops. How sick is that?

Posted by: The Progs at October 31, 2014 06:59 AM (iQIUe)

15 who is The Joker?

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 06:59 AM (sj3Ax)

16 >>who is The Joker? PHONE

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 07:00 AM (g1DWB)

17 Sickening.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:00 AM (IXrOn)

18 Thanks Jack Straw

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:01 AM (sj3Ax)

19 This is not how a war is won.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b][/u] at October 31, 2014 07:01 AM (0HooB)

20 Why they didn't have GPS trackers embedded in their skulls is beyond me.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:01 AM (IXrOn)

21 So there's a 1-in-4 chance that a Gitmo detainee will be identified taking up arms again, which in reality means there's more like a 1-in-2 chance they're actually involved in some way and we just haven't found the rest. The true failure of the Bush Iraq policy was that either we no longer have any military brass who understands Napoleon's maxim of "ask me for anything, gentlemen, except time" or he or Rumsfeld overruled them in favor of the lawyers. If you are still fighting an elective war after five years you've lost, no matter what the situation is on the ground. The same was true of the detainees - it was essential that we be trying - and if appropriate executing - these people within 90 days after they were captured. Instead, Bush let the process go on, and on, and on past ridiculous.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 07:01 AM (o+SC1)

22 Two companies. On the 'glass half full' side of the equation; At least it isn't a brigade! Yet.

Posted by: LoneStarHeeb (Psalm 109:7-8) at October 31, 2014 07:01 AM (BZAd3)

23 Carol, a better question, with the clowns we have running things right now, is who is NOT the Joker?

Posted by: BurtTC at October 31, 2014 07:02 AM (+yDt6)

24 They WERE all noble, pacific (if ignorant) goatherds, but gitmo turned them towards terror!

Posted by: Things the left actually believe at October 31, 2014 07:02 AM (JVEmw)

25 How much blood on his hands How much more dangerous the world

Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 07:02 AM (zOTsN)

26 Execute them now and send all Illegal Aliens to GITMO as modernized Ellis Island. Quarantine them and do what they used to do prior to 1965

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:03 AM (sj3Ax)

27 180 outta 620 ain't bad

Posted by: halal meat loaf at October 31, 2014 07:03 AM (JMCjf)

28 Daddy why are you such a clusterfuck?

Posted by: Sasha Obama at October 31, 2014 07:03 AM (sDapq)

29 Poor souls are merely responding to their terrible torture in the Guantanamo gulag.

Posted by: Harry Reid at October 31, 2014 07:03 AM (W5DcG)

30 I do blame Bush for this. He should have executed all these dregs before he turned it over to Obama. he had already released all the low value scum. There wasn't anyone left but the worst of the worst. Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2014 11:55 AM (u9gzs) Perhaps they were still trying to interrogate, dunno. But, imagine the world backlash with a mass execution? Who would have predicted that some psycho would release them? That some delusional narcissist wouldn't understand the basic premise, laws, or reason for Gitmo?

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (IXrOn)

31 Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 12:03 PM (sj3Ax Yeah, what she wrote.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, let's bungle in the jungle at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (2Aj5D)

32 Perhaps Isaa will investigate this as well as his other cases.

Posted by: Thin veneer of civility at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (XzRw1)

33 And here I was, spilling my guts about BJ's, in the last thread, you bastards.

Posted by: Jinx the Cat at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (l3vZN)

34 These guys should l d have been executed after military tribunals

Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (zOTsN)

35 Ann Coulter pointed out yesterday that within about 2 weeks of the release of the 5, & obambi's little garden party celebration with the idiot bergdahl muzzie father, the whole ISIS pot boiled over....

Posted by: Roscoe at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (MIovV)

36 Fabulous news daily from Le Roi's Reign of Tardation.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, Detective of infectious disease czarina at October 31, 2014 07:04 AM (dMEBN)

37 20 Why they didn't have GPS trackers embedded in their skulls is beyond me. Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 12:01 PM (IXrOn) =========================== Maybe not the skull but I also have never understood why we didn't do this.

Posted by: MTF at October 31, 2014 07:05 AM (6um35)

38 How much blood on his hands How much more dangerous the world Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 12:02 PM (zOTsN) Yes. And the JEF still thinks he's right, and everyone else is wrong. He won't make the connection. Ever.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:05 AM (IXrOn)

39 But everyone in Gitmo is an innocent practitioner of the religion of peace who was tortured for no reason.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at October 31, 2014 07:05 AM (Y92Nd)

40 Under international law these scum could have been executed already. And should've been. I remain convinced that, had that been done, we wouldn't be getting groped in our own airports like we're the enemy. They're at war with us, but as TFG loves to say, we're not at war with them. Our own government is at war with us. Does anyone doubt that all this massive expansion of government in the name of the WOT has benefitted cronies? As long as there's power to be gained, rights to be suppressed and money to be made, we'll never see the end of this "war." #WASTF

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b][/u] at October 31, 2014 07:06 AM (0HooB)

41 In Chicago, these released terrorists who return to the battlefield to fight again are called gangbangers.

Posted by: Roy at October 31, 2014 07:06 AM (VndSC)

42 Gee, it's a shame we couldn't have transferred them to a prison here in the US, given them a trial, and then released them into our own communities. Because you just know how an Obama DoJ run trail against jihadis would go.

Posted by: Bill Clinton at October 31, 2014 07:07 AM (D/504)

43 Anyone else here amused that the hero of San Fransisco's ball team is named Bum Gardener?

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at October 31, 2014 07:07 AM (rqP57)

44 We hereby declare this to be a non-story.

Posted by: The MSM at October 31, 2014 07:07 AM (MMC8r)

45 DRUDGE his version of The Flaming Skull up.

Posted by: Thin veneer of civility at October 31, 2014 07:07 AM (XzRw1)

46 What's that Batman line --- "Some men just want to watch the world burn?"
Yeah. That's Obama to a "t."

Posted by: Bill Clinton at October 31, 2014 07:08 AM (D/504)

47 Solid B+

Posted by: Barack Obama at October 31, 2014 07:08 AM (sDapq)

48 people will accept horrors so long as those horrors are all part of the plan the size of a tangerine.

Posted by: Insomniac at October 31, 2014 07:08 AM (DrWcr)

49 I still believe every one of them should have had a tracking device implanted that would allow a GBU to track them to the site of the crater.

Posted by: Gmac- Pondering...something involving rope and a tree at October 31, 2014 07:08 AM (baiNQ)

50 But, imagine the world backlash with a mass execution?

A tragic fire.

Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 07:08 AM (rwI+c)

51 @34 - well, some probably should have been. Not all. A few quick executions might have given the rest the idea we were serious. The problem was that those trials should have taken place immediately, no more than 90 days after capture, and the executions promptly thereafter. Bush let the JAGs fiddle-fuck around for years. Sheesh, it took the Democrats less time to come up with and pass Obamacare than it took Bush and Rumsfeld to come up with a trial structure for these guys.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 07:08 AM (o+SC1)

52 Yes...Drudge is interesting right now.


*Squirt*

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at October 31, 2014 07:09 AM (V4MhU)

53 I think the midterms are going to be a well-deserved Democrat slaughter. 10 seats is entirely possible.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at October 31, 2014 07:09 AM (Y92Nd)

54 Innocent goatherders and convenience store owners joined up with ISIS? Why that's Unpossible!!

Posted by: kbdabear at October 31, 2014 07:09 AM (aTXUx)

55 Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 12:01 PM (o+SC1) During the Cold War, the enemy was identified, and could thus be countered. But going back to 1983, for some reason our own Government refuses to identify who our actual enemies are... and their motivation. Its come to light that our Government had intercepts between IRAN, and it embassy, talking about how a2 Truck bombs was made in Iran, driven across Syria, to Lebanon, and used to kill our Marines, and French Foreign Legionaires.. This intercept was decoded within a couple of months of October 23, 1983... and even those in Theatre were never told who did the dead... we were told it was a crappy little Militia... it only came out 20 YEARS later. Even today, the historic record has not been changed... people do not know it was IRAN who Killed our Marines. Many of the IEDs used in both Iraq and Afghanistan to kill our troops... had parts manufactured in Iran. We also have direct serial number evidence that other weapons used against us were made in Iran. More than once, we captured Iranian military 'advisors', working with those who were killing us in Iraq. And yet.... we are LETTING them become a Nuclear Power? Note.... this 'interesting' policy has been perpetuated by Presidents from BOTH political parties.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 07:10 AM (f0pWu)

56 MisHum. I have been posting that for months, modernize GITMO as new Ellis Island Thx for email

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:10 AM (sj3Ax)

57 Bush let the JAGs fiddle-fuck around for years.

Was this prior to or after he called me a racist for not embracing amnesty?

Posted by: Thin veneer of civility at October 31, 2014 07:10 AM (XzRw1)

58 IIRC, Bush released/transferred to home countries the lesser jihadis, so what was left in Gitmo when Obama took office were the worst of the worst.
Which makes what he's done even more evil.

Posted by: Lizzy at October 31, 2014 07:10 AM (D/504)

59 Recidivism rate is under 30%, wingnutz!

Posted by: The MSM at October 31, 2014 07:10 AM (MMC8r)

60 Obama was right. Gitmo is an effective recruiting tool to terrorists: but not quite the way he meant it.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at October 31, 2014 07:11 AM (TIgJq)

61 1 out of 3 ain't bad.

Posted by: Boone at October 31, 2014 07:11 AM (1wYHA)

62 Click Click Pull.

Posted by: Saliva at October 31, 2014 07:11 AM (HstNY)

63 But, imagine the world backlash with a mass execution? They could have just quietly disappeared. And Amnesty International told to go horsefuck when asking for access to GTMO.

Posted by: Insomniac at October 31, 2014 07:11 AM (DrWcr)

64 I hear good things about the Saudi Terrorist Rehab Program.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2014 07:12 AM (OmbDz)

65 Guys, it's not like anyone could have foreseen this.

Posted by: Obama at October 31, 2014 07:12 AM (BPMYx)

66 @59 - is it a good or bad thing that the recidivism rate for Gitmo internees is probably lower than that for incarcerated civilian felons?

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 07:12 AM (o+SC1)

67 I have AOSHQ DD things to do. Have a nice afternoon Ace & Horde

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:12 AM (sj3Ax)

68 Gitmo detainees should have suffered a workplace incident

Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 07:12 AM (zOTsN)

69 There's 'sport-fishing' where you catch the fish and then release it to maybe catch it again. But you have a sense of confidence the fish isn't gonna be armed with an AK-47 next time.

Posted by: SE Pa Moron [/i] at October 31, 2014 07:13 AM (zxQ4h)

70 I don't know why we didn't drown them in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean like the vermon they are. Oh, wait, I remember, diversity 'n' situational ethics 'n' shit.

Posted by: Buddha at October 31, 2014 07:13 AM (3CczE)

71 69 There's 'sport-fishing' where you catch the fish and then release it to maybe catch it again. But you have a sense of confidence the fish isn't gonna be armed with an AK-47 next time. Posted by: SE Pa Moron at October 31, 2014 12:13 PM (zxQ4h) Frickin' laser beams, maybe.

Posted by: Insomniac at October 31, 2014 07:13 AM (DrWcr)

72 I awoke to find someone sucking my cock...

Posted by: A Goat at October 31, 2014 07:13 AM (OmbDz)

73 They could have just quietly disappeared.

The ferry that was transporting them to the US for trial sank suddenly.  The crew did all they could but it happened too quick to release the prisoners.

Sad really.

Posted by: toby928(C) with a goatee at October 31, 2014 07:13 AM (rwI+c)

74 Heard Bob Beckel arguing "well Bush did it too".

Conveniently forgetting all the dems screaming for it to be closed and lawfaring on GITMOs legality. Forcing Bush's hand at least partially.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (aVYsC)

75 Gitmo Catch and Release;  not quite as deadly as Obama's Ebola policy, but close.

Posted by: Fritz at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (UzPAd)

76 21 The same was true of the detainees - it was essential that we be trying - and if appropriate executing - these people within 90 days after they were captured. Instead, Bush let the process go on, and on, and on past ridiculous. Posted by: JEM Al Qaeda, Taliban and ISIS don't wear uniforms so when they are captured, try them on the spot as spies and summarily execute. Or pussyfoot. There's your two options.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (TIgJq)

77 Recidivism rate among those killed on the battlefield is virtually zero.

Posted by: --- at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (MMC8r)

78 Gee only 29% have returned to the fight? Not so bad, huh? I suppose transportation problems have kept it to only 29%. Eventually it will approach 100%. Our government is dumb as a cat turd.

Posted by: maddogg at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (xWW96)

79 Vic, I blame Bush more for never laying out a clear process to the American people of how it was going to be handled. Something simple like 1. These people are not in uniform and therefore are not protected by the Geneva Convention 2. All non-US citizens will appear before a military court. 3. One appeal to a second military court is allowed. 4. Judgment is either execution or release. If released and caught again, immediate execution. Bush could have watched the libs spin in circles.

Posted by: Better Feared than Loved at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (jasFi)

80 But, imagine the world backlash with a mass execution? President Boy wouldn't care. What part of "war" do they not understand? Our enemies have made no secret of their desire to conquer us and subject us to sharia law. Even after 9/11, we're not taking them seriously? WTF? Either they survive or we do. I'm pulling for us, I'm not so sure everyone in DC is.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b][/u] at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (0HooB)

81 69 There's 'sport-fishing' where you catch the fish and then release it to maybe catch it again. But you have a sense of confidence the fish isn't gonna be armed with an AK-47 next time. Posted by: SE Pa Moron Fish On! Posted by Jeremy Wade

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, let's bungle in the jungle at October 31, 2014 07:14 AM (2Aj5D)

82 72 I awoke to find someone sucking my cock... Posted by: A Goat at October 31, 2014 12:13 PM (OmbDz) El Gallocabras!

Posted by: Insomniac at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (DrWcr)

83 Aircraft could've gone down. Poetic justice in that. Weird how the pilots ejected

Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (zOTsN)

84 69 There's 'sport-fishing' where you catch the fish and then release it to maybe catch it again. But you have a sense of confidence the fish isn't gonna be armed with an AK-47 next time. Posted by: SE Pa Moron at October 31, 2014 12:13 PM (zxQ4h) Hey.... Mr. Shark??? where can I get one of those Kewl Lasers???

Posted by: Fish who was just released at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (f0pWu)

85 53 I think the midterms are going to be a well-deserved Democrat slaughter. 10 seats is entirely possible. Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at October 31, 2014 12:09 PM (Y92Nd) What the Democrats deserve is an actual slaughter. I denounce myself.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (txvbW)

86 @63 - you catch, you throw him in the pen next to ten other guys. You try him for half a dozen law-of-war violations, convict, then next morning at 6AM you pull him out of the cage and execute him. But it's got to happen like we mean it.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (o+SC1)

87 Top level meetings are taking place in the White House on how to get that recidivism rate up.

Posted by: --- at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (MMC8r)

88 Sharks still follow the path of the ferry.

Posted by: toby928(C) with a goatee at October 31, 2014 07:15 AM (rwI+c)

89 43 Anyone else here amused that the hero of San Fransisco's ball team is named Bum Gardener?

Posted by: Truman North, Moron Emeritus at October 31, 2014 12:07 PM (rqP57)


Well, Kansas City might have made fun of his name as he kicked their asses.

Posted by: kathysaysso at October 31, 2014 07:16 AM (jPT60)

90 The only good Muzzie Gitmo detainee is a ________________detainee. Ok Morons, have fun.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, let's bungle in the jungle at October 31, 2014 07:16 AM (2Aj5D)

91 Ah, but 440 of them have not have not slaughtered anyone, so the yoga and meditation therapy has worked. /liberal

Posted by: Jay Guevara at October 31, 2014 07:17 AM (SLea8)

92 @79 - close. The 'execute or release' might have some problems, I don't really like giving them a second shot at our guys, but it would at least guarantee that they'd be back in custody much more quickly.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 07:17 AM (o+SC1)

93 I would be giving these detainees estrogen treatments.  For the lul;z.

Posted by: toby928(C) with a goatee at October 31, 2014 07:18 AM (rwI+c)

94 180/620? So, that's like what?...5%?

Posted by: Joe Biden at October 31, 2014 07:18 AM (HRo7B)

95 What's that Batman line --- "Some men just want to watch the world burn?"
Yeah. That's Obama to a "t."

Posted by: Bill Clinton


Not really. The burning just provides for an interesting background while he looks into the mirror.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i] [/b] at October 31, 2014 07:18 AM (k1nNw)

96 In the thread below, did anyone get that women phone number? 


Asking for a friend.

Posted by: Nip Sip at October 31, 2014 07:19 AM (0FSuD)

97

JEM @ 21.  It's actually much worse, and in a different way, then you portray it (criticizing the handling of Gitmo detainees/military tribunals, etc).

 

Recall the various cases brought against military tribunal procedures (approved by Congress), which went to the SCOTUS (Hamdan v Bush).

 

In the final one of these debacles, Kennedy showed off his arrogance and absurdly unserious nature by, inter alia, usurping the treaty power and declaring that the war with AQ was NOT of an international nature (all this relating to Common Article 3 of the Geneva accords).  It was so bad, even the since-discredited Chief Justice used dissent language not seen since the Civil War era in savaging Kennedy's "reasoning".

 

Bush's error was not in some overall approach to Gitmo and detainees - in those areas he was generally outstanding, least cowardly and most responsible president since Truman in taking bold action on critical national security issues regardless of the ankle-biting from the free-riders in Europe and half of his own country.  His error was in accepting this particular ruling from the SCOTUS.

 

It was a constitutional crisis of the first order.  The court had shredded the constitution and usurped the treaty power in the midst of war, undermining a key national defense tool the president needed to do his duty.  Bush should have shocked the country - by doing his duty and relying on common sense and unanswerable arguments - and announced that the SCOTUS had exceeded its mandate and he would not allow the constitution to be discarded while the nation was endangered.

 

Of course all this is unthinkable, blah blah blah.  Sure it is.  But it's the central fact, and the shambles that is rule of law in the US is at least half attributable to this problem (courts outside their lane, and abusing their illegitimate power with capricious, ridiculous, and dangerous rulings).

 

 

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 07:20 AM (afQnV)

98 OT markets are up up and away after Japan goes full rxtard Japan will now monetize 100% of its debt It will buy all the govt bonds that it issues I guess no one ever told Abe not to go full rxtard S&P record high now 2011.78 DOW 17348 NAS 4147 Gold and silver hammered (SWIDT) since GED ended QE3 this week/ Shiny preccccious gold down $32 today alone $1165.93 Sister silver down 3.32% wow $15.88 Now try to find anybody who will sell silver (not paper) at that price HA AS IF!

Posted by: ginaswo at October 31, 2014 07:20 AM (+X1qa)

99 And yet.... we are LETTING them become a Nuclear Power? Note.... this 'interesting' policy has been perpetuated by Presidents from BOTH political parties. Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 12:10 PM (f0pWu) It is something I do not, and never have, understood. What is it about Iran that has caused us to tolerate their bullshit for so many years? I wanted to fuck them up back in 1979, and Reagan threatened to do it if they were still holding hostages when he took office. Why we haven't unleashed hell fire on their fucking asses I simply do not understand.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:21 AM (txvbW)

100 DRUDGE his version of The Flaming Skull up. Posted by: Thin veneer of civility at October 31, 2014 12:07 PM (XzRw1) Makes me dizzy.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:22 AM (IXrOn)

101 O/T, but not, considering that its Halloween...

http://tinyurl.com/4tcqw

(Anna should note this...)

Posted by: CPT. Charles at October 31, 2014 07:22 AM (/mTq0)

102 Bush could have watched the libs spin in circles. Posted by: Better Feared than Loved at October 31, 2014 12:14 PM (jasFi) Bush enabled\caused a lot of liberal bullshit.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:23 AM (txvbW)

103 What's going to be the November Surprise-- Peace deal with Iran, in our time?

Posted by: Zombie Paul Lynde at October 31, 2014 07:24 AM (RJMhd)

104 Amnesty

Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 07:25 AM (zOTsN)

105 But my minions keep telling the American people this won't happen and more believe than not. I thought I had things figured out in the 30s. These guys in collusion with Obama have me beat with Hitler by miles.

Posted by: Joey Goebbels at October 31, 2014 07:25 AM (WGm5T)

106 Of the 620 detainees released from Guantanamo Bay, 180 have returned or are suspected to have returned to the battlefield.
***
In the 40s the hero of the Democrats imprisoned people based on race and kept them imprisoned for the whole war.

Now the hero of the Democrats releases people engaged in what have traditionally been called "war crimes" in the middle of a war.


Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:26 AM (78TbK)

107 These people just seem to move around the world with the greatest of ease. Where the ckuf are they getting money to do this?

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at October 31, 2014 07:27 AM (oFCZn)

108 We did some good work there chaps.

Posted by: Eric Holder along with Covington and Burling at October 31, 2014 07:27 AM (fWAjv)

109 Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 12:20 PM (afQnV) which came about because Bush did not ask for an actual Declaration of War. If Bush had an actual Declaration in hand... those questions never would have come up. This whole thing is caused by a Legal no Man's land where we are perpetually using the military to kill people, without declaring war... (and no, the use of Force things from Congress are NOT a declaration of war)...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 07:27 AM (f0pWu)

110 Where the ckuf are they getting money to do this?

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at October 31, 2014 12:27 PM (oFCZn)


Qutar and UAE

Posted by: Nip Sip at October 31, 2014 07:28 AM (0FSuD)

111 Actually I guess the only thing that would surprise me is if Obama bombed Iran. Actually maybe not--he's that unpredictable which is really scary.

Posted by: Zombie Paul Lynde at October 31, 2014 07:28 AM (RJMhd)

112 What is it about Iran that has caused us to tolerate their bullshit for so many years?
***
When the Iranians moved from arming and training Jihadis to assassinating American soldiers in 2006 and the president did nothing I lost all respect for President Bush. 

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:28 AM (78TbK)

113 107 These people just seem to move around the world with the greatest of ease. Where the ckuf are they getting money to do this? Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at October 31, 2014 12:27 PM (oFCZn) Welll......

Posted by: House of Saud, and other Arab Potentates at October 31, 2014 07:28 AM (f0pWu)

114 A minor college polling outfit now gives Virginia Senator Mark Warner just a +7 lead over Uber-RINO.

Posted by: mrp at October 31, 2014 07:28 AM (JBggj)

115 Where the ckuf are they getting money to do this? Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at October 31, 2014 12:27 PM (oFCZn) It's actually scary how much money they have. And we can't get to it.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:29 AM (IXrOn)

116 The only thing that JEF would bomb is Israel. Ooops friendly fire mistake, my bad. Did I do that? In his best Uerkel voice.

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, let's bungle in the jungle at October 31, 2014 07:29 AM (2Aj5D)

117 What the Democrats deserve is an actual slaughter.
___
TOO OLD

Posted by: NARAL Bear at October 31, 2014 07:29 AM (78TbK)

118 In the 40s the hero of the Democrats imprisoned people based on race and kept them imprisoned for the whole war.


Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:26 PM (78TbK)


It wasn't race, it was nationality. The government also interned Italian and German nationals, and some American citizens of Italian and German descent who were thought to be security risks.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at October 31, 2014 07:29 AM (SLea8)

119 Only 180 out of 620?

Has anyone checked the recidivism rate between US criminals and jihadis?

Which is worse?  Or should I be asking a math question on this smart military blog?

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 31, 2014 07:30 AM (pQOKS)

120 Why, it's almost as if The Religion of Peace isn't so peaceful after all. Who knew?

Posted by: Citizen X at October 31, 2014 07:30 AM (7ObY1)

121 Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 12:27 PM (f0pWu)
^^^^^^
THIS!

No military action without a Declaration of War should be a basic Republican principle!

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 07:31 AM (o3MSL)

122 "Senior Defense and intelligence officials say the vast majority of detainees released from Guantanamo don't return to the fight..." Vast doesn't seem to mean what they think it means.

Posted by: 30% recidivism rate at October 31, 2014 07:31 AM (xSCb6)

123 A minor college polling outfit now gives Virginia Senator Mark Warner just a +7 lead over Uber-RINO.
***
One point that I hope is being noted - the R party got their RINO/establishment type in just about every primary.

And D in a red/purple state that doesn't go down is an indictment of the party leadership at this point outside of I suppose IA.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:31 AM (78TbK)

124 November Surprise.

A very special peace treaty will be confirmed. While we do not know much about the details of this treaty, we do know that it is comprehensive. This means it is between Israel and most of it's Arab neighbors. It will appear to be capable of providing Israel with a guaranteed peace, possibly backed by other nations or the United Nations as well.

The duration of this treaty will be seven years.

The treaty will not last and be broken at it's mid way point (after three and a half years).

The text indicates that the peace treaty will be confirmed (not necessarily signed) meaning that it doesn't have to be a "new" peace treaty. It could be a confirmation of a pre-existing peace treaty that is currently in place with new modifications makinging it more comprehensive to include a greater sense of security. The Camp David Accords which is the framework for the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel could serve as the framework for a modified agreement that would include other nations as well.

Posted by: wrg500 at October 31, 2014 07:31 AM (sWgE+)

125 Yesterday's WSJ blog. Corruption Currents: Uneven Effort to Stop ISIS Money Machine http://tinyurl.com/jwt73hf

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:31 AM (IXrOn)

126 110 Where the ckuf are they getting money to do this? Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at October 31, 2014 12:27 PM (oFCZn) ********* Well ISIL also captured the Central Bank of Iraq in Mosul after we vacated Iraq. So-- $400 MILLION right there. Then they have some oil fields and they get the revenue from that--not as sure about that someone might know the details on that . And then --gawd damn Qatar---as someone up thread mentioned. Qatar--where we have some prime facilities, etc.

Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 07:32 AM (RJMhd)

127 "...and of those who do, relatively few have made it to Syria." It's not just about spreading the wealth, it's about spreading the murder rate.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at October 31, 2014 07:33 AM (xSCb6)

128 "We have to win. We have to be able to send a national message with Andrew Cuomo. And the thing is: Everything we believe in - everything we believe in - they hate. They don't disagree - they hate! They think if you didn't come from Europe 30 years ago, you didn't even make it. Some of them believe that slavery isn't over and they and think they won the Civil War!" Rangel shouted. *steps away from keyboard*

Posted by: RWC at October 31, 2014 07:34 AM (fWAjv)

129 When the Iranians moved from arming and training Jihadis to assassinating American soldiers in 2006 and the president did nothing I lost all respect for President Bush. Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:28 PM (78TbK) I remember that, and I too was completely befuddled as to why he would put up with it. Beyond that, I do not grasp why he didn't explain to Iran that we would go Curtis LeMay on their fucking asses if they didn't stop trying to play with uranium. Does he not have a good grasp on the nature of those religious nutjobs over there, or is it my understanding of them that is wrong? Mutually Assured Destruction would work with Evil Soviet leadership that wanted to remain alive, but it will not work with evil nutball religious fanatics that regard plunging the world into fiery destruction as the pinnacle goal of their faith.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:34 AM (txvbW)

130 124 November Surprise. Avery special peace treaty will be confirmed. While we do not know much about the details of this treaty, we do know that it is comprehensive. This means it is between Israel and most of it's Arab neighbors. It will appear to be capable of providing Israel with a guaranteed peace, possibly backed by other nations or the United Nations as well. The duration of this treaty will be seven years. The treaty will not last and be broken at it's mid way point (after three and a half years).The text indicates that the peace treaty will be confirmed (not necessarily signed) meaning that it doesn't have to be a "new" peace treaty. It could be a confirmation of a pre-existing peace treaty that is currently in place with new modifications makinging it more comprehensive to include a greater sense of security. The Camp David Accords which is the framework for the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel could serve as the framework for a modified agreement that would include other nations as well. Posted by: wrg500 at October 31, 2014 12:31 PM (sWgE+) ******** Ya it really could be some b.s. exactly like that.

Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 07:35 AM (RJMhd)

131 So Obama's goals for the next two years 1) Release every last Gitmo detainee -- regardless of many people they murder after being released 2) Do a deal with Iran to let them have nukes 3) Amnesty 10+ million illegals 4) Pack the courts with fascist progtards

Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 07:35 AM (ZPrif)

132 That +10 Republican advantage over the Dems in early voting.  If true, that is really, really, something.  And it looks like independents are breaking for Republican candidates, too.

Posted by: mrp at October 31, 2014 07:35 AM (JBggj)

133
Thanks Obama.

Posted by: Enslaved and Raped Yazadi Women at October 31, 2014 07:36 AM (1nB6R)

134 It wasn't race, it was nationality.
***

Somewhere between 110,000 and 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry were subject to this mass exclusion program, of whom about two-thirds were U.S. citizens. The remaining one-third were non-citizens subject to internment under the  Alien Enemies Act;--wiki

Most of the them were Americans...

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:36 AM (78TbK)

135 Obama's totalitarian buttboy, Ben Rhodes, caught on tape Adam Kredo @Kredo0 2m .@marieharf You should address this audio of White House saying an Iran deal will be the Obamacare of the second term http://freebeacon.com/columns/the-coming-detente-with-iran/

Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 07:37 AM (ZPrif)

136 131 So Obama's goals for the next two years 1) Release every last Gitmo detainee -- regardless of many people they murder after being released 2) Do a deal with Iran to let them have nukes 3) Amnesty 10+ million illegals 4) Pack the courts with fascist progtards Posted by: Costanza Defense I wanted to add a 5th thing on the funny side. Problem is this is to sad & maddening to jest

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian, let's bungle in the jungle at October 31, 2014 07:38 AM (2Aj5D)

137 I have DC Examiner App on iPhone and McConnell is suddenly saying he is willing to try to repeal TFG Care with 51 votes He is only saying this because people know he sucked as minority leader and does not deserve to be majority leader He must have someone listening to Mark Levin I believe Levin said that last night.

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:38 AM (sj3Ax)

138 I'm curious where the other 440 released detainees are. Has there been any attempt to keep an eye on them? Or does the administration believe that "no news is good news"?

Posted by: junior at October 31, 2014 07:38 AM (UWFpX)

139 The Whittle sidebar video is good. Love that guy. Love him.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 07:39 AM (IXrOn)

140 Ardeth Bey 2016!

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 31, 2014 07:39 AM (pQOKS)

141 Trust Obama, it better to shoot hand than foot off. Fuck medium.

Posted by: Jose Canseco at October 31, 2014 07:39 AM (HstNY)

142 When the Iranians moved from arming and training Jihadis to assassinating American soldiers in 2006 and the president did nothing I lost all respect for President Bush.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:28 PM (78TbK)


There should have been a 10 km free fire zone on the Iraq-Iran border.  If it moved, it was a legitimate target.

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 07:39 AM (o3MSL)

143 I feel sick Iran deal.

Posted by: thunderb at October 31, 2014 07:39 AM (zOTsN)

144 There's some Iraqi tribe that got massacred by ISIS the other day, not the Yazidi. Some other tribe that I'd never heard of, that the media ignored, they rose up against ISIS and ISIS butchered them and Iraq and US refused to give them any aid. Iraq is using ISIS to solve any pesky tribal and ethnic problems it seems. Same way Obama used ISIS to expel Maliki. Everyone remembers that, right? Obama refused to help out until Maliki stepped down, letting ISIS kill tens of thousands to increase his leverage.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 07:40 AM (ZPrif)

145
Mutually Assured Destruction would work with Evil Soviet leadership that wanted to remain alive, but it will not work with evil nutball religious fanatics that regard plunging the world into fiery destruction as the pinnacle goal of their faith.
***
I wonder if the Israelis have told Iran that a nuclear detonation in Israel will lead to one in Mecca, Medina, and Qom as well.

Of course the Saudis have become more pro-Israel then the White House of late so maybe not the first two...

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:40 AM (78TbK)

146 112 What is it about Iran that has caused us to tolerate their bullshit for so many years?
***
When the Iranians moved from arming and training Jihadis to assassinating American soldiers in 2006 and the president did nothing I lost all respect for President Bush.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:28 PM (78TbK)


*********************


What makes you think we did nothing? Just because you never heard about it in the news media doesn't mean we were sitting on our asses taking it. Enough said.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 07:40 AM (5f5bM)

147 Well went and found this--from The Brookings Institute The World's Wealthiest Terrorist Group [...] ISIL's estimated total revenues from its oil production are around $2 million a day! Put simply, ISIL is in a position to smuggle over 30,000 barrels of crude oil a day to neighboring territories and countries at a price of between $25 to $60 per barrel depending on the number of middle men involved. Yes, The Brookings Institute actually used that exclamation point.

Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 07:41 AM (RJMhd)

148 I want to know what the 5 we traded for Bergdahl are up to...

Where are they.... what are THEY doing... and is anyone checking?
___
Same old same old infidel. Chopping off heads and blowing up kafirs.

Posted by: Obama's released buddies at October 31, 2014 07:41 AM (78TbK)

149 *1) Release every last Gitmo detainee -- regardless of many people they murder after being released
2) Do a deal with Iran to let them have nukes
3) Amnesty 10+ million illegals
4) Pack the courts with fascist progtards*




so what's your point?

Posted by: GOP/e [/i] [/b] at October 31, 2014 07:41 AM (NUCTk)

150 I put link here last month that Ledeen said TFG sent an ambassador to Iran before he was elected to say he would be friends with Iran I have things to do but go to PJM and do a search of Ledeen archives

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:41 AM (sj3Ax)

151 I dunno what Rangel is gassing about.  Republican votes in Congress passed the 13th Amendment, and 3/4s of the states ratified it.

Posted by: mrp at October 31, 2014 07:41 AM (JBggj)

152 There should have been a 10 km free fire zone on the Iraq-Iran border. If it moved, it was a legitimate target. Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 12:39 PM (o3MSL) It seems as if this nation has real difficulty in understanding the concept of a border.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:41 AM (txvbW)

153 What makes you think we did nothing? Just because you never heard about it in the news media doesn't mean we were sitting on our asses taking it. Enough said.
***
Because the Iranians kept doing it and none of the leadership had an 'accident'?

The CIA has never been the KGB and they sure as hell aren't now.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:42 AM (78TbK)

154 Yeah, Obama's been trying to "normalize" relations with Iran from day one. It's one of his overarching foreign policy goals because he is a traitor.

Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 07:42 AM (ZPrif)

155
How do you slaughter people with ISIS? I thought you used guns and bombs and stuff.

On a related note President Obama is only arming "moderates". As we all know, "moderates" only use moderate guns that fire moderate bullets that make people only moderately dead.

That's a really smart trick by our extremely smart president!

Posted by: Ed Anger at October 31, 2014 07:42 AM (RcpcZ)

156 Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:31 PM (78TbK)

The GOPe has a special place in its heart for Virginia!

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 07:43 AM (o3MSL)

157 Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 12:37 PM (ZPrif) there is a great WW2 computer game called Hearts of Iron... now on its third iteration... Its a sandbox that allows you to play a country during WW2, and totally rewrite history... I played once where the US, after Pearl, JUST declared war on Japan... and ignored the European Theatre... ie never declared war on Germany. It was ugly.... If you do not identify who your enemy IS, you can never defeat them.

Posted by: House of Saud, and other Arab Potentates at October 31, 2014 07:43 AM (f0pWu)

158 I'm curious where the other 440 released detainees are. Has there been any attempt to keep an eye on them? Or does the administration believe that "no news is good news"? The NSA can spend billions of dollars to watch innocent Americans illegally, but can't keep tabs on real enemies. #WASTF

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b][/u] at October 31, 2014 07:43 AM (0HooB)

159 >>What makes you think we did nothing? Just because you never heard about it in the news media doesn't mean we were sitting on our asses taking it. Enough said. I tend to believe this. Bush had his faults but pretending he was somehow soft on killing Islamic radicals is a new one. Name a president who has been tougher.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 07:43 AM (g1DWB)

160 I wonder if the Israelis have told Iran that a nuclear detonation in Israel will lead to one in Mecca, Medina, and Qom as well. Of course the Saudis have become more pro-Israel then the White House of late so maybe not the first two... Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:40 PM (78TbK) Why do we even play these games? Back when Iran first started tampering with Atomic research they should have been told "You better put that down or We will fuck you up!"

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:43 AM (txvbW)

161 142 When the Iranians moved from arming and training Jihadis to assassinating American soldiers in 2006 and the president did nothing I lost all respect for President Bush. Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:28 PM (78TbK) ******** You know who developed the ISR systems--- the drone program? Bush. You know who has been in charge of the country for some six years now? Obama. Snap out of it.

Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 07:44 AM (RJMhd)

162 Some of them believe that slavery isn't over and they and think they won the Civil War!" Rangel shouted. Um, Charlie? Who's "them?" The Republicans did win.

Posted by: Citizen X at October 31, 2014 07:44 AM (7ObY1)

163 The CIA has never been the KGB and they sure as hell aren't now. Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:42 PM (78TbK) But... they could have sent Bourne if we hadn't pissed him off!!!

Posted by: LIV who gets his news from TV at October 31, 2014 07:45 AM (f0pWu)

164

Lightning round

18-1, as Jay Guevara said and was partially correct, Japanese internment was based on nationality (or affiliation from origin with a certain nationality).  In fact - shock, shock, there is general misunderstanding about this whole chapter - under Geneva (to prevent reprisals) "enemy aliens", citizens of an enemy belligerent power, are SUPPOSED to be interned/separated from the general population for their own safety.  So probably 40%+ of those interned in 1942 belonged behind wire, under international law at the time.

 

Romeo, don't know what to say.  Yes, the AUMF are the equivalent of declarations of war - if they are not, specify how, exactly and concretely. 

 

Lots of people - WTF with this magic "name the enemy" stuff?   This goes beyond this topic of detainees, but WTF?  "Naming the enemy" changes the rot in the civil service so that war-time surveillance programs aren't feloniously compromised to the NYT?  It makes the American press more intelligent and responsible?  It makes the whining American electorate more serious?  It makes the miniature creatures in Congress (both parties) less slimy and despicable in panicking at the first sign of difficulty?  Nope.

 

Back to detainees/"int'l law".  Senior people directly involved in the issue told me back at the time that the administration clearly understood the need for amendments to the Geneva accords (a normal process, hence the "conventions" after major conflicts or novel issues appearing ..... up until now).  But they feared Europeans would undermine the whole thing if a session were convened.  The beneficiaries of our blood and valor and commitment would, they feared, not hesitate to throw sand in the gears even as we sought a clearly needed change to the conventions.  The rot is so bad, even the Int. Comm. of the Red Cross, whose actual purpose is promotion of the Accords, was pretending to believe that the AQ era required no change to the Accords, and violating (for the only time in their history) their protocols for confidentiality (WRT Gitmo inspections).

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 07:45 AM (afQnV)

165 The CIA has never been the KGB and they sure as hell aren't now. Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 12:42 PM (78TbK) You are right about that. The KGB at least gets results. http://articles.philly.com/ 1986-01-15 /news/ 26052630_1_ hostage-crisis- soviet-captives- islamic- liberation- organization

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:46 AM (txvbW)

166 154 Yeah, Obama's been trying to "normalize" relations with Iran from day one. It's one of his overarching foreign policy goals because he is a traitor. Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 12:42 PM (ZPrif) Not even a Chamberlain.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:46 AM (txvbW)

167 Name a president who has been tougher.
***
McKinley.

Of course we've had a serious of squishes since various Islamic elements declared war on us in the 90s. Saying Bush 43 was better then Clinton or Obama is true, though dam ing with faint praise.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:47 AM (78TbK)

168 All I know is, the minute Iran gets nukes, it's time to head for the hills.

Posted by: Citizen X at October 31, 2014 07:47 AM (7ObY1)

169 http://tinyurl.com/n569m72 Here is Michael Ledeen column on The JEF sending ambassador Miller to Iran before he was even elected

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:48 AM (sj3Ax)

170 >>The CIA has never been the KGB and they sure as hell aren't now. And the US is not the Soviet Union. You can do lots of shit in a totalitarian society you can't in democracy. Like take over portions of a sovereign nation right next door. I'll take our less that perfect CIA over a terror group like the KGB any day.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 07:48 AM (g1DWB)

171 But they fearedEuropeans would undermine the whole thing if a session were convened.The beneficiaries of our blood and valor and commitment would, they feared, not hesitate to throw sand in the gears even as we sought a clearly needed change to the conventions.
==========

So where do the oil billionaires in the ME go to party/buy personal property and invest their profits?  The US or Europe?

Posted by: mrp at October 31, 2014 07:49 AM (JBggj)

172 It's become a mental crutch for most of America--it's been six years--time to treat Obama like an adult.

Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 07:49 AM (RJMhd)

173 Iran Deal Affirmative Action has consequences.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2014 07:49 AM (OmbDz)

174 If'n I was President??? I'd have Vlad Putin over for a Beer.... and ask him if he REALLY wants a Nuclear Iran, sitting closer to HIM, than they are to us. Tell him we are the adults in the room, and while we may hate each other, we are civilized about it... we play by the rules... These barbaric children do not... and need to be spanked.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 07:50 AM (f0pWu)

175 So probably 40%+ of those interned in 1942 belonged behind wire, under international law at the time.
***
Whether you take wiki's 33% or your 40% those are both a minority of those rounded up...no?

I'm not disagreeing that something had to be done with Japanese nationals. I'm disagreeing that most, let alone all, of those rounded up were in fact Japanese nationals.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:50 AM (78TbK)

176 It was ugly....

If you do not identify who your enemy IS, you can never defeat them.

Posted by: House of Saud, and other Arab Potentates at October 31, 2014 12:43 PM (f0pWu)


I'm just wondering what happened. Germany had a great time?

Posted by: Stateless Infidel at October 31, 2014 07:50 AM (AC0lD)

177 >>Of course we've had a serious of squishes since various Islamic elements declared war on us in the 90s. Saying Bush 43 was better then Clinton or Obama is true, though dam ing with faint praise. He was also a lot better than Reagan or anyone else since McKinnley was president in 1800's. The country and the world have changed just a wee bit since then.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 07:51 AM (g1DWB)

178 What makes you think we did nothing? Just because you never heard about it in the news media doesn't mean we were sitting on our asses taking it. Enough said. Clearly we did nothing effective.

Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 07:51 AM (rwI+c)

179 The GOPe has a special place in its heart for Northern Virginia!

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 12:43 PM (o3MSL)


FIFY

Posted by: Nip Sip at October 31, 2014 07:51 AM (0FSuD)

180 I wanted a scary Halloween thread, but this one is too scary.

Posted by: Hobbitopoly at October 31, 2014 07:51 AM (fk1A8)

181 131 So Obama's goals for the next two years 1) Release every last Gitmo detainee -- regardless of many people they murder after being released 2) Do a deal with Iran to let them have nukes 3) Amnesty 10+ million illegals 4) Pack the courts with fascist progtards Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 12:35 PM (ZPrif) Yep,this is how the GOP/Opposition needs to be talking about Teh Won and the progressive agenda.

Posted by: Sambo at October 31, 2014 07:52 AM (sPp6M)

182 172 It's become a mental crutch for most of America--it's been six years--time to treat Obama like an adult. Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 12:49 PM (RJMhd) What about his behavior so far leads you to articulate this theory that he is an adult? He is a child, and he was elected by children. Stupid and spoiled rotten children.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:52 AM (txvbW)

183
Unfortunately, Bush did cave into the left's cries and released hundreds from Gitmo. Probably under Rove's advice, I'd bet.

Posted by: Ed Anger at October 31, 2014 07:52 AM (RcpcZ)

184 Yes, the AUMF are the equivalent of declarations of war - if they are not, specify how, exactly and concretely.
Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 12:45 PM (afQnV)


Overly simplistic I know, but if an AUMF is the equivalent then why is it not called a Declaration of War?

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 07:52 AM (o3MSL)

185 MRP I would prefer Gillespie to Warner and read that in TWS email today There is another poll that has Warner up by only 4 points Vox Popluli I am not sure if that is same Vox that we are constantly making fun of or not

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:53 AM (sj3Ax)

186 Is it 180 or 20/30?

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at October 31, 2014 07:53 AM (TIIx5)

187 I'll take our less that perfect CIA over a terror group like the KGB any day.
***
People are in weird form today.

Are you claiming that you prefer that the CIA is generally ineffectual at anything other then electronic intel as was my point, or are you actually responding to someone else?

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:53 AM (78TbK)

188 Um, Charlie? Who's "them?" The Republicans did win.

Posted by: Citizen X at October 31, 2014 12:44 PM (7ObY1)


History, er, never heard of it.

Posted by: Charlie Ragel, senile at October 31, 2014 07:53 AM (0FSuD)

189
I can't get past the 620 that have been released, although I am not gonna go study their cases, I do know non-uniformed combatants can be dispatched to their blah blah allah immediately.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2014 07:53 AM (1nB6R)

190 Yep,this is how the GOP/Opposition needs to be talking about Teh Won and the progressive agenda.

Posted by: Sambo at October 31, 2014 12:52 PM (sPp6M)


I don't think the GOPe understands Opposition to mean the same thing you do!

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 07:54 AM (o3MSL)

191 So probably 40%+ of those interned in 1942 belonged behind wire, under international law at the time. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Hawaii didn't go along with FDR, like Earl Warren did, and didn't do a mass internment of the Nikkei.

Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 07:54 AM (rwI+c)

192 It's our own fault that Iran is going to nuke the evil joos.

Posted by: Luap Nor at October 31, 2014 07:54 AM (HstNY)

193 Affirmative Action has consequences. Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2014 12:49 PM (OmbDz) Not nuking the one party media has consequences. If we had not had a media totally controlled by Liberal Democrats, we would have had sufficient information coming forward to preclude this unaccomplished inexperienced little man child from ever getting so far.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:54 AM (txvbW)

194 JEM, rhomboid, D-Lamp, Romeo13, others --

Rhomboid has it about right.

First of all, the detainees in theater, in black sites, and at Gitmo arguably had no rights under the Geneva Conventions. However, some of them did have actionable intelligence, and the problem is you don't know which ones until after you've worked them over for several weeks or months. . Remember, the top priority at that point was finding out what the enemy was doing so that we could prevent another 9/11, not eliminating Muslim extremism. So they needed to be held and interrogated, for months if not years. Which means you can't execute them summarily as a practical matter. The place to do that was on the battlefield and ask for forgiveness later, as Obama is doing with the drone program now, not once they were in custody. Does anyone think the drone program is getting us better intelligence? Summary executions would have had the same effect. We had to hold them.

We are a nation of laws and not of men, and when the Supreme Court decided that the detainees were subject to its jurisdiction, the game was over. Defying the Supreme Court, a la Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee removal, is not a realistic alternative and undermines the fabric that holds our society together. Look at how worked up we get over Obama's executive orders. Can you imagine the justifiable outcry if Bush had ignored the Supreme Court?

The blame here is not with Bush. The blame here is with the terrorist bar, of which Eric Holder's law firm, Covington & Burling, was the ringleader. His firm put thousands of hours of work worth tens of millions of dollars into undermining the President, and in my opinion it was not for any principled reason, but primarily to undermine him politically. I know that was the motivation of many of the others who participated in these proceedings. Tribunals couldn't occur because the process itself was under assault for years in a lot of different venues, both domestically and internationally, as was the so-called "torture" of detainees.

So all you Bush-haters out there, keep some perspective. The enemy is the antiwar Democrats (who mysteriously vanished once Obama won in 200 .

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 07:55 AM (5f5bM)

195 4) Pack the courts with fascist progtards
Posted by: Costanza Defense at October 31, 2014 12:35 PM (ZPrif)
===========
With the assumption that the GOP will take control of the US Senate in 2015, how many empty court seats will there be by the end of next January?

I'm thinking Harry's going to work up some calluses pressing that nuclear-option button.

Posted by: mrp at October 31, 2014 07:55 AM (JBggj)

196 These barbaric children do not... and need to be spanked. Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 12:50 PM (f0pWu) They need to be decapitated, and their religion needs to be expunged. I have come around to the view that Islam is not compatible with what we regard as civilization.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 07:55 AM (txvbW)

197 He was also a lot better than Reagan or anyone else since McKinnley was president in 1800's. The country and the world have changed just a wee bit since then.
***
To your point about McKinley, Reagan faced a different problem with Islam then the more recent three presidents.

And I could also point out, when Qaddafi assassinated American soldiers Reagan bombed Libya and tried to "assassinate" him.

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 07:56 AM (78TbK)

198 Romeo, don't know what to say. Yes, the AUMF are the equivalent of declarations of war - if they are not, specify how, exactly and concretely. Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 12:45 PM (afQnV there are many places in the UCMJ, Federal Law, and International treaties, where a distinction is made between Peace, and War... Where the Rules change, as to what is allowed. Its sophistry to try to say that Congress authorizing use of Force... has the same LEGAL effect as a formal Declaration of War. By your definition... the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was fine... was not illegal... because their Government had decided use of force was OK... One part of a declaration of war.... is the Declaration part... where you formally TELL your enemy you are at War.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 07:57 AM (f0pWu)

199 People are in weird form today. -------- It's election time, don't you dare criticize anything that has to do with the GOP. Why do you hate the military?

Posted by: Derpier Brigade at October 31, 2014 07:57 AM (ka5sv)

200 Lulz. The Shreveport Times didn't have a story about Landrieu's remarks, but now they have a headline of "GOP angry with Sen. Landrieu". Amazing how the anger can be news when the slur wasn't. "Landrieu is locked in a tight re-election battle with Republican U.S. Rep. Bill Cassidy, and is targeted by Republicans nationally in their efforts to retake control of the Senate." Anger. Targeted. And now I will shock you by mentioning they endorsed her. Glad I stopped subscribing.

Posted by: Mama AJ at October 31, 2014 07:57 AM (0xTsz)

201 Overly simplistic I know, but if an AUMF is the equivalent then why is it not called a Declaration of War?
---
War is icky and makes you plebes get all jingo-y

Posted by: Karl Rove at October 31, 2014 07:58 AM (78TbK)

202 I have come around to the view that Islam is not compatible with what we regard as civilization. Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 12:55 PM (txvbW) I concur... they are a threat to Western Civilization... Which is why I would be pointing this out to Vlad Putin...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 07:58 AM (f0pWu)

203 Caesar North of the Rubicon And that is Number One Reason Holder should never have been confirmed as AG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 07:58 AM (sj3Ax)

204 Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 12:55 PM (5f5bM)

As in so many things, this is yet another example of how the guild of lawyers and their judicial/political accomplices have managed to subvert the essence of the Constitution.

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 07:59 AM (o3MSL)

205 I would prefer Gillespie to Warner and read that in TWS email today
There is another poll that has Warner up by only 4
points Vox Popluli
================
If I lived in VA, I'd hold my nose and vote for Uber-RINO, too.  I said a long time ago that by November, every Dem candidate would be severely challenged for their seat - there would be no 'safe' seats.

Posted by: mrp at October 31, 2014 08:00 AM (JBggj)

206 >>Are you claiming that you prefer that the CIA is generally ineffectual at anything other then electronic intel as was my point, or are you actually responding to someone else? I'm saying quite clearly in response to your comparison that the CIA is not the KGB that I think that is a good thing. Some of you seem to think our presidents can act in a vacuum and we aren't held to different standards than totalitarian states like the Soviet Union or even the new and improved Russia for that matter. People don't lose their mud when the KGB does evil shit because they expect it. Bush water boarded 3, count 'em 3, hardcore terrorists who were involved in the slaughter of thousands of Americans and half this country wanted him brought up on war crimes charges. That's reality. And if my choices are to have what amounts to a state sponsored terror organization like the KGB or our less than perfect CIA that was gutted during the Clinton years when he refused to let us work with "unsavory" types when developing sources and intel gathering, I'll still take the CIA. I also hope like hell we only hear a fraction of what they are up to. Intelligence agencies work best when they work quietly.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 08:00 AM (g1DWB)

207 Here is Michael Ledeen column on The JEF sending ambassador Miller to Iran before he was even elected

Posted by: Carol at October 31, 2014 12:48 PM (sj3Ax)


**************************


Remember Candidate Obama said within the first year he was going to have a summit with Ahmedinijad.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:00 AM (5f5bM)

208 I have come around to the view that Islam is not compatible with what we regard as civilization.
***
Indeed. Modern civilization was built by and from Christianity so it isn't a surprise.

It will be interesting to watch what happens in Europe as they continue to rip out the underpinnings of their civilization (not that we aren't doing the same thing on a slower pace)

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 08:00 AM (78TbK)

209 Its sophistry to try to say that Congress authorizing use of Force... has the same LEGAL effect as a formal Declaration of War.

Posted by: Romeo13


Was Desert Storm a legally declared war?

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i] [/b] at October 31, 2014 08:01 AM (k1nNw)

210 Was Desert Storm a legally declared war? Posted by: weft cut-loop at October 31, 2014 01:01 PM (k1nNw) I would say.... no.... and I was in it....

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 08:02 AM (f0pWu)

211

18-1, not seeking to relitigate the Japanese internment, nor giving it some sort of general blessing.  Just adding some detail that is strictly excluded from the conventional fairy tale/civil rights melodrama usually presented.  The proper response to any part of the internment that was wrong was given by the volunteers of the 442nd, and the dignity and self-reliance of the internees regaining their prior social/econ status in short order (without "help").  The whole chapter, from the executive order to the amazing recover of the community - excluding the distortions, exaggerations, and moral preening - is actually an amazing tale of American exceptionalism, as a civic culture.  And the power of values.

 

And on Bush's war leadership, dismissing him as just a bit better than the absurd disasters of Clinton and Obama is silly.  There's a world of difference.

 

But Bush was such a spectacularly mixed bag that these generalizations are not adequate.  He was Harry Truman in taking out the Ba'ath regime in Iraq, but then lost his nerve (against both Iran AND Syria) and also indulged ridiculously poor field leadership (Gen. Casey, the whole war college-addled cohort that made an historically easy task look difficult).

 

 

 

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:02 AM (afQnV)

212 Good but chilling post by Roger L. Simon at PJM: "Welcome to Berlin, 1957" https://tinyurl.com/lc7eyhz

Posted by: rickl at October 31, 2014 08:02 AM (zoehZ)

213 Oops. 1937, not 57.

Posted by: rickl at October 31, 2014 08:03 AM (zoehZ)

214 184 Yes, the AUMF are the equivalent of declarations of war - if they are not, specify how, exactly and concretely.
Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 12:45 PM (afQnV)


Overly simplistic I know, but if an AUMF is the equivalent then why is it not called a Declaration of War?

Posted by: Hrothgar at October 31, 2014 12:52 PM (o3MSL)


**************************


A state declares war against a state. AQ was not a state.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:03 AM (5f5bM)

215 And if my choices are to have what amounts to a state sponsored terror organization like the KGB or our less than perfect CIA
***
But they aren't.

The OSS and early CIA were much closer in abilities to the KGB without a totalitarian state using them as enforcers domestically.

One could easily imagine the CIA dealing with Osama, for example, in the 90s after taking him from the Sudan.

Of course we are rapidly getting the worst of both worlds were the CIA is unimportant on the internal stage while the national security apparatus is deployed effectively against the domestic loyal opposition - see for example Atkinson...

Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 08:04 AM (78TbK)

216 @206 - the problem was that the Bush administration descended behind obscurity and legalese to try to defend their actions, hiding behind the desk instead of going on offense and presenting a sensibly historical/moral position. "These are bad people, they are mentally corrupted killers serving a fundamentally evil cause, and the only reason they aren't dead now is because we're still questioning them." I'd have been happy to advocate that position were I in the White House, instead Bush played the 'Religion of Peace' game and tried to hide where they had their captives. I'd have had every one of them - and their deeds - on the front page every day until they were buried.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 08:05 AM (o+SC1)

217 We are a nation of laws and not of men, and when the Supreme Court decided that the detainees were subject to its jurisdiction, the game was over. Defying the Supreme Court, a la Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee removal, is not a realistic alternative and undermines the fabric that holds our society together. Look at how worked up we get over Obama's executive orders. Can you imagine the justifiable outcry if Bush had ignored the Supreme Court? Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 12:55 PM (5f5bM) I do not think defying the Supreme court is much of a bugaboo. I can name half a dozen examples of when I thought they should have been defied, and I will point out that Abraham Lincoln did not much give a fuck what they thought either. I believe he said that he swore to uphold the constitution as he understood it, not as chief justice Taney understood it. Oh, and he contemplated arresting the Chief Justice as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taney_Arrest_Warrant It is long past the point where we should have told various Federal Courts and the Supreme Court to go fuck themselves, their ridiculous opinions would NOT be enforced.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:06 AM (txvbW)

218 Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 12:55 PM (5f5bM) But I agree with you about the need to acquire relevant and timely intelligence.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:07 AM (txvbW)

219 Jihad, it is not just a hobby anymore.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at October 31, 2014 08:07 AM (WNERA)

220

Romeo, name one thing - one - that was not done so far in the GWoT that was not done because a few words weren't added to the AUMF.  Lots of things not done that should have been - but none of them had anything to do with the wording of congressional resolutions.

 

Even easier way to illustrate this.  For sake of discussion "war" was declared in September 2001.

 

Please list the top 5 things that would have - even could have - been done differently in the following 10 years or so.

 

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:08 AM (afQnV)

221 Was Desert Storm a legally declared war?

According to the VFW here the last declared war was WW2. He said they are the only ones who can become full members. That's why I went to the American Legion.

Posted by: dartist at October 31, 2014 08:08 AM (ahBY0)

222 It is long past the point where we should have told various Federal Courts and the Supreme Court to go fuck themselves, their ridiculous opinions would NOT be enforced.



Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 01:06 PM (txvbW)


**************************


Then who gets to decide? Obama?

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:08 AM (5f5bM)

223 over at spectator.org AmSpec CALLING ALL MARRIED WOMEN -- VOTE ON TUESDAY! Not exactly the message Democrats will send out.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 08:08 AM (IXrOn)

224 O/T 


Why the hell are public schools in Charlotte closed today?



Is Halloween a new pagan holiday that requires closing the schools?



Posted by: Charlie Ragel, senile at October 31, 2014 08:08 AM (0FSuD)

225 Silver Lining: At Gitmo we couldn't touch them except to pamper them, on the battlefield we can kill them.

Posted by: Meremortal at October 31, 2014 08:09 AM (VNMuP)

226 Which is why I would be pointing this out to Vlad Putin... Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 12:58 PM (f0pWu) I think he knows this. He just regards them as a bigger problem for us then they are for him. They are useful to him because of how we chose to deal with them. When they start bothering him, he will just nuke the fuck out of them.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:10 AM (txvbW)

227 A state declares war against a state. AQ was not a state. Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 01:03 PM (5f5bM) but you are using this as a pretext to Use Arms against Sovereign Nations... even when the UN Charter specifically says we cannot. This pretext was used to overthrown the sitting Government of a UN Member State... Afghanistan... We then used another AUMF to overthrow Iraq. Those, are Wars.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 08:10 AM (f0pWu)

228 @217 - the problem wasn't the Supreme Court. The problem was the Bush administration. You cannot, CAN NOT, dither around on something like that for YEARS. You've got to be able to dust off the precedents, WWII or whatever, and run with it. The way Bush handled the detainee situation it's not remotely a surprise that the court inserted itself into the discussion. What should have been done in 90 days was instead left to fester for years.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 08:11 AM (o+SC1)

229 According to the VFW here the last declared war was WW2. He said they are the only ones who can become full members. He's full of it. Father928 was able to join just for the Lebanon Airlift, and that doesn't even count as a Police Action.

Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 08:11 AM (rwI+c)

230 off rangel sock

Posted by: Nip Sip at October 31, 2014 08:11 AM (0FSuD)

231 I think he knows this. He just regards them as a bigger problem for us then they are for him. They are useful to him because of how we chose to deal with them. When they start bothering him, he will just nuke the fuck out of them. Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 01:10 PM (txvbW) I don't know.... he had hundreds of children killed a few years back... by Islamic types... Problem is that right now the EU is encroaching on his borders... and he sees that as the greater threat...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 08:12 AM (f0pWu)

232 It will be interesting to watch what happens in Europe as they continue to rip out the underpinnings of their civilization (not that we aren't doing the same thing on a slower pace) Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 01:00 PM (78TbK) Europe seems to be a historically oscillating bloodbath.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:12 AM (txvbW)

233

Caesar, huh?  Congress defines SCOTUS' purview.  Congress could easily - should have, esp. after the absurd Hamdan usurpation - simply dismissed SCOTUS as having no formal role in military tribunals.

 

And I don't live in the same country you do.  The "fabric of the country"?  The courts have ravaged the constitution, usurped ultra-legislative power, worsened life, damaged the economy, now even pretended to redefine the oldest human institution there is.  True, most people have no idea of any of this.  They accept their loss of freedom of association, property, etc. without protest because it's the water slowly heating, and they're the frogs (or if younger they simply were born into it and know nothing else).

 

And with arbitrary, indefensible and conclusory behavior such as the courts exhibit, they have mooted the "laws not men" principle.  They are the ones acting without regard for law or the constitution.  Defying them would be asserting the rule of law over men.

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:13 AM (afQnV)

234 Problem is that right now the EU is encroaching on his borders... and he sees that as the greater threat... A threat only to his ability to reabsorb, against their will, the now independent states of the old USSR.

Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 08:14 AM (rwI+c)

235 213 Oops. 1937, not 57. Posted by: rickl at October 31, 2014 01:03 PM (zoehZ) That makes more sense. This regime *FEELS* like a Nazi regime.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:14 AM (txvbW)

236
In the sidebar on micro photos, I can't believe Jumping Spider Eyes didn't win it (3rd place).  That photo is awesome. 

7th place is also cool, human engineering is amazing sometimes.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2014 08:14 AM (1nB6R)

237 Putin is not afraid of a world war, in fact he pokes around to see where the edges are everyday. Dangerous game they play with the future of mankind.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at October 31, 2014 08:15 AM (WNERA)

238 18-1, also remember that Qolonel Qadaffy wasn't exactly Muslim in the sense of belonging to a recognised sect or legal maddhab. He had a number of strange notions.

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at October 31, 2014 08:15 AM (WxXqb)

239 The OSS and early CIA were much closer in abilities to the KGB without a totalitarian state using them as enforcers domestically. One could easily imagine the CIA dealing with Osama, for example, in the 90s after taking him from the Sudan. Of course we are rapidly getting the worst of both worlds were the CIA is unimportant on the internal stage while the national security apparatus is deployed effectively against the domestic loyal opposition - see for example Atkinson... Posted by: 18-1 at October 31, 2014 01:04 PM (78TbK) This is what I wished to articulate but couldn't think of the right words to do so quickly enough. I don't so much mind KGB like activity regarding foreign citizens, I just don't want to see any of that shit domestically. American citizens have rights under American law. I expect our intelligence agencies to respect those rights.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:16 AM (txvbW)

240 That makes more sense. This regime *FEELS* like a Nazi regime. We need more beer halls.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at October 31, 2014 08:16 AM (W5DcG)

241 "These are bad people, they are mentally corrupted killers serving a fundamentally evil cause, and the only reason they aren't dead now is because we're still questioning them." I'd have been happy to advocate that position were I in the White House, instead Bush played the 'Religion of Peace' game and tried to hide where they had their captives. I'd have had every one of them - and their deeds - on the front page every day until they were buried. Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 01:05 PM (o+SC1) You have Karl Rove to thank for him not doing that.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:17 AM (txvbW)

242 Hitler no doubt viewed the French as encroaching on his ability to reconstitute the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Posted by: toby928(C) goes Godwin at October 31, 2014 08:17 AM (rwI+c)

243 We need more beer halls.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at October 31, 2014 01:16 PM (W5DcG)

 

 

No, Beer Frau's.

Posted by: wrg500 at October 31, 2014 08:18 AM (sWgE+)

244 What should have been done in 90 days was instead left to fester for years.

Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 01:11 PM (o+SC1)


***********************


Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was interrogated and waterboarded for months before he gave up valuable intelligence without knowing it. He was the tip of the iceberg. There was great value in keeping those guys around to verify or dispute what the others were saying. I repeat myself, but summary execution without a judicial process of some type (e.g., military tribunal) once an enemy combatant out of uniform has left the battlefield is not a realistic option. And the terrorist bar threw years of monkey wrenches, at the cost of tens of millions of dollars, into the fight for partisan political reasons from 2001 to 2008. It was one of the most despicable episodes of our nation's history, and it is not President Bush's fault.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:18 AM (5f5bM)

245 We need more beer halls. Veritas Aeternitas

Posted by: toby928(C) goes Godwin at October 31, 2014 08:19 AM (rwI+c)

246 So I just got the mail. There was an Election Day flyer sent by some 'independent' entity that supports Charlie Baker. tl;dr - Someone in D.C. Is willing to spend money on the Republican candidate for governor in Massachusetts.

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2014 08:19 AM (Ua6T/)

247 >>One could easily imagine the CIA dealing with Osama, for example, in the 90s after taking him from the Sudan. Only if one ignores the reality of the world we live in right now. Again, not only was Clinton not interested in using the CIA for the kind of wet work it might have done during WWII, he actively tore the guts out of the organization. His distaste for dealing with the shady types who are vital to intelligence gathering is well documented and it has impacted us since. Layer on top of that this is not the same country it was during WWII let alone when McKinley was president and you realize the restrictions Bush was acting under. There were many in this country who believed anything Bush did regarding war was illegal and he should be prosecuted. Again, half the country was calling him a war criminal for water boarding KSM. Think about that for a moment. And you expected him to have some publicly acknowledged CIA hit job in Iran, a country we were not even formally at war with? Putin can do whatever he wants and still gets to keep his pygmy giraffe and his job. Not so much in a democracy. And the KGB didn't exactly turn the tide for the Soviet Union in Afghanistan so let's stop pretending they are some mythically competent organization. If Attkison had been attacked by Bush the response from the msm would be totally different any you it. There are different rules for Republicans. Thats just reality. Obama can kill American citizens with a drone and no due process and the msm barely farts but Bush water boards a foreign terrorist who bragged about killing thousands of American citizens and he is a war criminal.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2014 08:19 AM (g1DWB)

248 That some delusional narcissist wouldn't understand the basic premise, laws, or reason for Gitmo?
------------------------

They understand it, they just don't want it.

Posted by: Mega at October 31, 2014 08:19 AM (hHFOx)

249 Then who gets to decide? Obama? Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 01:08 PM (5f5bM) You mean like he is doing already? Apparently the President DOES get to decide which laws he wants to enforce and which ones he doesn't.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:19 AM (txvbW)

250 Russian politician: Gay Apple CEO should be banned because he could bring AIDS, Ebola, or the clap to Russia. http://bit.ly/1rGH6Zr H/T Weasel Zippers.

Posted by: rickb223[/s][/b][/I] at October 31, 2014 08:20 AM (5ic5a)

251 >>We need more beer halls.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr.


No, Beer Fraus.
Posted by: wrg500


With great beer halls come great wenchability.

Posted by: weft cut-loop[/i] [/b] at October 31, 2014 08:20 AM (k1nNw)

252 But on to the important matters. Halloween! Should I be a) zombie Osama bin Laden, with 71 raisins b) Mohammed (goat to f*ck optional) c) guitar half of the band from Future Folk Advice requested.

Posted by: stutterk at October 31, 2014 08:21 AM (95gQx)

253 And with arbitrary, indefensible and conclusory behavior such as the courts exhibit, they have mooted the "laws not men" principle. They are the ones acting without regard for law or the constitution. Defying them would be asserting the rule of law over men.

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 01:13 PM (afQnV)


**********************


Again, I repeat myself. If the operating principle is that it's preferable for the executive to defy the courts, do you trust President Obama to decide?

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:22 AM (5f5bM)

254 Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 01:08 PM (afQnV) You are talking about if the Government has conducted Illegal Military operations... They have. The Military and Government has decided that they can act as they wish, under the AUMF. Even when a Treaty says the action they are taking is against said Treaty. But, because they never actually declared War, the LEGAL framework is a muddle. Thus, what to do with the Non Uniformed Combatants, we hold in Gitmo, is a legal problem.... But our Government has ignored both law and treaty for so long.... we're well down the Rabbit Hole. Like... oh.... the Bergdahl Taliban we released... Treaty says they HAVE to be repatriated to the Country they were taken in.... And the FACT that we are assassinating people, via Drone, who are NOT at that moment under Arms or in Uniform.... in neutral countries... where we have NOT declared War.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 08:22 AM (f0pWu)

255 You cannot, CAN NOT, dither around on something like that for YEARS. You've got to be able to dust off the precedents, WWII or whatever, and run with it. The way Bush handled the detainee situation it's not remotely a surprise that the court inserted itself into the discussion. What should have been done in 90 days was instead left to fester for years. Posted by: JEM at October 31, 2014 01:11 PM (o+SC1) He should have also followed the World War II methodology to deal with Nazi party members after we won the war instead of doing that stupid "Hey! Let's kick all the Bath party members out of government!" fiasco.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:22 AM (txvbW)

256 Whoever pointed to the Roger L. Simon piece ("Welcome to Berlin, 1937") over at the PJMedia site, thanks. Reminds me of what I read the other day of the 13-yr-old Jewish girl that was attacked. The country is falling to pieces.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 08:22 AM (IXrOn)

257 >>> With great beer halls come great wenchability. I'll drink to that!

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2014 08:22 AM (Ua6T/)

258 He's full of it. Father928 was able to join just for the Lebanon Airlift, and that doesn't even count as a Police Action.

The dude I talked to served in Vietnam and said they went to congress and got guidelines for everyone else to join, but still couldn't be "full" members, whatever that means. I understood it to mean auxiliary members or some such shit. I said, so you have about 3 full members then?

Posted by: dartist at October 31, 2014 08:23 AM (ahBY0)

259 With great beer halls come great wenchability. Posted by: weft cut-loop at October 31, 2014 01:20 PM (k1nNw) The only Halloween costume I own is a Medieval "wench" dress. I love it.

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 08:23 AM (IXrOn)

260 I don't know.... he had hundreds of children killed a few years back... by Islamic types... Problem is that right now the EU is encroaching on his borders... and he sees that as the greater threat... Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 01:12 PM (f0pWu) Well exactly. He sees the gains as outweighing the losses. Besides, Chechnya was once part of the Soviet Union, so I think he views it differently.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:24 AM (txvbW)

261 Nued. Something about Coach Paul Bryant, I think.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b][/u] at October 31, 2014 08:25 AM (0HooB)

262 Blood Red Drinks and Pumpkin Cocktails http://www.drinkoftheweek.com/drink-recipes/drinks-by-occasion/halloween/

Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 08:26 AM (IXrOn)

263 And with arbitrary, indefensible and conclusory behavior such as the courts exhibit, they have mooted the "laws not men" principle. They are the ones acting without regard for law or the constitution. Defying them would be asserting the rule of law over men. Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 01:13 PM (afQnV) And this is exactly how I see it as well. The courts have damaged the rule of law, and more so than any other institution. "The Seeds of our dissolution lie in the Federal Judiciary." --Thomas Jefferson--

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:26 AM (txvbW)

264

JEM, there may have been "dithering" - defined as taking longer than 90 days, and simply using the WWII German infiltrator precedent - but you wouldn't have noticed it and it wouldn't have made any real difference if the SCOTUS hadn't engaged in (in the words of the vile and despicable John Roberts) "bait and switch" with Congress.

 

Caesar - your question needs to be rephrased. 


"Then who decides - the unelected and aberrant majority of nine, or the elected official with constitutional responsibility for national security?"  The founding fathers had a clear preference, as reflected in their making the elected branches - always - the supreme authority in the end.

 

Easy answer.  Anyway, you're basically attempting to scare people by referring to the current, disastrous presidential incumbent.  But that's changing the subject.  The supremacy of the court in constitutional matters (well, it's not even that - both Congress and the states have the ability to amend the constitution directly) evolved through events, was not and is not a perfect arrangement, and the abuse of their power by the courts has RE-raised the question of the difficult cases should be handled.

 

When the SCOTUS tears up the constitution and endangers the country, as it did in Hamdan, then no, they do not deserve deference.   And putting them in their place would not touch, much less rend, our social fabric.  In that case, it would have been a huge and positive move to begin the recalibration of the constitutional order.

 

If you can look at the Hamdan decision and the Obamacare decision (just to pick recent highlights), and still claim to believe that SCOTUS supremacy is rule of law and not men (just a smaller, unaccountable group of men), then you're pulling our legs here.  Rewriting the constitution and rewriting legislation, capriciously and without any basis, is not "rule of law".

 

 

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:26 AM (afQnV)

265 The dude I talked to served in Vietnam and said they went to congress and got guidelines for everyone else to join, but still couldn't be "full" members, whatever that means. I understood it to mean auxiliary members or some such shit. I said, so you have about 3 full members then?

Posted by: dartist at October 31, 2014 01:23 PM (ahBY0)


*************************


That's just completely wrong, and I am a member. I know this is dangerous with Pixy, but I went to the VFW website, and this is what it says:


If you have received a campaign medal for overseas service; have served 30 consecutive or 60 non-consecutive days in Korea; or have ever received hostile fire or imminent danger pay, then you're eligible to join our ranks.


http://www.vfw.org/Join/Eligibility/

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:28 AM (5f5bM)

266 Again, I repeat myself. If the operating principle is that it's preferable for the executive to defy the courts, do you trust President Obama to decide? Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 01:22 PM (5f5bM) He is already doing so.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:29 AM (txvbW)

267 216 @206 - the problem was that the Bush administration descended behind obscurity and legalese to try to defend their actions, hiding behind the desk instead of going on offense and presenting a sensibly historical/moral position. ******** Do you remember the debate between -- Biden and Ryan? In a nationally televised debate for the second highest office in the land-- Biden claimed that he voted no on the Afghanistan resolution, and that he did not vote for the resolution AUMF in Iraq. That was barely covered afterward. Biden lied about that and hardly anyone noticed. Then-- Benghazi. Benghazi. Benghazi. I don't think it as easy as some people seem to claim for Republicans to make their case in the media.

Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 08:29 AM (RJMhd)

268 234 Problem is that right now the EU is encroaching on his borders... and he sees that as the greater threat... A threat only to his ability to reabsorb, against their will, the now independent states of the old USSR. Posted by: toby928(C) at October 31, 2014 01:14 PM (rwI+c) The Russians have always had the concept of Near Abroad... where they had a series of small buffer states between them, and any other major Power (its their Monroe Doctrine). The EU has been expanding Eastward.... and is morphing from a collection of Independent States, to an actual Centralized Government. It is now has EU member States, and Military, directly on Russia's border. To them? Its the Cuban missile crises all over again... or as if Mexico had voluntarily joined the Soviet Union. Putin had made no move to reabsorb any nation of his near abroad... until Western Military units started playing on his border (like in Georgia, where US military units were 'training' in Georgia). He IS our enemy.... but he is NOT irrational.... like fundamental Islam.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 31, 2014 08:31 AM (f0pWu)

269 Looking for a way to control an out of control govt are we? Guess what, the constitution was written about governing a civil people. There in is the lesson.

Posted by: Bob from table9 at October 31, 2014 08:33 AM (WNERA)

270 Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 01:26 PM (afQnV) I can simplify my position even further. If the decision is the result of a majority of those liberal asswipes on the court, it is automatically wrong. I believe we should NEVER respect a decision put forth that is made up of a majority of the liberals. It should be dismissed out of hand.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:33 AM (txvbW)

271 I don't think it as easy as some people seem to claim for Republicans to make their case in the media. Posted by: your friendly Danube River Guide at October 31, 2014 01:29 PM (RJMhd) It is, in fact, impossible. This is why the existing media needs to be taken apart with a crowbar.

Posted by: D-Lamp at October 31, 2014 08:34 AM (txvbW)

272 That's just completely wrong, and I am a member.

I'm just repeating what they told me, so I'm not arguing, especially if you're a member. Kinda pisses me off because they have a pistol range too.

Posted by: dartist at October 31, 2014 08:36 AM (ahBY0)

273

D-Lamp, hate to be so boorish and ungracious when you're furiously agreeing with me on the courts ..... but I think the detainee situation in question was the Gitmo ones, not those in Iraq.  And .... for the last time, there was no "dismissing" the Ba'ath party criminals and idiots as some sort of optional policy decision.

 

Iraq was an utterly terrorized and degraded society.  The Ba'ath Party - almost exclusively, when it came to things that mattered, paralleling tribal and regional and sectarian divisions - was not some institution that could be used to any purpose.  It was a criminal operation that had destroyed the country, looted it, brutalized it, conducted genocidal depradations against it.  It personified the things that had to be erased and overcome.

 

Slightly varied but same bottom line for the self-disbanded army.  There were very few military or civilian Ba'ath officials (of any significant rank, outside some technocras in the oil ministry, or, amazingly, the antiquities area) who could have been of any use for a new Iraq, or would have been tolerated or trusted by Iraqis. 

 

I worked extensively - and with histrionic futility - with a multi-sectarian institution involved in a very high-profile mission.  The Sunnis there - and they were good guys, and committed to the mission - found it almost impossible to survive.  For understandable reasons, they were resented and distrusted, for no reason having to do with them personally.  There was no great reserve of competence or potential in Ba'ath personnel (again, outside some technocratic types) that was squandered.  And there is no way a new Iraq would have - or maybe should have - even tolerated their presence.

 

I too think the old army should have been re-assembled, with fanfare and offers of $$$$ .... and most of the Sunnis sorted out and put behind wire, indefinitely.  The rest dismissed and told to consider enlisting when a new force was stood up.  Preventive detention.  One of many things that would have saved many Iraqi and Coalition lives. 

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:39 AM (afQnV)

274 There's no point in debating whether the President and executive branch should follow the decisions of the Supreme Court.

Any Constitutional rule should be neutral in nature so that it is applicable to your opponents as well as you, and if you believe the appropriate rule is that the President should make up his (or her) own mind and defy the Supreme Court if he (or she) believes it's wrong despite having litigated his case and lost, then you should be eager to accept that President Obama or President Hillary! is going to do just that, and welcome the tyranny that is constrained only by what is possible in practice.

On the other hand, if you believe the appropriate rule is that the decision of the Supreme Court is the final word on a subject and the President should suck it up and comply, then it becomes a lot more important who the President and Senate put on the Court (and the lower courts). In either case Presidential elections are important, but in the latter case elections to Senate mean much more. Next Tuesday is a big day.

As for Congress stripping jurisdiction, there is an open question as to whether that would apply to Constitutional issues. But even assuming it did, some court somewhere would have to have such jurisdiction, and if the Supreme Court and Article III courts did not have it, then the court of general jurisdiction under our legal system is the state trial court. Would it be better to have the courts of Virginia, in the Hamdan case for example, asserting habeas corpus jurisdiction, or the District of Columbia courts, in most other cases?

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:41 AM (5f5bM)

275 272 That's just completely wrong, and I am a member.

I'm just repeating what they told me, so I'm not arguing, especially if you're a member. Kinda pisses me off because they have a pistol range too.

Posted by: dartist at October 31, 2014 01:36 PM (ahBY0)


********************


Join on the website and transfer in.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:42 AM (5f5bM)

276

Caesar, there is no suggested "principle" of defying the courts.

 

Just a common sense recognition that if the courts depart from serious, defensible, constitutionally sane behavior, they cannot be allowed free reign, to include endangering the country (as in Hamdan).

 

Do you swallow a few close calls, on non-central matters, just to keep things moving along?  Sure, maybe.

 

One thing missing from my rant.  The elected branches are also failing their responsibilities by not using their constitutional authority to "correct" the court when needed.  Instead of military tribunal rules, after the second bait-and-switch with a side dish of treaty power usurpation, Congress should have simply written the SCOTUS out of reviewing military tribunal procedures.  Congress can set the jurisdiction of the court.  But when was the last time they even considered that?

 

So the failure is general.  But to equate SCOTUS supremacy with "rule of law, not men" I think is simply not a serious argument that squares with the reality of the country today.

 

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:45 AM (afQnV)

277 The Russians have always had the concept of Near Abroad... where they had a series of small buffer states between them, and any other major Power (its their Monroe Doctrine). And Hitler thought the Sudetenland was rightfully a part of his empire. The idea serves to understand their Greater Russia thinking, but it fails to justify it or requires other states, or the inhabitants of those countries, to act as though it is so.

Posted by: toby928(C) goes Godwin at October 31, 2014 08:51 AM (rwI+c)

278 Rhomboid, I think we were typing simultaneously. We're not going to undo Marbury v. Madison and more than two centuries of practice. Some court is going to have habeas corpus jurisdiction over detainees who are not on the battlefield but clearly are in the custody of the President. Would you rather that it be the federal courts or the state courts?

I recognize that the President, in the latter case, might defy an order from the Commonwealth of Virginia to produce Hamdan. If he can defy that order, he can also defy the order to produce Caesar or rhomboid. And once again, we will have become a nation of men, not of laws. How many divisions does the Pope have?

The answer isn't to do away with the courts or to ignore them. The answer is to make them better. Elect better Presidents and Senators, appoint better judges, adopt better procedural rules, make better laws. Our system is terrible, but it's better than every other system.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at October 31, 2014 08:53 AM (5f5bM)

279 259 The only Halloween costume I own is a Medieval "wench" dress. I love it. Posted by: Ghoul 'ette at October 31, 2014 01:23 PM (IXrOn) You know the rules. Pics.

Posted by: rickl at October 31, 2014 08:57 AM (zoehZ)

280

Caesar, gotta run, but your last comment is kind of all over the board.

 

I don't think there's much question that if Congress simply declared that military tribunals of foreign nationals outside the US were to be run by the executive via the military justice system, without civilian court participation, the SCOTUS would be cut out.  What could they do?  What would even be there talking-point level argument for dealing themselves in to something entirely in the area of war-making, and outside US borders to boot?

 

And again, you're setting up a false choice on Hillary!  vs. SCOTUS (with SCOTUS as some sort of guardian against tyranny - hardly a credible supposition these days).  A tyrannical president has impeachment and re-election to worry about.  A tyrannical court - which we have now - is to be brought to heel how? 

 

SCOTUS is unaccountable.  Allowing them final say is to give absolute power to a tiny number of permanently unaccountable people.  This is the essence of "rule of men, not law". 

 

The constitution is not a perfect system, and SCOTUS supremacy is hardly any sort of bulwark against tyranny.  I thought (could be wrong here) that the founders, recognizing there was no perfect safeguard, always kept (insofar as possible) the highest powers in closest reach of the people - thus the House having budget power, etc.  Accountable branches. 

 

Even logically, how can an unaccountable branch be a safeguard against .... well, anything?  If the courts are immune to correction for anything they do, what sort of constitutional system could even be said to exist?

 

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 08:59 AM (afQnV)

281

Caesar, you're right, we're "cross commenting".

 

Two final points.

 

Illegal combatants outside the US (and the Gitmo guys aren't the first in our history) are subject to habeas corpus?  POWs are so subject?  Huh?  The president has no war-making power outside the US, in effect, it's one gigantic law-enforcement operation?  Cannot be.  I thought foreign humans in this cases were treated in accordance with the law of land warfare, Geneva, Hague, etc.  No review of any sort by any court.  The AQ detainees were a novelty for INTERNATIONAL LAW, but nothing for US law.  I thought the SCOTUS only had a bite at the German spy case because they were caught IN the US. 

 

The SS who spoke English and who conducted disruption ops in the first days of the Battle of Bulge and who were captured certainly had no recourse to US courts.  Why would AQ detainees outside the US?

 

You say that the solution is to get better justices/judges.  Thus confirming that, when logic and fact and common sense and humility are abandoned by the judiciary, in order to legislate .... it is, yes, rule of men, not of law. 

 

Generally I agree, our system is broken and cannot be fixed due to inertia (and a rapidly disappearing American mindset that valued individual liberty and accountable governance).  But we might as well have the satisfaction of speaking plainly and accurately.  When the judges depart from logic and law themselves, there is rule of men, not law.  Greek columns and black robes are quaint but do nothing to obscure the situation.

 

 

 

  

Posted by: rhomboid at October 31, 2014 09:19 AM (afQnV)

282 I tend to believe this. Bush had his faults but pretending he was somehow soft on killing Islamic radicals is a new one. Name a president who has been tougher.

Your continuing inability to understand the concept of better but inadequate actually enabling problems amazes me.  This whole century has been a shrieking demonstration of failing to break false constraints.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at October 31, 2014 10:00 AM (DL2i+)

283 Problem is that right now the EU is encroaching on he thinks the USSRs borders are his borders

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at October 31, 2014 10:12 AM (DL2i+)

284 Some court is going to have habeas corpus jurisdiction over detainees

Military detainees do not belong in civilian courts.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at October 31, 2014 10:26 AM (DL2i+)

285 Here I sit willow-hearted.
launched a rant but only farted.

Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at October 31, 2014 10:29 AM (DL2i+)

286

No, we cannot kill them now.  There are serious laws against assinations, assectomies, er. just no, trust me.

 

Posted by: Hector at October 31, 2014 11:02 AM (MelgH)

287

180 out of 160 ain't bad...

Wonder if any of the 4 we actually waterboarded turned against us, or just learned how to be better terrorists due to the cruel and inhumane treatment of Gitmo?

Posted by: Hector at October 31, 2014 11:04 AM (MelgH)

288 "Bush let the JAGs fiddle-fuck around for years. Sheesh, it took the Democrats less time to come up with and pass Obamacare than it took Bush and Rumsfeld to come up with a trial structure for these guys." BS. As stated earlier, liberals and the courts stopped Bush from using military tribunals for years.

Posted by: Davod at October 31, 2014 11:07 AM (aiTMj)

289 Could morons move past denial ?  Obama ALWAYS champions Islam to the detriment of Americans, Christians, infidels in general.

Its too often like watching a serial killer, caught and confessing, but insisting he is innocent anyway, because reality isn't real.  (or you're just a hardcore stooge demorat)

Posted by: ron n. at November 02, 2014 12:54 PM (YVQn/)

Hide Comments | Add Comment




What colour is a green orange?




228kb generated in CPU 0.26, elapsed 1.304 seconds.
64 queries taking 1.102 seconds, 527 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.