I'd want to kill anyone who held my friends or family indefinitely without a trial, wouldn't you?

This isn't anything particularly new, or anything that he hasn't said many times before. He was oblivious then, and nothing has changed.

Ah, the strident, failed voice of irrelevancy.

Yep, once again showing that he doesn't understand what's going on around him.

Hell, he probably figures that the way to keep America safe is to make sure no-one drops a hat.

rocks. obama will more and more find out what the real world is like.

Sending gitmo detainees to Bermuda with a wad of cash won't do it.

Can't someone just tie this "man" to his toilet and leave him to rot?

I guess I don't understand what Bush would do with Gitmo detainees. At some point we'll have tortured them enough so we'll have all the information they know, or they'll be in so long they will no longer have any information of value. Then what? Kill them quietly? Or was the plan all along to get them to commit suicide?

I didn't know gitmo was holding people in 2001. They sure loved us during the clinton years didn't they?

freakin' idiot.

Say there... could you direct me a url that documents the Obama administration's proposal to send the gitmo detainees to "Bermuda with a wad of cash"?

thanks

I understand that you and your fellow right wing bedbugs are really, really afraid of those incredibly dangerous Uyghurs. That must be who you're referring to, eh? After all, wasn't it Uyghurs who were behind 9/11!!?!?!

How do you manage to get out of bed in the morning, what with all the things you need to fear?

One simple question: Who's paying George Bush. Has this man no decency?

Well, Dubya took less time than any recent President to start attacking his successor. (BTW, whatever happened to his 'ranch?')

And how long did it take Georgie Boy to miss the 'love' of the wing nuts, six months? Must be a record for any of the current elected Republicans, they seem to need a daily dose of hate mongers and extremists around them.

Is that an honor among thieves?

Yes, Mr. ex-President, therapy and persuasion won't work, with the few that are guilty, or the many that are guilty, or the some that are guilty, but I don't recall anyone suggesting that it would.

As with his response to the question of, "If you knew then what you know now about weapons of mass destruction, would you have invaded Iraq" and his answer of, "I think freedom is better than tyranny," which has to be the gold standard, Bush remains the greatest straw man employer in the world. No one uses as many straw men as he does, and no one is as big a fan of straw men as he is. In fact, he may be more addicted to straw than oil.

The problem with Guantanamo is not therapy or hand holding: it's the fact that we simply don't know who is guilty, because no one is even being charged, much less tried. Find them guilty, and then we can talk about how inveterate they are. Until then, we don't even have charges to substantiate. He says they're killers: is that a legal charge? Is Bush officially saying that each person at Guantanamo is there on a charge of murder? That would be progress, at least.

Economy -- his "free market" got us into this mess, pure and simple. So sorry that Obama is having to do extraordinary things to get us out of the mess. Many of those things were started under Bush himself. What a jerk for criticizing Obama for continuing that effort and saving our asses.

Gitmo -- Bush created this situation where we have no end game for these people. We can't hold forever (so says the Supreme Court and any decent human being). So I'm glad Obama is doing something to resolve the mess Bush left us. "Therapy" isn't the solution, so only a fucking idiot would hold that out as the alternative being proposed.

Man, I hate that "man".

Argument is presented: this situation will motivate people to become terrorists

Your rebuttal: But people were motivated to become terrorists before this situation existed! Therefore, you are wrong!

Do you see the logical fallacy there? Guess I'm wondering if your dishonest or moronic. Cause no one proposed that detaining ppl indefinitely without trial is the ONLY reason people might become terrorists. So pointing out that people have been previously motivated to terror before gitmo existed is, um, true, but I fail to see it as a disproof that folks might be angry about being detained for 8 years without trial or formal charges.

Anyhow, to those questioning the Bermuda thing, that's mostly true--that's where we finally sent the Chinese Uighars that had long been demonstrated--by the bush administration no less--to not be connected to any terror group, to have no useful intelligence, and to not be a danger to anyone.

But we held them anyway, for 8 years, in a prison camp.

TO be fair, we had no where to send them--China would have imprisoned or executed them as dissidents. Other countries were acting like big pussies, like states in America who's tough-guy congressmen apparently piss their pants at the thought of a "terrorist" imprisoned in a supermax facility within their state borders, cause, um...they're supervillians I guess.

So yes, the innocent of all charges, zero intelligence value detainees with no terror ties were sent to Bermuda. Yes, they were given money. A financial settlement with the government is a common ending to wrongful imprisonment suits. I presume the DoJ settled preemptively with an agreement barring the Uighars from suing/prosecuting the US government, but I don't know that part for sure.

of President Obama's long-winded, borderline condescending explanations of his positions, I cast my memory back to eight years of listening to George W. say things like, "They hate freedom -- and we love freedom" over and over and over.