Obama to Reverse Himself on Detainee Tribunals

Today, President Barack Obama is expected to announce that he will reinstate the military tribunals he not only previously shut down, but also vehemently argued against as both a senator and presidential candidate. From what I hear, the conditions for reinstatement include the exclusion of hearsay evidence, as well as any evidence or statements garnered through enhanced interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, face-slapping, or enjoying the latest Metallica album.

If Obama has looked to irritate those on both sides of the political spectrum, I think he’s done so here. Those on the far left want the president to ensure that the detainees are released, given a latte, and escorted to a speed-dating event at the nearest neighborhood Applebees. Those on the right, like myself, want no such exclusions for hearsay evidence or statements obtained through–God forbid–the harsh interrogation of sworn enemies of the United States and western civilization.

After all, weren’t the tribunals set up as a way to adjudicate these cases without providing the rights enjoyed by the American citizens these detainees want to vaporize? Now, we’re suddenly concerned about the veracity of out-of-court statements from fellow terrorists and cave-dwellers used in court to prove whether the detainee is a terrorist? Give me a break.

These people are jailed for a reason. These aren’t teenagers plucked from their idyllic daily lives by American troops because they failed to deliver a goat cheese pizza within the promised 30 minutes — these are people who have injured, killed or threatened to injure or kill our fighting men and women who make enough of a sacrifice by being on the front lines in the first place, not to mention dodging grenades lobbed at them by soldiers of Allah.



  1. Laurie says:

    Jeff….I just don’t understand what it is about this that the left does not get. These guys did not wear a badge from ANY country and in their country the killed innocents without a second thought. Are not the laws in place against torture to include Military war prisoners…these guys cannot even go back to their home country for fear of facing payback from the families they tortured and killed. Where is the justice…I am so frustrated that the left can’t (or maybe does not want to) see that this is not torture and is not against the law (in my eyes). What a joke this government has become.

  2. Gail B says:

    Oh, to be a fly on the wall when such decisions are discussed and made! It surely would make second-guessing the Great Impostor easier!

    However, I’d rather see them in some sort of military tribunal than summarily brought to the United States under HIS watch–with Napolitano in charge of Homeland Security!

    I see your point, Jeff, and I totally agree with you. Thanks for the update.

  3. Anonymous says:


    Thanks for your comments. I believe this trial and release of people who have participated in terrorist actions was a bad idea from the start. What is even worse once you release them, no country wants to have them and for a great reason. They do not want them to go back to the creation of terrorist cells in their countries.

    I believe the evidence on the return rate of these detainees to their terrorist trade is high. I think Obama and his administration are either sick and insane or intend to create havoc in this country. OK maybe I can add one more, stupid.

  4. Gail B says:

    Your comment in reply to an observation on another story has sparked an interest in you.

    I remember that you said English is your THIRD language, too.

    An article by you on your perception of the upcoming elections, the fate of the nation insofar as the possible swing back to conservatism, etc. and the fate of America, even the possibility of Obama/Soetoro’s being exposed for the impostor that he is, would be quite an interesting read.

    Would you consider writing one; and Jeff, would you consider publishing it?

  5. BUT I THOUGHT YOU SAID.... says:

    I need some Dramamine, this president has got me spinning with all his reversals.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I can’t tell if this is evidence that Obama was willing to say anything to get elected, or if it is evidence of his ineptness. Maybe a little of both?


  7. C'MON BACK says:

    This president needs one of those reverse alarms imbedded on his keester; like on the back of a garbage truck … BEEP BEEP BEEP …. he backtracks so much.


    Must SUCK to be George Soros right now….. all the money in the world and this inexperienced community organizer is floundering.

  9. Rix says:

    Gail B,

    No doubt, I am flattered by your interest in my views. However, they tend to be a wee gloomy, and I’m sure that it’s not the spirit Jeff wants his blog to convey. And honestly, I couldn’t hold a candle to the people writing here.


  10. Gail B says:

    I was afraid you would say something like that. But, Jeff does have brilliance in his corner that matches his own in writing skills.

    Thanks, Rix. Maybe Pelosi has helped the conservative sector regarding the upcoming elections!

    And maybe Pelosi will have to stay home with her rats! (I’m sorry, Jeff, but I still haven’t recovered from the shock of rats getting our tax dollars!)

  11. Gail B says:

    One point in your story troubles me:

    “From what I hear, the conditions for reinstatement include the exclusion of hearsay evidence, as well as any evidence or statements garnered through enhanced interrogation techniques such as….”

    When did Obama become a member of the Justice Department? I was under the impression that the JD determined what was admissible and what wasn’t.


Speak Your Mind