The Awesome Obama Thread II

I feel like we've been over this, but now that you've made the demand for the fourth time, can you explain why you believe that Obama should close the US Embassy in Iraq?

Regarding the age:

quote:

---

Under the terms of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, on the involvement of children in armed conflict, to which the US is also a signatory, juveniles defined as those under the age of 18 when the crime they are accused of committing took place require special protection.

---

There is NO video-tape evidence of him being tortured that I know of. However affidavits state . . .

quote:

---

There is much more in the affidavit casual cruelty, whereby guards made Khadr do hard manual labor when his wounds were not healed, and, significantly, threats to have me raped, or sent to other countries like Egypt, Syria, Jordan or Israel to be raped. He also noted, I would always hear people screaming, both day and night,

---

quote:

---

Khadr stated that he was short-shackled in painful positions and left for up to ten hours in a freezing cold cell, threatened with rape and with being transferred to another country where he could be raped, and, on one particular occasion, when he had been left short-shackled in a painful position until he urinated on himself

---

quote:

---

Military police poured pine oil on the floor and on me, and then, with me lying on my stomach and my hands and feet cuffed together behind me, the military police dragged me back and forth through the mixture of urine and pine oil on the floor. Later, I was put back in my cell, without being allowed a shower or a change of clothes. I was not given a change of clothes for two days. They did this to me again a few weeks later.

---

quote:

---

It would have remarkable had this not happened, as countless witnesses including soldiers as well as current and former Guantnamo prisoners have described the brutality at Bagram at the time Khadr was held there between August and October 2002, which led, just over a month after Khadr’s departure for Guantnamo, to the murder of two prisoners and, very possibly, to other murders at the time he was held.

---

quote:

---

. . . the Obama administration has decided to press ahead with Khadr’s trial, . . .

---

The Torture of Omar Khadr, a Child in Bagram and Guantnamo | Andy Worthington Since america has "dirty hands" of destroying torture video-tape evidence, I'm INCLINED to believe the affidavits. What about you?

Right...So we know that torture has occurred. But the tapes were destroyed. So...We do not know whether Omar Khadr was tortured. Therefore we do not know whether any "child torture" actually occurred. It is a possibility, but we have no evidence beyond the knowledge that some unknown individuals were tortured an unknown number of times in unknown ways at unknown times and unknown locations, and Khadr may or may not have been one of those subjected.But beyond that, Kadr was no longer a child by the time Obama took office. It is therefore impossible for Obama to bear responsibility for torturing Khadr as a child, whether he was tortured or not. If Khadr was tortured between the ages of 15 and 18, then only the Bush Administration can possibly bear responsibility.It would seem, dronester, that while you and I would agree wholeheartedly that torture is repugnant and there is no excuse or reason for its use, ever, and particularly on a minor, if child torture has actually occurred under the Obama Administration, that fact is not known to you. Unless you have additional evidence you have not yet shared, in which case I would very much like to see it.

Yeah america always sends prisoners to Egypt, Syria, Jordan or Israel when america wants the prisoner to be merely "renditioned".
Sooo lame.

quote:

---

Khadr stated that he was short-shackled in painful positions and left for up to ten hours in a freezing cold cell, threatened with rape and with being transferred to another country where he could be raped, and, on one particular occasion, when he had been left short-shackled in a painful position until he urinated on himself

---

This would have been more effectively posted earlier, rather than using an admission of detroyed video tape with contents unknown excepting that the purpose of their destruction was to avoid possible torture prosecutions.Stress positions are in fact a method of torture. They can lead to permanent joint damage and even death, and they are excruciatingly painful. Other events reported in your quoted affidavits involve humiliation, which is also a form of torture.Both stress positions and humiliation are used frequently in American prisons on American citizens who are not terrorists, which to me qualifies the United States as a very serious human rights offender state, but the Federal Executive branch has little control over that excepting the ability to make it a political issue.But again - Khadr was only a child during the Bush Adminsitration. Obama cannot be guilty of sponsoring child torture in the case of this individual, because he was not a child by the time Obama took office, and because the dates from your own source are years prior to Obama's election.I would like to know whether torture has actually continued under Obama. Administration statements have indicated that the practice has supposedly stopped, and I'm aware of no further allegations of torture of the sort we saw during the Bush Administration, but I have no evidence beyond an assertion and a lack of mildly expected evidence that would be somewhat improbable to be made public anyway.

There are affidavits from those who say he was not tortured, that he was lying, as well as his assertions.Also, the Under 18 provision simply says that those under 18 should be given special protection, a vague and undefined stipulation.In the quotes you present are not what I'd consider torture with the possible exception of the dragging incident and there is no evidence that happened.Further, it is irrelevant whether or not someone was tortured whether the government should be proceeding with the trial .

Err, the tapes were from another torture incident. There are sooo many torture incidents, it is hard to keep track of.But you are correct, I cannot know 100% that torture has taken place in this specific incident. I can only weigh the supporting evidence:1. affidavits
2. witness testimony
3. dirty hands of america
4. the OBAMA administration has decided to press ahead with Khadr’s trial

You've provided no evidence that these are the renditions which Obama has continued.I'm not understanding the purpose of these arguments, Dronester. Why is it so important for you to fabricate and misrepresent "evidence" that Obama is torturing children? Obviously a conservative would lie about the Obama record to get a low-information observer to vote for the Republican candidate.But you know that, unlike Obama the Republican candidate really will torture children. Romney, as you'll recall, wants to "double Gitmo", whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.What's the point of all this, Dronester?

As an aside - you clearly have never experienced being bound in a stress position. Give me a day or two and some rope and even I could break damned near anyone who hasn't had military torture-survival training. Stress-position bondage is absolutely torture when prolonged beyond a few minutes to an hour.

This is irrelevant to your assertion, which was that Obama supported child torture.This case, even if you absolutely prove that torture occurred every single day that he has been detained, would still not qualify Obama as a child torturer, because the victim in question was an adult before Obama was elected President.Obama may or may not be guilty of perpetuating torture as an accepted practice in general, which would certainly be bad enough, but we have no additional facts (at least that you've presented) that qualify as convincing evidence of such a policy. The fact that accusations did arise from the Bush Administration but have not continued under Obama suggests that either the Obama Administration has significantly increased security (either indefinite secret detention with no communication so nobody finds out, or simply killing the detainees), or the torture policies have been discontinued.

What's the point of the following? Did you concede that Obama's america tortures children or not?

Thanks for the replies Rahvin.(Just some extra info: Khadr isn't some rare example. In 2003, at least 22 juveniles were held at Guantnamo. Age of the youngest prisoner at Guantanomo Bay; 13. Age of youngest prisoner to commit suicide at Guantanamo Bay; captured at 16, died at 21.) I think it is relevant because:1. Obama, not Bush Jr. pressed ahead with the trial, by MILITARY COMMISSION, of Omar Khadr.2. It concerns the charges against Khadr. One side should not be able to unilaterally label the suspect as a terrorist. Thusly, military commissions are fundamentally flawed. Yet Obama (a constitutional law professor?) still champions this cause.3. However, Khadre's case is not the type of case Obama would want to proudly hang as good evidence from torture and military trials. It is claimed that the embarrassed Obama administration was actively seeking a plea agreement to make the case less visible."President Obama has failed to make good on his own promises to close Guantanamo Bay or to fix the unfair military commission system. Powerful interests, including some in the Pentagon, are gung-ho on obtaining whatever convictions they possibly can — even if it’s just a wrongly accused child soldier. To date, President Obama has lacked the courage and leadership to stop them."zcommunications.org - zcommunications Resources and Information.Yes, again, I concede that this does not PROVE 100% that Obama directly supports child torture. But c'mon! Obama has been TIGHTLY in lock-step with Bush Jr.. The evidence is well beyond a shadow of a doubt. Even Crashfrog conceded it.1. In feb 2010, to defend a lawsuit brought by several men subjected to "extraordinary rendition" and torture, Obama invoked Bush Jr's ol' "state secrets doctrine".2. The ARBITRARY detention and torture of prisoners, and the complete lack of accountability for the crimes committed by the previous administration acknowledge the failure of the Obama administration to live up to their human rights obligations.3. Despite President Obama’s pledge to close Gauntonimo Bay, there is no indication from authorities or Congress that they will ever do so. Instead, Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which included an amendment that authorized indefinite detention. Obama added a signing statement that his administration would not apply the detention language to U.S. citizens. But what about future Presidents? Instead of signing the NDAA, Obama should have vetoed the bill and reexamined the original AUMF for its serious breach of civil liberties.4. Obama didn't want american soldiers to leave Iraq. He wanted to change Bush Jr's agreement and have the soldiers stay while having complete immunity from crimes they commit. Crimes like rape, torture, murder. Please read the atrocities of Haditha and Fallujah. Does this sound like a person who is against mere child torture?5. Under Obama, in Afghanistan, U.S.-led special forces often kill schoolchildren in night time raids.6. Obama, the president, took an oath to uphold the constitution and its laws. Obama becomes responsible for Bush Jr.'s crimes if Obama allows the perpetrators to walk free. When Obama was a senator, he did not join Kucinich in the 35 articles of impeachment against Bush Jr.. Thus, by omission and/or dereliction of duties, Obama DID support Bush Jr's torture of children.Am I to believe a person who stepped up the use of drone attacks which have killed wedding parties in the past and continues to kill innocent civilians somehow simultaneously cares about children?

Now you are just being silly and facetious.I never expected Obama to be a Messiah. What I naively thought was that Obama would be a politician who would shape the political agenda rather than be continually thwarted by it.Honestly - Are you happy with the Guantanamo situation, the healthcare bill, the extension of the Bush tax cuts, the position of Iraq etc. etc. etc....?Is this what you hoped for when Obama got the presidency?Can you honestly not see why people might be disappointed? Do you honestly think that any disappointment is a problem of their own making rather than anything at all to do with what the Obama presidency has actually delivered?Ultimately the proof is in the pudding - If Obama's last campaign was as down to Earth and pragmatic as you say it was the we should all expect a repeat of it this year.Personally I expect a lot less of the "Yes we can" principled idealism and a lot more "But it would be even worse under the other lot" type arguments.....But I guess we'll see.

And he has been. From day one Obama's been driving the agenda. Lily Ledbetter. The stimulus. Health care reform. That was all on Obama's schedule. It's just that the one thing he can't do is unilaterally pass legislation without the support of 60 Senators in Congress. So, unsurprisingly, enacting Obama's domestic agenda means compromising with the varied and conflicting interests in the Senate.Of all the criticisms, this one seems the most absurd. Absolutely Obama's been the one shaping the political agenda. How on Earth can you say he's not? Am I happy that Obama issued an executive order to close Guantanamo Bay? Absolutely I am. Am I happy with the Affordable Care Act? Thanks to that, millions now have health coverage who didn't, before; millions, like my sister, are no longer one "pre-existing condition" away from being locked out of treatment, forever. Insurance companies have a statutory requirement to spend 80% or more of their revenue on treatment. Am I happy with the extension of the Bush tax cuts? Absolutely I am, because that was part of a package deal that, for every dollar in tax cuts on the rich, got us three dollars in unemployment benefits and tax credits for college students and working people. Am I happy that we're pulling out of Iraq on a timetable that can't be used against the President, because it was Bush's plan all along? Absolutely - Iraq was a mess that Bush tried to pass off to the next guy, and Obama turned that shit around like judo.What, exactly, am I supposed to be disappointed about? Republicans enjoy structural advantages in every turn - in the rules of the Senate, in media coverage, in the difference between the conservative agenda of inaction and the fact that the progressive agenda requires doing something. What am I supposed to find disappointing about a President who keeps outfoxing Republicans at every turn and keeps delivering the most progressive domestic policy of any Democratic president in my lifetime?Even when he's losing, he's winning. You think the Republican primary and the rise of Romney is just a matter of chance? That Obama just lucked out?The Republicans had great guys they could have run. Chris Christie. Bobby Jindal. Mitch Daniels. Women, too - Haley Barbour, even Sarah Palin, maybe - terrible president, but she has an enduring base of support (ugh) that might have made her a formidable general opponent.And each time Republicans were nominating their New Jesus, they got up to fail. Bobby Jindal mocked "volcano monitoring" in a State of the Union response a week before a fucking volcano caused a billion dollars worth of disruption to the nation's air travel. Don't hear much about him, anymore. All the Republicans with any goddamn sense are staying home this year, and the only people in the primary are the suckers too desperate for their last shot at the office that they've got nothing to lose by getting the loser's stink all over their name (like Bob Dole.) Obama's gonna sail to re-election and the next job Romney's gonna have is hawking boner pills. All because Obama has the incredible sense to get out of the way when his opponents are determined to knock themselves out.So, yeah, I absolutely don't understand the disappointment. Maybe I understand yours, that electing Obama didn't rehabilitate the entire nation of the United States of America, but we've always been huge fucking idiots and it's going to take more than one Chocolate Jesus to fix that. We're still the same dumbasses who elected Bush, Straggler, and maybe if you keep that in mind more often, you can avoid some disappointment.

Three times.