[Bobboau]

I really liked that 'no more back room deals, all negotiations will be broadcast' promise.

[Grizzly]

Then why did credit card rates and fees go through the roof at the end of last year?

Credit crunch?

[Inquisitor]

so, he closes gitmo only to move all the people there into a prison in illinois, how is this really 'change'? I mean I guess it's not in Cuba anymore, but I don't think this is what you all had in mind when you voted for him on that issue.

That's actually exactly what we all thought should happen, put them into SOME jurisdiction as opposed to the limbo that is Guantanomo Bay, Cuba. Well, I actually expect a little more, like Due Process.

Olebrman has **** for brains though. He's screaming at the dark from teh other direction most days from what I have seen.

[Bob-san]

Then why did credit card rates and fees go through the roof at the end of last year?

Credit crunch?

Because new legislation is limiting the privledges of credit card companies. They figure that, since they have to be fairer now (or soon?), they should increase everything so it's legal when the laws come into effect. My family's had credit cards at 13-19% interest (without a balance, mind you) upped to 29+%. Fees are being added because they will be losing some of their penalty fees. They did it because they can. Plus, it's extra profit for them; moving up rates 3 months in advance means they'd have a better Q4 and new Q1.

[Bobboau]

That's actually exactly what we all thought should happen, put them into SOME jurisdiction as opposed to the limbo that is Guantanomo Bay, Cuba. Well, I actually expect a little more, like Due Process.

well... perhaps I have not been fully explained the changes that are going into effect, I have been under the impression that they were basicly moving gitmo to Chicago and changing it's name.

[Rian]

But if it’s actually in the geographic United States, it has to abide by US law. That’s why all the sketchy military prisons have been in foreign countries.

[Bobboau]

yeah, I'm sure.

[Inquisitor]

Productive response.

[Nuclear1]

Productive response.

Informed reply.

Link to substantial evidence

[Bobboau]

yeah I'm sure that a cosmetic move is going to necessarily entail a change of policy.

'oh, hey guys we cant to that any more cause now we are on American soil'

do you honestly think that something as minor as that is going to have any impact at all? really? it's not just some hand waving to make it look like he did something when in reality the issue hasn't been addressed at all because the inmates will still have the same legal status and will be treated the same way, right? not that I'm really in favor of the closing of gitmo, but I don't think you should dilute your selves just because it's your guy in charge now. I remember a lot of democrats saying 'where were you during Bush's term and he was spending us into a hole' when ever a conservative would bring up the fact that we now have a trillion dollar deficit, well if you are really concerned about the human rights abuses at gitmo shouldn't you make sure they actually end and aren't just moved into the current presidents old stomping grounds where he probably has all sorts of ties with every administrator that will come within ten miles of the militarized perimeter of place?

just because it is physically located in the geographic US it now suddenly must obey US laws where before didn't, as if this were some physical constant of the universe?
yeah, I'm sure.





better?

[General Battuta]

While it's an argument, I'm not sure it works.

The fact that it's now on US soil means that the loophole that was previously used to justify extreme measures is now closed.

If you're cynical, this means nothing, but if you're moderate/optimistic this means either some chance or a good chance of improvement.

You'll find reason to believe nothing will change if you really want to, but I'm skeptical of the assertion that this is some ploy to exploit the Chicago Machine or something. It just feels like a conspiracy theory.

I think it represents a genuine, good-faith effort to clean up.

just because it is physically located in the geographic US it now suddenly must obey US laws where before didn't,

Yes, as a matter of fact, this is law, and therefore as binding as any other element of our legal system. It has nothing to do with physics, but it does have to do with the way our country is set up.

[Bobboau]

was the fact that it wasn't on US soil used? I thought the loophole used was that they were not uniformed members of a national army, and therefore not necessarily covered by the Geneva Convention.

[General Battuta]

The court's majority opinion was that "the will of Congress" should prevail and that habeas corpus did not apply to foreign nationals being held at Guantanamo Bay because it is not US soil.

Referring to SCOTUS here.

You're correct, thought, that loophole was used to justify torture.

[Bobboau]

ok, so you think that if it's on US soil then it will force the government to give them a trial? I can see where you are coming from, but I'm still skeptical it will happen, the prison they are being transfered to is federally owned and run by the department of defense, they'll probably claim that it's a military base and therefore not really US soil any more than gitmo was, at the very least it'll be a court battle for a few years.

[General Battuta]

Yeah, but who is 'they'?

Why would Obama move the prison to US soil and then claim it was not on US soil due to a technicality?

Also, this is an honest question, not a jab: are military bases not considered US soil? Is habeas corpus suspended on bases?

Either way I guess we'll see.

[Bobboau]

the they I think you were referring to would be who ever was running the prison, i.e. the department of defense.

I thought military bases were considered US soil no mater where in the world they were, so I don't see how it was considered special when it was in Cuba, and I don't see why it would be treated any different now. I believe military bases fall under the uniform code of military justice (as opposed to city, state, or federal jurisdiction), but aside from that I don't know.

until I see actual results I'm going to doubt.

[General Battuta]

While I've heard the same things about military bases and US soil, the Supreme Court apparently considered the fact that it was not US soil to be meaningful. It now will be.

Wish they'd get a move on with the base closure.

[Nuclear1]

US military bases/ships are considered US soil when whatever ****ing politician in power decides it fits his agenda to consider them US soil.

Never been an attack on US soil under the Bush administration?  We're not gonna count the attack on the Army base because it wasn't on US soil! (Even though it was a US military base!)

Attack on the USS Cole?  Of course it was a terrorist attack under Clinton's Administration!

Torture under Bush?  Of course it's not US soil!  It's in Cuba.  Just keep em there so we can do whatever the **** we want to do with them! 

[Bobboau]

US military bases/ships are considered US soil when whatever ****ing politician in power decides it fits his agenda to consider them US soil.

QFT

[General Battuta]

Um, but the Supreme Court isn't a 'politician in power.'