[Peace-discuss] Stop the disgusting liar

[C. G. Estabrook]

	On Terror, Barack Channels W
	June 27, 2009, 2:56PM

With policies like these, they might as well just keep Guantanamo open.

As TPM is reporting, Obama has once again mimicked the Bush administration on 
its "War on Terror" policy.  He's now issued an order legalizing the indefinite 
incarceration of terrorism suspects.

This is exactly what we didn't want.

This is exactly what we were promised would be over following the closing of 
Guantanamo.

We were led to believe that the closure of Gitmo meant an end to the suspension 
of habeus corpus, to the crimes of the Military Commissions Act, to throwing 
people in jail for life without charging them with a thing.

And in a politically expedient move (questionable, considering how much this 
will anger liberals), the Obama administration has assured us that even if 
Guantanamo is closed, we can still sit on detainees for eternity, even if we 
don't know what they've done.  Even if waterboarding them dozens of times yields 
no critical, or accurate, information.

Perhaps Obama is trying to appease the NIMBY's-- that's Not In My BackYard: the 
rallying cry for Republicans who caution that putting an end to the abuse and 
lawlessness at Guantanamo would precipitate an influx of actual terrorists 
menacingly licking their lips in state prisons across the country, plotting 
their next attack.  Evil Muslims-- coming to a correctional institute near you!

I say YIMBY.  Yes in my backyard.  Please.  Why not?  Most of these guys, like 
the adorable uighurs who've been lounging in Bermuda following their release, 
are pretty harmless, anyway.  We know that a lot of the prisoners accumulated at 
Gitmo were simply swept up in the Bush White House's racist, post-9/11 fervor. 
They were victims of 'wrong place, wrong time syndrome,' people like Moazzam 
Begg, author of "Enemy Combatant," who happened to have been in a Muslim country 
when U.S. forces were less than discriminate in determining what a terrorist was.

What's so insidious about this decree is that it purports to support his larger 
effort to close Gitmo.  Sure, Republicans will be less squeamish if you say that 
yes, we will shut it down, but we can also still keep doing the same thing to 
these prisoners until the end of time.  Don't worry, they won't be released into 
the actual justice system, or even to a military justice system that's remotely 
fair (see the testimony of former military officers who have spoken out about 
the lack of fairness in the military court system, especially for so-called 
'enemy combatants.'  Military brass apparently advocated convictions no matter 
what the cost.)

Of course, closing Guantanamo is pointless if they rubber stamp the continued 
execution of the Cuban prison's biggest sin: the unconstitutional detainment of 
these people.

Yes in my backyard, Obama.  In my backyard, people are treated equally under the 
law.  So whether or not someone once trained to be a suicide bomber, or they had 
lunch with Khalid Sheik Mohammad, or they were simply a British person of Middle 
Eastern descent who had the misfortune to be captured by American forces, they 
still deserve a fair trial.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/elph16/2009/06/on-terror-barack-channels-w.php?ref=reccafe

C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>     Obama to Seek $83.4 Billion for Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
>     Thursday 09 April 2009
>     The US president's request would push the costs of the two wars
>     to almost $1 trillion.
> 
>     US president Barack Obama is seeking $83.4bn (£56.8bn) for US 
> military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pressing for 
> special troop funding that he opposed two years ago when he was a 
> senator and George Bush was president.
> 
>     Obama's request, including money to send thousands more troops into 
> Afghanistan, would push the costs of the two wars to almost $1tn since 
> the 9/11 terror attacks against the US in 2001, according to the 
> Congressional Research Service. The additional money would cover 
> operations into the latter months of this year.
> 
>     Obama also is requesting $400m to upgrade security along the 
> US-Mexico border and to combat narcoterrorists.
> 
>     Budget office spokesman Tom Gavin said the White House would send an 
> official request to Congress this afternoon. Congressional aides who had 
> been briefed on the request revealed its overall cost in advance.
> 
>     Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, acknowledged that 
> Obama had been critical of Bush's use of similar special legislation to 
> pay for the wars. He said it was needed this time because the money will 
> be required by summer, before Congress is likely to complete its normal 
> appropriations process. "This will be the last supplemental for Iraq and 
> Afghanistan. The process by which this has been funded over the course 
> of the past many years, the president has discussed and will change," 
> Gibbs said.
> 
>     The request is likely to win easy approval from the 
> Democratic-controlled Congress, despite frustration among some liberals 
> over the pace of troop withdrawals and Obama's plans for a large 
> residual force of up to 50,000 troops, about one-third of the total now, 
> who will train Iraqis, protect US assets and personnel and conduct 
> anti-terror operations.
> 
>     "The reality is the alternative to the supplemental is a sudden and 
> precipitous withdrawal of the United States from both places and I don't 
> know anybody who thinks that's a good idea," said US defence secretary 
> Robert Gates. "The reality is it would put everything we have achieved 
> in Iraq at tremendous risk, and I believe it would greatly endanger our 
> troops."
> 
>     "This funding will do two things: it will prolong our occupation of 
> Iraq through at least the end of 2011, and it will deepen and expand our 
> military presence in Afghanistan indefinitely," said Democratic anti-war 
> Representative Lynn Woolsey. "Instead of attempting to find military 
> solutions to the problems we face in Iraq and Afghanistan, President 
> Obama must fundamentally change the mission in both countries to focus 
> on promoting reconciliation, economic development, humanitarian aid and 
> regional diplomatic efforts."
> 
>     House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio predicted Republicans 
> would support the request overwhelmingly, provided congressional 
> Democrats do not seek to "micromanage" the war by adding a timeline or 
> other restrictions on the ability of military officials to carry on the 
> fight.
> 
>     He said the measure is required to pay for the new strategy in 
> Afghanistan and the drawdown of combat troops in Iraq. The White House 
> plans for future war expenses to be part of the annual legislation 
> appropriating money for the defence department.
> 
>     Obama was a harsh critic of the Iraq war as a presidential 
> candidate, which attracted support from the Democratic party's liberal 
> base and helped him secure the party's nomination. He opposed two 
> infusions of war money in 2007 after Bush used a veto to force Congress 
> to remove a withdrawal timeline from the $99bn measure.
> 
>     He supported a war-funding bill last year that also included about 
> $25bn for domestic programmes. Obama also voted for war funding in 2006, 
> before he announced his candidacy for president.
> 
>     The coming request will include $75.8bn for the military and more 
> than $7bn in foreign aid. Pakistan, a key ally in the fight against 
> al-Qaida, will receive $400m in aid to combat insurgents.
> 
>     The outlines of the request were provided in documents presented at 
> a private congressional briefing.
> 
>     According to the documents, obtained by the Associated Press, the 
> request would pay for an average force level in Iraq of 140,000 troops, 
> with force levels in Afghanistan rising to 45,000. It would also provide 
> $2.2bn to accelerate into this year implementation of the Pentagon's 
> plans to increase the overall size of US forces, including a 
> 547,400-person active duty US army.
> 
>     The coming debate in Congress is likely to provide an early test of 
> Obama's efforts to remake the Pentagon and its much-criticised weapons 
> procurement system. He is requesting four F-22 fighter jets costing 
> about $600m as part of the war funding package but wants to shut the 
> F-22 programme down after that.
> 
>     The special measure would include $3.6bn for the Afghanistan 
> national army.
> 
>     The White House wants the bill for the president's signature by the 
> Memorial Day holiday, 25 May, said a Democratic aide in the House of 
> Representatives.
> 
>     Obama announced plans in February to withdraw US troops from Iraq on 
> a 19-month timetable, with the last service members out of Iraq by the 
> end of 2011.
> 
>     His new request would push the war money approved for 2009 to about 
> $150bn. The totals were $171bn for 2007 and $188bn for 2008, the year 
> Bush increased the tempo of military operations in a generally 
> successful effort to quell the Iraq insurgency.
> 
> http://www.truthout.org/041009L
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss