vendredi 29 avril 2011

From Guantánamo to Benghazi: Obama's fuzzy policy

Avertissement : pour l'essentiel, ce document ne contient que des passages en anglais. Et soit dit entre nous, ce n'est pas de la mauvaise volonté mais je n'ai franchement pas trop de temps en ce moment, donc, j'invite les francophones et les non-anglophones à faire usage d'un traducteur en ligne. Ce n'est pas parfait, mais ça aide [on sélectionne quelques paragraphes à la souris, puis l'on copie (touches 'ctrl' puis 'C'), on colle ('ctrl' - V) et la traduction se fait toute seule, ou presque.]

Barack Obama, Anno dazumal! 

This German phrase should mean: B.O., long, very long ago!, or: B.O...., how time flies!

Remember: not so long ago...



À propos, can "the divine surprise" lose the coming election? 

Yes, he can! 

The reason?

For having disappointed his most ardent supporters!

Do you think that Black America, Latin America, Poor America, Middle Class America..., and especially the American Youth will trust him again?

Remember Guantánamo!

Council on foreign relations

The Candidates on Military Tribunals and Guantánamo Bay

The Democratic candidates have called for Guantanamo’s closure, saying the camp violates civil liberties and the Geneva Conventions. The Republican candidates have, with a few exceptions, reasserted their support for the activities at Guantanamo as legitimate for the country’s counterterrorism struggle. The 2006 Military Commissions Act divided the presidential contenders down party lines. That legislation, which passed, allows prosecution of Guantánamo prisoners in a military court, and abolishes habeas corpus for “enemy combatants.” The Democratic candidates in Congress voted across the board against the act, while nearly all of the Republican candidates serving in Congress voted to pass it. Meanwhile, the Bush administration has been steadily reducing the number of detainees and has been seeking to return dozens of cleared prisoners to their countries of origin. It has also considered closing Guantanamo and moving the prisoners to other detention centers.

Announcing the closure of the controversial detention facility would be among the most potent signals the incoming administration could send of its sharp break with the Bush era, according to the advisers, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak for the president-elect. They believe the move would create a global wave of diplomatic and popular goodwill that could accelerate the transfer of some detainees to other countries. But the advisers, as well as outside national security and legal experts, said the new administration will face a thicket of legal, diplomatic, political and logistical challenges to closing the prison and prosecuting the most serious offenders in the United States - an effort that could take many months or longer. Among the thorniest issues will be how to build effective cases without using evidence obtained by torture, an issue that attorneys for the detainees will almost certainly seek to exploit.
Although as a candidate Obama publicly expressed his desire to close the detention facility, his transition team stressed this week that the president-elect has not assembled his national security and legal team and that no decisions have been made "about where and how to try the detainees," Denis McDonough, an Obama foreign policy adviser, said in a statement issued Monday.
The incoming administration will also have to prepare military or federal prisons where it plans to hold those it intends to prosecute and must assuage state and local concerns about housing the detainees. The Obama administration is also likely to use its diplomatic leverage to seek guarantees that some transferred detainees will be closely monitored, commitments that the Bush administration has found wanting in the case of countries such as Yemen. Approximately 100 Yemeni prisoners remain at Guantanamo Bay. Human rights advocates and some advisers expect the new administration to outlaw torture and enhanced interrogation techniques, detain people seized on the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan under the traditional laws of war, and insist on criminal prosecution against terrorism suspects seized elsewhere.

Le président américain revient sur ses engagements et autorise la reprise des procès. Il n’y avait pas de meilleur critique du système de Guantánamo que Barack Obama. "Notre système judiciaire ne peut pas être basé sur la décision d’un seul homme", disait-il il y a quelques mois, en promettant notamment de mettre fin à la détention sans jugement mise en place par George Bush. Or, le président démocrate n’est pas seulement revenu sur son engagement de fermer la base militaire. Lundi soir, il annonçait la reprise des procès militaires d’exception, interrompus depuis deux ans. Le triomphe du "pragmatisme". Barack Obama reste déterminé à fermer Guantanamo. Il reste convaincu que la justice ordinaire des Etats-Unis est "un élément clé» pour juger les terroristes «de manière cohérente avec notre sécurité et nos valeurs". Il n’en reste pas moins que, en renouant avec le principe des commissions militaires pour des dizaines de détenus et en relançant la procédure de détention sans jugement pour une quarantaine d’autres, le président américain finit de faire une croix sur l’essentiel de ses engagements à propos de Guantánamo.

Guantánamo: Obama's final climb down

U.S. President goes back on his commitments and allows the resumption of trials.
There was no better criticism of the Guantánamo's system than Barack Obama. "Our judicial system cannot be based on the decision of one man," he said a few months ago, promising in particular to end the detentions without trials set up by George Bush. But the Democratic president not only went back on his promise to close the military base. Monday night, he announced the resumption of emergency military trials, that had been suspended for two years. The triumph of "pragmatism". Barack Obama remains committed to closing Guantanamo. He remains convinced that the ordinary courts of the United States are a "key element" to judge terrorists "consistently with our security and our values.".
Nevertheless, reestablishing the principle of military commissions for dozens of inmates, and restarting the procedure for detention without any trial for about forty others, the U.S. president finally gave up his main commitments about Guantánamo.

And now Benghazi!

McCain wants Obama to recognize Libyan rebel council

Senator Mc Cain

"We discussed the question of U.S. recognition and the question of U.S. help to the alliance in protecting civilians who are subjected to a true humanitarian tragedy," Jalil told the Qatar-based Al Jazeera television, monitored in Cairo. McCain, the top Republican on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, also said he was worried the battle between Gaddafi's troops and rebel forces was reaching a stalemate that could "open the door to radical Islamic fundamentalism." He said NATO should intensify its air campaign, particularly in the besieged city of Misrata, the largest rebel bastion in western Libya. "It is still incredibly puzzling to me that the two most accurate close air support weapons systems, the A-10 and the AC-130, have been taken out of the fight," he said.

Hey, let me ask a question, er...; no, two, er..., no, three questions :

1. "John Mac Cain wants Obama to recognize Libyan rebel council...", including Al Qaeda members actually present in Eastern Libya, according to Wikileaks?

2. State Secr. Hillary Clinton should have apparently disappeared from the surface of the Earth. Can anybody tell us where is Ms Clinton presently? I wonder why it is Senator Mac Cain who visited the new friends of Barack Obama in Eastern Libya, instead of Ms Clinton! 

3. Is it true that the American Republicans are presently urging Obama's government to budget cuts in Washington, according to this?...

But this time Republicans are holding us all hostage to their demands, saying, “We’ll shut down the government if you don’t agree to big, big changes” that are made outside of the normal budget process. They want dramatic cuts in the things We, the People (government) do for each other, such as investment in infrastructure, unemployment benefits, research, disease control, transportation programs, etc. They are even cutting the Social Security Administration -- the people who get you on the list when you are 65 and send out the checks! They are demanding that no compromises be made, they want the government gutted or shutted.

... And this:... 

"How can Democrats have an honest discussion and work toward a compromise when the other side is not so secretly hoping for a government shutdown because of their uncompromising, extremist views. Democrats widely support working toward a compromise while Republicans are strongly opposed to any kind of deal that doesn't allow them everything they want. They are like the kid on the playground who threatens to take the football home if he doesn't get to play the position he wants."

How funny are some comments on the Internet!


À propos : sharing water with neighbours...

Source : Webistan