The implementation of his plan will require congressional approval, since current law prohibits bringing Guantanamo prisoners into U.S. territory unless they are being put on trial. Congressional lawmakers voting on the plan to bring terrorist suspects now housed at Guantanamo to the U.S. will generally be doing so in the context of significant opposition from their constituents, thus potentially reducing the chances that the president will be able to get quick fix
and he recently reiterated his commitment to doing this in his West Point speech on Afghanistan. The plans announced this week represent the first concrete effort to follow through on his promise, but occur in the context of continuing opposition from the American public. About two-thirds of Americans in the Nov. 20-22 poll oppose such a move, virtually the same as measured last May.
Americans remain opposed to closing the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba and moving some of the terrorist suspects being held there to U.S. prisons: 30% favor such actions, while 64% do not. These attitudes could present a significant roadblock for President Obama at a time when he seeks congressional approval to move terrorist suspects from Guantanamo to a converted state prison in northwestern Illinois.
freedom and liberty my ass!! the wars are all over the world caused by americans, americans killing incent people by the word of freedom, if america turns to their real owners the real freedom will turn to all over the world, you go back to uk bitch
who give a fuck about what you love, and talking about lost.. japan the small country kicked your ass in the war, and even if we weak, i wonder why doesnt america mess with us but they only mess with small countries, how coward!!
It's a deal...as long as you take ALL gitmo detainees and let them run free throughout San Francisco. However, that will also decree that a wall will be built to isolate S.F. from the rest of the U.S.
gitmo would be a nice new Vacation home for me to visit here and there...
The gitmo detainees are mostly innocent and this is why so mant had been relesased before. The ones who are guilty can live on Bush range, he created terrorists with his illegal wars.
Who is "mant?..relesased?? You just gave a good reason why liberals are idiots...you can't spell.
bill clinton caused terrorism to flourish and he is ultimately responsible for 9/11...see video. 97% of gitmo detainees have NOT been released.
Your use of the term "illegal war" exposes your idiocy even further. That's like saying the insurgents were not fighting a fair war in Iraq because they weren't wearing uniforms.
It's ok, post again (owner of video is bitch master).
Do you know the difference between a typing error and spelling error ? Guess ya don't. Only toddlers whine about others making typos, making you a toddler.
Anyway, we liberals won and if you don't like it you can get the fuck out of this country since we liberals rule the country through Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Terrorists were created after Bush started his illegal war.
OK I got the little simple minded piss-pot liberal jacqe foaming at the mouth.
No nit-wit, you need to get the fuck out of MY country because I know that you're not even an American.
The limp dick faggots and ignorant cunts named Obama, Pelosi, Boxer and Reid are going to be thrown on the political ash heap in 2010 if a civil war hasn't broken out by then. The messiah's incompetence may make that come true.
Then you'll be batted out of this country with a rifle butt on your ass.
I'm a patriot and love America. Everybody who loves America voted for Obama after 8 terrible Bush years. Did I already mention to you that I voted for Nancy Pelosi in the CA 8th district ? Do you know that I'm a liberal ? You're not American, you're German. Kriegbell is German name since Krieg means war and you talked German ( Arch ) to Sarah. Get out German !!!
1) Ha, Ha I knew you were going to say that. "Bell" means...bell... in English.
jacqi - Apparently you make a lot of shitty videos. I know this not because I watched any of them (I don't want you to register any hits). It's because I see all of their 2 & 3 star ratings on your page.
The debate over whether or not to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is about much more then that facility itself. It is a debate over how the United States and its allies are conducting the war on terrorism. If the United States concedes that its actions in Guantanamo Bay are such that they warrant closing the facility, how can the U.S. defend keeping other facilities open?
And if the United States cannot house and interrogate suspected terrorists, how can it prosecute the Global War on Terrorism? The issue of whether the Gitmo detention facility should be closed should not be used as a proxy referendum for the Bush Administrations war on terrorism.
I dont question Obamas intentions for closing Gitmo and banning waterboarding. Clearly he isnt trying to make our country unsafe, but I fear that his good intentions are misguided and ultimately dangerous. And another question to consider: what is gained (or lost) by simply moving detainees from one prison to another? Closing Gitmo wont solve that problem
Why reverse the policies that have kept us safe for more than seven years? Closing Gitmo signals to the world that our country is softening its stance against terrorism, and such a signal is all that jihadists need to regain confidence.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What utter crap? I'm isck and tired of every right winger saying that we've been kept safe for seven years. Hey, if you're going to give Bush credit for the illusion of saftey after 9/11, then you have to keep him accountable for the attacks of 9/11. America's fighting 2 wars right now, and is doing a bad job of it, so I don't buy the bullshit line about being safe. The US is even further in debt after the BUSh years, so it's not helping our fiscal security. Wake up ditto heads!
My argument isn't that we are giving them rights, they already have them. What we would be doing by continuing in Bush's legacy is denying their rights without due process, stomping on our own constitution and International accords.
the darkest times, when fighting against some of the deepest evils we must make sure we don't trample all over what we are supposed to represent.
Now on if they have rights under the Geneva Conventions, I do think so. Even with a lack of belligerent markings there is no such thing as an unprotected person. I will send you some relevant information I discovered.
Oh no, I don't just support terrorist rights I support rights across the spectrum. From the rights of the unborn to the rights of scumbag terrorists I defend them all. Why? Is it because I am a terrorist sympathizer? Is it because I hold the US in contempt and wish to see it destroyed? No! It is because I believe that all human beings have rights that cannot be infringed upon without due process. Rights are one of the most fundamental intangibles that we as Americans hold dear and even in cont
Point 1 is not false, it is just a painful fact that many wish to glean over.
Point 2 is also not false because this has been determined by Supreme Court decisions and relevant interpretations of the constitution.
Point 4 it is true I am not advocating giving all of American citizens rights to terrorists.
Point 3- As I have informed you, we cannot determine if they ever WERE a threat because they never had a trial. I assume innocence until proven guilty, how about you?
First of all- The current Supreme Court actually has a conservative majority not a liberal majority which is why I found this decision pleasantly surprising.
Second- He has suspended charges until he can determine whether or not these people have had there rights violated. I am certain that he will not drop charges against KSM and others who obviously deserve to go to jail.
As far as rights, once under US control they are entitled to certain criminal rights. You are right they cont
I parrot liberal mantra-I don't know if you realized this but I AM a liberal.You parrot conservative mantra(That's fine, it's your ideology) so calling a particular stance liberal or conservative is just stating the obvious and does not do anything for your argument.
"its funny that idiot liberals will abort just about evry child but wont kill a terrorist"
You should not make such broad based assumptions based on nothing more than idealogical alignment, I am a liberal and I am AGAINST abortion.
1) Taking away the rights of suspected terrorists does not return to the victims their rights that were violated.
2) Anyone under US jurisdiction is entitled to the basic rights as stated in the Bill of Rights. We are not giving them these rights, they already have them.
3) As I have pointed out to you, of the 150, 89 were innocent.
4) No one is asking to give terrorists all the rights of American citizens, some rights only citizens have and rightfully so.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I've tested the YouTube removal system and if it in fact Cheneywatch had removed Kriegbell's comments posted on the video mentioned above, there would not be the message 'Comment removed by author. This is a typical tactic of one with nothing to say except the propagation of lies and hate. It is what is done when a Government that has no real proof produce a document that has been 99% redacted to justify their policy.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Is that the best insult you can come up with? My point is that you are a hate filled liar. YOU removed all your spew that you posted and then blame them... as if you are the victim. How pathetic is that.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I'm not defending anybody. I am calling you a liar. I've read much of what Cheneywatch has posted and I presume he pulled down your trousers and gave you a right good spanking. You then remove your comments and whine about those that bested you somewhere else. What a child you are.
open minded, it's simply not true. I sent the same thing to sockaccount and he didn't seem to think that this was reason to accuse me of being a mindless follower and this is one of the reasons he got a friend invite from me and you didn't.
BTW: How is sending you a personal message an act of cowardice?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You really are paranoid. Three tenets that I live by: 1) Never spit in the wind, 2) The best investment is a reliable timepiece, 3) When engaged in conversation and it has been determined that it is with one that is intellectually challenged... end the dialogue (see Tenets 1 and 2).
Your response was so predictable it was simultaneously amusing and depressing. Of course you would accuse me of following the mainstream media and not thinking for myself. I could have just as easily shown you the same thing from a more unconventional and right leaning source.(WorldNetDaily anyone?) but the message had two goals, the first one being to inform you of a case I was not sure you were aware of and the second to see how open minded you are. As much as I wish I could say you are cont
It took you four days to come up with that drivel? You just said a lot of nothing. You sending me an L.A. times article in a P.M. and not following it up with anything to say, is the same as saying nothing. I had already seen that story. What does a newspaper article have to do with being open minded.
And yes you're a coward. If you have anything to say, say it here. I don't want you as a "friend."
You just out-did me on the predictability factor. You're pathetic.
Ah, Kriegbell making assumptions with no proof yet again. I did not need four days to reply to you, rather I was/am involved in several different debates across You Tube on many different issues. Unlike most You tubers, my personal computer is not functioning at the moment. Thus, I must rely on the school computers limiting the amount of time I can dedicate to any particular video. If you had checked my channel during any of the days I was missing you would have come to this conclusion already.
I did not feel the need to write anything after the newspaper because it seemed obvious to me that you were reading my comments that were addressed to sockaccount.(an assertion that you yourself indirectly supported)
Finally, the newspaper article was not what determined your open-mindedness rather by your response. If you had been an unbiased observer and had read the article, would it not have been easier to simply state this fact. Instead you decided to go on a rant decrying the MSM and cont
proceeded to accuse me of being a "typical thoughtless person who lets the newspapers
dictate how you think." If thats what being open-minded means to you then I shudder to think what you would consider close-minded.
BTW- How am I pathetic? Please inform me so I can correct this grievous error on my part.(The preceding sentence was "sarcasm", just wanted to let you know ;)
Right, Kriegbell just look how far the conversation has deteriorated. We are insulting each other over insignificant things. I am going to end this now, for my part in this mess I apologize, no one deserves to be judged based on a reply. Consequently, I hope you can come to the understanding that sharing information is not an act of cowardice.
Furthermore, while the Geneva Conventions did say this, commentary on the Geneva convention further establishes that there is no such thing as an unprotected person. You either fall in the protection of the third or fourth.
Finally even if you can say they don't have POW status here is article five:
((Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.)) Thus, they are to be treated as POWs
Thanks for bringing us both back to civility. I can see how you could make a worthy argument with reference. But then I could could point back to article 4.1.2 where they do fall under the claims of Article 4 and therefore article 5 does not apply. I will admit that this is not a black and white issue for all cases; Ex. Jose Padilla is a U.S. citizen.
But let's say we agree with your argument (but keep in mind that I don't) the military tribunals can come into play. And that's where my biggest objection comes from. The Courts intervened in an area in which they have no conceptual experience. If I could, I'd like to refer you to a Heritage Foundation article titled
"Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties in Wartime" by Frank Williams. H.F. is a Right Wing Pub. but I still think it's a good read. I'd be open to a counter article.
Kriegbell I ama not finding the article you are citing. All that comes up is description a series of 8 essays by said author. I cannot access them. If possible, can you send it to me? BTW, I do know that Heritage is right leaning just like Human events, I do try to see the other side of these complex issues.
No I was not referring to you(I was referring to sockaccount) but your insights on this subject are welcome just the same. I understand your explanation but it clashes with our constitution and what we are supposed to stand for. The fact that they did not wear uniforms does not mean they lose there rights under our criminal justice system.(In fact the Supreme Court recently affirmed this fact) Even in this war, the essential rights of POW's cannot be violated.
And finally no one is asking for a mass release of suspected terrorists, they are trying to get these people a fair trial so we can actually determine whether they are guilty or innocent. "The Messiah", it's funny but only conservatives and the opposition refer to him as such, us supporters do not think of him as some kind of savior. "Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."- Benjamin Franklin.
If your talking to me you obviously missed the main point of the video. This is a Terror War. The former commander in chief George W. Bush declared it as such.
In a war the combatants usually wear belligerent markings. These terrorists at Gitmo didn't wear uniforms. They can be shot as spies. They do not have "the right" to be tried in our legal court system.
What part of that explanation don't you understand?
When the battlefield happens to be what used to be your house in the middle of one of your home cities then it's not a mystery as to how you were caught there. When you are held for years without a chance to defend your innocence then it's no surprise that you were ""determined not to return to terrorism"(A charge that has not been proved in a court of law) Finally everyone in US jurisdiction has Constitutional rights whether you think they deserve them or not.
So if 61 were terrorists this means that 89 people were innocent. 89 people who were held without constitutional rights. 89 people taken from their homes and families without a chance to defend themselves in a valid court of law. 89 innocent lives permanently altered
Sock, I've heard from other sources, those numbers are actually more than twice that.
Even if there's evidence of just one -and I've pointed out the fact that there are at least two- of these guys who were responsible for any coalition or civilian deaths, that's one too many.
"In the name of Allah", of all creation which is endlessly radiating
The common translation for bismillah is "In the name of Allah", which is actually an idiom, an expression that really doesn't make much sense on a literal word-by-word basis.
These two terms rahman and rahim refer to attributes of the One. While they are often translated simply as Merciful and Compassionate, the roots of the words point to a deeper meaning.The term rahman describes that aspect of the source of all creation which is endlessly radiating, endlessly nourishing, regardless of who or what is receiving the endless flow of blessings.
So, the phrase ir rahman ir rahim is a recognition and honoring of the very source of all existence, the source of all blessings, the source of all compassion, the source of all mercy who gives endlessly to us and who also responds according to our moral integrity, our harmony with all of creation and our love of Allah.
This phrase is truly an ideal to be expressed from the heart, an ideal to be expressed with the utmost sincerity, an ideal which leads us toward sacred purpose, the purpose for which we have been given life.
Atheists, communist and Muslims All believe in the destruction of the West, AS for Muslims: It is a religion of war and hate, just Like Mohammed ,a worrier who eliminated anyone and everyone that did not see things his way. Not That Different then today and smiler to todays Atheist and communist who may not believe in a religion but do believe in the power of the state and the power of one supreme leader as their GOD
Arab monotheism is superior.Yes, not all Arabs are Muslim. Christian Arabs predate Islam by hundreds of years, for instance. But Arab Muslims view them as fossils slated for conversion, death, or temporary source of revenue through jizyah an extra tax placed on non-Muslims, called dhimmis, in Islamic society. Arab Muslims in Palestine even have an expression for whats waiting for their Christian brethren, as well as Jews First the Saturday people, than the Sunday people.
Remember this Salman Rushdie the Satanic Verses AND the Pope "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
These words, expressed six centuries ago by a Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, in dialogue with an Iranian scholar, spur three reflections.
Pope Benedict XVI offered the above quote, neither endorsing nor condemning it, in his academic speech,
One of thoose who were released (as unguilty) from Gitmo now appeared on a video ... a terror-video from pakistan. he threatens the west with terrorattacks.
Terrorism is a logical outcome of putting the Qur'an into practice.
The Qur'an promotes permanent struggle against non-Muslims - or at least until non-Muslims are converted to Islam, subjected to Islamic authority, or killed. Below is a listing of relevant verses in the Qur'an.
(Q. 2:191) Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them.
(Q. 9:123),to murder them and treat them harshly
(Q.9: 5), slay them
(Q. 8: 65 )fight with them, even if they are Christians and Jews,
Deuteronomy 20:16 Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall NOT LEAVE ALIVE ANYTHING that breathes. 17"But you shall UTTERLY DESTROY them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, AS the LORD your GOD has COMMANDED you,
Terrorism is a logical outcome of putting the old testament into practice. Deuteronomy promotes permanent struggle against non jews. Above is a list.
However, regardless of how one may choose write the English transliteration of the original Arabic, it is neither the writing of the words nor their pronunciation which is crucial, but rather we shall each be rewarded according to what is in our heart and how we act in the world.
When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you go to possess, and has cast out many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than you, 2 and when the LORD your God delivers them over to you, you shall conquer them and utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them nor show mercy to them.
Those who say these words with thoughts of self-aggrandizement, or selfish gains, or self-centered vain profit in any manner, will receive their just reward... suffering, pain and confusion. Likewise, those who truly dedicate every step of their life to the glory and service of the Ever-present One shall also receive their just reward...
Islam is a caustic blend of regurgitated paganism and twisted Bible stories. Muhammad, its lone prophet, conceived his religion solely to satiate his lust for power, sex, and money. He was a terrorist. And if you think these conclusions are shocking, wait until you see the evidence.
This video is great But for the mentally challenged liberals and budapests of the world a narrative would be great too and it could use a narrative version
No, they both just want us destroyed. the moonbats don't bother thinking (ever), that islamofascists would enslave women, kill all the gays, force people to worship (satan) allah, and have us living in a feudal caste system. That's everything the left claims to stand against, yet they embolden the assholes who want to spread it.
Great work, great points there, kriegbell. Obama said he will close down Gitmo, yet what he plans on doing with the detainees is up in the air. Is this the short sighted moves we get to look forward to? I hope not.
Obama is looking bad NOW
tiptacboom 2 years ago
The implementation of his plan will require congressional approval, since current law prohibits bringing Guantanamo prisoners into U.S. territory unless they are being put on trial. Congressional lawmakers voting on the plan to bring terrorist suspects now housed at Guantanamo to the U.S. will generally be doing so in the context of significant opposition from their constituents, thus potentially reducing the chances that the president will be able to get quick fix
tiptacboom 2 years ago
and he recently reiterated his commitment to doing this in his West Point speech on Afghanistan. The plans announced this week represent the first concrete effort to follow through on his promise, but occur in the context of continuing opposition from the American public. About two-thirds of Americans in the Nov. 20-22 poll oppose such a move, virtually the same as measured last May.
tiptacboom 2 years ago
Americans remain opposed to closing the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba and moving some of the terrorist suspects being held there to U.S. prisons: 30% favor such actions, while 64% do not. These attitudes could present a significant roadblock for President Obama at a time when he seeks congressional approval to move terrorist suspects from Guantanamo to a converted state prison in northwestern Illinois.
tiptacboom 2 years ago
Quality work here.
Shame Obama didn't think his pandering plan through before shooting off his mouth self-righteously. NIMBY!
ArtsandLetters70 2 years ago 7
heyyyy kreigbell!!
any particular reason why I'm blocked from your channel comments?
just wondering.....
fellow sandnigger hater.....
runnerrk 2 years ago
freedom and liberty my ass!! the wars are all over the world caused by americans, americans killing incent people by the word of freedom, if america turns to their real owners the real freedom will turn to all over the world, you go back to uk bitch
ZOMBIEOFTHERAIN 2 years ago
gitmo my ass, you mother fucker americans deserve to die, HAIL TERRORIST GO GO GO
ZOMBIEOFTHERAIN 2 years ago
Zombie the bitter insecure russian who's pissed off because her country LOST THE COLD WAR.
I love it. I'm in rubbing the fact in that russia was a weak country full of dim-wits who couldn't innovate. YOU LOSE....I mean YOU LOST.
Kriegbell 2 years ago
who give a fuck about what you love, and talking about lost.. japan the small country kicked your ass in the war, and even if we weak, i wonder why doesnt america mess with us but they only mess with small countries, how coward!!
ZOMBIEOFTHERAIN 2 years ago
ZOMBIE:
1)Reason why you're a child
- I complimented your bg (romanovs) thenyou change to a Hate USA bg and have a tantrum.
2) Reason why you're a coward - You won't admit defeat. We don't mess with you because we already kicked your ass. YOU LOST.
Kriegbell 2 years ago
3) Reasons why you're an idiot
-Japan lost WWII but kicked your ass in1905.
-You lost the Cold War because of obsequious dim-wits like yourself.
-Your grammer is awful.
Kriegbell 2 years ago
nice vid!
YodelRock 2 years ago 7
Why you people again show us 9/11 it's your own shitty goverment who did that and not the moslims are you stupid ore what:S
(I'm from holland, my english is not so well)
But mann wake up you're only fooling yourself.
Dina0020 2 years ago
Yes, you need much work with your English language writing skills. Also, the only person here who is a fool, is you.
You obviously have very limited knowledge of history and are quite uninformed regarding the complex political situations of the present day.
Do some research and learn something before you expose your gross ignorance of a subject matter.
Kriegbell 2 years ago
Obama can keep 4 places open on gitmo for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and you
jacquelineveronique 2 years ago
It's a deal...as long as you take ALL gitmo detainees and let them run free throughout San Francisco. However, that will also decree that a wall will be built to isolate S.F. from the rest of the U.S.
gitmo would be a nice new Vacation home for me to visit here and there...
Kriegbell 2 years ago
The gitmo detainees are mostly innocent and this is why so mant had been relesased before. The ones who are guilty can live on Bush range, he created terrorists with his illegal wars.
jacquelineveronique 2 years ago
jacqel:
Who is "mant?..relesased?? You just gave a good reason why liberals are idiots...you can't spell.
bill clinton caused terrorism to flourish and he is ultimately responsible for 9/11...see video. 97% of gitmo detainees have NOT been released.
Your use of the term "illegal war" exposes your idiocy even further. That's like saying the insurgents were not fighting a fair war in Iraq because they weren't wearing uniforms.
It's ok, post again (owner of video is bitch master).
Kriegbell 2 years ago
mant is many.
Do you know the difference between a typing error and spelling error ? Guess ya don't. Only toddlers whine about others making typos, making you a toddler.
Anyway, we liberals won and if you don't like it you can get the fuck out of this country since we liberals rule the country through Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Terrorists were created after Bush started his illegal war.
jacquelineveronique 2 years ago
OK I got the little simple minded piss-pot liberal jacqe foaming at the mouth.
No nit-wit, you need to get the fuck out of MY country because I know that you're not even an American.
The limp dick faggots and ignorant cunts named Obama, Pelosi, Boxer and Reid are going to be thrown on the political ash heap in 2010 if a civil war hasn't broken out by then. The messiah's incompetence may make that come true.
Then you'll be batted out of this country with a rifle butt on your ass.
Kriegbell 2 years ago
I'm a patriot and love America. Everybody who loves America voted for Obama after 8 terrible Bush years. Did I already mention to you that I voted for Nancy Pelosi in the CA 8th district ? Do you know that I'm a liberal ? You're not American, you're German. Kriegbell is German name since Krieg means war and you talked German ( Arch ) to Sarah. Get out German !!!
jacquelineveronique 2 years ago
1) Ha, Ha I knew you were going to say that. "Bell" means...bell... in English.
jacqi - Apparently you make a lot of shitty videos. I know this not because I watched any of them (I don't want you to register any hits). It's because I see all of their 2 & 3 star ratings on your page.
Kriegbell 2 years ago
Wow, I have not been here in a while. Did you read it yet. What is your stance now?
fatkenstein 3 years ago
Don't worry, you have plenty of prisons in America, and you don't have the right to have a P.O.W camp in someone elses country anyways.
CanadianLiberalism 3 years ago 5
The debate over whether or not to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is about much more then that facility itself. It is a debate over how the United States and its allies are conducting the war on terrorism. If the United States concedes that its actions in Guantanamo Bay are such that they warrant closing the facility, how can the U.S. defend keeping other facilities open?
tiptacboom 3 years ago
And if the United States cannot house and interrogate suspected terrorists, how can it prosecute the Global War on Terrorism? The issue of whether the Gitmo detention facility should be closed should not be used as a proxy referendum for the Bush Administrations war on terrorism.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
I dont question Obamas intentions for closing Gitmo and banning waterboarding. Clearly he isnt trying to make our country unsafe, but I fear that his good intentions are misguided and ultimately dangerous. And another question to consider: what is gained (or lost) by simply moving detainees from one prison to another? Closing Gitmo wont solve that problem
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Why reverse the policies that have kept us safe for more than seven years? Closing Gitmo signals to the world that our country is softening its stance against terrorism, and such a signal is all that jihadists need to regain confidence.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What utter crap? I'm isck and tired of every right winger saying that we've been kept safe for seven years. Hey, if you're going to give Bush credit for the illusion of saftey after 9/11, then you have to keep him accountable for the attacks of 9/11. America's fighting 2 wars right now, and is doing a bad job of it, so I don't buy the bullshit line about being safe. The US is even further in debt after the BUSh years, so it's not helping our fiscal security. Wake up ditto heads!
ne1foa69 3 years ago
My argument isn't that we are giving them rights, they already have them. What we would be doing by continuing in Bush's legacy is denying their rights without due process, stomping on our own constitution and International accords.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
Sock account, I have an interesting question. In your opinion does a personal message constitute an act of cowardice?
fatkenstein 3 years ago
the darkest times, when fighting against some of the deepest evils we must make sure we don't trample all over what we are supposed to represent.
Now on if they have rights under the Geneva Conventions, I do think so. Even with a lack of belligerent markings there is no such thing as an unprotected person. I will send you some relevant information I discovered.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
Oh no, I don't just support terrorist rights I support rights across the spectrum. From the rights of the unborn to the rights of scumbag terrorists I defend them all. Why? Is it because I am a terrorist sympathizer? Is it because I hold the US in contempt and wish to see it destroyed? No! It is because I believe that all human beings have rights that cannot be infringed upon without due process. Rights are one of the most fundamental intangibles that we as Americans hold dear and even in cont
fatkenstein 3 years ago
Point 1 is not false, it is just a painful fact that many wish to glean over.
Point 2 is also not false because this has been determined by Supreme Court decisions and relevant interpretations of the constitution.
Point 4 it is true I am not advocating giving all of American citizens rights to terrorists.
Point 3- As I have informed you, we cannot determine if they ever WERE a threat because they never had a trial. I assume innocence until proven guilty, how about you?
fatkenstein 3 years ago
were not detained on US soil and that was one of the primary excuses for the denial of their rights.
The far left are indeed clamoring for terrorist suspects rights but so are more moderately inclined liberals(such as myself).
fatkenstein 3 years ago
First of all- The current Supreme Court actually has a conservative majority not a liberal majority which is why I found this decision pleasantly surprising.
Second- He has suspended charges until he can determine whether or not these people have had there rights violated. I am certain that he will not drop charges against KSM and others who obviously deserve to go to jail.
As far as rights, once under US control they are entitled to certain criminal rights. You are right they cont
fatkenstein 3 years ago
I parrot liberal mantra-I don't know if you realized this but I AM a liberal.You parrot conservative mantra(That's fine, it's your ideology) so calling a particular stance liberal or conservative is just stating the obvious and does not do anything for your argument.
"its funny that idiot liberals will abort just about evry child but wont kill a terrorist"
You should not make such broad based assumptions based on nothing more than idealogical alignment, I am a liberal and I am AGAINST abortion.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
Several Points on your previous points.
1) Taking away the rights of suspected terrorists does not return to the victims their rights that were violated.
2) Anyone under US jurisdiction is entitled to the basic rights as stated in the Bill of Rights. We are not giving them these rights, they already have them.
3) As I have pointed out to you, of the 150, 89 were innocent.
4) No one is asking to give terrorists all the rights of American citizens, some rights only citizens have and rightfully so.
fatkenstein 3 years ago 3
For anyone who wants to see a coward liberal in action go to the video
"Dick Cheney Threatens the US with a terrorist strike...when will he shut up?"
Once you trip him up on his answer he blocks you.
Go test this liberal punk coward. Let me know the results.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I've tested the YouTube removal system and if it in fact Cheneywatch had removed Kriegbell's comments posted on the video mentioned above, there would not be the message 'Comment removed by author. This is a typical tactic of one with nothing to say except the propagation of lies and hate. It is what is done when a Government that has no real proof produce a document that has been 99% redacted to justify their policy.
dawgnpony 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And lastly: To Kriegbell, you are a liar and your world of hate and fear will bring you a life of misery, pain and loneliness. I pity you.
dawgnpony 3 years ago
dawgnpony:
Those are mighty big words for a 12 year old. What's your point?
Kriegbell 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Is that the best insult you can come up with? My point is that you are a hate filled liar. YOU removed all your spew that you posted and then blame them... as if you are the victim. How pathetic is that.
dawgnpony 3 years ago
And dawgpony, why would someone go around on other YT videos to defend another YT user...nice sock account Cheneywatch
Kriegbell 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm not defending anybody. I am calling you a liar. I've read much of what Cheneywatch has posted and I presume he pulled down your trousers and gave you a right good spanking. You then remove your comments and whine about those that bested you somewhere else. What a child you are.
dawgnpony 3 years ago
dawgnpony:
Right, instead of going around like a little nit wit defending your buddy, have you got an intelligent point to debate.
I can expose more of your idiocy right here and now if you'd like.
So you're a defender of terrorists I take it...
Kriegbell 3 years ago
open minded, it's simply not true. I sent the same thing to sockaccount and he didn't seem to think that this was reason to accuse me of being a mindless follower and this is one of the reasons he got a friend invite from me and you didn't.
BTW: How is sending you a personal message an act of cowardice?
fatkenstein 3 years ago
And dawgpony please stop with the thumbs down from your eight differnet sock accounts.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You really are paranoid. Three tenets that I live by: 1) Never spit in the wind, 2) The best investment is a reliable timepiece, 3) When engaged in conversation and it has been determined that it is with one that is intellectually challenged... end the dialogue (see Tenets 1 and 2).
dawgnpony 3 years ago
dawgnpony:
I'm waiting......nothing huh?
Kriegbell 3 years ago
Your response was so predictable it was simultaneously amusing and depressing. Of course you would accuse me of following the mainstream media and not thinking for myself. I could have just as easily shown you the same thing from a more unconventional and right leaning source.(WorldNetDaily anyone?) but the message had two goals, the first one being to inform you of a case I was not sure you were aware of and the second to see how open minded you are. As much as I wish I could say you are cont
fatkenstein 3 years ago
fatkenstein:
It took you four days to come up with that drivel? You just said a lot of nothing. You sending me an L.A. times article in a P.M. and not following it up with anything to say, is the same as saying nothing. I had already seen that story. What does a newspaper article have to do with being open minded.
And yes you're a coward. If you have anything to say, say it here. I don't want you as a "friend."
You just out-did me on the predictability factor. You're pathetic.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
Ah, Kriegbell making assumptions with no proof yet again. I did not need four days to reply to you, rather I was/am involved in several different debates across You Tube on many different issues. Unlike most You tubers, my personal computer is not functioning at the moment. Thus, I must rely on the school computers limiting the amount of time I can dedicate to any particular video. If you had checked my channel during any of the days I was missing you would have come to this conclusion already.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
I did not feel the need to write anything after the newspaper because it seemed obvious to me that you were reading my comments that were addressed to sockaccount.(an assertion that you yourself indirectly supported)
Finally, the newspaper article was not what determined your open-mindedness rather by your response. If you had been an unbiased observer and had read the article, would it not have been easier to simply state this fact. Instead you decided to go on a rant decrying the MSM and cont
fatkenstein 3 years ago
proceeded to accuse me of being a "typical thoughtless person who lets the newspapers
dictate how you think." If thats what being open-minded means to you then I shudder to think what you would consider close-minded.
BTW- How am I pathetic? Please inform me so I can correct this grievous error on my part.(The preceding sentence was "sarcasm", just wanted to let you know ;)
fatkenstein 3 years ago
1) fatkenstein:
- They don't have rights. This is a time of war. 3rd Geneva Convention 4.1.2: All belligerents must wear Distinctive Markings (see video).
- I don't know or give a fuck where you are on YT or who you're having a discussion with at any given moment. Get a life. I have one.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
2) fatkenstein:
- I'm not Sock. Talk to Sock about the News article if you'd like. You can learn something from him. He's a smart guy.
- Deal with your pathetic situation yourself. I.m not interseted nor do I care.
- If you stop being pathetic and actually have something to say, which has merit, fine. Otherwise please don't bother me.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
Right, Kriegbell just look how far the conversation has deteriorated. We are insulting each other over insignificant things. I am going to end this now, for my part in this mess I apologize, no one deserves to be judged based on a reply. Consequently, I hope you can come to the understanding that sharing information is not an act of cowardice.
fatkenstein 3 years ago 2
Furthermore, while the Geneva Conventions did say this, commentary on the Geneva convention further establishes that there is no such thing as an unprotected person. You either fall in the protection of the third or fourth.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
Finally even if you can say they don't have POW status here is article five:
((Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.)) Thus, they are to be treated as POWs
fatkenstein 3 years ago
falkenstein:
Thanks for bringing us both back to civility. I can see how you could make a worthy argument with reference. But then I could could point back to article 4.1.2 where they do fall under the claims of Article 4 and therefore article 5 does not apply. I will admit that this is not a black and white issue for all cases; Ex. Jose Padilla is a U.S. citizen.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
But let's say we agree with your argument (but keep in mind that I don't) the military tribunals can come into play. And that's where my biggest objection comes from. The Courts intervened in an area in which they have no conceptual experience. If I could, I'd like to refer you to a Heritage Foundation article titled
"Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties in Wartime" by Frank Williams. H.F. is a Right Wing Pub. but I still think it's a good read. I'd be open to a counter article.
Cheers!
Kriegbell 3 years ago
Kriegbell I ama not finding the article you are citing. All that comes up is description a series of 8 essays by said author. I cannot access them. If possible, can you send it to me? BTW, I do know that Heritage is right leaning just like Human events, I do try to see the other side of these complex issues.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
dawgpony:
You're a typical liberal who, when confronted with a specific debate question, you obfuscate and avoid the subject at hand.
You, posting a bunch regurgitated quotes does not make you clever.
I'll give you one more chance. If you put up another pointles comment I will block you. Then you can comment under your sock CheneyWatch account.
My question again:
So you defend terrorists?
Kriegbell 3 years ago
No I was not referring to you(I was referring to sockaccount) but your insights on this subject are welcome just the same. I understand your explanation but it clashes with our constitution and what we are supposed to stand for. The fact that they did not wear uniforms does not mean they lose there rights under our criminal justice system.(In fact the Supreme Court recently affirmed this fact) Even in this war, the essential rights of POW's cannot be violated.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
I - Ignorance
S - Slaughter
L - Lust for blood
A - Absence of logic
M - Molestation of children
yingyangboy89 3 years ago 7
And finally no one is asking for a mass release of suspected terrorists, they are trying to get these people a fair trial so we can actually determine whether they are guilty or innocent. "The Messiah", it's funny but only conservatives and the opposition refer to him as such, us supporters do not think of him as some kind of savior. "Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."- Benjamin Franklin.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
fatkenstein:
If your talking to me you obviously missed the main point of the video. This is a Terror War. The former commander in chief George W. Bush declared it as such.
In a war the combatants usually wear belligerent markings. These terrorists at Gitmo didn't wear uniforms. They can be shot as spies. They do not have "the right" to be tried in our legal court system.
What part of that explanation don't you understand?
Kriegbell 3 years ago
When the battlefield happens to be what used to be your house in the middle of one of your home cities then it's not a mystery as to how you were caught there. When you are held for years without a chance to defend your innocence then it's no surprise that you were ""determined not to return to terrorism"(A charge that has not been proved in a court of law) Finally everyone in US jurisdiction has Constitutional rights whether you think they deserve them or not.
fatkenstein 3 years ago
So if 61 were terrorists this means that 89 people were innocent. 89 people who were held without constitutional rights. 89 people taken from their homes and families without a chance to defend themselves in a valid court of law. 89 innocent lives permanently altered
89.....
fatkenstein 3 years ago
I love this video! Thanks for posting it.
PropagandaBuster 3 years ago 6
Sock, I've heard from other sources, those numbers are actually more than twice that.
Even if there's evidence of just one -and I've pointed out the fact that there are at least two- of these guys who were responsible for any coalition or civilian deaths, that's one too many.
Let those guy's rot in there and die.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
"In the name of Allah", of all creation which is endlessly radiating
The common translation for bismillah is "In the name of Allah", which is actually an idiom, an expression that really doesn't make much sense on a literal word-by-word basis.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
In any language IT UNIVERSALLY BEAUTIFUL
THUS IT IS NOT exclusively Muslim
أيرلندي أيرلندي بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمΙ
ρλανδικές ιρλανδικές όνομα του Θεού το εύσπλαχνος
אירית אירית בשם אלוהים את רחמני
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Tip:
Please translate
Kriegbell 3 years ago
ir rahman ir rahim
These two terms rahman and rahim refer to attributes of the One. While they are often translated simply as Merciful and Compassionate, the roots of the words point to a deeper meaning.The term rahman describes that aspect of the source of all creation which is endlessly radiating, endlessly nourishing, regardless of who or what is receiving the endless flow of blessings.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
So, the phrase ir rahman ir rahim is a recognition and honoring of the very source of all existence, the source of all blessings, the source of all compassion, the source of all mercy who gives endlessly to us and who also responds according to our moral integrity, our harmony with all of creation and our love of Allah.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
This phrase is truly an ideal to be expressed from the heart, an ideal to be expressed with the utmost sincerity, an ideal which leads us toward sacred purpose, the purpose for which we have been given life.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Outstanding first vid Kriegbell.
Keep them coming 5*****
KtBdOKW 3 years ago 5
Absolutely! He'd have the ultimate paradise with all those obsequious liberal sheep to behead.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
Atheists, communist and Muslims All believe in the destruction of the West, AS for Muslims: It is a religion of war and hate, just Like Mohammed ,a worrier who eliminated anyone and everyone that did not see things his way. Not That Different then today and smiler to todays Atheist and communist who may not believe in a religion but do believe in the power of the state and the power of one supreme leader as their GOD
IS OBAMA THAT MAN FOR THE USA
IF SO GOD HELP US
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Arab monotheism is superior.Yes, not all Arabs are Muslim. Christian Arabs predate Islam by hundreds of years, for instance. But Arab Muslims view them as fossils slated for conversion, death, or temporary source of revenue through jizyah an extra tax placed on non-Muslims, called dhimmis, in Islamic society. Arab Muslims in Palestine even have an expression for whats waiting for their Christian brethren, as well as Jews First the Saturday people, than the Sunday people.
should we tax Islam
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Remember this Salman Rushdie the Satanic Verses AND the Pope "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
These words, expressed six centuries ago by a Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, in dialogue with an Iranian scholar, spur three reflections.
Pope Benedict XVI offered the above quote, neither endorsing nor condemning it, in his academic speech,
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Great video.
Just like a Liberal, Willing to Abort every child they see but not willing to kill a terrorist.
FightTheGoodFightUSA 3 years ago 3
One of thoose who were released (as unguilty) from Gitmo now appeared on a video ... a terror-video from pakistan. he threatens the west with terrorattacks.
bowman2064 3 years ago
Terrorism is a logical outcome of putting the Qur'an into practice.
The Qur'an promotes permanent struggle against non-Muslims - or at least until non-Muslims are converted to Islam, subjected to Islamic authority, or killed. Below is a listing of relevant verses in the Qur'an.
(Q. 2:191) Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them.
(Q. 9:123),to murder them and treat them harshly
(Q.9: 5), slay them
(Q. 8: 65 )fight with them, even if they are Christians and Jews,
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Deuteronomy 20:16 Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall NOT LEAVE ALIVE ANYTHING that breathes. 17"But you shall UTTERLY DESTROY them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, AS the LORD your GOD has COMMANDED you,
Terrorism is a logical outcome of putting the old testament into practice. Deuteronomy promotes permanent struggle against non jews. Above is a list.
applepie1e 3 years ago
The old testament applies to christians.
matt 5:18
for verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
applepie1e 3 years ago
bismillah ir rahman ir rahim
However, regardless of how one may choose write the English transliteration of the original Arabic, it is neither the writing of the words nor their pronunciation which is crucial, but rather we shall each be rewarded according to what is in our heart and how we act in the world.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you go to possess, and has cast out many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than you, 2 and when the LORD your God delivers them over to you, you shall conquer them and utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them nor show mercy to them.
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Those who say these words with thoughts of self-aggrandizement, or selfish gains, or self-centered vain profit in any manner, will receive their just reward... suffering, pain and confusion. Likewise, those who truly dedicate every step of their life to the glory and service of the Ever-present One shall also receive their just reward...
tiptacboom 3 years ago
Islam is a caustic blend of regurgitated paganism and twisted Bible stories. Muhammad, its lone prophet, conceived his religion solely to satiate his lust for power, sex, and money. He was a terrorist. And if you think these conclusions are shocking, wait until you see the evidence.
This video is great But for the mentally challenged liberals and budapests of the world a narrative would be great too and it could use a narrative version
need less music
tiptacboom 3 years ago
tip:
Good point. I'll work on that.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
he has to imprison them else where so what's the fucking point?
TelfLad 3 years ago
Exactly!
Kriegbell 3 years ago
obama sucks mccain
vtgdzfdtgbxftsgb 3 years ago
I did vote but it wasn't for either of those two.
Kriegbell 3 years ago
We need to send Nancy Pelosi, Barney "NAMBLA" Frank, Chris Dodd, & Harry Ried to Gitmo
anyway...5/5 Kriegbell
TAXtheAtheist 3 years ago
No, they both just want us destroyed. the moonbats don't bother thinking (ever), that islamofascists would enslave women, kill all the gays, force people to worship (satan) allah, and have us living in a feudal caste system. That's everything the left claims to stand against, yet they embolden the assholes who want to spread it.
KarrensMan69 3 years ago 4
California is a police state that has been run by the psychotic Democrats for the last two decades.
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
Just the state of California has more people in prison than any COUNTRY in the world.
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago 3
Nice vid, bro.
evenplay1 3 years ago 2
Good vid.
obama will not "think again". There is no thinking in the first place.
The primary objective of the left is to destroy the US. The goals of the socialists and al-queda are basically the same.
KarrensMan69 3 years ago
"The goals of the socialists and al-queda are basically the same."
No, they are EXACTLY the same!
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
AWESOME! let the punishment fit the crime!!
stonescourt3 3 years ago
Great vid, Kreigbell! 5 stars and fave'd.
MuddleVanHeck 3 years ago
Thaks. Thank you all very much!
Kriegbell 3 years ago
Motorhead!
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago 2
Great work, great points there, kriegbell. Obama said he will close down Gitmo, yet what he plans on doing with the detainees is up in the air. Is this the short sighted moves we get to look forward to? I hope not.
kasperthe44 3 years ago 2