Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gitmo Is Killing Me

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 539 posts

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#91

Post by gruseom »

ThrowawyAcctLOL wrote: post #75
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #17

Gitmo was the first thing that clued me that I had made a mistake voting for Obama's promises (not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead!). It was such a complete reversal that I immediately knew his promises were completely worthless. I appreciate that there may be anger outs people in Gitmo, but they have every right to a trial I have. The double standard of what human rights mean if you are a US citizen an…

> not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead! How are you so sure of that? McCain's neither a saint nor a philosopher-king: his personal narcissism seems to rival Obama's, and he often seems to be successfully flattered and managed by those around him. But he erratically takes stands on principle, and he also has personal experience of both torture and prolonged imprisonment. And in fact he took an anti-tortur…

his personal narcissism seems to rival Obama's

I realize that the view of Obama as a tremendous narcissist has become a right-wing meme, but it seems so odd (kind of like the related view that he's a know-nothing who can't speak without a teleprompter, though that one seems to have died down since the election). I'm curious: how did the narcissism meme get started, and what evidence is cited for it, other than that major politicians tend to have major egos?

I'm not trying to make a political point. I don't follow the sources on this and would like someone to explain to me how the people who believe this came to believe it and what arguments they advance for it.

(p.s. I think you may have misread the GP, who meant that McCain would not have gotten their vote instead of Obama.)

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#92

Post by sgpl »

vxNsr wrote: post #76

I think the most important part about this OpEd is the comments appearing here and elsewhere: Lots of righteous indignation for this poor fellow who claims that he's completely innocent of any charges brought against him and if he could only talk to someone they would understand. He feels the need to kill himself to prove a point, such conviction. What do they say about a prisoner and his crime? oh yeah: there's no s…

From the article:

"I have never been charged with any crime. I have never received a trial."

There haven't been any charges brought against him, and his life for the past DECADE (10+ years) has been stuck in a fucking limbo.

The US Government won't even let him commit suicide by way of hunger, so in essence he has absolutely no hope or choice as it currently stands.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#93

Post by jacquesm »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #17

Gitmo was the first thing that clued me that I had made a mistake voting for Obama's promises (not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead!). It was such a complete reversal that I immediately knew his promises were completely worthless. I appreciate that there may be anger outs people in Gitmo, but they have every right to a trial I have. The double standard of what human rights mean if you are a US citizen an…

> That said, we are not only Gitmo, and we actually do a lot of good things for the world.

Indeed, it is not just Gitmo, if only, and it's not just the US. Lots of EU governments are complicit in the whole rendition (what a word, kidnapping would be the appropriate term) program as well and there are/were more places in the world where people are being held without any sort of process, to be tortured and disposed of, either by killing them or by turning them loose years later without even an idea of who their captors were.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#94

Post by mynameishere »

natrius wrote: post #18
richardjordan wrote: post #3

The hypocrisy of the New York Times in printing this is shocking. The newspaper which did so much to whip up hysteria during the years of the Bush administration now trying to raise concerns about the inmates of Guantanamo is shockingly cynical. It's a shameful state of affairs that our political process is so broken we cannot deal with this situation in a civilized fashion, with investigations, trials and an end res…

The events you've outlined don't require intellectual dishonesty at all. It's possible to have thought war was a prudent course of action in 2003, then to have changed one's mind by 2013.

Eh, false memories. I distinctly remember the day after 9/11. Real people greeted it with maybe a sad shrug. I remember talking to a janitor who predicted war with Iraq. (He knew guys in the military who got phone calls right after.) Shrug. Whatever. It was only the media that kept up the hysteria.

The janitor and the New York Times were on the same page. Shrug. I still don't care that much. Those guys at gitmo at this point could seriously prove embarrassing, either through talking or blowing themselves up. That doesn't effect me, but TPTB are risk-averse.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#95

Post by GHFigs »

natmaster wrote: post #82
snprbob86 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily more, but it would require a different distribution. Money would need to be spent to relocate the prisoners. Congress has blocked that reappropriation. Quoting Wikipedia: On May 20, 2009, the United States Senate passed an amendment to the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 2346) by a 90-6 vote to block funds needed for the transfer or release of prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay detenti…

Does congress control how Gitmo is run? My understanding is that the President is in charge of the how (execution of the law), and congress only controls the what.

This is true in theory, but in practice, Congress can be as specific as it likes about how the money is allowed to be spent.

For example (from the NDAA 2013, Section 1022)[1]:

"(a) In General- No amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2013 may be used to construct or modify any facility in the United States, its territories, or possessions to house any individual detained at Guantanamo for the purposes of detention or imprisonment in the custody or under the control of the Department of Defense unless authorized by Congress.

(b) Exception- The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to any modification of facilities at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba."

[1] http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr4310/text

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#96

Post by cynwoody »

skyraider wrote: post #14
BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Closing it would mean having the prisoners moved elsewhere, but not a change to how they are being dealt with. That's the real issue; the location isn't what matters.

He could also order due process to start tomorrow. Maybe there are a few issues with sending people back to their countries, but certainly not in all cases.

> He could also order due process to start tomorrow.

The correct course of action, obviously.

> Maybe there are a few issues with sending people back to their countries, but certainly not in all cases.

Well, as Commander in Chief, he could just order the Marines to cut a hole in Gitmo's perimeter fence and shoo the prisoners into Cuber though it. I'm sure Fidel and Raúl would be pleased to handle their homeward travel arrangements, albeit not quietly.

Hell, Obama could even save some postage by having the Marines entrust the prisoners to a deliver a $4085 check to the Treasurer General of the [Cuban] Republic, in payment of Gitmo's annual rental[1].

[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/idUSN17200921

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#97

Post by andrewfelix »

joshuaheard wrote: post #87

Why does HN link to this propaganda?

Dissent is a powerful and useful thing.

If you feel this is article is a lie and part of a wider political strategy, then present your case. Making sweeping statements without context or reason will not win you friends on HN.

FYI HN doesn't control the links, its users post links and vote on them.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#98

Post by jacquesm »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #11
ck2 wrote: post #10

Obama could order it closed tomorrow. Congress could refuse to fund that action but it would still be ordered closed and his hands would be a tiny bit cleaner. But he likes his drones and gitmo now, so that's pretty much it until Hillary becomes president and I think she likes the idea of gitmo too.

Closing it would mean having the prisoners moved elsewhere, but not a change to how they are being dealt with. That's the real issue; the location isn't what matters.

> the location isn't what matters.

The location is what allowed it to exist in the first place. It matters a great deal.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#99

Post by anigbrowl »

dantheman wrote: post #84
Locke1689 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that to close Guantanamo, you need funding to a least move the prisoners to another facility. Introducing them to the justice system would require the same. As every American should know, Congress holds the purse strings here and has denied said request. The President has no power here.

The president can pardon them, the president can use private money to move them. The president can be on the news every night making this an issue.

Something like a quarter of Americans also think the President is a crypto-Muslim. In the Wall Street Journal, today, for UN ambassador John Bolton and Bush Admin. legal adviser John Yoo are arguing that the administration signed up to a UN treaty intended to curb the global arms trade is really a cover for destroying the 2nd amendment and confiscating Americans' guns.

I am, frankly, surprised that that nobody in the House has offered articles of impeachment so far. (checks) Well almost, but it died q uiet death in the House Judiciary committee: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.CON.RES.107:

This is one of those cases where only Nixon can go to China.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#100

Post by pacdavidson »

Joeri wrote: post #39
pacdavidson wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, as the wikipedia entry states, he has been on Berkeley's faculty since 1993. His return to Berkeley after being seconded to Bush's DoJ was met with heated resistance and continual protest (e.g. waterboarding enactments outside the law school). As a tenured professor, though, he couldn't be tossed out.

I don't believe this argument of impotence. If they wanted to throw him out, they would have. Tenure is not written down in the constitution. These 'we want to but we can't' arguments bother me more and more as i grow older. It's usually a pretty transparent excuse for not doing the right thing, by scared old men or ambitious young men.

And the unspeakably repulsive irony is that Woo enjoys these protections while the Gitmo inmates do not receive due process.
Post reply on HN