Obama Seeks Delay at Guantanamo Tribunals

In one of his first acts as President, Obama has asked military tribunals preparing to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed and the other 9/11 conspirators, as well as Omar Khadr, to suspend proceedings for 120 days so he can "review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically." The request was passed through Secretary of Defense Gates.

Such a request may not be automatically granted by military judges, and not all defense attorneys may agree to such a suspension. But the move is a first step toward closing a detention facility and system of military trials that became a worldwide symbol of the Bush administration's war on terrorism and its unyielding attitude toward foreign and domestic critics.
The legal maneuver appears designed to provide the Obama administration time to refashion the prosecution system and potentially treat detainees as criminal defendants in federal court or have them face war-crimes charges in military courts-martial. It is also possible that the administration could re-form and relocate the military commissions before resuming trials.

Delay and late prosecution is one of the due process violations which have been alleged against the military commissions, especially by the N.Y. Times, the ACLU, and many Democratic congressfolk. Somehow I doubt they'll oppose this, since they all think that Obama is going to let these terrorists off the hook.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:24 AM

Comments

1 Bad move,period. The sooner these scum are dealt with the better, otherwise they are free to plot more death, simple as that.

Posted by: mbruce at January 21, 2009 09:31 AM (t/GDA)

2 we are fucked.

Posted by: redrock at January 21, 2009 09:34 AM (wM2N8)

3 It takes time to build those gallows.

Posted by: Roy at January 21, 2009 09:35 AM (cB77O)

4 This is his first move, doing basically nothing while making it look like something? pretty close to voting "present" IMHO

Posted by: mbruce at January 21, 2009 09:38 AM (t/GDA)

5 It's what was expected at least.

Hopefully, he'll tweak a few bits, and the MSM will proclaim the system "cleaned of the Bush's evil touch", and then we can proceed......

Posted by: Techie at January 21, 2009 09:38 AM (906oR)

6 So, his first act on the first day of his first job is "wait, give me 120 days to decide..."

Posted by: t-bird at January 21, 2009 09:40 AM (FcR7P)

7 Smoke and Mirrors to appease his rabid whacko leftard...Anti-American supporters...you know..half the people that voted for him.

Present!!!!

Posted by: BigWyo at January 21, 2009 09:43 AM (mT7uC)

8 Yes, because the Bill of Rights has such a well known liberal bias...

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 09:45 AM (T67ZU)

Nah, you guys are all wrong. O's just messing with KSM's head.

He's going to govern from the right, remember?

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at January 21, 2009 09:45 AM (2QFX4)

10 It's the first step in a general amnesty for all federal crimes. Obama is gonna to free the prisoners and all that you know. Part of the Messiah thing. Next step is commute everyone's sentence that is on death row. Just wait till his Justice Department brings suit to have all rpisons intergrated due to racism. Since that isn't possible we just won't arrest black people till the prsions are diverse enough.

Posted by: Rocks at January 21, 2009 09:45 AM (3RHzM)

Smoke and Mirrors to appease his rabid whacko leftard...Anti-American supporters...you know..half the people that voted for him.

The problem is Barry is just as rabidly anti-American as his looney supporters. Believe me I know that Hyde Park crowd.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 09:46 AM (1Jaio)

Yes, because the Bill of Rights has such a well known liberal bias...

It's amazing, you get dumber by the second.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 09:47 AM (1Jaio)

13 The Bill of Rights applies to foreign born terrorists captured on a battlefield in a foreign country out of uniform? Wow who knew, how about we give em citizenship and the new right to healthcare too.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 09:47 AM (NM1Nu)

14 Welcome Progressive Dave, disillusioned with Obama already?

Posted by: Rocks at January 21, 2009 09:48 AM (3RHzM)

15 And here. we. go.

I'm really interested to see how the eventual freeing of KSM on procedural grounds will play out.

Posted by: alexthechick at January 21, 2009 09:48 AM (SHHaV)

With the return to the Clinton-era attitude that terrorists belong to the police instead of the military, The Vapid One has signalled retreat in the WOT.

Remember our enemies wanted him in office. So did the ABA. Who cares about national security when there's good money to be made in court defending scum and revealing classified intelligence data?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at January 21, 2009 09:49 AM (ZGhSv)

17 I all for freeing KSM, put him under house arrest for life in Hyde Park, IL

Posted by: MikeH at January 21, 2009 09:49 AM (XIXhw)

18 I'm really interested to see how the eventual freeing of KSM on procedural grounds will play out.

He will be given tenure at the University of Chicago and a condo in Hyde Park.
He's going to be chairperson of the joint Che-Chairman Mao Parade.

Posted by: Rocks at January 21, 2009 09:50 AM (3RHzM)

"a worldwide symbol of the Bush administration's war on terrorism and its unyielding attitude toward foreign and domestic critics"

UMM, "critics"? I WISH. Let's see... Letterman, Stewart, Rosie, Babs, Whoopi, the list goes ON AND ON. Are those the "domestic critics" we're talking about here? No... once again the "Liberal Media's(TM)" knack for EXAGGERATION is unprecedented. KSM flew commercial airliners, filled with people, into BUILDINGS on OUR soil. Over 3000 innocent Americans lost their lives that day. That's some HARSH criticism, asswipe.

Posted by: CWKing at January 21, 2009 09:52 AM (V7aQ1)

20 Yo Dave, the Bill of Rights applies to citizens, not your beloved terrorists.

Posted by: Ben B. at January 21, 2009 09:52 AM (rs7M9)

ProgDave -

You including the 9th ammendment in that "Bill of Rights" spiel?

Or can you not count past 6?

Or do you make the common mistake of thinking of the Rights as ordinal in their listing rather than cardinal in their nature?

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 09:53 AM (MKFU7)

22 ... and shit

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 09:53 AM (MKFU7)

23 This is complete ratshit; the trial was already underway and the simpletons had pretty much fucked themselves and now Obastard wants a time-out for them. We are so fucked under this punk.

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 21, 2009 09:54 AM (ZW5eD)

24 Oh yeah what about that pesky 2nd Amendment? Go f yourself dave.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 09:55 AM (NM1Nu)

25 Markie Marxist sez: "We're not especially comfortable with our jihadi allies, but they're what we have to work with in bringing down America, what with 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' and all that. We may not be able to help them out much with the Gitmo thing, but we'll do as much for them as we can get away with politically."

Posted by: Chas at January 21, 2009 09:56 AM (1XTjz)

26 ... and shit

Please allow me to congratulate you on your first post that approaches accuracy and substance.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 09:58 AM (T67ZU)

27 Oh yeah what about that pesky 2nd Amendment? Go f yourself dave.

Wow... the rights of the accused in US courts should be ignored so we can get into a "my amendment is better than yours" pissing match.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:00 AM (T67ZU)

28 Swing and a miss, dave. They are not in US courts. That was the whole point of the tribunals.

Posted by: Big D at January 21, 2009 10:02 AM (uMjcG)

... and shit

Please allow me to congratulate you on your first post that approaches accuracy and substance.

That post made more sense than anything you've ever written.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 10:03 AM (1Jaio)

aahhhhhhh, Dave -

We cheerfully admit this is a moron blog. The "... and shit" comment I added was to keep the potty mouth quotient in the "We're Number 1" range.

Thanks for playing.

Btw, Obama's got a blog. The progressive's plodding literalism and earnestness might be better received there.

Cheers ... and shit.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 10:04 AM (MKFU7)

31 What is the fucking point of this? Why doesn't he delay and review trials of some American citizens charged with trivial crimes?

Posted by: Rip at January 21, 2009 10:04 AM (TQGe/)

32 Dave,
The terrorists are being put on trial. They have lawyers. They even have judges. Congress has approved the process (need I remind you that Congress is controlled by Democrats).

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 10:05 AM (4pdbX)

33 But the move is a first step toward closing a detention facility and system of military trials that became a worldwide symbol of the Bush administration's war on terrorism and its unyielding attitude toward foreign and domestic critics.

Quite a sentence there. We know who the foreign "critics" of the Bush Administration's war policies were. Many of them are dead, running for their lives, or (currently) incarcerated in US-controlled facilities. Interesting that a Washington Post reporter would denigrate a world-wide conflict between the West and Radical Islam as a Bush-instigated contretemps.

Posted by: mrp at January 21, 2009 10:06 AM (HjPtV)

34 Watch and learn - this will be O's MO for the years to come. Don't expect hard decisions to come from him quickly, just like in the Senate you'll have study and wait, study and ponder, before any hard decisions are made. I think he'll be jelly in the hands of Pelosi, Reid and unfortunately, enemy states. Noone that I've spoken with can point to a ONE hard decision that the man has ever made and later had to defend. I wish that I were surprised by this but I'm not.

Posted by: volfan at January 21, 2009 10:06 AM (2V6Ai)

35 "Wow... the rights of the accused in US courts should be ignored so we can get into a "my amendment is better than yours" pissing match."

They are not CITIZENS, asshole - they are TERRORISTS wishing to do our country harm! They were grabbed on a field of battle - trying to kill American and allied troops! They were not in iniform, as required of combatants under the Geneva Convention - to which Iraq is not a signatory anyway.

e.g. ... they have no rights under our Constitution. What part of this don't you fucking lefties understand, anyway?

Posted by: Bruce at January 21, 2009 10:07 AM (oedyI)

36 Personally, I am looking forward to all of President Affirmative Action's failures so I can look at my libtard co-workers in confusion and whine "But Obama was supposed to -fill in the blank-. Did he lie to us?" Or something of that sort.

It's either that or spend the next year in an anti-depressant, anti-psychotic haze.

Posted by: shibumi at January 21, 2009 10:08 AM (tZB/c)

37 Well, if combatants captured on the battlefield have civil rights it seems that a helluva lot of presidents held a helluva lot more prisoners illegally throughout American history...

Seems like FDR was a major war criminal by the standards of the Left these days...

Posted by: nickless at January 21, 2009 10:09 AM (MMC8r)

38 Maybe we should give the Europeans what they want - we'll give them custody of everyone in Gitmo. They'll languish in their prisons for years as their bureaucratic machinery decides what to do with them before finally releasing them. They will quietly be absorbed by the thriving muslim communities that exist all over Europe and eventually return to acts of terror - but this time on European soil (they've been easier targets than the U.S. since 9/11 anyway...).

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 10:10 AM (4pdbX)

39 Wow... the rights of the accused in US courts should be ignored so we can get into a "my amendment is better than yours" pissing match.

Why the hell not? Libs have been playing that game for decades.

Posted by: Reiver at January 21, 2009 10:11 AM (Yi1Sk)

40
It's taken seven years to bring these guys to trial? Shit! Slow down!

Posted by: Prezizzil Obama at January 21, 2009 10:11 AM (Y5LIx)

Shibumi,

The mantra will be "Bush so traumatized [insert group here] during his reign of terror that the Healing Balm that is Obama ^tmmust be given more time to work.

Obama must soothe our collective psyche before He can heal our society - et cetera. This will, no doubt, involve a great many pictures of Obama in thoughtful repose.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 10:13 AM (MKFU7)

42 Two words: extraordinary rendition.

Its Democrat supported and Clinton approved!

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:16 AM (PD1tk)

43 They are not CITIZENS, asshole - they are TERRORISTS wishing to do our country harm! They were grabbed on a field of battle - trying to kill American and allied troops! They were not in iniform, as required of combatants under the Geneva Convention - to which Iraq is not a signatory anyway.

And how many Gitmo detainees were picked up in Iraq, buttercup?

I'll give you a hint: it's same number as the number of actual positive accomplishments during Bush's time in office.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:16 AM (T67ZU)

44 And how many Gitmo detainees were picked up in Iraq

*cough* Afghanistan *cough* The good war.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:17 AM (PD1tk)

45 BTW, wingers: the jurisdiction of US courts (and therefore, US law) over Gitmo detainees is now established by case law, all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Hey, just remember; reality has a well known liberal bias.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:18 AM (T67ZU)

46 13 The Bill of Rights applies to foreign born terrorists captured on a battlefield in a foreign country out of uniform? Wow who knew, how about we give em citizenship and the new right to healthcare too.
_______

And social security! Don't forget the social security.

Posted by: Jo at January 21, 2009 10:18 AM (r4ULk)

47 *cough* Afghanistan *cough* The good war.

Cough, cough... *he* said Iraq, junior.

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:19 AM (T67ZU)

48 As a concerned liberal, I would just like to add I'm glad that Obama will be closing down Guantanamo today and releasing all these poor put-upon militants who were just herding..............what?...................................He's not closing down this stain on the honor of the United States today?........................................Let me be the first to say that Obama has made a wise, no Solomon like, decision to delay these proceedings, and remember, it's only a failure if can't get the place closed in 4 years.

Posted by: sears poncho at January 21, 2009 10:20 AM (uj/0b)

49 junior.

Heh. Reality not biased enough I guess, puppy.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:20 AM (PD1tk)

50 Really though, the worst of these guys will just disappear, rendered to whatever hell-hole will have them. The press will notice it once, then never again. Problem solved for Apophis. Its not to worry.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:23 AM (PD1tk)

51 So, Dave,
What should be done with the prisoners in Gitmo (after the ACLU provided blow jobs)?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 10:25 AM (4pdbX)

52 How long before ol' Khalid is sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom?

Posted by: gm at January 21, 2009 10:25 AM (aXpYP)

53 And so the era of Responsibility begins. NOT! Practice what you preach Preacher President.

Posted by: CDR M at January 21, 2009 10:26 AM (WGcw3)

54 So if U.S. civilian courts have jurisdiction over these guys, what right does any U.S. President have to order any U.S. personnel to fire any rounds at these guys on a battlefield? Isn't that a much more massive violation of their civil rights than putting them up before military tribunals?

Really? Is that your position, Obamanots? Are you just hoping if you're nice enough to them they'll leave us alone?

I'm serious, I'd really like to know the strategy here.

Posted by: Burt TC at January 21, 2009 10:26 AM (sKauv)

55 Terrorists aren't evil. They are simply misunderstood.

Between now and 120 days from now, we will all come to understand that they should all be pardoned and sent forth into the world to sin no more, thanks to the forgiveness, understanding and humanity of our Messiah.

Jesus= community organizer that hung out with lepers and whores
Obama= community organizer that hangs out with terrorists and Democrats (aka- whores)

All hail the Dear Leader!
Amen.

Posted by: Damiano at January 21, 2009 10:26 AM (cfKer)

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:19 AM (T67ZU)

I just figured out the meaning of your name Progressive Dave. You're a guy named Dave who gets progressively dumber by the second.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 10:27 AM (1Jaio)

57 Great first move. Showing leadership.

Uhhh... I uhh... well uh... let's just uh... you know... uh... hang back for 4 months...

Posted by: scottythrust at January 21, 2009 10:27 AM (VTeUD)

58 Well, hey, you can't be a citizen of the world if you think there's a difference between american citizens and everyone else.

Posted by: Farmer_Joe at January 21, 2009 10:28 AM (z4es9)

*mmghf* *mmmmkng* *mmghihe* Neo-con!

Sorry. I was trying to post with my mouth full of The One's cock.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:29 AM (VmtE9)

I like the idea of giving them to the Europeans. Heck, even give them to the court system in Wash DC.

Or better yet, give every one of them a one year contract guarding a congress critter, if they are such nice guys and have rights and all.

Posted by: Mephitis at January 21, 2009 10:29 AM (17pTk)

8 Yes, because the Bill of Rights has such a well known liberal bias...

Progressive Dave: you stupid fuck. You don't care when Obama "violates" the 5th Amendment, only when Bush does? What a hypocritical piece of shit. Or are to too fucking stupid to even understand the post?

Posted by: gm at January 21, 2009 10:29 AM (aXpYP)

62

Hey Dave:

Justice delayed is justice denied.

Posted by: Tinian at January 21, 2009 10:29 AM (Ohodx)

63 the worst of these guys will just disappear, rendered to whatever hell-hole will have them

That's the Clinton Way�.

I'd render 'em to Hollywood; Ashton Kutcher can pledge to reach out and understand them, and they'll knock his block off. Win-win.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 21, 2009 10:30 AM (fGDhl)

No, but Anthony Kennedy does. If SCOTUS says that it is the law, then it is, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have a liberal bias. If you're not aware, several SCOTUS opinion are later overturned.

Posted by: gm at January 21, 2009 10:34 AM (aXpYP)

BTW, wingers: the jurisdiction of US courts (and therefore, US law) over Gitmo detainees is now established by case law, all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Hey, just remember; reality has a well known liberal bias.

So begins the age of Obama - I hope that he does release them all (what he really wants to do anyway) because it will be political suicide - and he knows it. So now he has to walk that tightrope of "dealing" with them w/o being "dealt" with himself. He now has to implement what the courts have imposed upon him - no easy task. The left gives us "wingers" a great opening for when O doesn't live up to the hype (and he won't, he knows it, hence the furious backpedalling and pleas for "patience") in 2010 an beyond when the foreign and domestic "reality" bites us all in the ass.

Posted by: volfan at January 21, 2009 10:35 AM (2V6Ai)

66 ... and shit.

Wait, wait, now it's shit? I thought we were still trying to up the cockholster quotient. Okay, maybe that's not an either/or proposition.

Posted by: alexthechick at January 21, 2009 10:36 AM (SHHaV)

67 Hey, kind of an off-topic question, but is the presidency still a regime, or is it now an administration again?

Posted by: krakatoa at January 21, 2009 10:36 AM (/FUhT)

68 Day 2, suckas!

Posted by: The Obama Regime at January 21, 2009 10:36 AM (4s1it)

69 I apologize for Dave's everywhere.. Progressive Dave is a retarded model, as made self evident by now.. We are attempting to add IQ points to the level where he doesn't shit in his pants and paints the walls with it anymore.

Thank you

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 10:37 AM (Woh2s)

Put them on a desert island and give me the coordinates. Next question?

Posted by: Big Fucking Asteroid at January 21, 2009 10:38 AM (8V5Ut)

71 45.

Then why the delay, Dave? Just transfer these shitbags to DC, put them on trial in a non-military court, and toss-out their charges (putting them on the streets of DC) because of "lack of evidence". Today.

We can put them all up at your place while the docket gets cleared.

C'mon, do it and get it over with. We know you want to.

Posted by: DocJ at January 21, 2009 10:38 AM (n2bMf)

72 krakatoa,
Neither - you will refer to it as an 'Era'. Or 'Age', as in the 'Age of Obama'. Maybe even Epoch. And I don't like your unworshipful tone - I'll let you off with a warning this time but next time I'll report you.

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 10:39 AM (4pdbX)

73 you will refer to it as an 'Era'. Or 'Age'

I'm going with Reich.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:40 AM (PD1tk)

74 The headline should be Obama �gets 120 day delay in Gitmo trials�. It�s a done deal folks.

Posted by: Vic at January 21, 2009 10:41 AM (f6os6)

75 Delay and late prosecution is one of the due process violations which have been alleged against the military commissions, especially by the N.Y. Times, the ACLU, and many Democratic congressfolk. Somehow I doubt they'll oppose this, since they all think that Obama is going to let these terrorists off the hook.

So. Would Obama want the 120 day delay in hopes of a mistrial for the detainees?
in effect, letting the problem take care of itself? (in so much as Obama voting 'present' in the matter)

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 10:41 AM (Woh2s)

76

I'm referring to it as the "Reich".

Posted by: Tinian at January 21, 2009 10:42 AM (Ohodx)

77 The DJIA is trying to lift its head but weakening fast.

Help us George Soros, you're our only hope.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:42 AM (PD1tk)

*mmghf* *mmmmkng* *mmghihe* Neo-con!

Sorry. I was trying to post with my mouth full of The One's cock.

Dave and the Dems put all their faith in this guy at their own peril. He can't solve all your problems any more than Bush caused all of them. You and all of your fellow worshippers are setting this guy up for a big drop, you just don't know it yet. You see, there is no one else to blame now when bad things happen, no Repub's, no Bush, no Cheney - just the Democrats and O in charge. And when things go bad, and they will, Dems without a reliable scapegoat will shoulder all of the resposibility. Good luck Dave - you're gonna need it.

Posted by: volfan at January 21, 2009 10:43 AM (2V6Ai)

79 Reich it is! So, is this the 4th Reich. Or are we starting over at 1?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 10:45 AM (4pdbX)

80 Maybe we should release all of the terrorists. Give them each a backpack full of C4 and turn them loose in D.C. What could go wrong?

Posted by: Ostral B Heretic at January 21, 2009 10:45 AM (id7IM)

Then why the delay, Dave? Just transfer these shitbags to DC, put them on trial in a non-military court, and toss-out their charges (putting them on the streets of DC) because of "lack of evidence". Today.

We can put them all up at your place while the docket gets cleared.

C'mon, do it and get it over with. We know you want to.

Hear, Hear....

Posted by: volfan at January 21, 2009 10:46 AM (2V6Ai)

82 Here is a translation of "President" Obama's request for time to "review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically."

Oh, shit, so now I have to make a decision? Hmmm ... uh, let's push this back. Yeah, that's it. Um, give me a couple of months to detox from all the coke I did last night, and, um, get organized. You see, even though I've been hammering Bush for the last 2 years about Gitmo, I never actually researched the subject - or had anyone else research it. It'll take a while to figure this out, so, uhmm, I'll revisit it in May. After basketball season ends and all, you know?

P.S. Progressive Dave is a cockholster ... and shit.

Posted by: FN Hussein G at January 21, 2009 10:46 AM (Ohodx)

Yes, please don't act like the Supremes are some kind of infallible genuises. I give you Plessy v. Ferguson as one example of the fallibility of that august body. The worst thing the Founders did was fail to provide a mechanism by which the Great Robed Ones can be removed from their post.

No to mention, I don't recall anything in the Constitution stipulating that it applies to citizens of the world...

It is the U.S. Constitution, after all...

Personally, I think you should be thrilled they weren't merely subjected to battlefield interrogation and a bullet. They do not fight in uniform, under a flag, or for any recognized nation. They're pirates. Refer to your history (or the news, for that matter) to see how pirates are typically dealt with.

Posted by: Miller at January 21, 2009 10:47 AM (x10cX)

Cough, cough... *he* said Iraq, junior.

You're welcome.

Like that makes a difference, dupe?

The Bill of Rights applies to foreign born terrorists captured on a battlefield in a foreign country out of uniform? Wow who knew, how about we give em citizenship and the new right to healthcare too.

Now now, don't give Dave ideas...

Posted by: Curmudgeon at January 21, 2009 10:47 AM (ujg0T)

AtC,

You're right. I missed the Cockholster memo.

_{Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster, Cock holster, Cockholster,}

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 10:47 AM (MKFU7)

86 #59 - You give yourself too much credit.

Posted by: RB at January 21, 2009 10:47 AM (ewXBY)

87 First act is to in effect pardon his friends in Islam, including the terrorists involved in killing 3,000 Americans. Now the fast journey of surrendering to Islam begins. B Hussein doesn't want his daughters 'stuck' with a child but evidently approves of sticking them in Islman dress and the degrading treatment/beatings of females that comes with it.

Posted by: Scrapiron at January 21, 2009 10:48 AM (XWJh5)

88 So, Dave,
What should be done with the prisoners in Gitmo (after the ACLU provided blow jobs)?

Please allow me to introduce you to a concept which is obviously foreign to you, a remedy that is specifically mentioned numerous times in the constitution.

You see, there is this thing called a (repeat after me) "trial". During which stuff is presented that people with triple digit IQ's call "evidence".

If people are actually guilty, evidence is presented and they go to jail, etc. If evidence is lacking, they go free.

And believe it or not, our country went up against the foremost world power at the time over issues such as the rights of the accused to actual trials. Instead of, you know, the government just accusing you of something and holding you indefinitely on just their say so.

So, between what the founding fathers established and people fought and died to defend, and winger macho posturing and horse shit, I'll take the former.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:48 AM (T67ZU)

89 volfan haven't you heard, because of Bush, Obama will HAVE to release these poor misunderstood militants since any evidence gathered against them is hopelessly compromised. Dude, believe me when I tell you that Bush will be blamed for every bad thing that happend from here on out.

Posted by: sears poncho at January 21, 2009 10:49 AM (uj/0b)

90 A backpack full of C4 for killing infidels is my constitutional right! I'm glad God-King Obama recognizes that, you filthy Bushies!

Posted by: Guantanamo Dave at January 21, 2009 10:49 AM (VmtE9)

In 1942 two teams of German saboteurs landed in Florida and on Long Island; they were quickly captured, put on trial in a secret military court and six of the eight were electrocuted shortly after the guilty verdicts were handed out. No appeals were allowed. Two were sentenced to prison and deported before 1950.

That is how we should deal with those creatures in Guantanamo. The precedent has been set.

Posted by: Holger Danske at January 21, 2009 10:49 AM (nw+cE)

92 cough, Dred Scott, Cough

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 10:50 AM (Woh2s)

93 Assuming Dave is right for the moment, I have 2 questions...

If case law is clear, why just a delay? Though not trained in the law, I would suppose that following binding decisions should not require a 120-day waiting period.

What am I to think about a man, who in his first major action in office, acts in the interest of some of the biggest pieces of shit on the face of the planet? If this is priority A1 for this administration, I can't wait to see what's next.

Posted by: bunny boy at January 21, 2009 10:50 AM (YsSn7)

94 Now now, don't give Dave ideas...

Sorry, somebody already gave "ideas" to the Supreme Court. You know, like the rule of law, etc.

Or are you like most wingers and just haven't paid attention to any of the Gitmo rulings that have already occurred?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:51 AM (T67ZU)

95 If case law is clear, why just a delay? Though not trained in the law, I would suppose that following binding decisions should not require a 120-day waiting period.

Considering that Obama was a law professor at the University of Chicago, I'd assume he knows what he's doing.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:52 AM (T67ZU)

96 92 was for 64..

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 10:53 AM (Woh2s)

"You see, there is this thing called a (repeat after me) "trial". During which stuff is presented that people with triple digit IQ's call "evidence".
If people are actually guilty, evidence is presented and they go to jail, etc. If evidence is lacking, they go free."

You are an efing moron. This would make an infantryman a cop. You ignorant piece of shit. I guess we would have to allow front line troops to also go back and "testify" after they saw someone shooting a rocket at them. Yes that is the ticket. Oh by the way O! is sending 30000 more troops to Afghan and keeping troops in Iraq until at least 2011 so when is your chickenhawk ass signing up?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 10:53 AM (NM1Nu)

98 I forgot to sign in. Holger Danske, is my younger son, and I hereby claim no responsibility for his postings.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 10:54 AM (nw+cE)

99 your chickenhawk ass

Hey, you're the macho wingnut, not me. When did you make it out of your recliner and down to the recruiting office?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:54 AM (T67ZU)

100

This time, it's personal.

Posted by: Marbury v Madison Part Deux at January 21, 2009 10:55 AM (MKFU7)

101 I know a bunch of recruiters numbers Dave just let me know when you want to sign up and stop advocating sending other peoples kids off to die.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 10:55 AM (NM1Nu)

102 I'd assume he knows what he's doing.

There's your, first, one among many mistakes.

I would love to see some of B Hussian's reviews of law and maybe a syllabus or two he wrote as a professor..

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 10:55 AM (Woh2s)

103 I'd assume he knows what he's doing. How is "assume" spelled?

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 10:56 AM (nw+cE)

104 I am already in dipshit. So when you singing up coward? Or are you too busy on your recliner playing Call of Duty?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 10:56 AM (NM1Nu)

105 Who the fuck's been jerking off on the keyboard?

that's the fifth one this week.

Posted by: Progressive Dave's Dad at January 21, 2009 10:58 AM (Woh2s)

106 the Gitmo rulings that have already occurred

Dave does have us on that point. The Supremes have spoken, sort of, and since many believe that 5 unelected officials trump the other two branches, we do have to deal with it. The various ruling have been contradictory and unhelpful, which really isn't surprising given they depended on Kennedy to make a majority.

Clearly, the Supremes were not happy with the Bush approach, but were not able to propose a method that would later meet their own scrutiny. First they complained that Congress wasn't involved, hence the military tribunals, then they found that these were somehow lacking.

I'm at a bit of a loss since the Courts rulings are so ... unruly. If we make adjustments to satisfy them today, they won't be enough tommorrow.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 10:58 AM (PD1tk)

107 You are an efing moron. This would make an infantryman a cop. You ignorant piece of shit. I guess we would have to allow front line troops to also go back and "testify" after they saw someone shooting a rocket at them.

You're not exactly a neurosurgeon yourself.

The *Bush administration* attempted to set the rules to this half assed rodeo. In an actual war, people are POW's, with specific rules as to when and where they can go back, treatment, etc. But no, according to the Bush gang this is a war... except when it isn't. And they're criminals... except where they're not. So, they're in this alleged shadowland where they get *neither* the rights of the accused or POW's. The Supreme Court has already called bullshit on this game.

Hey, you don't like how this cuts? Call up Captain Pretzel in Crawford and complain to him.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 10:59 AM (T67ZU)

108 Dave we can not win these wars without you. I mean once O! repeals Don't Ask Don't Tell I just know there will be long lines in San Fran outside every recruiting station available. You wouldn't want it to be said a lesbian had more balls than you would you? Freakin coward.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 10:59 AM (NM1Nu)

109 Progressive Dave,
They are being put on trial with fancy lawyers, judges and evidence and all. To allow them to be put on trial in the U.S. court system would pretty much guarantee they would all go free or if all the evidence was presented in the fashion required by U.S. courts to but them in jail then our intelligence gathering techniques/programs would be revealed. What if the defense attorney claimed his client wasn't taken into custody properly - well lets just pull the Navy SEAL's out of Afghanistan so they can spend the rest of their time as witnesses in court. We would be in the position of simply just releasing them or allowing them to make a mockery of our justice system.

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 10:59 AM (4pdbX)

110
Considering that Obama was a law professor at the University of Chicago, I'd assume he knows what he's doing.

Surely, we are free to assume such things. Hope you're right...

Posted by: bunny boy at January 21, 2009 10:59 AM (YsSn7)

111 Hey, you're the macho wingnut, not me. When did you make it out of your recliner and down to the recruiting office?

Why not you? waiting for the DADT to be lifted?

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:00 AM (Woh2s)

112 I can distinctly remember when Clinton, taking time off from preparing to perjure in a future sexual harassment case, sent troops into Bosnia. You know, Imperial US Stormtroopers. Nary a word from the left, and Billy just promised, in wistful tones, how they would be back by next April.

They're still there. No leftard screams "Bring them home."

So when Unicorn McEthnoFart Changes� the aim of closing Gitmo from first priority to "it's only a failure of policy if it's open fours years from now," he's only begun to redefine "success." If Gitmo is there in 2016, it will be a "tribute to the careful dispensation of justice which is a hallmark of the age of Lord Barry O'Guiltwhite."

Posted by: George Orwell at January 21, 2009 11:00 AM (FCbvi)

113

Hey, you're the macho wingnut, not me. When did you make it out of your recliner and down to the recruiting office?

Hmmmmm - Barack's issuing a call to arms for the Good Fight against Lots of Bad Stuff and capacity Will Be Needed and ProgDave is simply tapping away here, of all places.

ProgDave -

Enlist. Serve honorably, get a slew of beneifts. I did. So there. Fuck you.

Become certified as a teacher and prepare for The One to send you to some inner city school. You're life is no longer your own. Take The Pledge.

Get medical clearance to be able to drive a van or help deliver supplies to those in need. ObamaCorps will need labor, put your back into something for once.

Posted by: Bumper@Sticker.com at January 21, 2009 11:00 AM (MKFU7)

114

" people are POW's"

You know nothing about war so why freakin claim to. You have to be in uniform and not violating the laws of war to gain POW status. Terrorist need not apply except in your fairy tale world.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 11:01 AM (NM1Nu)

115

cockholster

_{for Alex the Chick and the Greater AoS community.}

Posted by: Bumper@Sticker.com at January 21, 2009 11:01 AM (MKFU7)

116 The Supremes have spoken, sort of, and since many believe that 5 unelected officials trump the other two branches,

They do when it comes to the interpretation and application of the law. Balance of powers and all that.

It's right there in the constitution and everything.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:01 AM (T67ZU)

117 Today is day 2691 of 10 September 2001. "Eternal September" has been redefined, and not in a good way.

Posted by: salfter at January 21, 2009 11:03 AM (S/yGJ)

118 Why not you? waiting for the DADT to be lifted?

Sounds to me like you're waiting for a date.

You must be in the "I like the military because I have the built in 'the foxhole was lonely' excuse" crowd.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:03 AM (T67ZU)

119 ...and one more thing: Regressive Dave is a cockholster. (But you all already knew that.)

Posted by: salfter at January 21, 2009 11:03 AM (S/yGJ)

120 Progressive Dave, read my posting # 91. Those Germans were not POWs. Those un-uniformed killers in Gitmo are not POWs either.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:04 AM (nw+cE)

121 Hey, you don't like how this cuts? Call up Captain Pretzel in Crawford and complain to him.

Guess we have to wait for the Obama regime to wait 120 days because Obama voted present and punted the ball.

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:04 AM (Woh2s)

122

The *Bush administration* attempted to set the rules to this half assed rodeo. In an actual war, people are POW's, with specific rules as to when and where they can go back, treatment, etc. But no, according to the Bush gang this is a war... except when it isn't. And they're criminals... except where they're not. So, they're in this alleged shadowland where they get *neither* the rights of the accused or POW's. The Supreme Court has already called bullshit on this game.

Of course, being assigned *POW* status has it's own legal requirements that these jokers don't meet, not least is that was no formal declaration of war, right? Way to abdicate your responsibility, Congress. And then there's that pesky fact that, again, they do not fight for a recognized nation, in uniform, under a flag. This is uncharted territory, largely, in terms of military law, unless you hearken back to the Barbary pirates.

But, then, you guys don't want to do that, do you. That's an inconvenient historical/legal precedent. If there's a pretzel here, it's not like Bush was the only one spinning the dough. There's plenty of blame to go around.

Posted by: Miller at January 21, 2009 11:05 AM (x10cX)

123 You don't even know WTF you are talkin about. You speak of the Geneva Convention, you only "learned" about it by reading DailyKos diaries, not by having to apply it or having any experience at all reading it. Why don't you save yourself some time and just cut and paste some Keith Olberman rants here?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 11:05 AM (NM1Nu)

124 Sounds to me like you're waiting for a date.

That's your response to a lot of things. Why is that?

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 21, 2009 11:05 AM (ZW5eD)

125 Progressive Dave,
So, in your POW scenario, to which nation or faction do our POW prisoners belong? And should we just imprison them until a 'peace' settlement is reached with this faction. I'm actually ok with this solution.

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:05 AM (4pdbX)

126 Also see # 98.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:05 AM (nw+cE)

127 You know nothing about war so why freakin claim to. You have to be in uniform and not violating the laws of war to gain POW status. Terrorist need not apply except in your fairy tale world.

Uhhh, genius... according to you, these people were picked up off a *battlefield* in Afghanistan.

Another thing: accused terrorists get treated as criminals. People off a battlefield are POW's.

So... which are they?

Damn, talk about fairy tales. The Brothers Grimm are more believable than wingers stabs at understanding jurisprudence.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:06 AM (T67ZU)

128 They do when it comes to the interpretation and application of the law. Balance of powers and all that.

It's right there in the constitution and everything.

and in excellent case law like Dred Scott vs. Sanford..

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:06 AM (Woh2s)

129

Yes, Mr. President! I will suck it some more. Just remember that you promised to make the eeeeeeeeviiilll 'Bush gang' go away! MMMMMuuuurrrrrffff!

Don't come in my mouth, Barack! Mmmmnnnnnnhhh!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:08 AM (Tp12J)

130 That's your response to a lot of things. Why is that?

History and experience, junior.

Go from Larry Craig and Jeff Gannon back to Roy Cohn, and that's just the beginning. They don't make closets big enough for the right.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:08 AM (T67ZU)

131 Wow so buddies of mine that went to Afghan in 03 weren't even on a battlefield? Dude you are a genius.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 11:09 AM (NM1Nu)

132 "They are not CITIZENS, asshole - they are TERRORISTS wishing to do our country harm!"

And how do you determine who is a terrorist? Amazing how many of these dumb rubes don't understand the purpose of the rule of law.

Posted by: Tom Dubya at January 21, 2009 11:09 AM (G4OgF)

133 Now you're just being a homophobe...

when it's obvious that you are the catcher..

why the self hate?

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:10 AM (Woh2s)

134

Today is day 2691 of 10 September 2001. "Eternal September" has been redefined, and not in a good way.

No, yesterday was day one of the year zero of the First Reich.

Posted by: Tinian at January 21, 2009 11:11 AM (Ohodx)

135 120 days gets us thru March Madness, but he's in danger of running into the NBA playoffs. Hey, what happens with Easter now? If He's here on Earth (I almost said 'in the US', such an antiquated notion), is every day Easter or do we repeal it?

Posted by: t-bird at January 21, 2009 11:11 AM (FcR7P)

136

Considering that Obama was a law professor at the University of Chicago, I'd assume he knows what he's doing.

Just because your a law prof doesn't mean you know what your doing, Dave. I had plenty of law prof's that didn't know crap (Billy Jeff was a law prof. too and see how that worked out?). There's a big difference between teaching and doing, O did a little of the former and not a lot of the latter. The fact is that his delay means that he doesn't have an answer, at least not one that's politically pleasing at the moment. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being, but please don't hold out O's pedigree as some beacon of competence because it's not.

Posted by: volfan at January 21, 2009 11:11 AM (2V6Ai)

137 Wow so buddies of mine that went to Afghan in 03 weren't even on a battlefield? Dude you are a genius

It was a battlefield then. Thanks for admitting it.

Build a proper POW camp, treat the detainees humanely, and admit Red Cross observers.

I knew you'd see it my way. Welcome to the human race.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:11 AM (T67ZU)

138 History and experience, junior.

What experience would that be, jizzstain?

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 21, 2009 11:11 AM (ZW5eD)

139 understanding jurisprudence.

and it only took me 5 tries to spell that correctly too.. I want my brownie button!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:12 AM (Woh2s)

140

People off a battlefield are POW's.

If they are not wearing a uniform or carrying a Military ID, they are hardly POWs. To which government have they taken an oath? In 1944, German soldiers who were captured wearing US uniforms were very quickly shot. I have seen the film.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:12 AM (nw+cE)

141 26 Please allow me to congratulate you on your first post that approaches accuracy and substance.
Posted by: Progressive Dave

Thank God the lefty school-marm showed up to give the good students a gold star.

Posted by: KingShamus at January 21, 2009 11:13 AM (7HvqU)

142 Progressive Dave,
So now your're claiming Gitmo is not humane? They're living better now than when they were in their homelands. And the Red Cross does have access to Gitmo.

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:14 AM (4pdbX)

143 Build a proper POW camp, treat the detainees humanely, and admit Red Cross observer

Last I saw, it was called Gitmo.. maybe you've heard of it.. the detainees are clean and tick free. First time for everything, I guess.

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:14 AM (Woh2s)

144

Ouch!

Ordinarily, my posts would make more sense, but that unicorn horn I shoved up my ass keeps poking me in the brain.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:15 AM (VmtE9)

145

"Build a proper POW camp, treat the detainees humanely, and admit Red Cross observers."

And then grant them full US Constitutional rights. Fuck yeah!!!!!!!!!

Hey coward when are you going to stop being a keyboard commando and join up to help fight O!'s pointless wars in Iraq and Afghan?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 11:15 AM (NM1Nu)

146 What experience would that be, jizzstain?

Experience with winger self loathers alternately hurling dumbass epithets at me and trying to cop a feel, followed by drunken pleas to join them for rounds of hide the salami up in their room.

You know, the usual wingnut mating ritual. A loveless marriage with an "onward Christian soldiers" little woman at home, followed by "down low" couplings with Jeff Gannon types on the road.

Sorry boys, I have better taste than that.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:16 AM (T67ZU)

147 The gitmo guys are neither criminals nor soldiers. They are pirates; hosti humanis generis. Like the ones before them, they respect no law or accord. Long established international law give them few rights. It was our own attempt to appear merciful that has tripped us up.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:16 AM (PD1tk)

148

The Dow is now up 12 points. I'm sure it will be in negative territory by noon.

Obama is working his magic.

Posted by: Tinian at January 21, 2009 11:17 AM (Ohodx)

149 Thank God the lefty school-marm showed up to give the good students a gold star.

nah.. Gold stars give students who get silver and green and red stars a bad complex.. bad for the self esteem..

all stars are now tope.. and every student gets a star.

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:17 AM (Woh2s)

150 Now, if you reich-wingers want to send some 5-year-old boys up to my room, that'd be great!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:18 AM (VmtE9)

151 I remember when Nixon inherited Johnson's war. Soon people forgot who got us there and began blaming Nixon. When will Obama start being treated like Nixon?

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:18 AM (nw+cE)

152 O!'s pointless wars in Iraq and Afghan?

Wow, Obama's powers now extend to time travel back so that he started those wars and not Dubya?

You wingers are really up shit creek if he's that powerful.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:18 AM (T67ZU)

153

Considering that Obama was a law professor at the University of Chicago, I'd assume he knows what he's doing.

And what brilliant works did he produce there? What actual work can he show us from his time as an attorney? What did he do as an Illinois elected official? What did he produce as a US senator? He's held a lot of nice titles with zero actual work put into them.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:19 AM (1Jaio)

154 "treat the detainees humanely"

They get fucking halal chicken pilaf, shrink-wrapped Korans, and La-Z-Boys to sit in while they watch TV in between throwing feces into the faces of the guards.

What the FUCK could be more humane than that?

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 21, 2009 11:19 AM (fGDhl)

155 Sorry boys, I have better taste than that.

Obama's cock for starters.. then that cottaged cheese mangled thatch of steel wool that is Michelle Obama's twat..

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:19 AM (Woh2s)

156

Wow, Obama's powers now extend to time travel back so that he started those wars and not Dubya?

You wingers are really up shit creek if he's that powerful.

Well the messiah did say he was going to have a fast response to Hurricane Katrina.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:20 AM (1Jaio)

157 Last I saw, it was called Gitmo.. maybe you've heard of it.. the detainees are clean and tick free. First time for everything, I guess.

Sorry, the Supreme Court and the Geneva Convention disagree.

Sucks to be you.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:20 AM (T67ZU)

158 Don't get me started on what I have to do to keep BO's mother in law happy..

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:20 AM (Woh2s)

159 And only when the military accepts open pedophiles, will I be willing to join up. And when they openly accept felons and registered sex offenders. I doubt they'd ever accept the other stuff I'm into, but I'll just keep those a secret.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:21 AM (VmtE9)

160 Well the messiah did say he was going to have a fast response to Hurricane Katrina.

Considering that Bush has a three year legacy of sitting around with his thumb up his ass, anything has to be faster than that.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:21 AM (T67ZU)

161 You know, the usual wingnut mating ritual.

Yes, as invented by some Kos circle jerk, which is where all your "talking points" originate.

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 21, 2009 11:21 AM (ZW5eD)

162 Sorry, the Supreme Court and the Geneva Convention disagree.

The Supremes yes, the GC not so much.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:21 AM (PD1tk)

163 Considering that Bush has a three year legacy of sitting around with his thumb up his ass, anything has to be faster than that.

if only I could be that thumb

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:22 AM (Woh2s)

164 The Supremes yes, the GC not so much.

Sorry, Gitmo is *not* GC compliant. The refusal to admit international observers alone violates the GC.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:22 AM (T67ZU)

165 Progressive Dave,
The Supreme Court didn't rule Gitmo as unlawful - it ruled that Congress was responsible for establishing a court to deal with the detainees. And what specifically in the Geneva Convention is violated by Gitmo? If you want to claim the prisoners as POW's then what problem to you have with Gitmo?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:23 AM (4pdbX)

166 I'm referring to The Geneva Convention, a gay techno band from San Francisco. My posts are fully consistent with the liner notes on their last CD, so suck it, wingnut!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:23 AM (VmtE9)

167 Sorry, Gitmo is *not* GC compliant. The refusal to admit international observers alone violates the GC.

They admit the IRC. The point is moot though, as they detainees are not signatories to the GC, which by its own terms, renders them outside its protections.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:24 AM (PD1tk)

168 Detainees in Gitmo aren't really GC compliant either..

so it's a wash..

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:24 AM (Woh2s)

169

Who the fuck's been jerking off on the keyboard?

Who the fuck�s been wiping their ass on the keyboard as well?

Posted by: Vic at January 21, 2009 11:24 AM (f6os6)

170

Considering that Bush has a three year legacy of sitting around with his thumb up his ass, anything has to be faster than that.

That's right stupid. Nothing was done. Nothing at all. The poor chocolate city was left to rot. Get your tongue out of Barry's ass for two seconds it might do you a world of good.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:25 AM (1Jaio)

171 If you want to claim the prisoners as POW's then what problem to you have with Gitmo?

See 164.

And that's just for one.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:25 AM (T67ZU)

172 Progressive Dave,
So, your have procedural issues with Gitmo but no real complaint with it?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:26 AM (4pdbX)

173

I looooooovvvvvveeeeee Cooooooooocccccccckkkkkk!

Especially the half kenyan flavor!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:26 AM (F+Nzw)

174 That's right stupid. Nothing was done. Nothing at all. The poor chocolate city was left to rot.

What town do you live in? What's the height of culture there; is it monster truck rallies or the pro wrestling tour?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:27 AM (T67ZU)

175 International Red Cross has/is there.. dumb fuck..

what part of international did you not understand?

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:27 AM (Woh2s)

176

Considering that Bush has a three year legacy of sitting around with his thumb up his ass, anything has to be faster than that.

The slow response to Katrina by the Feds was due to long standing law and policy. Washington could not send in Federal people until the states asked. They did not ask until it was too late. Bush got blamed for the failures of the New Orleans mayor and Louisisna Governor. That POS mayor got re-elected. Louisiana now has a real governor.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:27 AM (nw+cE)

177 Specifically, see the 164 guys I've blown at my mosque since Obama's coronation yesterday.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:28 AM (VmtE9)

178 Why do you guys continue to engage the troll? You're just giving it jerk-off material.

Posted by: Miller at January 21, 2009 11:28 AM (x10cX)

179 I haz cultures.. I make funz of truck ralliez..

I have one nut yet to drop but I'z thinks me bedders than youz.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:29 AM (Woh2s)

180

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:27 AM (T67ZU)

Davey judging from all of your posts you must have a lot of time on your hands. I guess that's one of the benefits of being a ward of the welfare state.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:29 AM (1Jaio)

181

------------

Sorry, Progressive Dave, but that most definitely isn't in the Constitution, or in the other founding documents. The Supreme Court grabbed the power to be the final "decider" on constitutionality in Marbury v. Madison. "Balance of Power" would mean, wouldn't it, that all three branches have an equal obligation to make decisions regarding constitutionality? They did originally, but now they don't, because the S. Ct. has usurped that power. Now the "balance" of power is all the S. Ct's way. And not to the benefit of the US's war efforts. A perfect example being the recent decision in the Hamdan case, where the Supremes, despite being specifically told by Congress that the Supremes had no jurisdiction over the issue (and Congress IS, explicitly in the Constitution, the body that decides the S. Ct's case jurisdiction), decided that they had jurisdiction and ruled anyway, and wrongly at that.

You really should pull your head out of Andrew Sullivan's squeakhole for a while and try to see reality. The sky is pink in your world because you're looking at someone's shredded rectum.

Posted by: Sharkman at January 21, 2009 11:29 AM (69J41)

182 So, your have procedural issues with Gitmo but no real complaint with it?

Let's see, prisoner treatment that is appalling by GC standards (sorry, no "forced intel gathering" allowed), indefinite detention, detention of not just minors but some who were barely teens, lack of access to counsel, and that doesn't count recent revelations that torture was in fact performed at Gitmo.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:30 AM (T67ZU)

183 *slurp* 165.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:30 AM (Woh2s)

184

Davey judging from all of your posts you must have a lot of time on your hands. I guess that's one of the benefits of being a ward of the welfare state.

And you're free to be here monitoring all my posts because you're such a hard working individual yourself.

Right?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:31 AM (T67ZU)

185 "Uhhh, genius... according to you, these people were picked up off a *battlefield* in Afghanistan.

Another thing: accused terrorists get treated as criminals. People off a battlefield are POW's.

So... which are they?"

Uh, pinhead..... people captured while wearing a uniform, under a flag, fighting for a recognized nation on a battlefield are POWs.

Per the Geneva convention you cited earlier, those on a battlefield engaged in fighting that don't meet these criteria are considered spies, to be summarily executed.

So to answer your tiresome question, they are in effect unrealized corpses per the Geneva convention articles you are trying to selectively reference.

I'd be the third poster to bring this up- why don't you address it?

Posted by: waitin' on my unicorn... at January 21, 2009 11:31 AM (mdZQh)

186 despite being specifically told by Congress that the Supremes had no jurisdiction over the issue (and Congress IS, explicitly in the Constitution, the body that decides the S. Ct's case jurisdiction), decided that they had jurisdiction and ruled anyway, and wrongly at that.

Prove it.

By the way, "the Heritage Foundation says so" is *not* proof.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:33 AM (T67ZU)

187

indefinite detention

Hell yes, as long as the war lasts.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:33 AM (nw+cE)

188

And you're free to be here monitoring all my posts because you're such a hard working individual yourself.

Right?

Well Davey someone has to bitch slap you in line.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:33 AM (1Jaio)

189 Uh, pinhead..... people captured while wearing a uniform, under a flag, fighting for a recognized nation on a battlefield are POWs.

Per the Geneva convention you cited earlier, those on a battlefield engaged in fighting that don't meet these criteria are considered spies, to be summarily executed.

So to answer your tiresome question, they are in effect unrealized corpses per the Geneva convention articles you are trying to selectively reference.

I'd be the third poster to bring this up- why don't you address it?

OK, then why haven't they been executed?

Here's one for you to chew on: what was the official Afghan army uniform at the time of the invasion?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:35 AM (T67ZU)

190 Well Davey someone

So, how did the welfare check work out for you this month?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:36 AM (T67ZU)

191

As I recall it, the two that were not executed were saved only by being slow getting out of their uniforms. The other six were already in full civilian dress, but these two lucky fucks were still half in uniform. Not in uniform? You're a spy subject to summary execution. In uniform? You're a POW with all the rights thereto. These goatshaggers in Afghanistan should be shot summarily.

Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 21, 2009 11:36 AM (5aa4z)

192 Why do you guys continue to engage the troll?

Because he's the best we've had in a while. He's wrong, but not ridiculously wrong, mostly. He's just going with the current buzz from the hive and its always good practice.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:37 AM (PD1tk)

193 (sorry, no "forced intel gathering" allowed)

you mean, the three people who were water boarded? including KSM?

that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid knew about and whoever else was in the closed room meeting including several other democrats who gave their approval (that means permission... like your master gave you permission to use the computer today before you go back into the gimp box) for the water boarding.

That Forced intel gathering?

more people have been water boarding protesting water boarding than have been subjected to real waterboarding..

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:37 AM (Woh2s)

194 Again you keep implying that terrorist, out of uniform and not part of a standing army, are entitled to rights under the Geneva Convention. Who the fuck told you that lie? You have to have been taught to be this stupid.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at January 21, 2009 11:37 AM (NM1Nu)

195 He's wrong, but not ridiculously wrong, mostly.

Unfortunately for you, you just can't prove it.

Sucks to be you.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:38 AM (T67ZU)

196 Progressive Dave,
Uh, the detainees do have legal counsel, and if Gitmo is a steel cage of hell as you claim then how did anyone 'find out' that 'torture' was going on there? Maybe you're referring to several false 'news stories' published by Newsweek?

You also, have yet to explain how the people at Gitmo are covered by the GC (and if they are which nation/faction they belong to, etc).

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:38 AM (4pdbX)

197 Here's one for you to chew on: what was the official Afghan army uniform at the time of the invasion?

You tell me, Dave. Let's see how much you know.

I know because I was there. You just sit here and keep throwing out strawmen and red herrings.

The fact that you didn't know the IRC was and has been at Gitmo is pretty much proof of your cluelesssness on the topic.

Call me when you know what you're talking about.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:38 AM (epqk/)

198

I came home for lunch, now it's time to go back to the office; besides, discussing something with Progressive Dave is like talking to a two year old.

Let's get this straight - Those creatures in Guantanamo do not get protection of the US Constitution. My last contribution to this farcical thread.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 21, 2009 11:39 AM (nw+cE)

199 what was the official Afghan army uniform at the time of the invasion?

flag on their arm.. really that's all they needed..

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:39 AM (Woh2s)

200 That Forced intel gathering?

more people have been water boarding protesting water boarding than have been subjected to real waterboarding..

All it takes is one.

BTW, a Japanese army officer was hung for war crimes after WWII. One of which was having people waterboarded. The evidence for waterboarding involved just a handful of people.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:40 AM (T67ZU)

201 Sucks to be you.

I take it back, he is ridiculously wrong. have at him.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:40 AM (PD1tk)

202 common banner or flag unifying them as a unit..

all they needed.

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:41 AM (Woh2s)

203 Obama is the elected leader of this nation. Yeah, it was a fairly narrow victory, having only a single percentage point better than Bush in 2004, even after spending 4 times as much as Mccain did, but Obama won.

His first move is to be soft on terror and waffle as though he isn't ready to lead. Obama's voters knew he would be exactly like this. Mccain's voters knew it too. As did the millions of conservatives who didn't bother voting because the GOP didn't provide a decent candidate.

that's democracy in action. The USA has chosen to be soft on terror and waffle about with an unprepared leader. While I hate it... it's something we have to get used to fighting if we're going to turn this around. Thank goodness that hacks like Progressive Dave intend to blindly fight for anything Obama does, even if they don't understand it. They are a constant reminder that we need to fight back, and that our opinions are actually pretty relevant (keeping conservatives home was Obama's campaign strategy from the beginning, and it's his strategy today with astroturfing). Hacks like Dave will keep us charged up and aware that Obama has nothing but 'Bush sucks and Fuck you!' to say to us.

Had Bush done this exact thing, Dave would not agree with it. Can Dave deny this?

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 11:41 AM (8jYMc)

204 what was the official Afghan army uniform at the time of the invasion?

flag on their arm.. really that's all they needed..

Afghanistan was the poorest country on earth, literally. They had *no* uniforms or even armbands, genius.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:41 AM (T67ZU)

205 BTW, a Japanese army officer was hung for war crimes after WWII. One of which was having people waterboarded.

We were signatories, Japan not so much, and we were the victors. Apples, oranges.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:41 AM (PD1tk)

206

Prove it? No need to refer to The Heritage Foundation. How about Scalia's dissent in the case? Considerably more interesting than reading your unlearned prose.

Posted by: Sharkman at January 21, 2009 11:42 AM (69J41)

207 I take it back, he is ridiculously wrong. have at him.

Hey, you have been "having at me" and gotten nowhere.

Trust me, they are no brighter than you.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:42 AM (T67ZU)

208

Its a shame Bush dropped the ball, he should have exercised their Geneva rights and hanged them all at dawn yesterday, wrapped them in nice orange tarps, and left their still warm corspes for Obama deal with.

Posted by: Jean at January 21, 2009 11:43 AM (L64A6)

209 All it takes is one.

and the high ranking DEMOCRATS signed off on that too..

including Hillery

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:43 AM (Woh2s)

210 Hey, you have been "having at me" and gotten nowhere.

Wait for the frozen fruit.

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:43 AM (PD1tk)

211

Sucks to be you.

Hey dipshit you've posted that same response about a dozen times. I'll give you this you're sincere in your stupidity. You border on Biden dumb.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:44 AM (1Jaio)

212 How about Scalia's dissent in the case?

Captain "homosexual agenda"?

Note: dissent.

Not case law. Hey, sucks to be you. In future years, Scalia dissents will be studied for laughs in law schools on days when profs want to give the kids a break.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:44 AM (T67ZU)

213 "Afghanistan was the poorest country on earth, literally. They had *no* uniforms or even armbands, genius."

Because a cloth armband is so much more expensive than an AK-47 or a rocket launcher. If they wanted to be considered soldiers as defined by GC they should have considered that earlier. Or are you suggesting that, we are correct that they were not in uniform, but that's not their fault so we should pretend anyway? Is there any scenario in your mind where the GC wouldn't apply?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:44 AM (4pdbX)

214 and the high ranking DEMOCRATS signed off on that too..

including Hillery

To their shame. They should have grown a backbone.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:45 AM (T67ZU)

215 Now send me those little boys you guys promised me!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:45 AM (VmtE9)

216 so poor.. can't afford food due to the high cost of AK 47s and that darn low cost of poppy seeds

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:45 AM (Woh2s)

217 Not case law.

So you can't refute it? Not even a little?

Posted by: toby928 at January 21, 2009 11:45 AM (PD1tk)

218 Afghanistan was the poorest country on earth,

They could afford guns and rocket launchers.......

Posted by: Prezident B. at January 21, 2009 11:45 AM (UrJLp)

219

Which Geneva Conventions does Gitmo violate? We are not a party to the 1st Protocol.

Posted by: Holger Danske at January 21, 2009 11:45 AM (nw+cE)

220 If they wanted to be considered soldiers as defined by GC they should have considered that earlier.

Just like the Ethopian tribesmen should have figured that out when Mussolini invaded.

Right?

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:46 AM (T67ZU)

221 If they wanted to be considered soldiers as defined by GC they should have considered that earlier. Or are you suggesting that, we are correct that they were not in uniform, but that's not their fault so we should pretend anyway? Is there any scenario in your mind where the GC wouldn't apply?

Ninja, you are correct as a matter of law.

Law doesn't matter to Dave. It's all about how he feels.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:46 AM (epqk/)

222 Progressive Dave is a 3 letter word, F U C K I N G S T U P I D...

Posted by: Joe Biden.. at January 21, 2009 11:46 AM (Woh2s)

223 So you can't refute it? Not even a little?

Let's try that again: IT'S A DISSENT, dumbass.

It's NOT law.

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:47 AM (T67ZU)

224 as has been already stated....
_{must learn to refresh the screen first...}

Posted by: Prezident B. at January 21, 2009 11:47 AM (UrJLp)

225 Progressive Dave, are you too stupid to not realize that it's Obama's fault Gitmo is open right now? He's had plenty of time to tell the country, without equivocation, what he's actually going to do to these detainees. Why is he waffling if you're right, and these people who disregarded the Geneva Convention in dozens of ways deserve our fair treatement (which I submit they do deserve).

Face it, Mccain would have treated these people a lot better than Obama will. Mccain was the true candidate for those who are opposed to waterboarding and things like that. Obama is just being vague enough that you can pretend he's on your side while you fight your villian Dubya. You're a dumbass to fall for it.

And in a couple of years you will console yourself by thinking that at worst, the dems are slightly better than republicans... but you're wrong. The Republicans would have ended Gitmo and waterboarding, and Mccain didn't fuck around not telling you exactly that. The true human rights activist would have realized that some jackass like Obama who has never made a hard decision would be less a leader on torture than a man who was tortured for years as a result of a hard decision he made.

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 11:48 AM (8jYMc)

226

Not case law. Hey, sucks to be you. In future years, Scalia dissents will be studied for laughs in law schools on days when profs want to give the kids a break.

There you go again. I realise that your tiny mind is doing its best to keep up but try to come up with a different response every now and then.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:48 AM (1Jaio)

227

Lindsey �Fuckstick� Graham was just on FNC (The All Obama Network) and he said yes we should close Gitmo soon. When asked what we should do with the �detainees� he said we have three avenues.

1. Repatriate some (Bush has already tried that and no one will take them).

2. Trial in civilian courts for some

3. Hold some without a trial indefinitely (good luck with that cockholster.)

Posted by: Vic at January 21, 2009 11:48 AM (f6os6)

228

BTW, a Japanese army officer was hung for war crimes after WWII. One of which was having people waterboarded.

I've heard that left wing claim before but never with details to back it up. No names, dates, etc. Also no mention of the other war crimes supposedly committed. War crimes (if the story is even true) that were far worse than waterboarding.

Hey Dave -- I know of someone who was executed by lethal injection for crimes. One of which was obstruction of justice.

Posted by: Tinian at January 21, 2009 11:48 AM (Ohodx)

229 Just like the Ethopian tribesmen should have figured that out when Mussolini invaded.

Yo, genius. The applicable part of the GC you're referring to here wasn't even drawn up until 1949.

Mussolini invaded Ethiopia in 1935.

I realize that on your planet time travel is possible. But we're not there yet.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:48 AM (epqk/)

230 Um, I've read the GC. These people do not qualify. It's not even a question. Read it for yourself, PD. It's not all lawyerly language. Pretty straight forward text.

The fact that the exisiting administration decided to afford them any kind humanity is in their favor (I guess). Personally, I think they should have never left the theater of action, been interrogated by military intelligence, then executed forthwith.

By all existing "international law" and precedent, that is fully within the bounds of action. Any better treatment than that is more than they deserve.

When stating that they are POWs by rule of GC, please state section, paragraph and line next time. Bet you can't.

Posted by: mr.frakypants at January 21, 2009 11:49 AM (PonvG)

231 Law doesn't matter to Dave

Yes it does; it simply does not to you.

Geneva Convention: no "enhanced interrogation".

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:49 AM (T67ZU)

232

Let's try that again: IT'S A DISSENT, dumbass.

It's NOT law.

You're welcome.

Which is the highest form of patriotism. Sucks to be you.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 11:50 AM (1Jaio)

233

In future years, Scalia dissents will be studied for laughs in law schools on days when profs want to give the kids a break an idea of how a case should be properly decided, based on the law, and not on a tingly feeling running up a judge's leg or the judge's heartfelt desire to see a certain outcome despite the law.

Fixed that for you, numbnuts.

Posted by: Sharkman at January 21, 2009 11:50 AM (69J41)

234 Geneva Convention: no "enhanced interrogation".

GC only applies to signatories

You're welcome

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:50 AM (epqk/)

235 Dave, go read this. Study it.

Then come back and play with the big boys.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:51 AM (epqk/)

236

became a worldwide symbol of the Bush administration's war on terrorism and its unyielding attitude toward foreign and domestic critics.

FINALLY, an American leader who will yield to foreign critics.

Posted by: CJ at January 21, 2009 11:52 AM (JQtNT)

237 #227

Glad to read that bugeyed cocksucker is as useless as ever

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 21, 2009 11:52 AM (ZW5eD)

238

'GC only applies to signatories'

Wrong. The GC's give protection to non signitories if they follow the Geneva Conventions.

We are in violation of the 1st Protocol Additional. But Congress did not ratify it, thus we are not a party to it.

Posted by: Holger Danske at January 21, 2009 11:53 AM (nw+cE)

239 I have been playing with "the big boys" all morning, and my jaw and ass sure are sore.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:54 AM (VmtE9)

240 Holger Danske,
So, your claiming the detainees/terrorists in Afghanistan are obeying the Geneva Convention?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:54 AM (4pdbX)

241 Wrong. The GC's give protection to non signitories if they follow the Geneva Conventions.

Which they DID NOT. That would have provided the same effect as signatories.

You're welcome.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:54 AM (epqk/)

242 Hey, Tinian...

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers
for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the
trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the
1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid
and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given
several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call
the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese
soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I
was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:54 AM (T67ZU)

243 Dave, your ass is sore for other reasons. Don't blame it on us.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:55 AM (epqk/)

244 "OK, then why haven't they been executed?"

Wish I knew Dave, wish I knew. You still haven't addressed the point though, now have you?

"Here's one for you to chew on: what was the official Afghan army uniform at the time of the invasion?"

So is it your contention that the spies we're discussing were actually members of an army?

Please, give us your reasoning, or provide documentation to the effect that they were in uniform, under a flag, fighting for a country.

Posted by: wair's muh dang skittles? at January 21, 2009 11:56 AM (mdZQh)

245 Progressive Dave,
Any other war crimes that were committed by the Japanese or are you just cherry picking the waterboarding?

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 11:56 AM (4pdbX)

246 OK, that was fun. But lunch hour is over and it's back to a real job.

But damn....I haven't had that much fun screwing with an adolescent quality mind since I was teaching college in Boston.

But this was easier.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 21, 2009 11:56 AM (epqk/)

247 "You're welcome" doesn't have anything to do with you wingers. That's for a just-satisfied customer. Geez, you guys have big egos!

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:56 AM (VmtE9)

248

Gitmo "detainees" protest 120 day delay from judge.

Posted by: Vic at January 21, 2009 11:57 AM (f6os6)

249

cockholster.

let's keep our eyes on the prize here, people.

and PDave

Posted by: Bumper@Sticker.com at January 21, 2009 11:58 AM (MKFU7)

250 Seriously Lefty Dave why can't people like you admit that you hate the country you live in and move to one that suits you better. Instead you're a typical whiny little pussy that accepts all the benefits America gives you that no other country could ever provide and then shits on it. You stand right along side of Obama's friend, Bill Ayers and literally stomp on our flag. You dismiss and ridicule the freeing of 25 million people from dictators but suck the cock of Castro and Chavez while wearing your mass murdering Che t-shirt. You sleep under the safety of our troops while chanting that you will support them when they shoot their officers. You are a classless low life prick.

Posted by: polynikes at January 21, 2009 11:58 AM (m2CN7)

251

You wingers don't expect me to stop satisfying strange men just because I'm busy cutting and pasting from commenters at Kos, do you?

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:58 AM (VmtE9)

252 Dave, you're really in serious error when you compare our actions tot he actions of the Japanese Empire. No one was convicted solely for mere waterboarding in WWII. That's a fact. There was plenty of stuff far more serious to charge those monsters with.

But you realize you are making an argument for Mccain being a better president than Obama, right?

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 11:59 AM (8jYMc)

253 Any other war crimes that were committed by the Japanese or are you just cherry picking the waterboarding?

I think we all know how rhetorical that question is..

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 11:59 AM (Woh2s)

254

You do realize that, since they were just torturing American soldiers, I don't really give a shit. It was just a way of throwing you off the scent.

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 12:01 PM (VmtE9)

255

'Which they DID NOT.'

And remember, we did not ratify the First or Second Protocols.

Posted by: Holger Danske at January 21, 2009 12:02 PM (nw+cE)

256 "FINALLY, an American leader who will yield to foreign critics."

litmus test....litmus tEST....LITMUS TEST!!!!!11!!!!!

Posted by: ghost of creepass Kerry's campaign at January 21, 2009 12:02 PM (mdZQh)

257

Dave: So, if 5 Supreme Court judges say something, THAT is the law? Period. What purpose, really, is served by having the other two branches of government, other than the implementation of what those 5 unelected people say is the law?

If 5 Supreme Court judges came out in a recent case and said that you can't suck cock any longer, would you just roll over for that, or would you consider it wrong, and decide that the dissent by Stevens on the issue might just have some merit? But most importantly, would you obey that decision?

Drop that cock, man! Definitely sucks to be you.

Oh, wait! 5 Supreme Court justices stopped the Florida recounts in 2000. So that means that George W. Bush really did win the election fair and square and you and all your fuckstick buddies were wrong.

Posted by: Sharkman at January 21, 2009 12:04 PM (69J41)

258 Who the fuck cares? I just want my muthafuckin' money. I want pie. I want him to pay for my gas and my rent. Where the fuck is my check? I want my fucking check! HEY BARRY, IT'S TIME TO PAY UP BITCH!

Posted by: ol-dirty-/b/tard at January 21, 2009 12:04 PM (IoUF1)

259

Hey Dave:

They also killed four of the Doolittle Raiders. Three were shot after a mock trial and the fourth was starved to death.

I'll bet they wished they were only waterboarded.

Posted by: Tinian at January 21, 2009 12:05 PM (Ohodx)

260 Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..
Sucks to be you..

There.. had to get those out of the way.. then I can move on to more manly taunts.. who am I kidding..

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 12:05 PM (Woh2s)

261 Progressive Dave ignores the simple question: since Mccain was much more clear about Gitmo and waterboarding, does Progressive Dave have any reason for supporting Obama on this issue?

Sorry, the democrats are playing a game they've played for years... taking the easy and vague position while attacking as harshly as possible. Dave has an absurd view of republicans and Obama's dissenters because he's been programmed to hate without hesitation or thought. A swarm of Axelrod motivated blogs are teaching a greater swarm of morons like Dave to brownshirt and polarize and attempt to make Obama dissent into some kind of shameful thing.

But Obama isn't even being coherent enough to dissent against. We have no idea what he's going to do, and he's probably going to do nothing.

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 12:05 PM (8jYMc)

262 And now that Progressive Dave can see that he's utterly lost the argument, and that anyone reading this thread with an open mind will realize that, he's going to sputter inane repetitive stupid insults.

He made the mistake of attempting to argue on the merits, and that is just not how Obama or his friends win. Just taunt taunt taunt away, Progressive Dave. Maybe you can make this thread so unreadable that few will see just how wrong you were!

sucks to be us!!!!

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 12:07 PM (8jYMc)

263 242 Hey, Tinian...

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers
for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the
trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the
1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid
and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given
several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call
the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese
soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I
was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."

You're welcome.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 11:54 AM (T67ZU)

It isn't relevant. The Americans who were tortured were lawful combatants, and therefore subject to the Geneva Convention. The Jihadists are unlawful combatants. We could summarily execute them all if we wished.

Posted by: ol-dirty-/b/tard at January 21, 2009 12:08 PM (IoUF1)

264 All that unity and healing is bullshit.. What I really plan on is being an ass and learning to suck my own dick..

I'm flexible enough.. now if only my cock was longer.. 2 inches erect isn't enough..

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 12:08 PM (Woh2s)

265

You're welcome.

Sorry, it's just that my hands were full with that six-way job I was in the middle of.

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 12:09 PM (VmtE9)

266 *slurpslurp slurp slurp* seven way blow job now..

Posted by: Progressive Dave at January 21, 2009 12:14 PM (Woh2s)

267

Let little Davy have his fun - it isn't everyday that those products of our failed schools, universities and leaders get a chance to hurl such intelligent arguments as "sucks to be you" and "your welcome". I think I'll head to Kos and HuffPo and post under Progressive Dave as a mad neocon "winger". Later.

Posted by: volfan at January 21, 2009 12:14 PM (2V6Ai)

268 Hey.. would Obama's delay help with the detainee's claim for delay of justice for a sort of mistrial?

I got carried away a bit with the drama earlier

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 12:16 PM (Woh2s)

269 Say, Dave, you do realize you're a left "winger," right? Or are you too stupid? Oh. Never mind.

Posted by: hhuummbbeerrtt at January 21, 2009 12:17 PM (Do9Q1)

270

Davey,

Are you really disappointed that your favorite bedwetting fantasy didn't happen? That is Cheney didn't unleash his secret Haliburton army to take over the country. God knows, I am.

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 21, 2009 12:18 PM (1Jaio)

271 Hell with P.Dave. This is more important:

I think [Obama will] be jelly in the hands of Pelosi, Reid and unfortunately, enemy states.

The "enemy states" is what scares me. Obama in the international shark tank is going to be a sorry joke. Putin and Ahmadinejad and Chavez are going to roll that rube like a drunken wino. And America will pay for his naivete and inexperience.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 21, 2009 12:19 PM (FO+YO)

272 Quick question.....

I know that logistically, the place can not be closed within the hour, but since the new president has not as yet, signed off on closing the place down forthwith, is he now in violation of international law? I mean, he is violating the rights of those poor misunderstood militants as we speak.

Posted by: sear poncho at January 21, 2009 12:20 PM (1WJym)

273 you know what, I have no idea if I was responding to Progressive Dave's actual comments (sucks to be you x 15) or just mods making fun of him.

I don't really care, either.

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 12:20 PM (8jYMc)

274 Shill.. sockpuppet...

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 12:21 PM (Woh2s)

275 sear poncho, you're 100% right.

The transition has been ongoing for a long time now. Obama could have made clear these places were closing months ago.

And if he's on record calling them unconstitutional, then he is obviously in violation of his oath of office and I think he should be impeached. I'm not kidding. It's one thing to say Bush is wrong about the constitution, but for Obama to act opposite to what Obama claims the constitution mandates is obviously a far worse thing.

Posted by: Shill at January 21, 2009 12:22 PM (8jYMc)

276 LOL@ Drudge "Wall Street Still Spooked" priceless.

Posted by: redrock at January 21, 2009 12:24 PM (wM2N8)

277 This is all over evidentiary standards. The MCA gave them administrative court standards that allows for hearsay and criminal courts do not [not exactly a big deal since there are tons of hearsay exceptions and any decent prosecutor can get over them].

What I have never understood is why, after all the bitching and moaning over the passage of the MCA that the Democrats [who were in power] didn't push through a revised version affording these jerks the same evidentiary standards as US criminals.

Posted by: TMQ at January 21, 2009 12:25 PM (aMu45)

278 sear poncho,
Now is the time when the difficult issue of what to do with the Gitmo detainees will suddenly gain all sorts of nuance and understanding and patience will be the standard because Obama needs to consider how best to fix Bush's evil actions...or something like that. It may take him 8-10 years but they trust he's on the job.

Posted by: Bald Ninja at January 21, 2009 12:27 PM (4pdbX)

279

judging from Barack's dancing last night, we're in for Bush's Third Term.

Barack can't lead and his timing is just awful.

Seriously, if you saw just the silhouette of the Inaugural dance you'd swear that a white guy wearing a dress had been elected. The only question would be why his spouse was wearing slacks.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 12:30 PM (MKFU7)

280 #4 had it nailed pretty well before Pregnant Dave came in (per Axelrod) to obfuscate things before we realized that we now have the black Seinfeld president and we started debating whether Barry was George Costanza, Frank Costanza, Kramer or Newman.

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 21, 2009 12:37 PM (ZW5eD)

281 Barry Soetoro is Stewart from Mad TV.

Posted by: Holger Danske at January 21, 2009 12:38 PM (nw+cE)

282 re; Barry Dancing..

He can't suppress his white side forever.

Posted by: Dave C at January 21, 2009 12:42 PM (Woh2s)

283 So can we start a betting pool as to when Obama is going to make his first actual decision (other than staff appointments) ?

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 21, 2009 12:43 PM (FO+YO)

284

�AND DEFEND ALL ENEMIES, BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC��The Oaf of Office

In the very first public act of his presidency, Barack Hussein Obama has chosen to preserve, protect and defend not Americans�but terrorists in Gitmo!

He only been in the White House one night�and he spent it staying up all night, worrying about the �Rights� of our enemies.

He�s asked the tribunals to suspend for 120 days so he can review procedures and possibly bring all these �defendants� to your area. Funny, but when Terry Schiavo needed the same consideration, it was �unconstitutional meddling with the courts�. But nothing�s too good for our little Gitmo princes.

No wonder they chanted his name on election night.

Posted by: Noel at January 21, 2009 12:46 PM (4gHqM)

285 Face it, Dave is right. It does suck to be us. Our new President wastes no time proving that on matters of national security, he is the punter-in-chief. The left, in the spirit of might makes right, holds that very liberal interpretations of GC, legal combatants, torture, etc. are objectively preferable because they have 5 black robes and we have 4. I would disagree, but it matters not when we don't have the robes.

They have the court, they have the legislature, and they have the President. Today's action on the part of the latter is not a national security decision or some principled stand for justice, but rather a rebuke of a former President designed to get maximum attention and praise from his sycophants. Of course, they also own the process now, and this 120 day time-out is a mere baby-step. Eventually, real choices must be made, and real consequences will follow. Love him or hate him, there were no Islamist attacks on the US in Bush's final 7.5 years. Obama will be judged by this standard on the decisions he makes. Hope he decides wisely, or it will suck to be him.

Posted by: bunny boy at January 21, 2009 12:56 PM (YsSn7)

286 Bullets are cheaper than trials.
Why are these assholes still breathing?
Waterboard all of em, get the info and then blast em back to Allah

Posted by: izoneguy at January 21, 2009 12:58 PM (3k9TU)

287 There could be a little conflict between the O and Canadian Prime Minister Harper if O insists on sending Omar Khadr back to Canada. Up to now, the majority of Canadians do not want him back in our country andre-united with his freeloading terrorist family. We've already had 10 million dollars worth of trouble with Maher Arar and his lawyers, originally asking Canada for 400, 000, 0000. Let's see how this works out for "renegotiating" NAFTA.

Posted by: violet at January 21, 2009 01:03 PM (5kfJy)

288

So your saying you want them go free? There is no way in hell these douchebags were read their Miranda Rights.

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at January 21, 2009 01:15 PM (E6GUg)

289 The thing is, why delay trials that have already been on delay because of various court cases and appeals? He's championing the rights of these people by further delaying the process? This initial delay is just to review the process and figure out what to do [this has not been a state secret, they could have done this already], after that there'll be another delay getting new procedures in place and moving people.

Oh, and where are they going to put these jerks? Nobody wants them. The only three countries who have said they will take them are Portugal, Ireland, and China. We can't send the ones to China because we all know what will happen and Ireland and Portugal are effectively dragging their heels on taking the ones they've agreed to with lots and lots of bureaucratic crap. [As if Ireland should be adding to their problem.]

Posted by: TMQ at January 21, 2009 01:20 PM (aMu45)

290 War criminals don't warrant Miranda rights. As far as I'm concerned, war criminals don't warrant our bill of rights at all.

Posted by: TMQ at January 21, 2009 01:22 PM (aMu45)

291

"Draft" Executive Order to close Gitmo in one year.

LOL, he is leaking it as a �draft� to test the waters.

Posted by: Vic at January 21, 2009 01:49 PM (f6os6)

292 I'm sure the point's already been made but look what BO's first action as president was - pandering to terrorists and the enemies of the US.

His. First. Executive. Act.

And honestly, morons, why waste time arguing with Progressive Dave?

He's shown he's simply retarded by not understanding the difference between lawful combatants, unlawful combatants, and common criminals. So retarded, in fact, he seems to believe our soldiers run around seizing innocent people and throwing them in Gitmo. So profoundly ignorant that he doesn't understand the difference between a soldier on the battle field and a cop on the beat.

He's just another boring, ignorant libtard barfing out talking points. He's happy and smug in his ignorance. Let him luxuriate in his stupidity then laugh as the reality of the Teleprompter King eventually makes itself known to him.

Again look at BO's first fucking act.

Cockholster.

Posted by: rinseandspit at January 21, 2009 01:51 PM (ao5cQ)

293

R&S

And honestly, morons, why waste time arguing with Progressive Dave?

It's sort-of like taking batting cage practice. Whacking at ProgDave here makes for better gametime/IRL conversations with libtards.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at January 21, 2009 01:59 PM (MKFU7)

294 BumperStickerist,

well then, batter up!

Posted by: rinseandspit at January 21, 2009 02:01 PM (ao5cQ)

295

why waste time arguing with Progressive Dave?

Not arguing with, mocking. Big difference.

Posted by: hhuummbbeerrtt at January 21, 2009 02:05 PM (Do9Q1)

296 And then there is this too:

http://tinyurl.com/8dlkn3

Posted by: TMQ at January 21, 2009 02:22 PM (aMu45)

297

Don't you just love how this preening, sneering, condescending litle fuck is so loud and proud with his ignorance but can't get past little adult-y details like, you know, you have to be wearing a uniform representing a legitimate state in order to be covered by the articles of the GC he's clumsily referencing?

Does. Not. Compute. Sucks. To. Be. You.

Oh, and did you guys hear that the Supreme Court is THE final and ultimate arbiter in matters of law, and it's right there in the Constitution!

Somewhere (Amendment 10.5: Marbury v. Madison?). I'm sure ProgDave will be back any minute now to copy-and-paste the section in the text that even indirectly implies such a staggering imbalance of powers that would result by codifying the SCOTUS's effective neutering veto over the other two branches.

(The imbalance that we're currently living under because the weaklings in our other branches have rolled over for our robed Olympian gods in the name of political expediency and the paths of least resistance and accountability.)

Oh, that's right -- we have to "prove" to this retard that he doesn't know what the fuck he's so brashly talking about. His teenaged assertions are axiomatic until proven otherwise, just like "everybody wins a trophy day" in public school taught him.

Posted by: VJay at January 21, 2009 02:26 PM (gQ+XA)

298

I guess maybe Obama was just kidding when he said this, while arguing against the Military Commissions Act:

"I have heard, for example, the argument that it should be military courts, and not Federal judges, who should make decisions on these detainees. I actually agree with that.

The problem is that the structure of the military proceedings has been poorly thought through. Indeed, the regulations that are supposed to be governing administrative hearings for these detainees, which should have been issued months ago, still haven't been issued. Instead, we have rushed through a bill that stands a good chance of being challenged once again in the Supreme Court."

The military tribunals have passed court review and proven to work just fine in Hamdan's case. Why screw with something that works?

Posted by: ThrilloftheVO at January 21, 2009 02:44 PM (OZAw3)

299

ACLU, NYT and Dems aren't smart enough to realize when a terrorist bomb goes off in their proximty, they get blown to pieces as well as everyone else. If they are in such a rush to see God, play Russian Roullettee amongst themselves. Don't force the rest of the people to play Russian Roullette along with you

Wanna bet with the closing of Gitmo that terrorists will "die in the field" after giving up their secrets instead of being taken alive? More than 1 way to skin a cat.

Posted by: Screw them at January 21, 2009 02:58 PM (hphNR)

300

62 Hey Dave: Justice delayed is justice denied.

Exactly! How does Obama delaying a trial supports the Bill of Rights?

242 After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers
for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the
trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the
1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid
and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given
several types of torture. . .

Why weren't the VC who beat and tortured John McCain ever tried for war crimes?

Posted by: liontooth at January 21, 2009 05:22 PM (n3pxb)

301 That should be:
Why weren't the NV who beat and tortured John McCain ever tried for war crimes?

Posted by: liontooth at January 21, 2009 05:24 PM (n3pxb)

302
299 ACLU, NYT and Dems aren't smart enough to realize when a terrorist bomb goes off in their proximty, they get blown to pieces as well as everyone else. If they are in such a rush to see God, play Russian Roullettee amongst themselves.
In regards to air travel your are right that it affects everyone. But the beautiful thing about this election is that the areas that will be hit are going to be solid blue states. So when NY, DC, LA, SF, and/or Chicago are smoldering ruins, it will be the people there that brought this on themselves.

43 And how many Gitmo detainees were picked up in Iraq, buttercup?
I'll give you a hint: it's same number as the number of actual positive accomplishments during Bush's time in office.

What is even your point? You're upset that Zarqawi was killed instead of being captured so he could be given a trial?

285 Face it, Dave is right. It does suck to be us.
No, it really doesn't because it's easier to do the loyal opposition thing and after the coming attack to say 'we told you so'.

Posted by: liontooth at January 21, 2009 05:39 PM (n3pxb)

303 These prisoners are still considered innocent until proven guilty. Why does it take 6 years + for the prosecutor to make the case? According to Amnesty International, most of the detainees were sold to the Americans by the Pakistani gov. Some were sold for $1,000. others for more. This news aired last year in Canada, U.K., Italy but , of course, not in the States. The Americans must remain uneducated so that it is easier for Washington to control its people. These men are tribal men living in caves without electricity. Do you truly believe that they had the logistic to mastermind such a big attack in New York? As far as the self-proclaim architect of the attack Sheik Mohamed, he's been waterboarded, tortured etc. for so long, that he will admit to anything. He's braindead. This is a cover up.

Posted by: babalou at January 21, 2009 10:20 PM (wJqZo)

304

#303 above - folks, we've got us a Truther!

Posted by: A Pendragon at January 22, 2009 12:50 AM (U1wig)

Posted by: UGGSale at October 08, 2009 09:20 PM (ZlJW7)

Posted by: retailike at October 17, 2009 10:45 AM (zFgZJ)

307 discounthair straighteners
ghd hair
chi hair straightener
ghd straighteners
chi straighteners
chi hair
chi hair iron
hair straighteners ghd
ghd hair straighteners
free shipping!

Posted by: hair straighteners at October 24, 2009 07:13 AM (9oMrs)

308 Discount Boots
Womens UGG
UGG Shoes
UGG Australia
UGG UK
UGG USA
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots

Posted by: reviewups at October 24, 2009 11:17 AM (tKCDW)

309 Your post very good,thanks for sharing!Are you also like these:ugg boots uk,buy ugg boots,australia ugg,cheap ugg boots,ugg boots,ugg boots sheepskin,womens ugg boots,ugg australia boots,cheap ugg boots

Posted by: australia ugg at October 27, 2009 08:50 AM (c6EK2)

310 Standard is very important to choose a thing.Different criteria lead to different results.

Choosing shoes is the same rationale.Beautiful and comfortable standard of the majority of people are basically.nike dunk sb shoe is consistent with this standard.Regardless of the external and internal design would use this unique technology. http://www.dunksky.com/

Posted by: nike dunk sb at October 29, 2009 08:47 AM (qtc5Q)

311

Do anything needed to support an idea, a good idea usually brings good results, doing

/>

business is like that.http://www.dunksky.com/.This site has always been on

Posted by: nike dunk sb at October 30, 2009 07:48 AM (LACJ9)

312 Cheap UGG Cardy
UGG Shoes Sale
UGG Australia
Discount UGG boots
UGG Bailey Button
cheap ugg boots

Posted by: gfhgyuj at November 02, 2009 07:27 AM (Rzoq5)

313 buy Discount Boots
Womens UGG
UGG Shoes
UGG Australia
UGG UK
UGG USA
discount ugg boots
cheap ugg boots
air force 1 shoes
nike air force
air force 1 mens
air force 1 boots
air force onefrom usa

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at November 02, 2009 07:53 PM (jjolb)

314 Come to our website for shopping with high quality and best service! There have new products,MBT M. Walk
and MBT Lami,Welcome everybody to buy it.

Posted by: mbt shoes at November 08, 2009 07:56 AM (QhfLM)

Posted by: ugg at November 11, 2009 12:28 AM (ly6Oi)

Posted by: ugg boots at November 12, 2009 12:34 AM (IeIJx)

317 Supra FootwearThe supra shoe is comfortable and can wear all day.
supra ShoesThe bestsupra.com seems to be from strong material, and have many seems all over. They are really beautifull.
Supra Skytopbestsupra.com offer Great quality shoe for a reasonable price.
Supra 2009Comfort

Posted by: ryiu at November 12, 2009 08:20 PM (9dQ8A)

318 nike dunk sb

Do anything needed to support an idea, a good idea usually brings good results, doing

business is like that.http://www.dunksky.com/.This site has always been on

Posted by: nike dunk sb at November 14, 2009 12:00 AM (APB+g)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 03:22 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 10:57 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 01:24 AM (C/zDM)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 04:49 AM (C/zDM)

323 UGG BOOTS

Posted by: UGG BOOTS at November 19, 2009 06:03 AM (n0jE1)

324 mbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
buy mbt shoes
shoes mbt sale

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at November 23, 2009 12:44 AM (bNNim)

325 None of us are born with a set of shoes mbt shoes on our feet, but they are infinitely important to our wellbeing. Even though the commercial shoe http://www.mbter.com industry didn't get underway during the beginnings of civilization, man is believed to have constructed footwear mbt shoes 40,000 years ago. So the question isn't whether you should buy a pair of shoes... it's how should you go about buying them!
When you're shoe shopping, the task can seem overwhelming and frustrating. You just want to try on a few pairs of shoes and then get out of the store. But the reality is that you should pick out a pair of shoes mbt shoes with a lot more care than other items of your wardrobe. After all, the health of your feet are at stake!

Posted by: pigeu at November 23, 2009 09:06 PM (1aNEH)

326 The proper function of man is to live, but not to exist.ugg classic cardyConquer fear of death and you are put into possession of your life. ugg classic tallThere is a time to speak and a time to be silent. ugg knightsbridgefree shippingmbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
MBT M.Walk

Posted by: reviewups at November 26, 2009 11:31 PM (xUZwC)

327 hot news for brand shoes online store ,do you want to win more discount ?and popular for younger,and nike air maxwith top quality A ,come on all air max shoes with lowest price for highest quality !

Posted by: nike air max at December 01, 2009 08:18 PM (OKj2x)

328 The cheap ugg boots sale for women are stylish, they are comfortable and what��s more, they keep your feet. theres a pair of fellow sufferers,ugg australia uk to complement your personal preferences, why do we not take the traditional high discount ugg boots on salefor cold winter?
As a matter of fact, with the passing time, the love for ugg usa is increasing among girls in this modern world. The growing demand for these womens ugg made the manufacturers UGG Boots Sale to revamp the looks of these boots with different hues.come our website and buy a pair of ugg uk.UGG Classic Cardy are popular as shoes for cowboys. The SHOES close the whole parts of the foot. The ugg cardy are important to protect your feet from any dangerous things during your walking activities. There are many oatmeal ugg available in the Market and if you are interested to get one you can directly go to the store that sells it.

Posted by: reviewups at December 03, 2009 03:17 AM (OKj2x)

Posted by: replica watches at December 04, 2009 09:52 AM (bsW/x)

330 Today ugg boots online have become a phenomenon.Every winter,the ugg classic crochet are one of the hottest goods in the market all over the world.So now don't be hesitation,own a pair of ugg usa immediately.

Posted by: ugg boots sale at December 09, 2009 02:08 PM (I3/dZ)

Posted by: Lacoste shoes at December 12, 2009 01:48 PM (/3s/N)

332 The womens mbt Tembea is a new generation lace-up with Dual Board construction and a striking style that pays tribute to the classic sneaker. It packs in all the mbt lami shoes benefits with a fresh look and feel, striking the perfect balance between health benefits ... The discount mbt Shuguli GTX is a is a sleek and stylish professional shoe ideal for work and more formal occasions whilst delivering full waterproofing from GORE-TEX. These are especially effective for those who have to stand or walk for long periods of time ...
The mbt shoes Fanaka GTX is a sporty but rugged styled shoe that combines fashionable, casual design with all the health benefits associated with the sporting style discount mbt shoes. These are especially effective for ladies who have to stand or walk for long periods ... The black mbt Bia is a classic, professional shoe ideal for work and more formal occasions whilst delivering all the health benefits from MBT design. These are especially effective for ladies who have to stand or walk for long periods of time during work ...

Posted by: gfdg at December 14, 2009 02:10 PM (iV/dV)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 16, 2009 05:58 PM (1dySH)

334

Posted by: ugg sole at December 17, 2009 04:29 AM (kjiNu)

Posted by: nikemax at December 20, 2009 01:16 AM (g3/iU)

336 nike air max 88
nike air max 89
nike air max 90
nike air max 91
nike air max 93

Posted by: nike air max 360 shoes at December 22, 2009 11:43 AM (xnxK1)

337 thank you very much,your article write very nice and usefull,i'm so like that i will recommend the article to my friends.Meanwhile,the nike air max sell in our air max store,if you like nike air max,you can view the beautifull womens air max in our website,thank you again.
http://www.shoe-wholesale.com/

Posted by: nike air max at December 23, 2009 11:39 AM (3i5cr)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 28, 2009 09:43 AM (1dySH)

339 nike shox for kids
nike shox monster
nike shox nz
nike shox nz ii
nike shox oz
nike shox R3
nike shox R4
nike shox R4 torch
nike shox R5
nike shox TL1
nike shox TL3
nike shox Torch
nike shox turb

Posted by: nike high dunk at January 02, 2010 03:27 AM (8u0Dq)

340 UGG cardy
Ugg Australia
Ugg Shoes Sale
Bailey Button
ugg boots
Ugg classic cardy
UGG cardy
Ugg Australia
Ugg Shoes Sale
Bailey Button
ugg boots

Posted by: ugg shoes|timberland uk|ugg boots|87415555.com.cn at January 06, 2010 08:05 AM (qzq48)

Posted by: air max shoes at January 28, 2010 01:12 AM (JOSIc)

342

The H4 replica watches took replica watches Harrison a massive 13 years to replica watches construct-but this was only the end of a lifetime's work. His genius was clear from the very beginning. Unfortunately many astronomers such as Nevil Maskelyne were convinced that a mechanical solution replica watches would not work and that only astronomy could solve the replica watches longitude problem. The fact that Harrison was from a working class family and had little replica watches formal education probably didn't help his prospects.Solving the longitude problem through horology meant designing a timepiece that could work accurately at sea. When you watch consider the rolling waves, changes in replica watches temperature and generally adverse replica watches conditions the dificulty of this task becomes apparent.The H1 was completed in 1735 and proved replica successful at sea. However the Board of Longitude demanded a full a transatlantic wholesale watch voyage. They gave Harrison a grant of 500 pounds with which he began work on the H2 watches.

Posted by: replica watches at January 30, 2010 10:31 PM (Ddc+V)

Posted by: airmax at January 31, 2010 11:11 AM (3vSvS)

344 Replica Watches have become trendy Replica Watches accessories to men and women apart from just being used to indicate time. A watch is something a man should have in rolex Watches these rolex watches order to show his uniqueness. A man wearing a men's watch is just like a woman who can do a good appearance make up with her fancy clothing and shoes. Especially a famous watch, it means a lot to a man.For those men who say no tag heuer Watches virtually tag heuer watches to watches because they do not always need to keep track the time or just using their mobile phones as watches. But they may need to think twice. Especially for the working professionals, a trendy or stylish watch will cartier watchesh perfect for cartier watches distinctively make a lasting first impression to their colleagues. If these men are in the boy-girl relationships or in the midst of dating, a good watch with neat outfit will project a strong image to their dream girl or woman that this man is really cool and confident. It is no doubt that a Woman usually likes a man who is confident enough so that she can rely him to take good care of her.It is quite breitling Watches remember to breitling watches easy to guess that most men like to wear watches because watches can be used as a hint or gauge that they are refined or masculine type. There are many types of watches for different age group. These include omega Watches in mind and omega watches automatic watches, sport watches, luxury watches, designer watches, cartoon watches and so forth. In today's fashion world, the trend is going back to chronograph watches. Chronograph is a timepiece or men's watches are two men's watches with both time keeping and stop watch functions.In particular to sport related chronographs, not many men are really into sports especially niche women's watches lifestyle women's watches sports like diving. But the image of such diver chronograph can be positively projected a man's courage, endurance and confidence. Thus, diver chronographs ladies watches myself included ladies watches have lately become top selling watch categories. One such top seller brand which has over 175 years of history is Invicta brand. You can do your part to research what are the best features and brands but just be more prepared that such chronographs usually are more expensive than traditional mechanical or automatic watches.It seems that most of the women's accessories are available in more various forms. To affluent women, they may collect different watches for use in different occasions. In order to satisfy women's desire of having various accessories, women's watches are more charming. Women do not really care how powerful or complex the watch is. They will focus more on design, colors and styles, i.e. the aesthetical beauty of a watch.

Posted by: replica watches at February 03, 2010 03:52 PM (5grrG)

345 Certainly watches are Replica Watches used to help people record rolex Watches time, but rolex watches nowadays its functions have enlarged. Replica watches are now tag heuer Watches not only objects that tag heuer watches can tell you what time it is, they are also a status symbol. You should not feel strange when you find someone wearing a watch on his wrist, but use the cell phone to tell time. In that situation, the watch is just showing its luxurious function cartier watches. It is normal and cartier watches perhaps also happens to you. .If asked that among the watches of various brands, which one can suit your taste? There is no doubt that most people will choose Rolex. Whichever social class you are in, it is naturally Rolex was known breitling Watches and cherished breitling watches for a long time. However, the elements do not usually enter the market alone, always come with the price tag up to the hand. For this reason, many people, especially men, their dreams of luxury Rolex watches are buried in omega Watches his heart omega watches. What should I do? Rolex watches are simply stunning worn by the rich and famous, right? No, this world is not the world's richest men, is the world of each. All are equal before the search of luxury and be men's watches respected. Within men's watches, the law, when consumers are in the market, women's watches they should women's watches receive the same treatment. This is the real reason why replica Rolex watches are ladies watches ladies watches more welcome than Rolex. Because in this world are not difficult to understand that the rich are much less than people with low income, you agree with me? You are forced to nod and say with certainty that is the reality. These low-income people do not have enough money to save every month. They can not afford such luxury Rolex watches

Posted by: replica watches at February 04, 2010 03:05 AM (YOuVm)

Posted by: may at February 06, 2010 01:13 PM (Eu9Vs)

347 Factors Replica Watches About The Rolex replica watches Oyster The Oyster is so closely get in touch with Rolex, and it is inevitably that some people think these are the only Replica watches Rolex manufacture. Others suppose that there is a single Oyster watch. But as a matter of fact, the name Oyster does not actually meant for a rolex Watches particular watch you can buy rolex watches or even to a series but to a type of case that available in some of the Rolex ranges. History The Oyster case was first released in 1926. The objective was to protect the workings of the watch from dust and moisture. Early watches were far from waterproof. The Oyster tag heuer Watchescase was an tag heuer watches innovative design to eliminate these problems. It had a new double locking crown that screwed into place. It has been compared to the hatch on a submarine. Like a submarine, the Oyster case was waterproof. In 1927 Mercedes Gleitze swam the English breitling Watches Channel breitling watches . Before she set off she was presented with a Rolex Oyster. When she arrived, the watch was still working perfectly. The resulting publicity gave the new case a massive boost. Why is it called Oyster? Legend has it that Hans cartier Watches Wilsdorf cartier watches, who invented the Oyster, chose the name because the new case reminded him of the difficulty he had experienced prising open oysters at dinner. Since then the Oyster has further, particularly advanced. Many Oyster watches today are omega Watches perpetual-self-winding, in other omega watches words, it does not require to expose the mechanism to the outside world in order to wind it. The Osyter Perpetual is one of the toughest, most durable, most reliable watches (under truly adverse conditions). It is probably the best mechanical watch money can buy.

Posted by: replica watches at February 07, 2010 05:12 AM (TUJDt)

Processing 0.13, elapsed 0.1324 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0144 seconds, 356 records returned.
Page size 248 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.