President Obama today signed an executive order that will formalize the indefinite extralegal detention of terror suspects without charges as a permanent aspect of American life, while announcing that he intends to use this on detainees “who continue to pose a significant threat to national security” but against whom there is insufficient evidence to actually charge them with any crime.
The move came as the administration also ended a two year halt on new military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay, allowing the administration to avoid actual real courts and instead use stacked military tribunals in those cases where they have at least some evidence and feel comfortable with proceding to something resembling a trial.
But this will likely be the exception rather than the rule, and the administration seems likely to pursue even tribunals unless it is confident of success, and the executive order will allow them to be selective in even attempting to charge detainees, in that it is no longer at all essential to keeping them in prison for the rest of their lives.
In 2009 President Obama had expressed discomfort with the notion of keeping people in prison for life without charges, but even then was seen as probably doing so, which indeed he now has.
Officials still, incredibly, insist President Obama hopes to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, a promise that he made as soon as he took office but has not mentioned in quite some time. Today’s moves, to the contrary, seem to be assuring that this closure will never happen.
34 thoughts on “Obama Approves Indefinite Detention Without Trial”
How many shoes does this crime spree have to drop on us,,,,,????
When Obama came into the white house on the first day the CIA and military set him down and told him how foreign policy was gonna be done. When they got finished the pharmaceutical, defense and insurance lobbies set him down and told him how domestic policy was gonna be done. Then they patted him on the head and told him to go take some vacations. That's pretty much the history of the Obama administration.
I don't see it going down like that at all. This implies an air of innocence be conferred on candidate Obama. From my point of view, Obama was in on the fix from day one, as exemplified by his voting record as a U.S. Senator.
Exactly. His voting record was actually not all that different from Hillary's.
yea you're right, I was giving him too much credit.
I agree. I was warning people during 2008 that Obama would betray them and be a lackey of the status quo. From the first time I saw an interview with him shortly after he declared his candidacy for president, he impressed my as a from-the-mold, polished, typically phony politician. By the time he secured the nomination, I was convinced that impression was correct.
Dead on. None of these rat bastards in power are innocent. They knew full damn well what was going down and simply rode the gravy train. Any excuses to paint Obama, Bush et al as somehow not "being in control" or "unwitting victims of fate" are childish. On top of that these swine are deadly as they affect all of us directly.
Naw, he was hand-picked and groomed for the job. He had a role since day one and he knew it. Look at all that he has accomplished in a short two years: (a) he finished what Bush started (right down to more bail outs for the rich); (b) he took all the blame for the mess the Shrub made; (c) but, most importantly, he's 'proven' beyond a shadow of a doubt that people of a certain skin color cannot lead. You'll never again see a tanned candidate on that ballot.
So, after Shrub fails his stint at the presidency, that proves that white people cannot lead?
And before the CIA, no doubt, came the Israel lobby.
(You mustn't fail to mention our most important "friends" in the Middle East.)
Only your timing is wrong, it happened before he announced his candidacy, this is why he won.
Isn't that a crime? What's the difference between holding someone without trial and kidnapping?
To quote a previous Archon…"It's not illegal if the President does it."
yea, and it's not immoral if the US government does it. Like hte new TV ad for the navy says, we're a global force for good.
Can I get an AMEN!!!!
Well, the US citizens do seem not to care,,,until they are hauled in for posting on sites such as this.
"Executive Order" trumps the constitution,,,I doubt that, but again,,does anyone care?
The executive branch EXECUTES the law. An executive order is nothing but an instruction from the chief executive to his subordinates on how to execute the law. It can fill in gray areas, and change policies where the law is unspecific, but if the law says X, an executive order that says the opposite would raise a constitutional crisis and would likely be an impeachable offense as it would be an abuse of power
This president received the Nobel Peace Prize? Now President Obama joins the ranks of Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Saddam Hussein by trampling on any pretense of supporting basic human rights. This is a very sad day for America and Americans.
Hope and change…LOL!
"Extralegal", good one. When Baruch's Obama presidency is over, which can't come a second too soon, who will turn out to have been the bigger liar, Bush or Obama?
And here I thought McCain was the neocon sockpuppet candidate.
Poor folks who elected this fraud thinking they'd get something other than Bush.
Stuff like this makes you hope America goes bankrupt altogether. Maybe then the criminals in power will have to worry about doing something and saving their skin. With all this free time the only thing they want to do is keep killing and torturing the world's non-white, non-Christian population.
When Baruch's Obama presidency is over, which can't come a second too soon…
Careful what you wish for. You may end up getting Sarah Palin or Newt[er] Gingrich or both! And that can actually be worse, much, much worse.
Well, marginally worse perhaps.
yeah , do be careful–it's terribly disappointing-maybe he's looking to make the R's happy AGAIN or maybe there's a method to his madness.
As Menken said, each subsequent president makes one nostalgic for the preceding.
How can we be nostalgic for Bush when Obama is his philosophical clone?
Ah, hope and change we can believe in…NOT! Only a fool would vote for the magic negro again in 2012.
Magic negro, good one.
Change we can believe in–in north Africa maybe. Pay attention.
Right! Obama has continued the repressive foreign policies of his predecessors and consequently helped to spark the changes we can believe in now occurring in North Africa and the Middle East.
What would expect from a “democrat” policies toward its people and rest of the world.., Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya, Rockefeller, Hillary Clinton, Madeline Albright, Bill Clinton, Paul Wolfowitz, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and a falsified one…, from Chicago…?
And the Soros 'puppet' Obama continues to destroy the American Republic and democracy here in the US – what else did we expect from a Muslim Marxist-Communist?
1- First Questions.., how is it possible that the Libyan National council within few days declaring themselves as Libyan only legitimate representative.. was there any elections held that rest of the world didn’t know about, nor anyone been informed about such election..? I don’t want to speculate but looking into facts presented thus far something is wrong here, I think US and EU governments are well aware of their situation steering the problem looking for a new Iraq and Afghanistan war. That is because of two factor, one both government have problem getting their military budget approved at home, two the economy situation both in US and EU is getting worse. Otherwise and without wars how would they be able to improve the US and EU economy for a short term and ask for a new military budget…, there are rebels in Libya and for sure in Iran and elsewhere and other nations whom are against US and EU foreign policies in Middle East.
2- Here the question number 2 is: if rebels are for democracy, independent and self governing movement and implementation of a new constitution based on peoples democratic rights in Libya.., then why they have rejected Muammar Gaddafi offer in resigning..; furthermore, why would they reject Hugo Chavez offer for mediation. All that doesn’t make any sense, Look: people in Egypt and Tunisia they ousted their dictatorial regimes – leaders by a way of demonstrating, to certain point a peaceful one, here in Libya over a few days they (Libyan National council ) call themselves the ”One and Only” and arm themselves fighting Muammar Gaddafi regime, and all of the sudden US and EU is involved advising all kind of measures which is leading toward a military invasion and occupation of Libya…, those this make any sense to you…?
Enter text right here!
You are a threat, I am a threat, anyone who questions the Governments agenda or direction is a threat. Anyone who has a gun is a threat to National Security. I can walk up to just about anyone and create an identity with them that could be considered a threat to National Security. According to this plan they did not have to break ANY law they just have to be a threat. WE ALL ARE A THREAT!!!!! Martial law could detain all of America without ANY Constitutional Rights. None, Nada, Zilch No rights whatsoever just because we are labeled a threat.
This sure sounds like the ground laying foundation of a Dictatorship coming.
Comments are closed.