By Lindsey Ellerson

Feb 5, 2009 5:46pm

Military Commission Charges Dropped Against Terrorist Suspect Al-Nashiri

As President Obama prepared to order the Department of Defense’s Military Commission to withdraw charges against terrorist suspect Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri on Friday afternoon, the convening authority for the Commission, Susan Crawford, withdrew the charges on her own Thursday night.

The charges were withdrawn without prejudice, meaning they later can be reinstated in a military commission or pursued in a civilian court. Al-Nashiri will remain in custody.

The original plan was for the announcement not to be made until after President Obama meets with the families of victims of terrorist attacks on 9/11 and on the U.S.S. Cole Friday afternoon, where he will assure them that this step was not done to be lenient towards al-Nashiri.

The move is being done to stop the continued prosecution of al-Nashiri in a court system that his administration may ultimately find illegitimate, not for any other reason, sources told ABC News.

President Obama has expressed concern about whether the military commissions set up by the Bush administration are the proper way to go forward in pursuing charges against the U.S. detainees, and on January 22 he asked all the judges supervising the trials of detainees for a continuance of 120 days, so a team of administration officials could review the best way forward.

In almost the cases, that continuance request was granted. But last week the judge supervising the al-Nashiri trial — Army Col. James L. Pohl, the chief judge at the Guantanamo Bay war crimes court — said he would not heed President Obama’s request for a 120-day continuance, or delay, in prosecutions of terrorism suspects. Pohl called the president’s request "not reasonable" and not "in the interests of justice."

The arraignment of al-Nashiri is scheduled for Monday, February 9.

Al-Nashiri has been identified as the former Persian Gulf Operations Chief for al Qaeda and the mastermind of the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. In March 2007 he testified in military court  that he only confessed to certain crimes because he has been tortured for the previous five years.

Asked for reaction to the news, Commander Kirk Lippold (Ret.), former Commander aboard the U.S.S. Cole when it was bombed on October 12, 2000, told ABC News that he was "concerned" about the move.

"For some reason the administration says what’s been expressed through the legislature is not sufficient," Lippold said of the military commissions, which he said had "undergone extensive legal and legislative review…They need to allow the process to go forward."

The 26-year Navy veteran said he found the decision to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay "disappointing," but he seemed willing to hear the president out.

"I’m interested in hearing what his long-term plan is on how he’s going to deal with the detainees because he hasn’t articulated that," he said. "He may have a clear-cut path that may massage some of the concerns that I know many of the families have right now."

In a way, the President tied his administration’s own hands, requiring the dropping of the charges. The executive order President Obama signed on closing the Guantanamo Detention Facilities states that "all proceedings" in the US Military Commissions must be "halted":

"The Secretary of Defense shall immediately take steps sufficient to ensure that during the pendency of the Review described in section 4 of this order, no charges are sworn, or referred to a military commission under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the Rules for Military Commissions, and that all proceedings of such military commissions to which charges have been referred but in which no judgment has been rendered, and all proceedings pending in the United States Court of Military Commission Review, are halted."

Lippold, a Senior Military Fellow with Military Families United, served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and crafted detainee policy in the initial stages of what the Pentagon called the Global War on Terror. He was invited to meet with the President along with the other families tomorrow.

"I’m looking forward to hearing what the president has to say tomorrow when he meets with the families of the U.S.S. Cole," Lippold said.

- Jake Tapper with additional reporting by Luis Martinez at the Pentagon

* This post has been updated.

 

User Comments

Jake – You are a bulldog. A benefit to ABC news and the public at large. Keep asking the tough questions. And, please, let us know when the Ethics Disclosure forms are available and how to find them. Thanks!

Posted by: Mr E | February 5, 2009, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

Jake, you have to change your wording man. You say earlier…
” he asked all the judges supervising the trials of detainees ”
Then you quote the order:
“The Secretary of Defense shall immediately take steps sufficient to ensure that during the pendency of the Review described in section 4 of this order, no charges are sworn, or referred to a military commission under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the Rules for Military Commissions, and that all proceedings of such military commissions to which charges have been referred but in which no judgment has been rendered, and all proceedings pending in the United States Court of Military Commission Review, are halted.”
I’m sorry, the President didn’t “ask” or “request”, he ordered. Col Pohl deemed it an “unlawful” order under the UCMJ, and I’d bet you a steak dinner the Supreme Court would agree.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm

So a known terrorist has no pending charges against him?
So isn’t that prima facie making a “habeus corpus” problem where we had already resolved it by accusations made in lawful tribunal?
Also Colonel Pohl stated in his order denying 4 month continuance that “At the arraignment, the Commission will address the remaining portion of the
government motion requesting a continuance of all other sessions of the Commission”
This means this aint over until Colonel Pohl goes ahead and denies all continuances.
This will force Obama to withdraw all charges against the high value Al Qaeda terrorists, shutting down the tribunal system without anything in its place.
Ludicrous!!!!!!

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm

“This means this aint over until Colonel Pohl goes ahead and denies all continuances.
This will force Obama to withdraw all charges against the high value Al Qaeda terrorists, shutting down the tribunal system without anything in its place.”
Right, its bizarre that he feels its better to circumvent the law of the land than insult the families like this.

Posted by: BertieW | February 5, 2009, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

OUTRAGEOUS..!!!

Posted by: CW | February 5, 2009, 6:12 pm 6:12 pm

I don’t like how this is shaping up at all. As an American citizen, I question my president’s actions. Is it time to gird our loins, Mr. Biden?

Posted by: Disappointed | February 5, 2009, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm

The President will speak with the families and Military Families United represented and I’m sure he will tell them what he intends to do with the scumbag and what he intends to do to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law. Refreshing after 8 years of a secret society in Washington. And lastly for all anti-President Obama folk – if you take a minute to read (and despite Mr. Tapper’s desire to get on the neo-con approval list) you may discover that the President of the United States understands that which he swore to uphold with hand on the Bible. Refreshing.

Posted by: OnTheGloryRoad | February 5, 2009, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm

You know, all we heard for years was how Bush made up his own laws and undermined the constitution blah blah… if thats true, … then what the heck is this?

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

soft on terrorism!
appeasement!!

Posted by: gays4palin, west hollywood, ca | February 5, 2009, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm

This is a worst night that the President is for the terrorists. There is reason to believe that he is a sleeper cell.

Posted by: Bob | February 5, 2009, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm

Can we impeach Obama yet? He gets all pansy on terrorists just so his popularity doesn’t slip. WHAT AN IDIOT! Col Pohl deserves a medal for standing up to the jerk.

Posted by: Allie | February 5, 2009, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm

Great, good for Obama, this is taking way too long. Give these guys a fair trial and then shoot them dead.

Posted by: Ayatrollah | February 5, 2009, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm

The prior administration ruled that there is no right to a writ of habeas corpus so these people can be held as long as desired. These “trials” were delayed for years by the previous administration and only started when their “dictatorship” was ending.

Posted by: Tom | February 5, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm

WOW, I have never seen so many folk jump to so many different conclusions and skipping right over the point of the whole thing. The BIG picture; Here is is again:
President Obama has expressed concern about whether the military commissions set up by the Bush administration are the proper way to go forward in pursuing charges against the U.S. detainees, and on January 22 he asked all the judges supervising the trials of detainees for a continuance of 120 days, so a team of administration officials could review the best way forward.

Posted by: gcbfred | February 5, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm

I wonder how the parents of the 12 men that died that day fell about BO now! More BS from BO.

Posted by: Darthgator | February 5, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm

“discover that the President of the United States understands that which he swore to uphold with hand on the Bible.”
Obviously not, his Executive order is wrought with legal issues, and hes a constitutional lawyer?

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm

Commander Lippold; In all probability Obama intends to rewrite our entire civil and military legal codes to fit his perception of what it should be. Before it’s all over al-Nashiri will probably become a citizen and a decorated hero entitled to back pay and benefits. Maybe Obama intends to appoint him to the HHS post vacated by Daschle.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 5, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

Yea, they kill us and we can sue them! riiight.

Posted by: Darthgator | February 5, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

They’ve had this guy since November 2002 and they’re just getting around to a trial?? Speedy justice for the families huh??

Posted by: rightbehind | February 5, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

mr president you have just spit in the eye of all those working so hard in the armed forces.your community leader at work.whats next? i think uhm we will uhmallow iran to uhm have a nuke uhm because uhm its only fair uhm cause we have one. more pathetic each and evry day.did you announce that to al jeezera first?

Posted by: catman | February 5, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

“WOW, I have never seen so many folk jump to so many different conclusions and skipping right over the point of the whole thing. The BIG picture; Here is is again:
President Obama has expressed concern about whether the military commissions set up by the Bush administration are the proper way to go forward in pursuing charges ”
This is where YOU are missing it. That was set up through LEGISLATION and the SUPREME COURT. It wasn’t something the administration did on it’s own. It tried to do that, but the Supreme Court batted it down over the summer, remember? You all cheered?
Guess what, that took it out of being controled soley by the excutive branch, and brought it into the judicial as well. Obama cannot issue orders on it anymore. Dems wanted this, they got it.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm

If this guy if found not guilty, he will come back make a similar attempt against our serviceman. What in the world is Obama thinking?????????

Posted by: Real_Thinker | February 5, 2009, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm

And yet a President like a governor, mayor or district attorney cannot make judicial decisions. That’s what he’s trying to usurp and that’s on the face of it unconstitutional.
He appear to be withdrawing a case but then doesnt the district attorney and sheriff have to let someone free if they have no charges against them. Again on the face of it, habeus corpus suspended – unconstitutional, at least how it’s being extended to non-citizen combatants.
What exactly is Obama going to say about the guy we agree is a scumbag. We’re going to hold him (solely by executive authority) and develop a new system that will replace the tribunal system I’ve abolished
(solely by executive authority)
He like Bush can act as Commander in Chief with clear authority, but as Lawyer in Chief he has limits and he definitely in no shape or form Judge in Chief.

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm

Unconscionable.

Posted by: Karen Otravez | February 5, 2009, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm

I thought we elected Obama to run things, it looks like we got Osama.

Posted by: cbk16 | February 5, 2009, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm

He’s not doing it to let him go. HE’s doing it to let the charges stick, you idiots. If you charge him after holding him illegally he may get off in the end. Why is ABC purposely having misleading headlines about Obama? Between the ridiculous article about ‘perks’ of the presidency, to this idea that it’s Obama fault that others are’t paying their taxes, why is ABC all of a sudden ######## on Obama so much???? IS this some sort of witch hunt????? IS ANYONE here aware of who cheats on their taxes at work???? did OBAMA do ANYTHING wrong??? NO! The guy is killing himself trying to HELP US!! you idiots! you should be SUPPORTING him! We finally have someone SMART who can HELP US and you keep trashing him over stupid superficial crap that has nothing to do with him!! Is it Obama’s fault the holding detainees without charges may later be a loophole they have to get their sentences illegal??? NO!It’s BUsh’s!!! STOP BLAMING OBAMA FOR TRYING TO FIX BUSH’S MESSES!!!!!! Forget this “news” – it’s FOXNEWS wannabe! I’m taking it off my browser!

Posted by: frank | February 5, 2009, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm

WOW why not just set everyone free that is in prison MR OBAMA. Well America you getting your change. It is not looking good!!!

Posted by: Doug | February 5, 2009, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm

“They’ve had this guy since November 2002 and they’re just getting around to a trial?? Speedy justice for the families huh??”
Go back and look at the different legislation that was passed on these detainees, much of that, plus pending court cases slowed down the process drastically.
The military tribunal system was set up years ago and promptly halted, restarted, halted again. Finally the Supreme court decided on it in the summer. Folks get your head out of the TV and go read.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm

Pohl is acting like Doug MacArthur, and President Obama – as Commander in Chief – should play Harry Truman and simply ORDER this brass-hat to either comply with the request or else resign his commission on the spot!

Posted by: Jordan | February 5, 2009, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm

This is crazy! “Sure, blow up our ships.” Obama is trying to distract us from having Senators vote “NO” on the $1.2 Trillion PORK Stimulus Package he is trying to get passed through the Senate tomorrow!

Posted by: Jeannette Pickering Rankin | February 5, 2009, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm

Obama is starting to lose the vets and at the rate he is going, he will lose the american voters before his term in office is over. You are our president but remember Chicago.

Posted by: Ray | February 5, 2009, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

Obviously not, his Executive order is wrought with legal issues, and hes a constitutional lawyer?Posted by: KR
Well it seems that “Commander in Chief” is subject to interpretation just like the law. Viewed as some would like to see it. The United States Constituion has been treated like a gd piece of paper over the past 8 years. I hope to see the honor of it restored!

Posted by: rightbehind | February 5, 2009, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

“this step is not being done to be lenient towards al-Nashiri. The move is being done to stop the continued prosecution of al-Nashiri in a court system that his administration may ultimately find illegitimate”….why is this a headline then???? why a re you makingit seem like he’s setting him free? He wants him arraigned in a court that CANNOT be found unconstitutional in the future. To be arraigned in Gitmo MAYBE later allow a loophole for the guilty to say “unconstitutional process” and they therefore, be set free. This is soooo misleading.

Posted by: mary in the heartland | February 5, 2009, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

Personally i think the president has lost his nerve. He is appeasing terrorist and is bowing to the enemy.. This is BAD mojo and willnot be tolerated by the Military Commission. I agree with Tom. “Give these guys a fair trial and then shoot them dead.” What are we doing ! Are we going to stand by and allow this insanity.. The President has lost his nerveand needs to stop with this lunacy.. The man aint right in the head…Another Kookoo in office i fear.. whatdoes the future hold for us as Americans ? I fear it will only get worse as time goes on.. we will have to wait and see whatother surprises this man brings tolight.. Ay law!!!!

Posted by: Thee Egg | February 5, 2009, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

So I’m the new president, and I really hate my predecesssor, and the techniques he used to get information from terrorists. So I’m gonna let the terrorist that planned the Cole hit go. He’s real angry now, of course. Let’s see…he killed 17 the first time out. I wonder how many he’ll kill next time. Oh, well, I’ll just blame it on Bush.

Posted by: Jay Frederick | February 5, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

This case is going to end up in a civilian court, intelligence sources and practices are going to be compromised, the trial will be a circus, and Americans will die.

Posted by: Mesquito | February 5, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

LMAO!!! how soon we forget 9-11

Posted by: Doug | February 5, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

Hopefuly this is not an indication of the way this administration is going to handle extremists and/or people who plot against our country. Unfortunately, to me, Obama’s shown his true self, first by closing Guantanamo, now this. I find it sad that (IMHO) our President does not seem to care about our national security.

Posted by: demetria | February 5, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

Yes Doug, we are getting the change we wanted and about time, I was beginning to think America would never return to a law abiding state and would be doomed to third world dictator status forever.

Posted by: JR | February 5, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

Here is another disappointment and President Obama has not even reached his first 100 days. He is being outrageous!!!!! Sounds like he is for the terrorists.– what goes Mr. President.

Posted by: Mona | February 5, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

“This means this aint over until Colonel Pohl goes ahead and denies all continuances.
This will force Obama to withdraw all charges against the high value Al Qaeda terrorists, shutting down the tribunal system without anything in its place.”
Have you forgotten that President Obama is the commander in chief? Colonel Pohl will likely end up a private again or out on his but if he pushes his luck much more.

Posted by: Marilyn | February 5, 2009, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

If President Obama really supports human rights how can he give any rights to an enemy which treats females worse than dogs, hangs homosexuals in the public square, uses the disabled to act as homicide bombers, and uses children as a defense shields among many despicable and inhumane activities?
I think there is something hideously wrong with President Obama’s concept of the meaning of human rights.
Of course, he was indoctrinated at Columbia and Harvard so I suppose this explains his determination to protect oppressive barbarism.

Posted by: syn | February 5, 2009, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

“paper over the past 8 years. I hope to see the honor of it restored!”
Then I assume you too are outraged over the Executive order? Because the only way it could be followed is to usurp it and ignore the Judicial branch.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

Why shouldn’t America follow our own laws, what are we becoming, a terrorist state like Israel?

Posted by: JR | February 5, 2009, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm

I think the president has opened up a door that was better left sealed shut!There is a reason this has been done, and we may never know the real meat of it!

Posted by: Mr RM | February 5, 2009, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm

Good for him. The Military tribunals have not exactly gotten the job done, nor has the results been what was expected.
The Judge on the other hand could have honored an continuance, and this maneuvering would not have been necessary.
Everything is not a oneway street, and it pleases me that Obama shows that he is smart and unafraid.

Posted by: Thinking | February 5, 2009, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

I’m waiting to form an opinion on this. It sounds weird but I wouldn’t presume to have an understanding of military commissions and the ins and outs of military versus civilian courts.
The article does say that the guy (Al-Nashiri) will be held in custody, so I’m not too worried. He’s effectively in prison already.
It seems to me a lot of people here are rushing to judgment. It feels good to get all hot-headed about things, but can you honestly say that, at this point, you have a clear understanding of the situation?

Posted by: Tman | February 5, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

“Have you forgotten that President Obama is the commander in chief? Colonel Pohl will likely end up a private again or out on his but if he pushes his luck much more.”
Hard to believe some of you people actually think this way. Col Pohl is acting through Judicial authority, not Executive. That executive order IS NOT THE AUTHORITY in these cases dimwits. The Supreme Court ruling over the summer? You remember that? You all cheered? Guess what, that decision took it out of the Commander-in-Chiefs hands. That executive order is now only a request to the presiding judge, Col Pohl. He does not have to follow it anymore. Only the supreme court can “order” Pohl now.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

Jake, I do not like the way you attack the press secretary today. Because the President is going to be more transparent does not mean he is going to let us see everythinh. If he is 20% transparent that is 20% more than the Bush white house. Also, try to be more respectful. I never liked your questions anyway to the obama administration. You can tell that you are definately a Republican and you never liked Obama.

Posted by: as | February 5, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

Frank I’m sure you can’t follow the whole argument I made so I’ll make it simple in your own words -
How does Obama holding Nashiri illegally without charges fix the problem you see in Bush holding Nashiri without charges? I don’t get it.
_____
So, Jordan – you suggest that Obama exert a dangerous precedent of relieving an “brass hat” officer without proper procedure. I certainly concur he has authority as Commander in Chief, but Obama wants to be Lawyer in Chief. He CANNOT be Judge in Chief though over a Congressionally authorized military tribunal system.

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm

This is the problem with electing two chickenhawks like Obama and Jody Biden who never served. Obama could care less about the soldiers he commands. What a loser.

Posted by: robtr | February 5, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

Ever notice when we see Obama we never see Bill Clinton? Or when we see Bill we never see Obama??? Clark Kent Types?
Their thinking is the same, I think they are one…it’s just a mask…..it’s a set up..see..we have been had ..see….the Terrorists go free…see….they will rub us out ..see…wise guys huh?????

Posted by: gatornation1957 | February 5, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

It’s great to have a President again. And even greater that the people of this country may come to know that the Constitution is number one – NOT political parties, not arm-chair generals and NOT people working as news commentators who learned writing for Confidential magazine.

Posted by: OnTheGloryRoad | February 5, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

#1) This is crazy! “Sure, blow up our ships.”
#2)Obama is trying to distract us from having Senators vote “NO” on the $1.2 Trillion PORK Stimulus Package he is trying to get passed through the Senate tomorrow!”
On both counts Obama is just cleaning up the military and economic disasters left by Bush and the GOP. Have a field day all you Rush Limp supporters out there, your lame ideas got us into this mess. Now watch as Obama tries to do things the right way for a change. The free spending Republicans racked up five trillion in debt under Bush and what do we have to show for that? Bush’s “land of make believe” terrorist court system is a total failure, not one serious prosecution since 9/11.

Posted by: Maxwell in NY | February 5, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

And so it begins… Slowly letting down our guard and showing our willingness to compromise. Our enemies are patient and very smart. Always looking for a way to get in and murder more or our innocent citizens. Obama is taking a page from Clinton’s book on how to deal with terrorists.

Posted by: Tim | February 5, 2009, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

syn, you don’t understand the situation if you think that “there is something hideously wrong with President Obama’s concept of the meaning of human rights.”
This isn’t about human rights. Obama isn’t doing this out of concern for Al-Nashiri’s rights. It’s a legal issue. Obama has a degree in constitutional law, by the way. As far as I can see, he is trying to prosecute this man in the right way, so that it sticks, and so that due process is followed. Like it’s supposed to be, in America..

Posted by: Apples | February 5, 2009, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

What an idiot.

Posted by: RL in Illinois | February 5, 2009, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm

WOW why not just set everyone free that is in prison MR OBAMA. Well America you getting your change. It is not looking good!!!
Just so you know because of the botched job the last administration did in detaining these people, Some have had to be released already. Before Obama took office.
Bush and Cheney (the war criminals) by using torture put in dispute and information that can be used during trial.
Now the current Administration has to fix this!
Obama is moving the prosecution so that maybe we can actually bring the terrorists to justice.
This is exactly what America needs, a President that thinks with his brain and not with his balls.

Posted by: Joe | February 5, 2009, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm

Two weeks in and….
I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!
I NEVER would have guessed, not in a million…

Posted by: Buyer's Remorse | February 5, 2009, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm

In almost the cases, that continuance request was granted. But last week the judge supervising the al-Nashiri trial — Army Col. James L. Pohl, the chief judge at the Guantanamo Bay war crimes court — said he would not heed President Obama’s request for a 120-day continuance, or delay, in prosecutions of terrorism suspects. Pohl called the president’s request “not reasonable” and not “in the interests of justice…… So, now that Obama is the President, the request is somehow unreasonable?? What’s the hurry now, Justice Pohl? You wouldn’t be playing the game of partisan justice would you? Sneaky Freaky indeed. Tsk,Tsk.

Posted by: Coherent1 | February 5, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

Its a travesty these unlawful combatants are even having our laws applied to them, they don’t deserve our civility. They are not citizens but will the recieve the protections of one. They are not POW’s, as written by LAW they are not POW’s, but will recieve treatment as one.
This sends so many wrong messages to the enemy. But you asked for it, now you got it.
The left was so obsessed to tie Bush’s hands over these detainees that they tied Obamas hands too. Funny he still tried to do exactly what Bush tried to do. Consitutional lawyer?

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

Wow. Lots of depressive, paranoid people around. So sure that you know how things are going to go with Obama as our prez. So sure that it’s all doom and gloom.
How about giving the new administration a chance? How about letting go of your whining and giving Obama the benefit of the doubt?
Cheer up already.

Posted by: POJ | February 5, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

Is the message to the service men, make sure you don’t take prisoners, they will only be turned loose. When we get Osama, if he is taken alive, will he be granted some of the bail out $$$$$$

Posted by: Ray | February 5, 2009, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm

While the President is removing doubts about “Legitimacy” why doesn’t he prove his own by opening up his Citizenship documentation for public scrutiny instead of hiring an army of lawyers to keep whatever he is hiding from coming to light. He is So concerned (he says) about “upholding the Constitution” and “The Rule of Law” Why does he let these cases (regarding his Citizenship) languish on the Court dockets when he could (IF he is Legitimately a Natural Born Citizen or even a Citizen) with one phone call END ALL OF THIS DISCOURSE. Is this RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR For the President of the United States??
ELMo

Posted by: ELmo | February 5, 2009, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm

To one and all thinking Obama is fresh breath of Constitutional air, answer 2 questions:
1) How does Obama holding Nashiri illegally without charges fix the problem you see in Bush holding Nashiri illegally without charges? I don’t get it.
2) How does Obama’s plan to usurp due judicial authority – a) suspending and b)abolishing the tribunal system, c) impose a new system by executive order until Congress can approve it – how does THAT make for proper executive respect for the constitution????

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm

This is a disgrace. The Military Courts were established by Congress and approved by the Supreme Court. Thus, they are lawful. Obama may call himself an expert on Constitutional Law but I saw an interview he gave around 2001 where he stated he felt that the Constitution was deeply flawed. Obama feels that terrorists should have all the rights of American citizens. I don’t know why he does not get that they want to kill every American especially the President. I hope our military now understands that they should shot to kill-take no prisoners. We are in a fight for our survival and the fight will last for years. Just because you don’t want to use the term “War on Terror” does not mean the fight is over. Obama is soft on terrorists and we will all pay for his actions.

Posted by: Mary | February 5, 2009, 6:46 pm 6:46 pm

“What happens if your trial is ruled in the future as unconstitutional????”
This is great. Does our consitution apply to the world or just US citizens?
Now you are seeing why these unlawful combatants should have NEVER been let in under our constitution. You just opened up a huge can of worms. Enjoy the mess you made.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:47 pm 6:47 pm

I am not understanding this because the Military Commissions Act is a law and the President’s obligation is to carry out the law and if he doesn’t like the law … he is supposed lawyer up and go back and change it. At least this is what the Supreme Court explained to the last President and it is what the last president did. Obama cannot prance around waving magic wands and over turn laws and Trapper’s job is to explain how this fits together and he hasn’t done that either. This whole thing is beginning to look like a circus run by a bunch of little kids in short pants playing with matches who don’t understand the consequences of what they are doing.

Posted by: Slager21 | February 5, 2009, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm

UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!
UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!
O, WAIT!!!! It’s Obama!!! This is GREAT!!! I live in a big city and I feel like he just put a target on my back- THANKS,Barak- George Bush was pretty incompetent on lots of things, but we didn’t get attacked again, DID we!!
Just a little note, Obama- YOU CANNOT NEGOTIATE WITH PEOPLE WHO WANT TO CUT YOUR HEAD OFF!!!!

Posted by: aelspache | February 5, 2009, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm

KR, I appreciate your attempts to educate this forum, but you’re probably wasting your time. As far as I can tell, most of the folks here only absorb knowledge when reading their NY Times or watching their Michael Moore DVDs. ;-)

Posted by: Open-Mind | February 5, 2009, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm

Obama did work on Miracle though. Robert Gibbs makes Scott McClellan look like a genius

Posted by: robtr | February 5, 2009, 6:49 pm 6:49 pm

This turns my stomach. This ### attacked our MILITARY! Impeach Obama!

Posted by: realnyer | February 5, 2009, 6:49 pm 6:49 pm

Wrong so very wrong. They attacked a military target they should be tried by the military. This is crazy.

Posted by: Ohnohedidn't | February 5, 2009, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

don’t be surprised if one of the family members from 911 throws a shoe at his head during their upcoming meeting!

Posted by: mememe | February 5, 2009, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

Where were all these concerned citizens while Bush was wiping his behind with the Constitution? His gang has almost fatally compromised these prosecutions, and garbled up actual “bad guys” with many people picked up by accident or malice, tainting the whole process. Actual suggestions, anyone?

Posted by: Kenji | February 5, 2009, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

“unlawful combatants are even having our laws applied to them”..well, let’s just shoot them all in the head and get it over with, huh??? Let’s just forget the fact that we are supposed tobe that fair and free country with morals and just say’ nah, we’re ######## and have no moral compass, we’ll kill innocents as well as guilty, we’re no better than the terrorists. Let’s just say it and be done, then, huh??? becuase if you want this country to a fragment of what the founders said it should be, you put to trial the guilty, you set the innocent free, and you DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM unlike bush who just did NOT deal with it, just throw them in cuba and hope they just, what??? die there? what??? What miracle was going to fix this problem for bush???? yet another screw up he just didn’t deal with. Had hack Texas laywers who probably couldn’t pass the bar i n a real state come up with ‘opinions’ that would never hold up in superior court, and that mess needs to be FIXED and DEALT WITH and i do think the constitutional laywer knows a whole hell of a lot better how to deal wit h this than some stupid hot headed McArther wanna be. If Obama says, cease and desist, we will charge him later, in a way that will stick, you say “YES, SIR!”

Posted by: frank | February 5, 2009, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm

Well, Frank’s well reasoned arguments almost persuade me…NOT
How is a military trial duly authorized by Congress prima facie unconstitutional? please answer, Frank
How do you bring secrets of national security into an open court? please answer, Frank
What right do or do not a non-citizen combatant have in the Constitution? please answer, Frank

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm

Nice Obama get ready from club GITMO judge to call you out on your Ineligibility to be POTUS under Article 138 in the military code.

Posted by: Jesse | February 5, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

Impeach Obama!

Posted by: realnyer | February 5, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

When is Mr. Westin going to answer up on the charges of Mr. Stephanopoulos’ ethics violations?

Posted by: Les Godfried | February 5, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

I’m telling you, there is an easy fix.
Extradite them to their host nations for trial.
See how many of these detainees will be screaming torture then. Id put money down every one of them would take back that statement and beg to stay in GITMO. Any takers?

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm

“but we didn’t get attacked again, DID we”….Sept 11, 2001. Uhhh, yeah, we did. He got a memo saying we would. He went golfing. No free ride for 3000 dead on 9/11. YES WE DID Get attacked under Bush, you idiot!And WHAT GOOD is putting a trial for a terrorist if the verdict gets overturned i n a few years and he gets sets free because some short order cook from texas who claims to be laywer says “uhhh, i THOUGHT you could just do it in a military court???? who knew???”

Posted by: frank | February 5, 2009, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

Don’t judge the whole story until you read the whole story! NEW charges will be brought against this terrorist. The previous charges will not stick because of the mess of legislation that Bush left behind. Again – read the WHOLE story before you jump to conclusions.

Posted by: sandra4677 | February 5, 2009, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

Ah yeah! The sweet sound of American justice; GUILTY until proven innocent.

Posted by: Coherent1 | February 5, 2009, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

There is some weapons grade stupid up in this forum…
Have any of you read the way this whole “military tribunal” system Bush set up works? It’s ridiculous and when he was implementing it I thought it was a travesty that went against everything America stands for.
Did we not deal with criminals before 9/11 without this smoke and mirrors backroom “court system” Dubya set up? Is there not precedent in our standard court system to convict these guys with IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAWS AND ETHICS OF THE UNITED STATES?
I want these guys to go away forever too but if you are gonna protect individual freedoms of the people sometimes you have to protect the freedoms of bad people. Otherwise the definition of bad people will shift and become a slippery slope where YOU might be considered bad one day.
And if you are gonna convict someone of something, we need to do it in the right way. So there will be no doubts as to the guilt or the fairness of the sentence. Obama just wants to insure that we REALLY get this guy. The right way.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm

Tic Toc, Tic Toc, BOOM!!!
Wow never saw that coming.
Oh, wait we just let that guy out of jail after keeping him locked up for years. No way he would “mastermind” any other bombings after being treated so well by US.

Posted by: Tim | February 5, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

I don’t even know why any of you Obamabots that were drunk off the hopeychangey rhetoric are all of a sudden shocked and upset. YOU are also to blame when this scum of the earth gets released (cause he will eventually get released) and for this disgrace Clown-in-Chief.

Posted by: Sam | February 5, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

This is not Change that we can believe in. I don’t think Americans by and large support this. Didn’t Obama learn any lessons from the nearly 3000 that died on 911? This suicide maniacs want us dead, they will not compromise, there can be no peace. Obama is a nieve fool

Posted by: Tom | February 5, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

Idiots trying make things that are not.
The Republicans have nothing to do but blow things out of reality. Obama isnt cutting known terrorist loose but is doing things according to law and as the article says the charges may be reinstated. However if there are innocent people being held and they were arrested on the fact they are Arab alone and there is no real proof or evidence, then let those go. Its the right thing to do.

Posted by: CW | February 5, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

“some short order cook from texas who claims to be laywer says “uhhh, i THOUGHT you could just do it in a military court???? who knew???”
Surprising, a lefty making fun of military lawyers. And folks question their support for troops. How could that be when you call them stupid short order cooks from Texas?

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

There’s nothing in this article that says President Obama has any intention of just letting the guy go. In fact it says: “Al-Nashiri will remain in custody” at the end of the 1st paragraph. I say good job Mr. President – you do what you feel you have to to make sure none of these terrorists get acquitted bc of Bushy Loopholes. That’s the last thing anyone wants. Al-Nashiri has been in custody for years, a few more months won’t make any more difference ultimately. And the families of those killed and injured on the Cole will appreciate wanting to make sure the charges stick too, make no mistake.
You can’t have it both ways; it can’t be stupid of him to postpone the trial to strengthen the process by which he’s being judged and also be stupid for just letting the trial go on and risk having the terrorist set free bc of careless technicalities. Come on people, how p***** would you all be if a court said “bc of his treatment during containment and the nature in which a confession was acquired we do not feel it lawful to continue pursuing charges against this person.”?? Oh wait – we did hear that not too long ago… and if Obama didn’t do anything to change those circumstances and the same result came of Al-Nashiri’s trial you’d all be howling like stuck pigs that Obama should’ve learned a lesson and acted differently to ensure a full prosecution of captured terrorists.

Posted by: MyEyedea | February 5, 2009, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

Disgusting and disgraceful! How can he possibly do this to these families and this country?

Posted by: jennifert7 | February 5, 2009, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

I am confident that Borack Hussein Obama coddeling terrorists isn’t going to go over very well with the American People. His ignorant actions are going to cost him and the American people dearly.

Posted by: robtr | February 5, 2009, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

“according to law and as the article says the charges may be reinstated.”
According to “the law” Obama cannot make that determination. Its now Judicial thanks to lawyers acting on behalf of the unlawful combatants at GITMO. So you stepped in your own mess so to speak.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

Thank god for President that knows and values the Constitution.

Posted by: Sean | February 5, 2009, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

Wonderful!!!
Now this guy can get back to what he does best: Killing Americans! And not be bothered by a president that may want to kill him and his buddies.
Under Barrack they will be free to operate as they did before!! Thank you Mr. Obama for giving these fine mis-undertood guys their freedom!!

Posted by: MGM4706 | February 5, 2009, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

The arm-chair conservative nut jobs are in full force on here tonight. No one, including the prez is trying give these detainees the same rights as Americans. Get that through your extremely THICK skulls. It’s about trying these bozos the right way. Has it ever concerned you idiots for even one moment these bozos have been in custody for more than 7 years with alleged confessions, yet very few if any have been put on trial from Gitmo…? Many have been released over the past couple of years, nice and quiet like. Now you suddenly have concern.

Posted by: seansatx | February 5, 2009, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm

“How is a military trial duly authorized by Congress “…it is NOT within congress’ judgement to say whether a man caught in a foriegn country who has NO EVIDENCE of being a military combatant (was he holding weapons, shooting at the time? was he just ’round up’ as many of these men were) who has not had any charges brought against him for seven years is applicable to a mitliary court? IF he was caught on foreign soil for a terrorist attack, and the evidence is from intelligence, with him being caught in non-military exercise (not ceased during battle, rather during a raid on a house) then trial by military court may very well, no will PROBABLY be deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL in the future and he will NOT be tried twice, HE WILL GO FREE!!!! combatant.

Posted by: Frank | February 5, 2009, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm

If you think Bush ruined the economy you are a fool. Just wait and you might see what bad is. If we get attacked again the you will see bad. Bush protected us. With Obama I am affraid we are sitting ducks and thats when it will get bad. Impeach

Posted by: Joel Smith | February 5, 2009, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm

LOL..some funny stuff here!Some of you need to READ what is being said before blasting off. Bama is not letting anyone go. He’s probably making sure that they can’t be let go, which is why he is personally visiting the victim’s families..to make sure they understand what’s really going on and that they are not just reading the opionions at the end of the news articles.

Posted by: rs | February 5, 2009, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm

O, Frank, Frank, Frank!!! We were attacked a scant few months into Bush’s administration- We got attacked in Clinton’s, as well, but he just let it slide- They figured they could get away with it with Bush, as well- THAT’S what I mean, dear, that we didn’t get attacked again- They messed with him ONCE and celebrated when Obama was elected- Get it???? Dear????
And why the name-calling?? You asked for this and you got it- Aren’t you happy YET?????

Posted by: aelspache | February 5, 2009, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

It’s amazing how many of you Republican hacks cannot read. The guy is not getting let go. He will be prosecuted under a legal court system. No wonder you guys value Palin so much.

Posted by: Sean | February 5, 2009, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

Get him out of office now he is a lunatic! We are all in trouble thanks democrats this is on your shoulders. I hope you all can sleep with your selves. Are children are at risk now you are all such bad people. I pray for us now!

Posted by: KATHY SHERMAN | February 5, 2009, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

” it can’t be stupid of him to postpone the trial to strengthen the process by which he’s being judged”
Ok folks you need to start reading! The process is one that is LAW, passed by CONGRESS and backed up by THE SUPREME COURT.
Unless of course you think Obama can unsurp both of the branches of government because he’s popular.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm

Memo to Obama: Knee-jerk actions do not make good policy. Start serving the interests of the people, sir, instead of their enemies.

Posted by: GVnana | February 5, 2009, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm

TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ALL OF THIS IS A LITTLE TEDIOUS BUT I AM TRUSTING IN GOD THAT THESE PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING.

Posted by: the voodoo doll | February 5, 2009, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm

So President Obama thinks the military court is too slow? Yeah, lets move this to our even slower civilian courts, where inmates typically stay on death row for 20 years … plenty of time for the terrorist to recruit new followers.

Posted by: Open-Mind | February 5, 2009, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm

“I don’t even know why any of you Obamabots that were drunk off the hopeychangey rhetoric are all of a sudden shocked and upset. YOU are also to blame when this scum of the earth gets released (cause he will eventually get released) and for this disgrace Clown-in-Chief.”
Yep, and this ‘clown in chief’ is now your president and you have to live with it. Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Posted by: keredte | February 5, 2009, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm

“was he holding weapons, shooting at the time? was he just ’round up’ as many of these men were”
Some of you folks are screwed in the head… really. The crap you believe and subscribe to is disturbing. You actually believe our military, your sons and daughters, just rounded people up for the heck of it? One of the guys that got off (through the military commission process) is now the leader of AQ in Yemen. I guess he was just “rounded up” for no reason at all huh?
Disgusting.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm

More liberal freakshow stuff. Obama is a rookie senator who lied his way into the white house.

Posted by: Dr Dan | February 5, 2009, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm

THIS MAN IS BEING HELD UNDER AN ILLEGAL SYSTEM, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are still Americans that believe in justice for all!!!!! How would you feel if another country such as Iran held one of our own in an illegal manner and tortured. How can this country lead another one when it’s policies are just as foul. There are laws that were ignored by the other Morans that the Morans elected to this great country.

Posted by: sara wilson | February 5, 2009, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm

I did read the article. The article says the charges MAY be reinstated. It doesn’t say they WILL be.
You liberals have severe reading comprehension difficulties brought on by excessive Obama kool-aid drinking binges.

Posted by: jennifert7 | February 5, 2009, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm

Lynne,
You may try reading the Constitution. No oath or bible is even required.

Posted by: Sean | February 5, 2009, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm

“military tribunal for all gitmo prisoners would be ‘fine’!! Gitmo is unconstitutional. Prosecuting folks who were just roudned up will be found unconstitutional.”
The constitution is applied to YOU, NOT THESE GUYS. At least that is how it was before idiots got involved. This is a mess because of that, and I’m pretty sure we have the left to blame for it.
Riddle me this batman, does the US Constitution apply to a citizen of Yemen, apprehended in Yemen? Your saying yes. Thats sick.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:07 pm 7:07 pm

This is all so predictable. Really, is anyone -on the left or right- surprised at this? I’ll bet when Obama gets finished screwing this up the guy walks out of civil court, which is probably Obama’s intent. Short pants indeed.

Posted by: Keith E. | February 5, 2009, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm

You elect a terrorist sympathizer president and now you are surprised at this? It’s going to be a long 4 years.

Posted by: Bored at work | February 5, 2009, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm

Good grief, you libs are incredible. These guys are not protected by the US Constitution.

Posted by: jennifert7 | February 5, 2009, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

“Riddle me this batman, does the US Constitution apply to a citizen of Yemen, apprehended in Yemen? Your saying yes. Thats sick. ”
Why shouldn’t it? The constitution doesn’t allow us to deal with serial killers and rapists in our own country well enough?
Why does the right hate the constitution?

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

ABC please, we already have Fox noise we don’t need more garbage from the press. This is a judical matter, and a legal maneuver by the President in order to stop the trial of this person until the laws that Bush created to try these people can be reviewed to ensure they can’t later be overturned and these people released. This wouldn’t be necessary if the Trial Judge, an Army Colonel hadn’t refused to delay the trail until the laws could be reviewed. So please stop the BS hype…or switch to Fox noise.

Posted by: Your Stupid | February 5, 2009, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm

Obama is a danger to America.

Posted by: CW | February 5, 2009, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm

O’bummer may have a good plan, but until he sets it forth clearly, his moves continue to look idiotic, anti-justice and pro-terrorism. It was clear to me months ago he’s no one to believe in. Each passing day he’s proves it over and over again.

Posted by: gvz | February 5, 2009, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm

Dan… MORAN is an internet meme

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm

Frank, thank you for responding on “How is a military trial duly authorized by Congress ” question.
I’m not sure how the circumstances of “arrest” would determine the jurisdiction or authority of the military court as established by Congress? For example, if a suspected bank robber escaped, any level of law enforcement, bounty hunters or an MP for that matter could detain him and return him to the system established. Even if his treatment by the bounty hunter or other police agency was over the line, that would not necessarily effect his trial and conviction.

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm

“a scant few months “…NINE!! NINE MONTHS!! CLinton held a terrorist assement meeting EVERY WEEK. BUsh NEVER HELD ONE!! HE was on vacation when he got a memo saying point blank “WE WILL BE ATTACKED IMMINENTLY BY AQ…WILL USE PLANES AS MISSLES” and he did NOTHING!!!! Had bush done ONE THING- made a no fly list of KNOWN terrorists, the whole plot would have been foiled!!! Pentagon officials were telling their staff not to fly the ywere so sure ther was going to be a hijacking and where the # was Bush????? on vacation – he did NOTHING!! No call to the FAA. no call to the FBI. NOBODY!!!!! You should try READING the 9/11 commission report! i did! Again, the scope and magnitude of the ignorance of a republicans is just stunning!! AMericans killed under Bush = 7000+ DEAD AMERICANS THANKS TO BUSH!!!!! 9/11 = 3000 dead Americans. IRAQ, the war that NEVER need be, in fact, we would be better off it never happened killed 4000+. So Bush has been direclty responsible for the death of over 7000 Americans and you say we were ‘safe’ under him?????? one man. One man, responsible for so many dead. Do you understand the power ofthe president??? how BADLY he screwed up?? ALL of the prisoners at Gitmo, they may eventually go free!! ALL OF THEM!!! Why??? because the whole damnn thing, the detention, the military tribunal – it may ALL be found unconstitutional. Yeah, heck of a job, Brownie!

Posted by: Frank | February 5, 2009, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm

“Ok folks you need to start reading! The process is one that is LAW, passed by CONGRESS and backed up by THE SUPREME COURT.”
And your point is what?, however the process’ mechanics are designed to work there are loopholes in it that are setting untried terrorist suspects free. Obama wants to get that repaired before one of the biggest suspects gets the benefit of following the others out through the same loophole.

Posted by: MyEyedea | February 5, 2009, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm

The news media wants to know where they should go to get their credibility back.
First, listen to Rush, Remember everything Barry says has an expiration ate. Just words…………
Second, get over your plantation owner mentality.
Third, journalism died in 2008. We are all journalist now.

Posted by: Rhonda | February 5, 2009, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm

“”Why shouldn’t it? The constitution doesn’t allow us to deal with serial killers and rapists in our own country well enough?
Why does the right hate the constitution?”
Ok great im glad you answered, now stay with me.
We get into a war with Yemen. If our constitution applies to them, how do we prosecute war on them? Do we read them Miranda rights in the field? Do we offer them an attorney when we apprehend them? Can you even shoot them at all?

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm

Some facts that most of you get wrong..
1) The Military Court is under the Executive Branch not the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government , as all things under the U.S. Military
2) al-Nashiri is not being set free. Obama is using his Constitutional authority to stop the trial, because in all likelihood that after it has been concluded it may be deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court because evidence probably was derived by torture.
3) Bush/Cheney administration has been prosecuting these guys for 7 to 8 years now…. What’s another 4 months, while the administration has a chance to figure out exactly what it’s working with ?

Posted by: Zoom | February 5, 2009, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm

If they’re on our soil, they are protected. Sooooo, my dear Aunt from London can be tortured, charged with a crime without due process? Again will it be right for Afgan to capture and torture one of ours without proving what they have accused him/her of. Get Real!!!!!

Posted by: sara wilson | February 5, 2009, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm

“You actually believe our military, your sons and daughters, just rounded people up for the heck of it? One of the guys that got off (through the military commission process) is now the leader of AQ in Yemen. I guess he was just “rounded up” for no reason at all huh?”
Weren’t you watching the news or aware of what was going on when these giant sweeps happened right after 9/11? Were you living in a cave or something?

Posted by: keredte | February 5, 2009, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm

This makes me angry and very upset! It is worse then I thought it would be and the
first 100 days are not over yet!
“and they’ll say ‘help us’ and I’ll say no”

Posted by: right | February 5, 2009, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm

IT’S NOT AGAINST THE LAW OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO BE HOLDING THESE GUYS.
You people who claim he is being held illegally or it’s against the constitution need a better understanding of how this game has been played. They are being held in a military base on foreign soil in a foreign country. Our constitution and civilian laws do not apply there. Most if not all of these guys were never on American soil and therefor even at the farthest stretch of civilian law they can’t be treated as being prisoners of the American court system. Our constitution does not apply to situations outside of the US and US territories. Saying it is against the law doesn’t make it so. As far as it being morally wrong that is another story.

Posted by: Bored at work | February 5, 2009, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm

“And your point is what?, however the process’ mechanics are designed to work there are loopholes in it that are setting untried terrorist suspects free. Obama wants to get that repaired before one of the biggest suspects gets the benefit of following the others out through the same loophole.”
My point his he cannot just issue an Executive order and change it up. It’s no longer his call to make. He can’t make up new laws as he goes along, and needs a court order to stop the trials, just like with any other court. He has to file an injunction to stop the trials with legal grounds as to why they must be stopped. Not just because he feels like it and wants to review and make sure they are valid. They are lawful trials, as ruled by the law passed by the people (Congress) and the Supreme Court.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm

Ok KR I see your point, however it was because I was trying to make a point and exaggerated a bit. You do realize we now have 3 Court systems right?
The court system for US citizens.
The military court system.
And this military “tribunal” system.
I wouldn’t seriously recommend they be tried in the first system, but why not the military court system?
Why did Bush need to create a third system? And have you read the details of the tribunal system? I did, it was a long time ago, so I can’t quote directly, but I am about to go study it a little…

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm

I enjoy the reasoned arguments of our elite liberal friends. It is great we can have discussion at this civil level
“The arm-chair conservative nut jobs are in full force …
impressive

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm

Since when does the military tell the Commander in Chief what they will do?

Posted by: ronnierayjenkins | February 5, 2009, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm

“Weren’t you watching the news or aware of what was going on when these giant sweeps happened right after 9/11″
How many of those are in GITMO? Give me a number and reference link, not bogus political one liners.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm

“Even if his treatment by the bounty hunter or other police agency was over the line, that would not necessarily effect his trial and conviction.”..two problems. ONE – you are talking about a civilian court, as am i, as Obama wants this guy to be tried, because constitutionally, that is probably the only way the conviction will stick. Second problem, the detention itself, coudl, anydaynow, we found unconstitutional, which would mean ALL of hte prisoners would be let go IMMEDIATELY> hence, Obama says it gets shuts down ASAP! Third problem, this guy was not captured DURING a bombing, he was captured later so he MUST have a civilian trial. Whatever short order cook laywerwanna be who told, nahhhh, “military trial is fine” is WRONG!! for it to STICK it must actually comply with our pesky little constitution, which would NEVER have been a problem if Bush just DEALT with these people as they came in, as thing unravelled, but he didn’t. Guys who were caught red handed with guns were roudned up and throw in with guys who were just hanging out in a square and all brought in and given thumbs screws hoping the y would tell us something useful. they didn’t. THe whole thing is a fiasco. IT needs to be CLEANED UP!!! This army idiot who shoudl shut up, stop the military trial, let Obama close gitmo, weed out who had guns intheir hands and GET TRIALS nad real convictions so they can have sentences and prison terms that STICK!!!!! I heard of three chinese guys today who were nowhere near battle when picked up. What do we do with them???? if THEY are found to be held against the constitution then ALL who are held there will be set free IMMEDIATELY!!! HOnestly, republicans have screwed up enough. They DO NOT understand the complexities of the issue then they should STAND ASIDE so solutions can be done!!!!

Posted by: frank | February 5, 2009, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm

Easy solution: if we capture AQ in battle, extract any information we can then hand them over to the locals to finish off. The locals have no illusion of being “good guys”.

Posted by: Deguello | February 5, 2009, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm

Listen, never mention the word “impeach” again referring to Obama because that would mean only one thing: Joe Biden. Leave well enough alone. This loser will be gone after this term.

Posted by: Chas | February 5, 2009, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm

“Since when does the military tell the Commander in Chief what they will do?”
Since lawyers took it out of the military (executive) and stuck it in Judicial, he no longer can tell the judge in the case what to do. He needs a court order to force the judge to do anything, and it probably has to come from the Supreme Court.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm

Got lesson from Proff Ayers?

Posted by: cilla | February 5, 2009, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm

Bush did not set up a military tribunal system, at least not the one that is IN operation until this attempted abolishment – Congress did. Supreme Court last year ordered some changes but did not abolish it.

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm

Ok Ok… I will admit you fine folks nursing from Obama may have valid points and perhaps the rest of US are out of our minds.
However, when we are all back here on this forum debating the most recent terrorist attack on our citizens; please remember your comments at this time. If not the rest of US will remind you, if that’s ok.

Posted by: Tim | February 5, 2009, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm

Just becouse someone hates Obama does not mean there racist! Saying that means that you are the one with the low IQ. Just becouse someone doesn’t agree with one person does not mean they hate all of one race! That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard!

Posted by: right | February 5, 2009, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm

Good point Chas!!!

Posted by: robert b | February 5, 2009, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

4) The Constitution applies to all U.S. Citizens, anyone within our borders and anyone that’s in our custody regardless of the location…

Posted by: Zoom | February 5, 2009, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

WOW…! Obama is no leader

Posted by: neofred | February 5, 2009, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

Graham stood by and allowed the Banks to get 350 billion and didn’t “utter” a word. This was the last harrah for the Republicans and their “fat cat” buddies on Wall Street. Now the “sicko” Cheney trying the scare tactic again, wanting to distract the American people again, bashing Obama because he has focused on Wall Street. WHAT IN THE WORLD IS HE AFRAID OF????? All of you “distracted” ones out there, Bush and Cheney ran this country in the ground, stole your money and distracted you with an unjust war.

Posted by: sara wilson | February 5, 2009, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

Talk about jumping from he fire into the skillet. This is not good! I hope sincerely that he changes his mind. While I do support him as my president this is wrong. I will pray for him to reverse that thought. We lost many good sailors that day.

Posted by: Steve | February 5, 2009, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm

I contributed to McCain’s campaign and voted for him and still damn proud that I did both!

Posted by: MBNA Joe | February 5, 2009, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm

Great another cowart like Bill Clinton in the White House! If hadn’t of let Bin Ladin go when he was in office, the towers would still be standing today and peoples lives spared! Now Obama wants to let the terriorist go and you liberals agree ~ Thanks for putting my Marine sons in more danger. The sad thing is they are willing to die for liberals who are to cowardly to fight! As the song says, if you dont’ want to fight, GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Semperfimamabear | February 5, 2009, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm

Do you think the bad guys will play nice now?

Posted by: Gary | February 5, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm

KR innocently asked… “You actually believe our military, your sons and daughters, just rounded people up for the heck of it? ”
Of course that’s what they believe, because that’s what Michael Moore taught them in “Fahrenheit 911″. Unfortunately, few of them bothered to watch the rebuttal documentary “FahrenHYPE 911″ which very effectively revealed Moore’s many deliberate lies and spin.

Posted by: Open-Mind | February 5, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm

“Why did Bush need to create a third system? And have you read the details of the tribunal system?”
Actually he didn’t. He wanted the military tribunal system only. However, lawyers got down there and took cases to the Supreme Court which really botched up the whole thing.
We had a military tribunal back in WWII, the spies from Germany who plotted to blow up facilities in the US. They were caught, put on military tribunal in the Justice Department (in location only, military judges oversaw the procedure), and executed (all but two).
So what we’ve done is muddied up the system by injecting our court system into warfare, a very bad idea. But, we shot ourselves in the foot on this one cause we just hated Bush so much.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm

Joey Says
“To the people who think Obama is a danger to America”
You bunch of Liberals, Do not Pay Taxes, lives on Government Checks, have no right to tell us to leave the country.
We pay Taxes and we have every rights to say what we want to say.

Posted by: adam | February 5, 2009, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm

semperfimamabear….
First of all thanks for your sons service.
Second of all, he is not letting anyone go, he is trying to make sure the guys is never let go by making sure he is convicted under a system that is 100% legal.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm

Obama continues to send signals to our enemies that he is weak and timid. Clinton ignored the USS Cole bombing resulting in an emboldened Al Qaeda. BHO has already apologized to Iran and we saw how much they respected him for THAT. GWB didn’t trample the Constitution no matter how much you lefties like to claim that he did, but just wait until you see what BHO is going to try to do to it.

Posted by: Joanne600 | February 5, 2009, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm

“You bunch of Liberals, Do not Pay Taxes, lives on Government Checks, have no right to tell us to leave the country.
We pay Taxes and we have every rights to say what we want to say.”
I am a liberal, and I would fight to the death for you to be able to say what you want to say. However dumb and generalized your idiotic statements may be. That’s your right.
I don’t live off government checks and I pay taxes. Thanks.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm

I wonder how the 9/11 families and our soldiers feel about this.

Posted by: cilla | February 5, 2009, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm

“The Constitution applies to all U.S. Citizens, anyone within our borders and anyone that’s in our custody regardless of the location”
This does not apply to War. Conduct for POW’s doesn’t come from our Constitution, it comes from International Law and the Law of Armed Conflict. Those in military custody taken from the battlefield follow international law and the law of armed conflict.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm

The Constitution applies to all U.S. Citizens,and the Geneva convention doesn’t apply to terrorist that do not wear a uniform or represent “A Government”. This president is weak and some where sometime we are going to see the end result

Posted by: neofred | February 5, 2009, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm

“debating the most recent terrorist attack on our citizens; please remember your comments at this time”…Huh???? apples and oranges. Had Bush DEALT with this issue in a timely manner, this would not be happening. Had Bush had REAL laywers and not tried ot ignore the constitution, maybe this plethora of suits that is working it’s way up the courts, would not be happening. But he CHOSE to throw anyone and everyone whether on the battlefield hanging out, in the same prison, torcher them and never ever actuallyl press charges, in a country that HAS a constitution, while families of those being held are getting laywers, bringing suits and Bush is clearing brush in Texas pretending none of this is happening. Maybe if I close my eyes and tap my heels three times it will all go away. well, here we have a trial about to begin that may very well have it’s conviction thrown out, the guy go free, a nd he IS a terrorist, and Obama says “cease and decist” on all trials and the military says “no”????? hello???? I think Obama, the constitutional law professor knows how to get this done so it sticks. You say ‘yes sir, mr. president!” or I hope you find yourself scrubbing latrines until retirement. and what ANY Of that has to do with a terrorist hitting us , I dont konw, but if one of these suits gets found the wrong way, and ALL of these guys get set free, then YOU think about it!!! YOU getting in the way AGAIN are the cause of getting terrorists being set free!

Posted by: frank | February 5, 2009, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm

“Now Obama wants to let the terriorist go … ”
Er, you might be confused: He’s merely disappearing the charges for the MOMENT, in order to prevent the prisoner from being able actually to GO TO COURT on February 9.
No wonder The Puppet was only a lecturer on the Constitution.
How … Lincolnesque. Next, He’ll be marching through Georgia.

Posted by: General Braxton Bragg | February 5, 2009, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm

I will admit something. I have never been racist in my life. I was not raised to hate anyone. However, I am getting where I cannot stand listening to anything about fairness and equality. Obama is not fixing anything he is driving a wedge between the races. People where I work are saying terrible thing about coworkers that are black. Comments that would have never been said before. This is real people not just all of us arguing. People are developing real hatred for people they have worked with for years.

Posted by: Tim | February 5, 2009, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm

Also as a side note to those reading, I heard a Lt. Colonel on the radio the other day that served in Gitmo as a Prosecutor before resigning due to the horrible state of all the evidence against these guys in Gitmo.
He said files of evidence against these guys were thrown in lockers in a huge pile scattered all about made it nearly impossible to find the evidence against a particular guy.
This is why there are so few convictions, the military record keeping was in complete disarray. Seems like if your primary focus as president was “the war on terror” then record keeping against enemy combatants would be priority number 1.
And KR I am pretty sure Bush set up the military tribunals, but you seem intelligent and I will concede that I need to research it further before I can speak intelligently about it.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm

“The prior administration ruled that there is no right to a writ of habeas corpus so these people can be held as long as desired. These “trials” were delayed for years by the previous administration and only started when their “dictatorship” was ending.”
^^^ The previous administration was correct. These are not american citizens therefor the US Constitution does not apply to them.
Do the world a favor and learn something about government please.

Posted by: Travis | February 5, 2009, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm

For 8 years the Clinton Administration proved that treating Islamic terrorism as a law enforcement issue was ineffective! The very reason why Osama bin Laden is walking and talking today and was able to attack the US on 9/11 is due, solely, to the fact that President Clinton did not “think” they could secure a conviction if they had arrested him 1996 when Sudan offered him to the US..

Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter | February 5, 2009, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm

robert b, you have simply pointed out one of the major problems with the entire “military tribunal” system of (in)justice: it puts too much under the executive branch. But the President – as CinC – cannot permit his military officers to mutiny when he orders that a process of questionable legality be continued while the question of legality is properly settled. This is precisely the sort of challenge that Doug Mac threw at HST, and it cannot be tolerated lest our nation become subject to a possibility of military coup: military officers must ALWAYS obey an order of the President unless they can show EXTREMELY good evidence that that order is unlawful!
What we have here is a soldier who has decided that he is more loyal to the former POTUS than to the current POTUS – and that is a VERY dangerous thing!
As far as “holding Nashiri illegally without charges”, there is a legal reason to hold him: he is a WANTED MAN in another country (Yemen) with which we likely have an extradition agreement or can craft one quickly if we need to! That makes holding him COMPLETELY LEGAL, and thus your argument moot.

Posted by: Jordan | February 5, 2009, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm

Semperfimambear,
As it happens I have a son in the army and a nephew in the marines. Both are currently serving in Iraq. I was proud to vote for President Obama, and I know the safety of our troops and of our country is as vital to him as it is to anyone; perhaps more so, because it is his burden to bear. He promised to clean up the wrongs of the Guantanamo detentions for a very valid reason. If we do not honor the established rules for civiled nations in dealing with enemy combatants, what can we expect when our own troops are captured by rogue nations. We can once again look the other nations of the world in the face and say ‘these are the rules and America plays by the rules”. My son, my nephew, my sister and I are all behind the president.

Posted by: phoenix lady | February 5, 2009, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm

” am pretty sure Bush set up the military tribunals, but you seem intelligent and I will concede that I need to research it further before I can speak intelligently about it.”
Yes he did set them up. Sorry if our lines crossed. The military commission was set up by Congress and the Supreme Court.
Before Congress and the Supreme Court got involved, the method of dealing with “unlawful combatants”, which is what these guys are, was through military tribunal. This is because POW status, and the Geneva Convention does not apply. The detainees do not meet the requirement set forth for POW status. Thus, a trial can be set forth with the penalty of execution.
But then we let lawyers in and they screwed it all up. Now we have one heck of a mess.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:36 pm 7:36 pm

I have to admit, when I first read the headline, I was shocked too. It’s not until you read further in that you realize the reasons why. I think ABC should rewrite the headline because it’s not until paragraph three that it becomes apparent that this is not a move toward leniency.

Posted by: Just looking | February 5, 2009, 7:36 pm 7:36 pm

This turns my stomach. This ### attacked our MILITARY! Impeach Obama!
Posted by: realnyer
*********************************
sour grapes

Posted by: spacerook1 | February 5, 2009, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm

9/11 was never properly investigated at all.
Why was Cheney in charge of NORAD and doing practice terrorist exercises at the SAME TIME there was a terror attack?
How come we have never seen the photos of the Pentagon attacked?

Posted by: hbeachrealist | February 5, 2009, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm

America,you selected a wrong “guy” to run our Great country ! Good luck.

Posted by: lu | February 5, 2009, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm

How did we let lawyers in? Who is “we”? And what did the lawyers do?

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

“He can’t make up new laws as he goes along, and needs a court order to stop the trials, just like with any other court. He has to file an injunction to stop the trials with legal grounds as to why they must be stopped. Not just because he feels like it and wants to review and make sure they are valid. They are lawful trials, as ruled by the law passed by the people (Congress) and the Supreme Court.”
I feel like he and the hundreds of lawyers he has at his disposal to advize him on this will have researched the ‘how-to’s’ at great length. The next steps, rights, and due courses of law are clear, set and established in civilian court and in military court – -this new tribunal court is a whole different branch of the judicial system. It is precisely bc it was created and thrown together by a president that wanted to get away from the regular and established rules of law in military and civil courts that the loopholes exist, and if terrorists can exploit those loopholes to get away and do more harm to the US, why shouldn’t the president be allowed to step in and clean up the system so that it is more regulated and functioning with a meritted intent? If it was as easy as filing an injunction then I’m sure that’s what he would be doing, but it doesn’t sound like that’s the case. If President Obama flat out can’t do something, isn’t allowed, is overstepping his permissions as President, then one of the other branches of gov’t will let him know and quick. You’d be seeing that as the top headline as opposed to how he dissed Washingtonians and their cold weather reactions.

Posted by: MyEyedea | February 5, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

There’s something odd in this story. Its not clear what the charges are against al-Nashiri, and if they include terrorism, as the adjectives used imply, what does that have to do with the bombing of the Cole? Are we to consider that an act of terrorism and not an act of war? Or is the US claiming that it is both? Further, this guy wasn’t al Qaeda, apparently he refused to swear an oath to Bin Laden. Who is linking him to Al Qaeda? I don;t think whoever is saying this knows what they are talking about, but since that ‘identification’ is unsourced here, we don’t know.
This does show what a mistake the torture was though.

Posted by: Flash Override | February 5, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

“The Constitution applies to all U.S. Citizens,and the Geneva convention doesn’t apply to terrorist that do not wear a uniform or represent “A Government”.”….says you. How’s that going to hold up in court??? Habeas Corpus applies to every individual. period. Illegal immigrant, criminal, terrorist..EVERYONE! sorry. YOu can go yell at Thomas Jefferson, he was a flaming liberal and he had this thing about freedom. And we’re stuck with it. Fact is, suits are coming up the line, and what you call “weak” is actually intelligence. Obama KNOWS the ramifications of these military tribunals going forward with convictions that could all be overturned null and void in a few years a nd ALL these terrorist walking home free. ####, moan, complain all you want. wE HAVE a constitution and you MUST comply by it and if this ###### you off, then your biggest problem is with the original constructors of our government and with Bush who chose to ignore it because it was too hard for his wittle brain to hanbdle. I can see why he was liked by people like you. You think ignorance is stengtg. you dont understand something, oh, forget it, I’m not dealing with it! I”ll just rant like a child. SO much easier. well, don’t worry. We have a grownup in charge now. That allows mental midget mentality such as yours this luxury of p*ssing and moaning. Go cry in the corner while someone actually takes care of the nitty gritty details of setting this all right so it all works nad sticks in the end. Dont worry your pretty little head. Just get the h*ll out of way while the work is being done, ok Jr?

Posted by: frank | February 5, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

whats next from the great fraud? perhaps making spanish the official language of the US? or ARABIC? you want our troops to fight for you and respect you? free the enemy….outrageous

Posted by: catman | February 5, 2009, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm

instead of all the bashing going on, why doesnt the president, or whoever has the authority, ask the the supreme court a simple question, “do these enemy combatants, have the same rights of american citizens” to me its obvious they dont, but then if the supreme court sees otherwise, then all this blethering will stop

Posted by: sandy | February 5, 2009, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm

“what can we expect when our own troops are captured by rogue nations.”
What we can always expect, torture and used for propaganda. Many of those nations don’t sign the Geneva convention and really could care less if we abide by them or not. That is of course assuming those in GITMO are covered by the Geneva Convention, of which they are not. But we apply it to them anyway, hey why not. Go ahead, hide in the population and don’t wear uniforms when you attack us, we’ll protect you when caught. It’s lunacy.
People may find this odd, but US Soldiers captured in Germany in WW2 were treated better than US Soldiers captured in just about every other war.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm

Just another terrorist that’ll blow up something else once freed. Maybe we’ll get lucky and he’ll blowup an inhabited White House. It’ll save us all the impeachment proceedings when he runs the country into bankruptcy with China.

Posted by: WhatChange? | February 5, 2009, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm

“If we do not honor the established rules for civiled nations in dealing with enemy combatants, what can we expect when our own troops are captured by rogue nations.”
Ahem, AQ will torture and behead our POWs whether we act like a “civilized” nation or not.

Posted by: Deguello | February 5, 2009, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm

You know what KR? I don’t really care about what the standards of other countries are, how barbaric they are and how twisted in their thinking. I do care what we are and what we do as a people. I grew up believing that Americans were the best people in the world. When I read so many of these posts it is hard to hold on to that belief.

Posted by: phoenix lady | February 5, 2009, 7:44 pm 7:44 pm

Why doesnt Obama just tell the familes, “well we know he killed some of your loved ones but you have to understand us liberals are more interested in protecting the guilty than anyhing else and well i’m sorry but your family members were innocent”

Posted by: Dan | February 5, 2009, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

“Just another terrorist that’ll blow up something else once freed. Maybe we’ll get lucky and he’ll blowup an inhabited White House. It’ll save us all the impeachment proceedings when he runs the country into bankruptcy with China.”
@ WhatChange
HAHA! As if we aren’t already bankrupted and under the influence of China.
Have you noticed the national debt racked up by “small government” conservative leadership under Cheney and Bush?

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

I thought it would be a while before I would have the opportunity to say this, but YOU voted for him, not me. While I wasn’t happy with the choice I had, and being a registered Independent, this election was one that came down to substance v. style, however un- conservative he was, McCain was at least somewhat sensible. Obama was your will o the wisp fantasy, someone who looked good in a suit, who spoke in a decidedly practiced but elegant way, someone who may have brought Chris Matthew’s out of the closet…..but not anyone I would trust my life, my children’s nor my grandchildren’s life to….but you won…he is here…selecting Porn lawyers for Asst. AG, and flat out, destroying the very fabric of this great Country. I’m old, but you will have a long time to sleep in the bed you have made, all for the sake of elegance and style. Poor exchange for freedom, but then maybe freedom was too hard for many of you to handle.

Posted by: joanne | February 5, 2009, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

“says you. How’s that going to hold up in court??? Habeas Corpus applies to every individual. period. Illegal immigrant, criminal, terrorist..EVERYONE!”
That is so twisted it’s scary.
Law of Armed Conflict, Article 4
Article 4(A)(2) includes as POWs members of “other militias” and “volunteer corps,” including “organized resistance movements” that belong to a Party to the conflict. In addition, members of militias and volunteer corps must “fulfill” four conditions: (a) “being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates”; (b) “having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance”; (c) “carrying arms openly”; and (d) “conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.”

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm

“You know what KR? I don’t really care about what the standards of other countries are, how barbaric they are and how twisted in their thinking. I do care what we are and what we do as a people. I grew up believing that Americans were the best people in the world. When I read so many of these posts it is hard to hold on to that belief.”
God Bless you and thank you for your families service and your love of our great nation.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm

“I don’t really care about what the standards of other countries are,”
You might if you wear a uniform like me.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm

The very reason why Osama bin Laden is walking
and talking today and was able to attack the US on
9/11 is due, solely, to the fact that President
Clinton did not “think” they could secure a
conviction if they had arrested him 1996 when
Sudan offered him to the US..
Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter
*****************************************
Yet right after 9/11 Bush let the entire Bin Laden
family leave this country even though there was
a ban on air travel during that time. This family
know what was going on by having contact with
Bin Laden operations, but as predictable, they were
best pals to the bush family.

Posted by: spacerook1 | February 5, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

Are you kidding me!!? I knew this was going to be a trainwreck from the beginning but this is a whole other level disgrace for even him. He’s going to go down as the worst president in history!!!PERIOD. LIVES, BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS HAVE GONE INTO MAKING THIS GREAT COUNTRY. Ones That allowed him be president of this great country. He must’ve forgotten this in his hope haze. He’d like to see change…well hes about to get change alright….THIS IS AWFUL!!!!!

Posted by: WWWOOOWWW!!! | February 5, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

9/11 was never properly investigated at all.
Why was Cheney in charge of NORAD and doing practice terrorist exercises at the SAME TIME there was a terror attack?
How come we have never seen the photos of the Pentagon attacked?
Posted by: hbeachrealist | Feb 5, 2009 7:38:55 PM
There are many types of medications to help you deal with your Paranoia.
Put the tin foil hat down, and make the call brother.. there is help.

Posted by: realnyer | February 5, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

KR I do understand the limitations of the Geneva Conventions when dealing with a prisoner who is not a combatant who can be attributed to a military of a certain country in a uniform.
I realize there needs to be rules for this type of combatant. But the policies in place now are not efficient or effectual at all and they need to be cleaned up.
It is my understanding that this is what Obama is trying to do.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm

Bleeker: If you really have to ask “How did we let lawyers in? Who is “we”? And what did the lawyers do?” You really do not need to involve yourself in the conversation.
These enemy combatants have no business being tried in anything other than a military tribunal. Plain and simple. The legal precedents for using military tribunals were set by George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt. The ACLU has no business stepping in and derailing this process.

Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter | February 5, 2009, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm

“I do care what we are and what we do as a people. I grew up believing that Americans were the best people in the world. When I read so many of these posts it is hard to hold on to that belief.”
I do as well, and we should preserve that at all costs. But unlawful combatants do have a right to our lawyers or our law system. They have the right to a trial and a swift sentence. Military Tribunal was set up for the latter and we just blew it up. So yeah, I’m a bit ticked we are trying these guys like they ripped off a grocery store in Tampa.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:50 pm 7:50 pm

Repeating the errors of the past, if Clinton hadn’t been soft on tterror, 9/11 would have never happened … The Willie Horton terror ads are going to be fun next election.

Posted by: bill-tb | February 5, 2009, 7:51 pm 7:51 pm

KR As it happens my SON wears the uniform, and his father did before him and my father, a career Navy man did before that. You people think you are the only patriots, but there are people who are not afraid to buck the conventional wisdom. That is what makes them great.

Posted by: phoenix lady | February 5, 2009, 7:51 pm 7:51 pm

Way to go Obama,,,, It’s kinda funny that the first thing you do as president is start fighting for the terrorist…You gonna have LUNCH with this one too??????? What do you care, you havent lost a loved one to this war on “TERRORIST”….. thought you were for the AMERICANS???? You are an AMERICAN president.. or did you forget?

Posted by: shakinmyhead | February 5, 2009, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm

“I realize there needs to be rules for this type of combatant.”
There are rules. He has the right to a trial and sentencing to include execution. That is all the law says.
Unfortunately, we interpreted trial as throwing him in front of Judge Judy instead of letting the military deal with it.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm

phoenix lady, what conventional wisdom are you trying to buck?

Posted by: Dan | February 5, 2009, 7:54 pm 7:54 pm

” buck the conventional wisdom.”
Maybe should read what the conventional wisdom is based off of before you buck it. Law of Armed Conflict, Geneva Convention. There are those who are not afforded the protection and it outlines exactly who they are, and its those in GITMO. Yet, we do it anyway. Thats not bucking conventional wisdom, that’s bucking common sense.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm

You fools. You decry torture and perpetual GITMO detention of suspects, and then when those are stopped for legitimate reasons, you think the crap has hit the fan! You know why? ‘Cause YOU ain’t got a plan!
This is called CHANGE, people. I knew you were all scared of it.

Posted by: window | February 5, 2009, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm

bill-tb: I am afraid I cannot disagree with you enough. Too many Americans are going to die between now and the next election cycle for me to laugh at the ads pointing out Obama’s failure to protect America.

Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter | February 5, 2009, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm

The very reason why Osama bin Laden is walking
and talking today and was able to attack the US on
9/11 is due, solely, to the fact that President
Clinton did not “think” they could secure a
conviction if they had arrested him 1996 when
Sudan offered him to the US..
Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter
*****************************************Right you are.
Yet right after 9/11 Bush let the entire Bin Laden
family leave this country even though there was
a ban on air travel during that time. This family
know what was going on by having contact with
Bin Laden operations, but as predictable, they were
best pals to the bush family.
Posted by: spacerook1 | Feb 5, 2009 7:48:22 PM

Posted by: rich | February 5, 2009, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm

Remember when the Cowardly Obama was was trying to show how smart and tough he was by promising to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan where “the real war was”? You should, the last time was only 5 days ago. Not so much now. Obama has decided to put that on hold why he studies his new “Hug a Terrorist” policy.

Posted by: robtr | February 5, 2009, 7:59 pm 7:59 pm

“f you really have to ask “How did we let lawyers in? Who is “we”? And what did the lawyers do?”
Sorry bleeker I missed this earlier. I’m not sure who let them in, had to be the Administration. What they did is migrate the cases to the US court system, ending in the Supreme Court.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm

A real Republican would want us to attack China and Russia right now. Yeah, that’s the ticket!

Posted by: bob | February 5, 2009, 8:02 pm 8:02 pm

To: Signed be American…..
Let a terrorist go… huge surprise there.. and you say President Bush failed Katrina. Why is it that all of those folks couldn’t leave when they were warned, yet the treck to Washington D.C. yielded masses in minutes. Hummmm…… interesting

Posted by: usa330 | February 5, 2009, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm

Oh btw the cases that migrated were over the issue of whether or not the detainees would have access to civilian courts. The Supreme Court said yes, in one of the most ridiculously bad rulings in Supreme Court history.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm

My last peice, then I’m back to work –
The reason the Military Tribunal system was set up was bc of the permissions allowed the President by the Patriot Act – that’s why all of this “legality” stuff is where it is now. Because the Patriot Act allows the president to engage in an act of war without the support of Congress, the status of any and all those captured during any such campaign comes into question. If Iraq and Afghanstan were constitutional wars (meaning the President petitioned Congress to send the US to war) then how we deal with POWs in the legal aftermath is much clearer. But when Bush and Cheney pushed the Patriot Act through, they created a void that those captured during combat fell into, and now we’re trying to put these detained individuals on trial using a tribunal system that’s being designed, revamped, and taped together as it goes to fill in the vagues of how to deal with such prisoners. None of the regular rules of military war apply bc this was not a regularly petitioned military war (not in any way to disparage the sacrafices of our military), and bc the military is being used in a combative nature, obviously this is not a civil endeavor and therefore not able to be tried under regular civil law. So now what? We get the Tribunal fix-it, the result of which is 5 terrorist suspects having all of their charges dropped due to the accusation of confessions being attained through torture and therefore weaking the prosecution’s case. Even still, those men are all still being detained (as far as I know) bc the Patriot Act as allows the President to hold enemy combatants indefinitely. So, rights to a speedy trial, don’t really hold water as a reason to deny the President’s request to postpone judicial proceedings since it’s just as legal to keep those suspects imprisoned as long as the President wishes.

Posted by: MyEyedea | February 5, 2009, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm

Repeating the errors of the past, if Clinton hadn’t been soft on tterror, 9/11 would have never happened … The Willie Horton terror ads are going to be fun next election.
Posted by: bill-tb
************************************
Maybe if Reagan hadn’t given Hussein power in
the 1980′s, gave him the crop dusters to spread the poison (which were our chemicals) on the Kurdish, paid for the installation of those caves in Aftganistan which were used by terrorist, 9/11 would have never happened. Willie Horton is Republican.

Posted by: spacerook1 | February 5, 2009, 8:04 pm 8:04 pm

Well KR, thank you for protecting me. I agree, we should have just let the military deal with it instead of setting up this laughable 3rd party court system. I think it would be best if Obama just abolished it and set everything up just like it was before Bush had to go screw with it. Maybe legislating how the military courts were to deal with this new type of combatant where the Geneva conventions don’t apply.
There is too much stupid in here and I am going to go find something better to do. Maybe read up on exactly how this new court system operates…
It is nice to have a non-partisan conversation with someone where all the stupidity and name calling isn’t necessary and the parties involved respect one another.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:04 pm 8:04 pm

“It is nice to have a non-partisan conversation with someone where all the stupidity and name calling isn’t necessary and the parties involved respect one another.”
Agreed there Bleeker. I try my best not to let emotions get too much into my posts. I think the only way to keep a level head is to try and get a maximum perspective and read a bit of history. Nice talking to someone who doesn’t automatically spit out political one-liners for once.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm

Dang it, people. Get a clue. Al-Nashiri is going NOWHERE. Guantanamo has been closed. Obama is asking for a continuance, not immediate release of prisoners. They’re still there, awaiting trial based on evidence. Isn’t this what you wanted?

Posted by: clue | February 5, 2009, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm

“he reason the Military Tribunal system was set up was bc of the permissions allowed the President by the Patriot Act – that’s why all of this “legality” stuff is where it is now.”
Wrong, military tribunals have been around since the Revolutionary War. Got to stop reading whack job conspiracy web sites.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:08 pm 8:08 pm

KR
I don’t readily fit into a political party. I am socially liberal, but I am financially conservative. And while I understand the conflict in that statement, there is so much pork in the defense industries and elsewhere that we go do a lot of good for a lot of people while giving our country greater prospect for the future (I’m big on education and *gasp* socialist healthcare) AND eliminate a lot of government bureaucracy at the same time.
And the main reason I lean so Democrat these days is because the Bush Administration strayed so far off from the underlying Conservative principles that I said “to hell with it” if we are gonna rape the treasury we might as well help the common man while doing so, not just Big Business.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm

Well, when we get hit, and we will get hit, I am hoping the attacks will be on a large leftist population center like NYC, Washington DC, LA, Boston or San Francisco. At least let the people who voted for Obama take the brunt of the attacks.

Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter | February 5, 2009, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm

Your right, Al-Nashiri isn’t going to be set free. He is however going to end up in front of a civilian judge here in the US. Count on that.
It will be a remarkable moment in history to be honest. A foreign, unlawful combatant will be put in front of a civilian judge in the US court system. A great message to send to all the wanna be unlawful combatants everywhere.
And we thought the OJ trial was bad.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm

What a loser!!! I don’t feel safe anymore under Obama.

Posted by: anonymous | February 5, 2009, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm

“Are you kidding me!!? I knew this was going to be a trainwreck from the beginning but this is a whole other level disgrace for even him. He’s going to go down as the worst president in history!!!PERIOD. LIVES, BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS HAVE GONE INTO MAKING THIS GREAT COUNTRY. Ones That allowed him be president of this great country. He must’ve forgotten this in his hope haze. He’d like to see change…well hes about to get change alright….THIS IS AWFUL!!!!!”
Jesus, calm down. Try reading the article again. Let the guy do his job.

Posted by: keredte | February 5, 2009, 8:15 pm 8:15 pm

Brilliant. Sends a great message. I personally not concerned about treating terrorists like ballerinas. They kill any of us like pigs. Way to send a wus cookie signal to the rest of the world Prez. History teaches us that we can’t make peace by simply playing nice in the sand box. It’s not respected internationally (regardless of what is trumpeted) and it makes us seem weak.

Posted by: Chris in TN | February 5, 2009, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm

“Bush Administration strayed so far off from the underlying Conservative principles that I said “to hell with it” if we are gonna rape the treasury we might as well help the common man while doing so, not just Big Business.”
I’m with ya there, except I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Obama, and only reluctantly for McCain. I thought they were both poor choices and would have been much happier with Clinton/Huckabee contest. I just put national defense as my priority at the polls. I guess cause I still wear the uniform on weekends. Was 11 years active duty and served overseas. I’ve seen the evil in the face and I wanted it to stay over there.
I’m afraid over time, military is going to be pulled off the duty of counter terror and its going to become civilian. This move to the civilian courts was the first step in that process. I believe thats dangerous for our future.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm

If General Colin Powell still believes in President Obama, then so I. Powell tried to buck “the conventional wisdom” of the Bush administration, most of whom had never seen an enemy combatant in their lives, and he was shunted aside. For me he is a true American hero for trying to steer us back to the nation we once were.

Posted by: phoenix lady | February 5, 2009, 8:18 pm 8:18 pm

The Obamabots thought he would get right in DC & get Jobs back & New Jobs started. That he would stem the bleeding on Home Forclosers. That he would improve the Economy for the Middle Class, Get our Borders & Ports secured. In His book he said he would stand with the Muslims. Looks to me that is where he is standing all right. He hasn’t done anything to make America more safer or to improve the economy. Oh, well, there is that 10.00 a week tax cut we may see in our paychecks. Let’s be fair, what a big help & stimulas!!

Posted by: Disgusted in Ohio | February 5, 2009, 8:19 pm 8:19 pm

You may disagree with me but personally I would much rather the military slim down and focus on covert Ops. In this day and age I only feel like we will only need one more big huge military deployment and that will be WW3.
Until then I think we should play somewhat isolationist and bulk up for the obviously ensuing world wide conflict that I think is imminent.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm

And Obama believes that parsing jurisdiction of a terrorist case proves his moral superiority – and that most americans will agree that this action is more important than advancing an authentic stimulus package?
Obama demonstrates that he is more and more out of touch with us every single day.

Posted by: s. valenti | February 5, 2009, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm

“It will be a remarkable moment in history to be honest. A foreign, unlawful combatant will be put in front of a civilian judge in the US court system. A great message to send to all the wanna be unlawful combatants everywhere.”
With Obama in office, al-Nashiri will probably end up suing the US Government and all us taxpayers will end up giving him a couple of million $$$ and an apology.

Posted by: Deguello | February 5, 2009, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm

KR – I realize military tribunals have been around for a long time, and used at many and various points throughout history. I am talking about ‘this’ military tribunal system – not the others. ‘This’ tribunal was created out of a demand for some sort of legal action to be enacted on those people being captured during the pre-emptive strikes Bush initiated. ‘This’ tribunal is being peiced together as it goes. ‘This’ tribunal is not following all of the previously prescribed proceedings of those set up in WWII and other wars bc the same rules don’t apply in ‘this’ case. I remember reading articles/editorials that asked over and over again “Bush, what are you going to do with all of these people you’re capturing?” and “‘enemy combatants’ is now the name the White House has designated for those being captured during pre-emptive strikes” and specifically one peice that pointed out that what to do with persons captured during a presidentially declared military engagment was not detailed in the Patriot Act. So, ‘this’ tribunal system is the result of that void; Bush & Co. had to come up with some sort of trial system for those captured, and they drew on pieces of other judial endeavors; but also wanted to make sure not to resemble either civil or military code to closely or risk having constitutional allowances be permitted to detainees. It’s all a very elegant mess.
And speaking of elegance, I’ve enjoyed talking to you and reading your other comments. Thank you.

Posted by: MyEyedea | February 5, 2009, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm

” Bush administration, most of whom had never seen an enemy combatant in their lives,”
Please don’t use enemy combatant. The term is unlawful combatant.
” me he is a true American hero for trying to steer us back to the nation we once were.”
Actually he was pretty ticked off that he paraded in front of the U.N. for the Iraq thing when he personally had reservations about it. He is an internationalist and thought that Iraq would be a bad idea without Russia, Germany, and France. In some way she was right, in some ways he was wrong. Either way, he did what he thought was best and I respect him for it.
Doesn’t mean I think he was right. But as an internationalist, and with all the international fawning over Obama, it would make sense he would support that.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm

I can’t believe what he is doing. First he closes down Gitmo and now this. He seems to be letting the terrorist win. This will not be good for anyone.

Posted by: Frank | February 5, 2009, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm

With Obama in office, al-Nashiri will probably end up suing the US Government and all us taxpayers will end up giving him a couple of million $$$ and an apology.
—————————————
YOU ARE SOOOOOOO RIGHT!!!!!! lol, yOU COULDNT BE MORE RIGHT ON!!!!!

Posted by: shakinmyhead | February 5, 2009, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm

I cannot believe you all, how on earth can we be a peaceful nation, when all of you have such hateful feelings against your own countrymen! Just because they belong to a different party than you do. Wake up people, love begins at home!!

Posted by: Ginger | February 5, 2009, 8:25 pm 8:25 pm

Jeepers. Maybe obama can get him out in time to have dinner with ahmadinejad in the white house. Won’t that be a kodak moment.

Posted by: LindaSoG | February 5, 2009, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm

This country is either a demoncracy or it isn’t. If we want to torture people, then let’s not go around tooting our own horn about how just we are. We are either civilized or we aren’t. It’s that simple.

Posted by: sosupernova | February 5, 2009, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm

Obama is now trying to get into the judicial system. Our fathers have tried to separate him from that and he is weaseling his way in. This is one more reason he should not be in charge. He has no clue how to run this country and is making serious mistakes one after another. He has tried to appoint 3 tax-evaders, one successfully to run our IRS??? Now wants to drop these charges on a terrorists that killed our troops. Putting lobbyists in a position they once lobbied. Somebody find a way to impeach this idiot or change our motto to “home of the brave and land of the terrorists”. How many of you voted for this guy and now are sorry of it? I am ready to listen to Rush now, seems like much to my surprise, he may be the only public figure speaking sense.

Posted by: Mike | February 5, 2009, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm

“This’ tribunal is being peiced together as it goes.”
Actually, military tribunals don’t have too many set rules or procedures. They were meant to be established on the battlefield in ad hoc fashion. You didn’t even need someone around who was a lawyer.
Initially it was set up so those who were captured violating the laws of armed conflict could be tried within the span of capture, “caught red handed” type of thing. Military officers could literally make the call, record the evidence, relay the call to higher command, and higher command could decide sentencing. It was meant to be quick, without much effort, with the commander taking responsibility.
In WW2, the tribunal was used as a propaganda tool against the Germans, it had more value than simple throwing them in front of a military judge and executing them.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm

After all the eloquent speeches, cute slogans, “Hisorical Moments” what have we seen the first two weeks? So far not so good.

Posted by: evonaix | February 5, 2009, 8:29 pm 8:29 pm

Typical of liberal Democrats handling Terrorists as a “legal problem” and not as a “threat to all humanity” problem. Wait until a mushroom cloud appears over one of our cities as the Liberals will still have Lawyers showing up first, instead of First Responders.

Posted by: Vidkun Quisling | February 5, 2009, 8:29 pm 8:29 pm

OUTRAGEOUS WE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF OURSELVES AS AMERICANS.

Posted by: Mike S. | February 5, 2009, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm

After all the eloquent speeches, cute slogans, “Historical Moments” what have we seen the first two weeks? So far not so good.

Posted by: evonaix | February 5, 2009, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm

“whats next from the great fraud? perhaps making spanish the official language of the US? or ARABIC? you want our troops to fight for you and respect you? free the enemy….outrageous”
Where do people keep getting this idea he is freeing this guy.
By the way, you Republicans need to get used to the fact that the Republican fear mongering and scare tactics are over! Try reading the article again.

Posted by: keredte | February 5, 2009, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm

“He has Charisma”…. this is what we voted in guys!!!! i wanted a president with #####.

Posted by: shakinmyhead | February 5, 2009, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm

Rush Limbaugh for Secretary of State!!

Posted by: Patricio | February 5, 2009, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm

Unfortunately, Obama mis handled this whole thing. First he shot off half cocked with the Executive order when it had glaring legal issues. Next he made it all public. Matters of national security, such as GITMO, shouldn’t be made public until you are SURE its going to shake out like you want it to.
So whoever is coaching him is partly to blame for this.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm

Truly, terrorists now have a good friend in the White House!
He promised “change” – suckers who believed he would keep the country safe might be waking up to reality about now.

Posted by: Wow! | February 5, 2009, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm

@AZ Elk Hunter
Also pay tell. Name one Politician who is for closing the borders. Because I’m all for it, but NO ONE is proposing that.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm

Im off to get some dinner, night bleeker. Nice talking to ya.

Posted by: KR | February 5, 2009, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm

Hellllllooooooooo.

Posted by: Patricio | February 5, 2009, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm

Better wake up America before another attack on us here at home or elsewhere is perpetrated.

Posted by: Al | February 5, 2009, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm

KR – you too buddy. Awesome to talk to someone educated on matters they spout off about.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm

“Dang it, people. Get a clue. Al-Nashiri is going NOWHERE. Guantanamo has been closed. Obama is asking for a continuance, not immediate release of prisoners. They’re still there, awaiting trial based on evidence. Isn’t this what you wanted?”
The problem is “evidence” is not so easy to collect on the battle field- the point of tribunals is to judge cases taking into account the environment. As soon as these guys step into a regular court they will be afforded all of the protections that people who are not holding AK’s in Afghanistan shooting at our soldiers and blowing up their own civilians get- courts will have to apply a different standard of evidence. Better just to avoid taking prisoners from now on. Also Obama is President, not Caesar- he is held to the same judicial process as the rest of us… he can’t “order” a sitting court to decide anything. Kudos to officers who do the right thing!!!!

Posted by: dan | February 5, 2009, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm

TRAITOR!
This system is the same system that congress could have scrapped 2 years ago when they had the chance and Obama was a part of that congess yet they chose not to scrap the commissions but did give detainees extended rights beyond ordinary. Col. Pohl could order Al-Nashiri released if the arraignment proceding is not put forward on Feb 9.
Time to impeach!

Posted by: toby hill | February 5, 2009, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm

Well, hopefully more AmeriKans are beginning to figure out that President BHO, aka Captain Coward, is everything but “tough on terror”. I’ll guarantee you the terrorists have figured it out!

Posted by: TxBoB | February 5, 2009, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm

“bleeker, can’t you read? Nothing said about hating America. America was fine untill idiots in high place started screwing over the tax paying Americans! Read your History bleeker, nothing is new under the sun. These terrorists, don’t forgive & forget. They believe in an eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth. Tea parties, & talks are laughed at, they have an agenda & will use any means to get there. Even if it takes centuries. If you Love America Bleeker, read your history & use common sense. Look at what is going on around you.”
What is going on around me is the collapse of the economic structure that has been brought on by deregulation of corporations. I haven’t ever seen a terrorist. Have you?

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm

Obama will betray the American people. You all can bank on this. He’s begun by hindering justice. And to those folks who helped him get elected, may God have mercy on your souls: Obama is about to destroy everything this country was founded on.

Posted by: Mike | February 5, 2009, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm

I am not a lawyer, but aren’t terrorists considered enemies of the state therefore they should be tried in a military court. Would we try Hitler in a civilion court…

Posted by: Meg Jacoby | February 5, 2009, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm

Yes these enemy combatatants should have been tried in the military court system already set up. There was no need to set up a 3rd court system to deal with them. We just needed to amend the military court system to deal with people who can’t be considered military personnel from an army of a nation. That was the whole problem to start with.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:50 pm 8:50 pm

Am i glad i did not vote for obama! He showing his true colors! You wanted change you got change! I think a revolution is coming soon!

Posted by: me | February 5, 2009, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm

You guys are morons. The only smart conservative guy I have been talking to has left and I am about to do the same. If someone wants to legitimately engage in real conversation in the next 2 minutes, I will gladly debate and discuss these matters with you without name calling or sweeping generalizations.
I am a moderate who leans liberal. I understand this person doesn’t exist in todays MSM but trust me, there are more of us than are given credit for.

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm

Perhaps, Commander Kirk Lippold (USN-Ret.), former Commander aboard the U.S.S. Cole should perhaps be more concerned, and explain to the relatives why he violated the rules of engagement and had only unloaded weapons available to defend the Cole.
Had those weapons been loaded, the crew of the Cole could have defended itself by opening up on the terrorist in the boat.
This is the reason that the good commander was forced into retirement at the rank of commander 0-6, rather than being promoted Captain 0-7 for “saving the Cole.”

Posted by: quickphil1943 | February 5, 2009, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm

Bleeker:
“So I guess you were tickled about 9/11 then huh?”
You could not be more wrong.
As for naming a politicians who are for closing the borders…JD Hayworth, Tom Tancredo, Mitt Romney, Pat Buchanan, Mike Huckabee, John Cornyn, Bill Frist, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions and Rudy Giuliani.

Posted by: AZ Elk Hunter | February 5, 2009, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm

“Well, when we get hit, and we will get hit, I am hoping the attacks will be on a large leftist population center like NYC, Washington DC, LA, Boston or San Francisco. At least let the people who voted for Obama take the brunt of the attacks.”
“So I guess you were tickled about 9/11 then huh?”
justify this

Posted by: bleeker | February 5, 2009, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm

What an insult to every service personnel in the military and for each and everyone who died on 9/11. I want the Obama supporters to look these brave people in the eye and say “Obama is the answer for America”. CNN T-shirts that say “Obama raised his hand and saved a nation” What a farce and insult.

Posted by: Bob | February 5, 2009, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm

Bush had YEARS to try these people and never did! Now the new president is finaly doing it. Don’t like the way it’s being done? Too bad. Take it up with Bush. Ask him why had sat on his @ss and did nothing all these years.
You say these people shouldn’t be tried. You say they should finaly be tried but not this way. You say this guy has been freed, which he hasn’t. I can’t believe some of these posts on here. This president has a huge mess to deal with, try letting him do his job.

Posted by: keredte | February 5, 2009, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

Obama meets with 9/11 and cole attack victims family members and then goes about dropping charges on the terror suspects?
This guy is turning out to be huge embarrasment within 2 weeks of assuing office, how on earth did America elect this guy.

Posted by: Greg h | February 5, 2009, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

You go Jake Tapper. I just watched you in the press conference; yes the information is pertinent. Great job. Keep it up.
Unfortunately, re: the above article, I pegged Obama as an intelligent fool before the election. I truely wish he had shown me wrong. He hasn’t. Between his cabinet choices, this absurd decision,his trying to pass the stimulus using the tactic of fear, etc., his performance is more than underwhelming. He isn’t simply inexperienced; he has a lack of common sense.

Posted by: BJ | February 5, 2009, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm

We can only hope President Obama does not intend to let any terrorist suspects or enemy combatants into civilian courts…

Posted by: dan | February 5, 2009, 9:10 pm 9:10 pm

Obama should step down.

Posted by: gotterdammerung | February 5, 2009, 9:11 pm 9:11 pm

Many American Patriots have died securing and protecting the “rights and privaliges” we Americans enjoy. I am eternaly grateful for their sacrifice and that of their familys. May God bless them and all who serve in our military, Thank you so very much.
The fact that we extend those rights to forein nationals who come here, legaly or illegaly, is an act of grace on our part. That is a good thing, it is part of what makes us American, they really do not have a right to those rights and privaleges. In fact most of our enemeys want to abolish those paid in blood rights. Every time a forein national partisipates in a protest march and wave his countrys flag; it is a slap in the face of all our fallen patriots!
nothing less than act of war! Dont belive it – take the stars and stipes on your next world tour, stand on a capital street and protest thier government and see how far you get.
Forein nationals who want to kill and maim American citizins and then when cought want and demand our legal system
to protect them; thats an idea I can not understand or accept.
In the late 30s and 40s we allowed Japan to dictate forein policy changes to us, it set us up for Dec 7 41.You better read your history before we go down the same path again.

Posted by: R G | February 5, 2009, 9:14 pm 9:14 pm

Someone please tell me how this makes Americans any more safe. I would really like to try to understand.

Posted by: jjsmith | February 5, 2009, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm

Ok folks, this is from the article, which you supposedly read. Read it CAREFULLY. I post it for reading again in regards to most of the comments posted below this one.
———-
The move is being done to stop the continued prosecution of al-Nashiri in a court system that his administration may ultimately find ILLEGITIMATE, not for any other reason, sources told ABC News.
President Obama has expressed concern about whether the military commissions set up by the Bush administration are the proper way to go forward in pursuing charges against the U.S. detainees, and on January 22 he asked all the judges supervising the trials of detainees for a continuance of 120 days, so a team of administration officials could review the best way forward.

Posted by: keredte | February 5, 2009, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm

“The move is being done to stop the continued prosecution of al-Nashiri in a court system that his administration may ultimately find ILLEGITIMATE, not for any other reason, sources told ABC News.”
“President Obama has expressed concern about whether the military commissions set up by the Bush administration”
keredte,
I know some people, Obama included, like to blame the system on President Bush but the fact is that it was Congress that set up the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

Posted by: toby hill | February 5, 2009, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm

Did someone say earlier,
“A revolution is coming”?

Posted by: Warren Latham | February 5, 2009, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm

over his head I suppose. BO, step down and let a grown up run the free world.

Posted by: mary | February 5, 2009, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm

We’ve got Kennedy, Pelosi, & Reid to thank for messing over Hillary & pumping up the Fraud Obama. Hillary was right about the 3AM phone call, this is what No Experience gets us, present, just present.

Posted by: Disgusted in Ohio | February 5, 2009, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm

Obama needs to resign and we need to hold elections again. It is amateur time in the White House.

Posted by: Brian | February 5, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm

I am so disgusted by this president. He has disappointed so many Americans in just 2 short weeks. I wanted to give him a chance, but he really isn’t holding up the oath of office to ‘protect and serve’ the United States. Americans need to get more involved and wake up, and take off your rose colored glasses.

Posted by: gentry | February 5, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm

POWs do not have constitutional rights. You Libs have no idea what you are doing

Posted by: Brian | February 5, 2009, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm

All I know is that the terrorists who attacked Americans are one step closer to getting tried. I know nothing of military law and I don’t know the details of the U.S.S. Cole attack but hello people, the terrorists are NOT free. Action is being taken to put them where they belong. Either in prison for life or 6 feet under ground. I have no complaints.

Posted by: calihanCJ | February 5, 2009, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm

The entire point of Obama’s ordering charges to be withdrawn THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR COURT SYSTEM is precisely to BE SURE that the guy doesn’t later get off on a technicality. So you post-ers who want to be sure the guy doesn’t walk should thank Obama.
Whether the mil commission courts are good or bad is a separate matter and will be decided in its own right.
Whether the guy is guilty or not is also a separate matter; some of these folks are guilty as sin, and some may not be. I don’t see that it serves any purpose to tar all with the same brush – - avoiding THAT is how I believe this action is intended to make America safer. ‘Due process’. It’s in the Constitution.

Posted by: Tade | February 5, 2009, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm

PLEASE, start the impeachment process. Obama is totally out of control.

Posted by: jeff | February 5, 2009, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm

Robin, Obama is going make most of America miss Bush. Obama is a moron of epic proportions.

Posted by: chattyway | February 5, 2009, 9:55 pm 9:55 pm

Obamites are completely full of interesting Hope and Change sophistry. This Obama administration decision will certainly rest among Obama’s greatest hits.

Posted by: flopez5 | February 5, 2009, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm

Thanks Obama in advance, for all of US americans you get murdered by terrorists as you give them more rights and encourage their behavior. What a bloody fool!!

Posted by: chattyway | February 5, 2009, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm

If you haven’t read Obama’s statement about the closing of Guantanamo Bay THEN DO YOUR RESEARCH. It seriously takes 30 minutes of reading and it’s pretty clear. The prisoners at G.B. were sitting there. They were detained. Some had been there for SIX YEARS. Not to mention, over the past seven years, out of 800 prisoners detained, FIVE HUNDRED were released to their homes or third world countries. THIS WAS DURING BUSH’S PRESIDENCY IF YOU DON’T KNOW. Obama is saying that an executive investigation is absolutely necessary in the interests of national security and justice. Not to mention I believe it was our fore fathers that developed the writ of habeus corpus. Obama is doing the right thing, but all of the people who are still sour that “The Maverick” lost won’t give Obama 30 minutes to do some elementary research into what is really going on. It’s real easy to sit at your computer, read 30 words and come up with an uneducated opinion. The responsibilities of a true patriot don’t end after waiting 5 hours to vote, but in the countless hours of research, checking to see what our government is really doing.

Posted by: calihanCJ | February 5, 2009, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm

“Obama is saying that an executive investigation is absolutely necessary in the interests of national security and justice.”calihanCJ I’m glad someone here is in Obama’s blackberry, and can explain this morally superior decision.

Posted by: flopez5 | February 5, 2009, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm

The stated reasoning appears sound. However the whole issue of dismantling the tribunals to give accused terrorists access to our liberal court system means i don’t vote for Obama a second time.

Posted by: LB | February 5, 2009, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm

Actually I read the official report that Obama issued through the white house (It’s actually a link in the article right above these comments… you know the one you were supposed to read about before making a comment?) Obviously you don’t care enough to read about things you decide to talk about.

Posted by: calihanCJ | February 5, 2009, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm

Posted by: keredte – and on January 22 he asked all the judges supervising the trials of detainees for a continuance of 120 days, so a team of administration officials could review the best way forward.
—– Understand what that is saying. The President of the United States asks you to do something. And you tell him no? The base is closing people, get over it. Obama’s doing it right. Something that nobody is used to in this country. He’s showing you what democracy is really all about and take these guys down the right way. Our POTUS is going to do just as what Apples said below.
Posted by: Apples – This isn’t about human rights. Obama isn’t doing this out of concern for Al-Nashiri’s rights. It’s a legal issue. Obama has a degree in constitutional law, by the way. As far as I can see, he is trying to prosecute this man in the right way, so that it sticks, and so that due process is followed. Like it’s supposed to be, in America..
—- I want it to stick. But I also want to be sure that these guys get a fair shake just as I would want any other civilized nation to do for my people. If they are found guity, they should be charged with absolutely everything possible and receive the same punishment we would give one of our own for what they did. This is what makes us the country that we are, and better than their countries. This sends a positive message to the world that justice will be done. Give it time. Reserve your judgement until you see what starts happening after this.

Posted by: 1-Human | February 5, 2009, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm

For me this is bottom line. During Bush’s administration there were hundreds of prisoners detained at Guantanamo Bay, and many of them have been detained for an extended period of time and have been denied the writ of habeus corpus (look it up on wikipedia if you care). Obama wants to investigate why the people are there, and try them if they have commited injustice against the United States. It’s too late to change how we have treated our prisoners of war, and I’m sure we have many global enemies because of it but I have absolutely NO complaints that finally something is being done with the prisoners of G.B. If they are true terrorists, lets try them. If they are not, get them home to their families and lets not make any more enemies.

Posted by: calihanCJ | February 5, 2009, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm

UNbelievable……..the very thing the CLINTONISTAS did……treating the war on terror as if it was a “criminal investigation”…………………….change we can believe in???

Posted by: socialism101 | February 5, 2009, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm

Panetta, Clinton, Richardson, Daschle – where is the change? I will reach across party lines….. “I won” give me what I want! Now, let the terrorists go!!!! WAKE UP AMERICA, do you have any idea of the Socialist you have elected. PLEASE defend him, you morons.

Posted by: Bob | February 5, 2009, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm

We are at war.
Too bad we do not have a leader anywhere within the US Government.

Posted by: Vet | February 5, 2009, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm

impeech this ,guy NOW before its to late i dont blame the voters they knew what not what they do but the press knew better and made it happen anyway

Posted by: david reyes | February 5, 2009, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm

robtr: “…two chickenhawks like Obama and Jody Biden who never served” … Oh, surely you were referring rather to Cheney (“ran” the DoD under George Bush Sr., but never wore a uniform or took an order from anyone) or George Bush Jr. (joined the National Guard, but only showed up for duty when he wasn’t hung over.) Yes, they were two such exemplary military-service role models, weren’t they both?

Posted by: Jordan | February 5, 2009, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm

you know all the other presidents waited till after the war was won to give back the prisoners

Posted by: david reyes | February 5, 2009, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm

most of you people posting,a few exceptions who try to say read the report, are either Poor losers form McCainor you don’t know our law.A buch of people like limburg who don’t know what they are talking about.I read the article and nowhere did it say the man was going to be be let free.Use common sense people no way would most of these poeple be let go but you all complain about political prisoners in other countries being kept in prisons with not charges well we are no better.Use your head if you were being tortured wouldn’t you say or do anything to stop it.I know I would.Why do you think we have cameras in interview rooms in our police departments.Because people were being forced into giving confessions weather true or not just to close cases.Thank you homeland security for taking our rights from us

Posted by: jojobo1 | February 5, 2009, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm

JORDAN, not one issue with validity. The Bush scenario about his service was proven FALSE 9-TEARS AGO. Stop living in the past. Stop hating a man that is no longer in power. OBAMA is the focus. This man lied to get his job, and has now let down 350,000 men and women by letting a terrorist go. Not to mention the “CHANGE” of Panetta, Clinton, Richardson and Dashle. Yes, I know that Richarson withdrew his name. When you stuff CLASSIFIED documents down your pants people do remember.

Posted by: Bob | February 5, 2009, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm

The saga of the POST TURTLE……a farmer was driving down the country roads near his farm and he spied a TURTLE on top of a fence post along the side of the road………….the poor turtle was flailing its legs as it sat straddled on top of the fence post…..soon a good samaritan drove by and saw the turtle’s plight….he admonished the farmer that the turtle needed help. The wise farmer told the good samaritan that this was just a “POST TURTLE” and he had seen them before…the good samaritan asked “What is a POST TURTLE”???
The farmer said a “Post turtle” is one who was placed on top of the fence post………….he did not get there by himself….someone had to put him there…..and when he gets there, he has no clue as to what to do….or how to get down.

Posted by: socialism101 | February 5, 2009, 10:44 pm 10:44 pm

CAUTION:folks lets watch this CHANGE thing play out.I voted for Obama and I am not feeling real good about the people working in our government be they politicans or employees of various agencies,I watch, as you the arogance of our leaders in congress and the total ineptness of the agencies that are guilty of defrauding the tax payers.What the hall has happened to our government.GREED!!!!!!.POWER!!!!>?

Posted by: Ray.B | February 5, 2009, 10:44 pm 10:44 pm

Jordan: You and Dan Rather really need to give up on trying to disprove that GWB was AWOL. Besides, compared to Bill Clinton and Barak Obama both GWB and Cheney are bonafide war heroes.

Posted by: I Hunt Elk In AZ | February 5, 2009, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm

Gosh, it’s just like Mark Twain said “too bad youth is wasted on the youth”. Do you all have such short memories? The World Trade Center had two attacks during Clinton’s Presidency, what did he do? Nothing. The USS Cole? US Embassies worldwide? Nothing. The WTT gets attacked again during W. Bush’s term, what does he do? He instigates a war against the wrong country (thereby isolating other countries and allies through his irresponsible actions). Obama has the duty of repairing the damage of the previous administrations and getting our country off to a repectable start. In case you are unaware, the US is NOT looked upon as a leader of the free world, it is looked upon as a “corrupt” and “greedy” nation. And “drill, baby, drill” oil and Wall Street seem to be proving it. Let Obama do his job, he is the most intelligent President to be had, be thankful. Stop attacking and start by helping within your own community; US education is poor and crime is embarrassingly high. Do something instead of complaining.

Posted by: Jasmine in Germany | February 5, 2009, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm

Keep it up, Obama. You’ll have us answering the prayer horn five times a day before long…

Posted by: MyFellowAmericans | February 5, 2009, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm

I hunt elf’s in Arizona. Just another OLD position. Bush is not a war criminal – Cheney is not a war criminal. These are arguements of years ago. Please find a new mantra. The CHANGE did not happen. The Terrorists are being let go. The Stimulus package is a GIFT the the masses or is it dumbA&^es. Why do you wear blinders? God help America.

Posted by: Bob | February 5, 2009, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm

Well this is all real interesting. SOme of you folks trying to defend this liberal idiot that’s in the White House. HOw soon we forget; all that died on 9-11 as well as the USS Cole. You talk about the prisoners in Gitmo and that during the Bush administration many were already released… once they investigated and found no terrorist connection… as should have been done. Seems to me that the ones left were apparently left there for just reason. and that reason was not to just be set free!!!!!! And furthermore, isn’t it ironic that we’ve had no attack on U.S. soil since these terrorist have been in Gitmo…. hummmm, any connection there, i wonder
s

Posted by: A | February 5, 2009, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm

Looks as though we’re actually going to do something according to our Constitution. Refreshing after eight years of mauling and manipulating that grand document.

Posted by: devilkev | February 5, 2009, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm

The guy looks like a terrorist, therefore he must be guilty.
Time to change the Constitution.

Posted by: JimL1956 | February 5, 2009, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm

REAGAN SAID “TRUST, AND VERIFY” – SEEMS LIKE OBAMA IS SIMPLY SAYING “TRUST”.

Posted by: ron | February 5, 2009, 11:45 pm 11:45 pm

Obama wanted to halt all criminal proceedings until all the cases can be revealed. I don’t think charges being dropped altogether is a part of that resolution. I think the trial should have at least been postponed to a later date.

Posted by: Andrew | February 6, 2009, 12:02 am 12:02 am

Hey, you know what, under the Bush administration things were going nowhere. Cases are finally starting to be reviewed and trials are finally starting to happen. There is a 120 day order to stop current criminal proceedings. I don’t think that Obama’s intention was to drop charges on this guy. I believe that the intention was to stop all criminal proceedings until cases are reviewed.

Posted by: Andrew | February 6, 2009, 12:07 am 12:07 am

This is exactly why I’m glad that I am no longer in the military because this so called Commander-in-Chief does not support the military. This will do nothing but put our servicemen more in the line of fire because these terroists who play by no rules have won when we play by a strict set of rules. He needs to learn that when you play with these nutcases you have to play by their rules or you are guarenteed to lose.

Posted by: ratrat | February 6, 2009, 12:10 am 12:10 am

Funny, other news agencies are reporting the judge is the one who dropped the charges. I suspect Mr. Tapper or Taper or what ever his name is got all upset after his little tiff with Gibbs and is now trying to get even.
It would be nice if ABC would ge their story right, why are other news agencies saying the judge dropped the charges but ABC is saying Obama will drop the charges.

Posted by: Michael | February 6, 2009, 12:15 am 12:15 am

Here we go again, first the Clinton Cabinet is put back into office, that is the one’s that could manage to hide most of their past, the Stimlus Package that the taxpayers of America will be paying for “no telling how many years” & now telling one of the terrorists that he doesn’t have to stand trial for bombing one of our Navy ships & killing American sailors! Oh Yea, also the releasing of Gitmo terrorists, if I was any relative to a person killed on 9/11, Pres. Obama would get a personal letter from me saying how proud I am of him for releasing the people responsible for the killing of thousands of American people sitting at their desk for a days work, people going to work, people attempting to make business transactions & the heroic firefighters, policemen, but people’s lives mean nothing in this day & age. We the American people are having these things crammed down our throats by “elected politicans”, the other parts of the world must be having a side splitting laugh on us, especially the al-Queada & Taliban, our soldiers putting their lives on the fighting front everyday are probably very proud of their country & thinking about their friends (other soldiers)killed protecting American lives. Two of the articles that I have heard on Natl. News that are in the Stimlus package is the funding of conceptives for foreign countries, how is this helping “our American freedoms, also colleges that are receiving Federal funding are to remove all religious programs from their campuses, our country is losing more freedoms as the days go by with “our Democratic Senate, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi & Pres. Obama. I hope “Hell” is making renovations, it will be receiving large crowds from now on. People please “wake-up”, stay on the backs of the Senators YOU elected to read each portion of this Stimlus mess & think very hard about their voting freedoms & the people that voted then into office & to remember that some of them will soon be coming up for re-election. I was so proud the day I was of age to fill my voter registration & to right in Democratic Party, well I am no longer proud of Democrats, “most of the Democratic Senators are just followers & do not vote for the freedoms of all people” & never will, but “I AM PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN” & hope we can continue these freedoms for generations to come.

Posted by: collielady1950 | February 6, 2009, 12:53 am 12:53 am

President Obama is the Commander in Chief who keeps on giving a feeling of sinking failure> One would believe that the simpliest thing President Obama had to do was pick a nominee after he was properly vetted. That task was difficult for President Obama. Then he daily pushes for his trillion dollar stimulus but will not tell us HOW MANY JOBS ARE BEING GENERATED AND WHY swimming pools, dog parks, frisbee dogs, motorcycles for policeman etc. I want it GONE!!!!

Posted by: Deborah | February 6, 2009, 12:57 am 12:57 am

What is going on in this country????? This so-called leader of the Greatest Country on earth is about to destroy the heart and soul of this country and the spirit of each and every true American. I am so tired of this administration and it hasn’t even been two months! The only reason the Judge is dropping the charges is Obama had put a halt to all trials by the military court against the terrorists. This killer is going to be let go by U.S. Courts and when he and his buddy’s are let go, I hope they get some real justice! To leave these killers in the hands of the failing U.S. judicial system is suicide. And we will soon see the end of a once Great Civilization…..

Posted by: lsom | February 6, 2009, 12:57 am 12:57 am

Of course! It was Clinton’s watch!

Posted by: LongT | February 6, 2009, 1:15 am 1:15 am

Tic Toc, Tic Toc, Tic Toc.
It just a matter of time now.
Perhaps those that defend Obama will be the ones that pay with there lives not me and my family.
This president is going to kill many civilian Americans. He will go down in history as the first American President to actually kill his own people.

Posted by: Tim | February 6, 2009, 1:28 am 1:28 am

Just to let you legal geniuses know, the judge, by definition, cannot “drop” the charges against Al-Nashiri. Only the prosecution can. Get a clue.

Posted by: Bob | February 6, 2009, 1:29 am 1:29 am

The plan is Purification. Purify the populace. Start on Day 1 by killing the unborn. Now free terrorists to kill more unwanteds. The detention camps are next.
 
“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
 
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
 
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
 
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.”

Posted by: Stunned | February 6, 2009, 2:01 am 2:01 am

Lets see…President Obama says he’s a Constitutional scholar (I never heard him claim to be a Constitutional lawyer, though I might have missed it), yet he seems to be amazingly ignorant of the Constitution itself. Meanwhile his school records have been sealed… have any of you folks seen any documentation of this claim? Seen any documentation of ANY of his educational history? Seen an interview with anyone who witnessed or participated in his graduation? Have any of you seen any evidence WHATSOEVER, other than his unsupported statements? If so please direct me to it, because I certainly have not seen it…and I HAVE been looking.

Posted by: Star King | February 6, 2009, 2:08 am 2:08 am

The president’s order honors those on the U.S.S. Cole and those killed on 9/11 by ensuring that terrorists do not erode our system of government. Once we lose the Constitution, they’ve won. Clearly, they’ve won over Pohl.
*****************************************************
Something which definitely bears repeating.

Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 3:23 am 3:23 am

SAY NO TO STIMULUS BILL!!!!SAY NO TO FREEING AL NASHIRI!!Every American needs to e mail the White House and demand to be shown how many jobs this stimulus will generate and explain all the PORK. Why don’t they use that pesky internet service that catapulted President Obama into the White House> I would love to read this bill and then start speaking up and loud if its wrong as I suspect.

Posted by: Deborah | February 6, 2009, 3:42 am 3:42 am

This guy is a national security threat. And I’m not talking about the terrorist. We’re in deep crap. He’s nothing but another Jimmy Carter. Maybe worse if that’s possible. Thanks america.

Posted by: Ryan | February 6, 2009, 3:51 am 3:51 am

This action will be ultimately remembered come 2012. I also believe the plan is to basically let all the rest of the 240+ detainees also fly free–no charges. This is not only a slap in the face of anyone who tried to protect this country from these vermin, but also an out an out slap in the face of each and every military man or woman; serving or had served as being you are worth nothing for following George Bush’s orders. This will be remembered. Especially remembered with these creeps come here and begin to really kill Americans again.

Posted by: J Kline | February 6, 2009, 3:59 am 3:59 am

all:
Does anyone here have family members that were on the U.S.S. Cole? Or were 9/11 victims? or further back were Beruit marine barracks bombing victims?Cause these are all splinters of the same groups that were supposedly trained by the U.S. China and Pakistan Gov as far back as of July 3,1979 due to covert operations carried out by our Government for a period of 10 years. That is several administrations back and inclusive of several administrations culpability.Each with a unique excuse for why it was someone else’s fault. the thing that concerns me the most as mentioned before is expost facto and amnesty laws . Those are soverign laws and international laws and in order to hold someone without charge in an undisclosed location you have to follow that country’s laws or you get off on a technicality because they are very intricate and involved and involve as I said immunity if the defense can prove it’s case. If the tribunal is declared unconstitutional, on the legal grounds of what charge against the Patriot act , that the language of ‘good faith ‘ was ambiguous and vague ? then it, the Patriot act falls to do what? Taking the higher moral ground against Al-Nashiri? You don’t set the standard very high there. You will be letting the shark go with the guppies. Did the surveilence and evidence against Al-Nashiri just dissapear?. Al-Nashiri is a freakazoid of epic proportions he commits atrocities against ‘his own’ when it suits him or he gets bored with blowing us up and .the Military Code of Uniformed Justice has no jurisdiction , becasue we are declaring the patriot act unconstitutional and unpatriotic? Again this is a slap in the face to the families and victims that we as a nation are willing to ‘stand on principles of the constitution for enemies of the state, what was that based on ? If He (al-N) were here illegally, and if it was “illegal” for them to be here doesn’t the very act of terrorism make Al-n an enemy of the state and not subject to the constitution? … The last time I checked the victims and families of these attacks were U.S. citizens with the higher need for accountability as to the constitution. They were obeying the law when they were victimized. Are we not in esssence aIding and abeting a terrorist on a technicality? That would make the defense lawyers guilty of the same things everyone seems so hot on acusing Bush and Cheney of ‘war crimes’ ? Or are Bush and Cheney not afforded the same good faith rules that the defense lawyers and the current administration will no doubt! so vehemently cling to when this whole thing goes not the way it was expected. !Bush and Cheney are not victims of this crime !.the families are…Our accountability is to the victims in this case not the perpetrators.and sense there no pevious legal ‘presedence’ to base any of this fiasco..Have you seen and heard the accounts of the attack on the Cole? They were approached by the terrorists as if they were in some kind of garbage boat. A boat that is common to that area and easily recognizable as harmless. The terrorist were waving at them . There was no way of knowing it was coming. They were not rushing the Cole. They were coming up to the cole looking like they were civilians and needed assistance and did not detinate until they were hullside. To witness or be there would scare the crap out of you.This is not the only crime they have this Al-N for , and I’m supposed to beleive the terrorist is the victim? In what freakazoid messed up marvel comic world would I ever beleive that I would want to let this nut back into my country to “try him humanely” or beleive that he was ‘victimized’ by my country for the act of comitting terror in my country? What’s more would he do the same for me? He was not a law abiding citizen he does not need a ‘loophole” He should be tried by the military. That won’t be happening on Feb 9th or in 120 days if the scope of it is made inadmissable due to evidence being declared as illegally obtained on the basis of moral high ground or the amnesty laws kick in or the holding time runs out first becasue it has been heldover until the statute of limitations runs out . That is not high ground that is low ball. He is an enemy not a victim. Excuse the vent but this one touches a really raw nerve.
Does the standard “I am sorry , or I screwed up’ apply as an explaination to the families past present and future? let me know how that works for them…

Posted by: margo | February 6, 2009, 4:33 am 4:33 am

You knew people would glance at your headline and read its meaning to be that President Obama ordered charges against al-Nashiri dropped altogether, never to prosecute him. You COUNTED on it. “Dishonest” hardly covers the implications.
************************************************
It’s plausible. I don’t think the repetitious use of the word, rhetoric, was because of a lack of a thesaurus. It was used in two headlines and used verbally by Jake during the Gibbs interview. If you want to imply that a speaker is lacking in credibilility, then rhetoric will help suggest that. It’s also plausible that the choice of a prevalent word could be systematic also.
What isn’t plausible is that the posting I’m commenting on will remain -or for that matter, that my own comments will.

Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 4:40 am 4:40 am

Groups representing victims’ families were angered by Obama’s order, charging they had waited too long already to see the alleged attackers brought to court.
The survivors of the USS Liberty have waited since 1967 for justice and America should be focused on the terrorist attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967 by Israel. This war crime by Israeli monsters on patriotic Americans serving their country is a tragic, sad chapter of how America betrayed these patriotic Americans and did not hold Israel accountable for this savagery
Meeting a survivor of the attack on the USS Liberty was a profound experience. As he recounted that brutal terrorist attack by Israel, tears rolled down his face He recounted how Israel attacked the USS Liberty, a US intelligence-gathering ship in international waters off the Sinai Peninsula on June 8, 1967, killing 34 sailors and wounding 172. He talked about the bravery and valor of Captain William L. McGonagle and the crew in saving the LIBERTY He said he could remember it as clearly as if had happened yesterday. America must remember this also! It was a colossal mistake not to have confronted Israel! I recommend that you get in touch with a survivor of this war crime committed by Israel and ask him if he believes Israel is an ally of this country. (ASSAULT ON THE LIBERTY — by James M. Ennes, Jr.

Posted by: M. Delphia Block | February 6, 2009, 4:46 am 4:46 am

When we get attacked again is Obama going to tell the American people ” sorry ,I screwed up”

Posted by: CW | February 6, 2009, 6:09 am 6:09 am

Perhaps BObama and the rest of the liberal idiots will hold a tea party for the little darling.

Posted by: BeaverFood | February 6, 2009, 6:43 am 6:43 am

I was willing to give our President the benefit of the doubt, but now I no longer believe that he has the best interests of our country at heart. He cares more about his “image” than he cares about keeping our Country safe. Disgusting.

Posted by: ddee | February 6, 2009, 7:34 am 7:34 am

I understand the legality issues of this order. But it’s still a victory for our terrorist enemy just to print the headlines of this matter to the whole world. I can’t help to somehow feel nervous about it because of our flawed legal system. There is loop hole for everything. Transparency ends with war criminals and top secret national security information, which is the way this order should have been treated until completion.

Posted by: morethanafeeling | February 6, 2009, 8:46 am 8:46 am

I wonder if al-Nashiri has any tax problems? All he needs is a bogus birth certificate and he can join the cabinet.

Posted by: N'erdowell | February 6, 2009, 10:27 am 10:27 am

“The new team at the Pentagon did not push for action. On the contrary, Rumsfeld thought that too much time had passed and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, thought that the Cole attack was ‘stale.’”
9/11 Commission Report, Page 202
Did. Not. Push. For. Action.
STALE.
How do you think the families felt when your little tin gods were in the Pentagon?

Posted by: Roger Beddecker | February 6, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am

Obama will do what he needs to do to rid the Country of the injustice perpetrated by the Bush administration the past eight years and move us toward real Justice. He will not be stopped by the obstructionist practices of Republicans in and out of the Military that have worked so well in the past. This is no longer the past and Obama has the full confidence of the American people behind him (no matter what the talking heads have to say).

Posted by: karen | February 6, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm

Please………………dittoheads and neo cons have no corner market on national security and patriotism…no more than Tinky Winky has on his purple purse. Fatboy drugger Rush gleaned his expertise from where again? Watching D List Raygun war movies doesn’t count. Try Again Ace!

Posted by: Denise | February 6, 2009, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm

At least the headline, which was worded that Obama dropped the charges against Nashiri, was changed with the update of the judge who dropped the charges. The headline was particularly inflammatory because a picture of the USS Cole with the hole in it with fire superimposed around it.
I see my previous concern about the headlining and the impact it was having on the postings was removed — even though it wasn’t incendiary, and a number of postings, which are distinctly fear mongering, remain. It’s just an observation of what is and was.

Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 12:28 pm 12:28 pm

At least the headline, which was worded that Obama dropped the charges against Nashiri, was changed with the update of the judge who dropped the charges. The headline was particularly inflammatory because a picture of the USS Cole with the hole in it with fire superimposed around it.
I see my previous concern about the headlining and the impact it was having on the postings was removed — even though it wasn’t incendiary, and a number of postings, which are distinctly fear mongering, remain. It’s just an observation of what is and was.

Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 12:28 pm 12:28 pm

The president’s order honors those on the U.S.S. Cole and those killed on 9/11 by ensuring that terrorists do not erode our system of government. Once we lose the Constitution, they’ve won. Clearly, they’ve won over Pohl.
****************************************************
Ditto. There’s nothing wrong with a little repetition. After all, the righties can do it frequently to the point of inducing a spam-like situation.

Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm

These are either POW’s or they are criminals, but Democrats are bending over backwards to provide the dirtbags with the rights of both.
If they are POW’s they are tried in a military tribunal. To do otherwise violates the Geneva COnvention.
I can’t wait for Obama to relesase KSM.
That will certainly make us all safer.

Posted by: drjohn | February 6, 2009, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm

Of course, there would have been no bombing had the men on the U.S.S. Cole been allowed to shoot at the approaching craft full of explosives. But even in war we must be politically-correct, causing the lives of American sailors because we dare not fire upon a boat that ignores our warning shots. Why even waste bullets on warning shots if that is the strongest action we’re going to take?

Posted by: Colony14Author | February 6, 2009, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm

Get a grip. If we don’t get back to using the constitution the terrorists have already won. Bush/Cheyney trampled that.
If we choose to ignore the Constitution, laws, etc and do things however we damn well please then we are no better than those countries that wish us harm.

Posted by: Jwench | February 6, 2009, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm

One thing I wanted to add. Where does it say they are releasing him? How can he do any harm if he is still incarcerated?

Posted by: Jwench | February 6, 2009, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm

If America sacrifices it’s laws and it’s Constitution for an illusion of “safety”, the terrorists will have won. Anyone who argues differently is no more than a traitor. And the biggest terrorists are Bin Laden, Bush and Cheney. All three use terror (fear-mongering) for political gain.

Posted by: Steve | February 6, 2009, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm

this is insane. treating terrorists like they deserve rights is crazy. are we giving them the rights that soldiers who have died lost? this is complete BS. terrorists can kill people and torture people but god forbid we keep them prisoner if we dont treat them right…..

Posted by: jonathan | February 6, 2009, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm

Disappointed, try to actually understand the details and reasoning behind this judgement…you’ll feel better…

Posted by: Jazz | February 6, 2009, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm

i am truly shocked to find out that this president thinks more of a killer than our own military, one thing you have to give him credit for, he didn’t lie at his promise, he said we need change, and change we will get. So get ready for this president to put other countries and people before us AMERICANS. SHAME ON YOU, OBAMA !!!! I HOPE I CAN STILL SAY THIS, WE DO STILL HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH ???

Posted by: TONY | February 6, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

I served in the United States Navy for the past five years. I know many people that have served on the USS Cole, and at Gitmo. What the hell is OBAMA doing? How can he call himself the COMMANDER IN CHIEF when he does CRAP like this? SHAME ON YOU OBAMA!!! HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN ABOUT THE WORLD TRADE TOWERS, THE PENTAGON, AND THE PLANE THAT WENT DOWN IN PENNSYLANVIA!!!!
SOME PRESIDENT YOU HAVE TURNED OUT TO BE.

Posted by: Jewels | February 6, 2009, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

What the heck is our President doing? What do you want more American’s to die? You call yourself the Commander in Chief? What are you saying to the veterans? How can you do this and then send service members to fight when you are letting the terrorists out of prison? SHAME ON YOU PRESIDENT OBAMA

Posted by: SCOOT | February 6, 2009, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

What a slap in the face to the familes of the men and woman killed in the Cole bombing. This guy will get an easy chair and perhaps a white guy to fan him and then he will be turned loose upon the American people so he can kill. Well the lefties got their way and now we only have to wait until we are attacked on our own soil by these nuts that Obuma is going to welcome with open arms. What a fraud this guy is. Obama should be tried for treason and the military should be in charge of the trial.

Posted by: madvtr | February 6, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

LMAO I think so many people are so liberal that they forgot to read the whole constitution. Do you know the constitution was written for legal Citizens of the USA. The writ of Habeas Corpus is null and void when it comes to Non US citizens. That is why international laws are used, As in the UN Laws.
The 1st lines of the constitution states “We the People of the United States” not We the illegal immagrants, terrorists, against the United states.

Posted by: who me | February 6, 2009, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm

no one should be surprised that obama is taking care of his muslim friends either directly or by applying pressure as in this case. obama is already appeasing the muslims, arabs, palestinians, hamas, hezbollah in the middle east. obama is america’s chamberlain, britain’s diplomat, who appeased germany’s dictator prior to ww2.

Posted by: Lawrence | February 7, 2009, 8:59 am 8:59 am

This certainly doesn’t help me feel safe about Obama answering that 3 AM phone call!!!

Posted by: Disgusted in Ohio | February 8, 2009, 9:15 pm 9:15 pm

I can honestly say that I am scared, this is going to be a long 4 years!

Posted by: Chuck | February 10, 2009, 9:39 am 9:39 am

I read many of the above comments> I am very puzzeled.
Where are those “Americans” who voted for Obama??
Barak HUSSEIN Obama is all the ugly descriptions in the book, but I blame most those who voted for him.
He OBVIOUSLY Muslim our enemy), he lied and lied and contradicted himseldf, sometimes in the same speach, during his campaign. Where he got over 800 million from? That soes not nedd a brainer. From the oil rich Muslim countries mainly Saudi Arabia.
I, really, cannot call him traiter, becasue this is not HIS country.

Posted by: Bill | May 2, 2009, 8:24 am 8:24 am

come to Serbia and face real problems!

Posted by: rapidshare movies | September 14, 2009, 6:31 am 6:31 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.