So everyone wants to close down our terrorist prison operation on Guantanamo in Cuba.
I say “why the heck not”?
After all it has not helped matters much. I mean why imprison suspects if you can’t charge them and detain them?
Why arrest people who you are simply going to set free so that they can continue to plot, plan and participate in the mass murders of us.
And besides, there is not a neighborhood in America that wouldn’t welcome a terrorist prison camp in its midst. Right? Who cares about the fact that more than 30 freed Guantanamo detainess have been either killed or recaptured after taking arms against allied forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan after being released from Guantanamo.
According to Commander Jeffrey Gordon, while in custody, detainees falsely claimed to be farmers, truck drivers, cooks, small-arms merchants, low-level combatants or had offered other false explanations for being in Afghanistan.
He added "We are aware of dozens of cases where they have returned to militant activities, participated in anti-US propaganda or engaged in other activities". So why hold prisoners in Guantanamo Bay?
Detaining prisoners of war only helps to become fodder for the left.
Last year, much of the presidential race centered around hypothetical abuses of the rights of enemy combatants. Liberals tried to use these prisoners of war as tools which they used to paint Republicans as insensitive goons with.
So politics being the game that it is, forced the release of many of these Guantanamo Bay enemy combatants.
In some cases their arrests only helped to further the careers of these combatants.
Former inmates Abu al-Hareth Muhammad al-Oufi and Abu Sufyan al-Azdi al-Shahri, known previously to us as prisoners number 333 and 372, respectively, recently surfaced in a new Al-Qaeda video. You know, the jihadist version of the Girls Gone Wild videos we see so much of.
In that video, former U.S. prisoner number 372, Abu Sufyan al-Azdi al-Shahri said "By Allah, imprisonment only increased our persistence in our principles for which we went out, did jihad for, and were imprisoned for".
In that same video it also became clear that al-Shihri was promoted for the time he sacrificed at Guantanamo. Now he is a senior member of Al-Quaeda’s leadership.
Doesn’t that make you feel good?
It is nice to know that there exists a new government program to help disadvantaged terrorists further their career goals.
While we are closing down prisoner of war facilities and making it clear that we want to be friends with everyone, the Islamic extremists are continuing to arm themselves and plan strikes against us. And while they are doing that, what are we doing?
We are making it easier for them to do it.
According to the Defense department 61 of 520 former Guantanamo detainees have returned to the field of battle.
What I want to know is how will we be better off when we discover that any one of those 61 former detainees were responsible for a suicide bomb that went off in Isreal and killed school children, or blew a hole in the side of an American passenger cruise ship or an airliner or the Empire State Building?
This sense of renewed optimism that many perceive under the new administration is a wonderful thing but is there really anything to be optimistic about when we are extending a hand of friendship in the spirit of unity while at the same time we are getting slapped in the face in the war on terror.
|
|
| 
|
|
web are fighting a war on terror anyone against us is guilty ... so yea
well at least we agree on the principle of getting these people tried at least- as far as gitmo- i go back and forth on it. for the record Brownback is out there to me as well-lol++++++++++ on a side not if MM was really using us for class i am pretty sure he would have to get permission. any kind of case study that I ever did I had to get waivers from people even if there names were not being used.
That would be the smart thing KT but I saw Brownback on tv saying Leavenworth didn't have the space if they were leaning toward military or federal pens. Either way, we need to either try them or let them go. I don't agree with closing Gitmo but I can agree that we can't imprison and hold someone indefinitley without trying them.
That's funny, MM spells my name incorrectly the exact same way you did. You must be twins.
well even i can admit that Murtha is a bit out there. i read it was going to be pendleton, levinworth and the one in south carolina.
sorry to dissapoint you smashy I am not MM although after his grades in psych I decided to watch the site and find out what he was talking about
I hope so KT but as far as I understand they have no plan yet on what to do with them. Except for Murtha, he wants them in his district. :)
The Founding Fathers wouldn't have stood for gitmo in the first place.
Read
this,
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1217-30
.htm
I love the sarcasm within Kemp's posts. I rarely, if ever, agree with him on a lot of things, BUT damn if he is not funny.
I think some of you are misinformed - from what i understand is that they will be brought into military brigs, not your average federal or state prison so they are not entitled to things like miranda rights. they will be tried under military law which is different from our civilian justice system.
Good afternoon MM.
See Geniva Convention as pertains to un uniformed personel. See terriost laws, See spy laws.
they are lucky to be alive.
We will spend hundred of thousands of US taxpayer $ to set them free to kill us never fear Obamas here
Bringing them onto US soil gives them the right to our criminal justice system. The main issue with this is they will be given the rights of everyday criminals. Most of these individuals were captured on the battlefield by US soldiers. Because of that they were not read Miranda rights as is required by US law. By treating them like US criminals and bringing them into our criminal justice system, we effectivley release them all on that technicality. I agree we need to speed up the process and either try them or let them go but binging them here into our system sets them free regardless. The only way we can prosecute the guilty is to set up a new court to try the so called 'enemy combatants'.
If all of them are guilty, then why the apparent fear of giving them fair trials? Doesn't seem like much to ask for, right?
Also in our history we have imprisoned people with out due cause. so i am a bit skeptical when we start rounding people up into camps.
So you are saying every single one of those people is guilty. I find that to be statistically impossible.
They don't imprison people for no reason they have a reason to be there and sending them to the main land s retarded and another reason Obama needs to get his head examined.
If it can be proven that every person detained was guilty then so be it, but detaining innocent people does not justify the actions this government took. Also the detainees will be moved to places like camp pendelton and other military bases.
Kempite, what war? There was never an official declaration of war.
The terrorists won when the Patriot Act was passed. The best way to combat terrorism is to go about your business.
|
<< Home