It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BobAthome
*SNIP*
There is no law preventing Obama from making a POW exchange.
THE GOPpers are only making hay over the "30 day notice" since their stance has been to be obstructionists to Obama at all costs, even when they have to pull an about face over their own past actions.
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Wrabbit2000
PS: I'm not justifying what Obama did, only pointing out the hypocrisy of the complaints coming from the right wing.
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
There is no law preventing Obama from making a POW exchange. .
A senior administration official, agreeing to speak on the condition of anonymity to explain the timing of the congressional notification, acknowledged that the law was not followed. When he signed the law last year, Obama issued a signing statement contending that the notification requirement was an unconstitutional infringement on his powers as commander in chief and that he therefore could override it.
*SNIP*
Obama was required to notify Congress 30 days prior to the release of prisoners or “detainees” held at the detention center in Guantanamo.
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Wrabbit2000
1,500 missiles were part of that deal. What do you think those would have been used for?
"5 of the most dangerous commanders..." That's the justification used by the CIA and military for holding them in eternity, after torturing them and who knows what else. But now they want to horse trade them in exchange for a POW, it turns out not so much. Seriously, I believe the military inflated the position and alleged crimes of every one of it's prisoners in order to facilitate keeping them detained without trial indefinitely.
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: FlyersFan
Obviously that SOB traitor wasn't a 'captive' but was there fully friendly-engaged with terrorists.
Ah, and your proof of this? Maybe remind yourself once in a while "innocent until proven guilty."
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
The WH stated the deal was in the works for more than two years.
Congress has had plenty of notice, if they were paying attention.
The law in question was written by the House and passed in 2013
When he signed the law last year, Obama issued a signing statement contending that the notification requirement was an unconstitutional infringement on his powers as commander in chief and that he therefore could override it.
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel did, in fact, notify Congress of the U.S.’s intention to transfer five prisoners held at Gitmo to Qatar in exchange for Sgt. Bergdahl.
Many in Congress will still be opposed to the swap, but lawmakers gave up their right to stop it. A small change in the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which passed last December, now makes it only a requirement that the Defense Secretary notify Congress when releasing Guantanamo prisoners. Before the change, Congressional sign off on any Guantanamo releases would have been needed.
originally posted by: amazing
How can you guys defend Guantanamo?
Some of you are saying they do not deserve a trial but are POWs. Think about this for a minute. We might be in Afghanistan for decades. A war with no end. Where is the official end to this war? So, you're saying that it's okay to capture foreign solders for decades and decades and decades just because we have a war with no end. If these were American POWs you'd be singing a different song.
I stand by my original post. They couldn't be that important or dangerous since we haven't put them to trial yet. What kind of a war has no end? A colonial Occupation. That's what kind of a war.
Let's start treating human beings like human beings.
Now you can say they were terrorists. In that case put them to trial.
It's been over a decade since 9/11. These guys don't have any pertinent information. Everything's changed since they were in the game.
And if you really want to talk about terrorism. Let's count all the innocent civilians and children that the USA has killed in IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN and PAKISTAN with our wars and our continuing drone strikes. Yes?
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
Two of them, Noori and Fazl, the ones being called the most senior of the Taliban commanders, were only accused of leading military actions against Shiite's in Afghanistan before 2001. The US took them out of Afghanistan not for what they did to us, but apparently to secure Afghanistan's cooperation in hunting Bin Laden. Their biggest crimes appear to be killing Shiites and wiping out the Northern Alliance. (hint: the USA was backing the Taliban's Northern Alliance.)
To date, not one of these men has convicted of anything or even taken to trial.
That's what Bush-style "indefinite detention" has gotten you.
The USA has scooped up anyone anywhere and made all sorts of allegations using 'extraordinary rendition.'
Now the military is exchanging them for a POW, think this is happening without their approval? Of course it is. They've had these men in their clutches for nearly 13 years. We've run out of excuses for holding them.
An illegal war has resulted in illegal prisoner detention. We've used propaganda to prosecute a "war on terror," based on lies and more lies.