Guantanamo: A ‘False Choice Between Our Safety and Our Ideals’?
The newspapers bring to us news that Obama has ordered the shutdown of Guantanamo within a year:
Obama said that by ordering the shutdown of the Cuban prison within a year, he hoped to send a message that the U.S. would pursue the struggle against violence and terrorism vigilantly, effectively and “in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals.”
He said his administration would not “continue with a false choice between our safety and our ideals,” an express slap at policies pursued by his predecessor, former President George W. Bush.
“It is precisely our ideals which give us the strength and moral high ground to deal with the unthinking violence that we see emanating from terrorism organizations around the world,” Obama said.
I suggest that this is a strange combination of hubris (he can find a way out of this Gordian knot that no one before him could) and fatuity (the notion that there exists some sort of international goodwill which can be tapped to help us repatriate the prisoners and see that they are imprisoned humanely on the soil of their native lands). Then there’s the idea that illegal combatants can either be released before the end of hostilities or tried as criminals in our courts.
But for the moment I’ll desist from my skepticism and note the difficulty of what he says he’s undertaken and offer the hope that this plan will work.
The facility at Guantanamo has been a rallying cry for every anti-American and anti-Bush sentiment since its creation. The inimitable Mark Steyn punctured the ludicrous tales of sweltering heat, torture, and Koran desecration to all but the most obdurate denier of reality. Still, we have about 250 detainees who remain there and — however wrongly it was reached — the perception that there is some manifest unfairness in holding men caught on the battlefield in irregular fighting groups and warehousing them in Guantanamo until the end of hostilities.
Thursday’s announcement –though it has a long deadline — may assuage the feelings of those who hold these views. (The media certainly seems willing to give him the time he needs, switching gears to remind us that closing the prison creates difficult problems and cannot be done overnight.)
It may be that the enemy has been so crushed by the surge and our anti-terrorism efforts elsewhere that closing Guantanamo and “sending enemy combatants to a facility where they will immediately be able to lawyer up” will have no effect on our security. And the administration could then dream up some criminal trial proceeding which would authorize trying the accused without eyewitnesses or the turning over of any classified exculpatory evidence in the prosecution’s possession.
“I’ll take a wait and see attitude toward all this, but just as I am unwilling to prejudge this move by Obama as a failed bit of fluff, I am unwilling to agree that it is a solution before I actually see one.”
A sensible approach would be to study the problem and then announce if and how Gitmo could safely be closed. This is not failed fluff but serious anti-Bush politics- something the Democrats excel at. And little else.
But fail it will. One of the 61 already released from Gitmo, by mean George Bush, because he was considered safe, by mean george Bush, is now third in line to the Al Qaeda throne.
If they have jury trial the jurors will be wearing balaclavas to protect themselves and their families.Witnesses will disappear. All it would take for KSM to get an acquittal is one Islamist on the jury. Good grief.
Detaining terrorists without trial until the war ends offends our vaunted values. Ripping fetae from wombs, not so much.
I apologize if I said anythig that offended Muhammed (PBUH ) or Allah.
Clarice, I share your fears, and even more than you, since I live in Israel, and Barack Obama’s policy of cozying up to Moslems and his dismantling of all the effective and serious anti terror policies actually puts my life and my families life at risk.
Yes, I know that American lives will be at risk too, due to Obama’s juvenile and shallow understanding of Islamic terror, but at least you Americans voted for this inexperienced Left wing socialist, the rest of the world did not.
Hold the president to his word?????
He’s the president now. He has the Senate and Congress behind him. He has the media behind him.
Who is going to hold him to what? Us? The stupid citizens? The Constitution which he’s already said needs reform? A bunch of suck-up Republicans trying to elbow their way to the trough?
Thanks for the first laugh of my day.
Have the detainees over for a slumber party at Murtha’s house while they await their trials. When John opens the fridge to offer them bologna or the left-over porkchops, do a bed check the next morning and see if he’s still alive.
Send each back to their respective homes accompanied by an ACLU lawyer. I see a twofer here.
Letters of release packed with mysterious white powder?
For a highly “lawyered up” administration the Democrats seem unable to grasp a simple concept. These detainees at Guantanamo are “Unlawful Combatants” that Obama has given the status of Prisoners of War. By removing the incentive for enemies to engage in lawful combat in accord with the constraints of the Geneva Convention he has significantly increased the probability of future lawlessness and barbarity.
We’ll be talking about the closing of Gitmo at 5 PM New York time today on News Talk Online on Paltalk.com.
Please go to http://www.garybaumgarten.com and click on the Enter Chat Room button to participate.
Thanks,
Gary
Should I point out the obvious – we released 61 people, who all went back to commit more terrorist violence, i.e. We did not convince them to stop, we merely hardened their resolve. Many of them were questionable as to their devotion to their ’cause’ but after being locked up for six years with no trial, and subjected to water-boarding and other tortures whether innocent or guilty, they definitely weren’t our friends.
The last I heard Islam was still as valid a religion as Judaism, and no more prone to terrorist acts than oh, say Christians (bombing a country on a pretext, because they ‘might’ do something with WMD they didn’t have – as President Bush stated in his farewell remarks…or going back longer to witch hunts, Catholic/Protestant massacres in England, the Crusades) so Islam/Muslim are not synonymous with terrorist and more the Irish Catholic was when the Irish Protestants were just as bad.
Our ‘vaunted values’ like liberty, justice, rule of law, democracy, had done a pretty good job of setting an example to the world. Did we believe in them…not so much, because when they became inconvenient we tossed them aside.
Or don’t you believe in them, Terry, or are they only for the special ‘chosen’ ones who have the right by dint of what…God-given blessings?
President Obama didn’t say our Constitution needs reform, but he did say that we need to actually follow it.
Ken, how well are Israeli policies working for you so far? Last I heard they were still raining bombs. Fifty years and no end in sight…the only time there was anything approaching peace were when Carter and Clinton were in office. As soon as the Republicans came in advocation harsher measures it started all over again.
Historians will mark this decision as the first of many made by the neophyte, affirmative action president that led to the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans, the institution of martial law, and eventually the erosion of the rights of American citizens the constitution was actually designed to protect.
5. Vaughn wrote:
Send each back to their respective homes accompanied by an ACLU lawyer. I see a twofer here.
Peter writes: I second that motion!
The good news is this is the first step to the Republicans regaining power. The bad news is Americans are going to die in the process. Obama cannot send them back to their native countries after the beating Bush took for doing just that. No other countries will take them. The only option left is brining them here. After Obama brings them here, the ACLU will get them released onto our soil. It’s only a matter of time before one or more of them commit mass murder of Americans. Shortly there after, the Democrats will be out of power again.
How quick we forget:
Gitmo is a pleasure palace.
Send them back to Iraq,
The Iraqis will treat their Muslim brothers with respect and kindness.
Look: this is not a problem. If there’s any terrorizing/killing to be done, It will happen in urban centers in blue states,infested with the people who voted for the kind of change Obama promised. Let them experience the consequences of their political choices!These cretins need an education in terrorism.
Well if nothing else this will teach our troops not to bother bringing people in for questioning, they can just go ahead and shoot them where they find them!
“President Obama will have to show Americans….”
That phrase shines light on the elephant that has been the room ever since he launched his campaign in the primaries: when has obama EVER had to “show Americans” anything?
He only has to “say to the Americans” and, voila, it is so. I do not intend to (only) be facetious with that comment. When has he actually “showed” anything?
He’s playing a role, always intending to persuade his audience of the moment, desiring their approval, demanding their approval, and behaving with petulance if he doesn’t get it.
I don’t think he carries any personal sense of obligation to “show Americans” anything. He’s like a 1 year old who operates only in the immediate moment, looking for smiles of approval, fussing when they are not there and completely, factually irresponsible and incompetent when it comes to dealing with reality.
There is a serious disconnect in this boy. If there are any adults left in the democrat party, they would do well to recognize how serious it is and show some evidence that THEY do not suffer the same complete disconnect. They’ve used him and his excesses up until now for their own purposes, and that says as much about them as it does about him.
2.KenBesig
58 million of “you Americans” did NOT vote for him.
Don’t group me with the numskulls who voted for bambi.
Take them to their favorite Cuban beach and instruct them, at gunpoint, to begin walking back to Afghanistan.
“…the U.S. would pursue the struggle against violence and terrorism vigilantly, effectively and “in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals…”
With those words our new President once again shows his astounding lack of historical knowledge and an understanding of the issues involved in the detention of AQ detainees. Had he spent his Lincolnesque journey to Washington studying Lincoln’s executive orders instead of his lunch menu he might have a better understanding of how little the Bush administration did to diminish the our Constitutional rights during his tenure in office. He could have also spend a little time studying the wartime restrictions placed upon American’s during the Wilson and Roosevelt administrations during the two world wars. The United States has always made compromises between constitutional values and necessary wartime measures to protect the nation when needed. So let us put the President on notice that he is now responsible for the safety and security of the Nation and if there is another terrorist attack on the United States it is his responsibility since he has now reversed policies that have kept us safe since 9-11.
There is a high degree of hypocrisy in the President’s moralism on the treatment of AQ unlawful combatants. The Bush administration claimed that under customary international law unlawful combatants do not receive the rights given to traditional POWs or private citizens. President Obama claims to be setting policies in keeping with our civil libertarian values yet he will end up detaining people indefinitely without trial. Perhaps he and his legal team should put their money where their mouth is and release KSM since there is no admissible evidence that KSM was ever involved in the 9-11 or any other terrorist plot.
Clarice Feldman should also mention the aspect of race guilt. The prisoners at Guantanamo are overwhelmingly dark skinned. Western liberals are existentially incapable of perceiving them as anything but victims. They supposedly engage in violence because of the vile treatment of the white majority. We, the oppressors of the West, are merely enduring richly deserved “blow-back.”
Directly from the inaug. address:
“..Our security emanates from the justness of our cause.”
Good idea Vaughn!
It is not that Obama or Democrats are simplistic enough to believe what they spout, it is that they are so blind, deaf and dumb on this issue as so many others, that not even if their heads were handed to them on a silver platter by the terrorists would they believe it. It is not naivety on their part, they simply cannot understand the words and/or pictures they can hear and see for themselves. But, more Americans voted for them, even when you remove dead people, illegal aliens and Mickey Mouse. You only have to hear Jz or Pdiddy (sp??) to begin to understand the futility of this time in America.
Throw a White House dinner and dance. Present each Gitmo detainee with a diploma for graduating from Club Gitmo. This is indeed, something to celebrate. The detainees will be so overwhelmed by Barack’s aura and kindness, they’ll convert to Christianity, and beg for citizenship. HAAAAACK!
22.Sue Hey, I’m with you! I don’t know how to spell the names of those Hollywood goofballs either! (and I’m not planning to learn)
Scary times in that these brainless wonders have such a high profile and are considered a credible source of guidance on the part of some voters.
I think the case can be made that Gitmo today has created more terrorist than almost any other action by the US. By all means bring them all to justice, but show the world we are a country of laws.
VALERIE
#9
Gee Val, maybe we should all just join hands and sing a few choruses of Kumbaya together…!
Hurley:
So what do you want to do with KSM? You can’t try him because we have no admissible evidence. The only thing you can do with him is either let him go (the logically consistent thing to do) or hold him indefinitely without trial (the hypocritical thing to do). My guess is that the President will choose the hypocrisy.
If we didn’t use harsh interrogation tactics on him we wouldn’t even have tainted evidence that he was involved in 9-11. Do you think he would have said “you got me chief, I did it”?
The greatest political danger of the one year deadline is that it holds the prospect of unpopular prisoner releases just in time for the next Congressional election cycle.
This holds the possibility of a repeat of 1994, when the last Democratic POTUS lost the House.
Bring them to Texas where U.S. housed german prisoners back in WWII.We all own guns here and know how to use them so we aren’t scared like the rest of the nation. We also have the death penalty and use it quite often .texas values and texas ideals..you kill us and we will gladly kill you back. Under Bush torture and let them go policy doesn’t work they seem to get rather pissed off and go back to jihading… Take prisoners to court give them a lawyer the are found guilty send them to death row…Just like grown ups in a democracy
ROBERT HURLEY
#26
Ditto my Kumbaya comment !!!!
He was released to Saudi Arabia in 2007 and passed through a Saudi rehabilitation program for former jihadists before resurfacing with Al Qaeda in Yemen.
Gee, that rehabilitation program really worked, eh wot ?
Guantánamo detainee resurfaces in terrorist group
Valerie, what you miss is that none of the other religions you referred to have, as an intrinsic part of it’s creed, the oppression and extermination of all other religions. Islam does. These wackos have decided to take arms to achieve that aim. They would happily kill you for something as simple as failing to wear a burka, or having the temerity to address men as if you were an equal.
The reason they found their way to GITMO is that they had already chosen to violate international law and the Geneva Conventions. They weren’t some happy-go-lucky kids out on a camping trip that somehow fell foul of a bunch of Marines, they were captured under arms and fighting as an illegal combatant, they are by every definition of the word war-criminals.
From now on, forego their intelligence value and just kill them all on the battlefield, rather than be forced to unleash these malevolent creatures back into the human population to resume their unrelenting desire for death and destruction.
Valerie, re the last line @9. Do you really beleive that the Israelis would even notice the Palistinians if the Palis would stop sending missles and suicide bombers toward Israeli schools? Really?
I think there are going to have to be some hard choices – The use of torture on some of these terrorists makes it impossible to use any evidence gathered by those means. Which is exactly why you should not use torture. Now some of you would use any illegal means to get information which makes you just like the people we are fighting. Funny how the military and FBI are perfectly OK with using legal means to gather evidence and have testified that they have very effective ways of interrogating prisoners. No one – repeat no one has produced any evidence that the information gathered by torture is better than that gathered by legal means. If you carried your argument to its logical conclusion, we would use torture on any murder suspect. One of the values that makes America great is the adherence to the rule of law.
That’s quite the selective memory Val. Please put your head back in the sand. Had thos Administrations actually “been close to peace” I’m sure Dem’s wouldn’t have relinquished the office starting with Jimmuh Cartuh. Truth is they oversaw nothing more then cease fires (i.e. Gaza’s on again/off again truces) or flat out ignored the problem (i.e Miller’s interview with OBL himself in the 90′s). Democrats have the rep and media enhanced perception of being the “peace makers” but is that the reality? You can only negotiate with a willing partner. I assure you, AQ, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah and the other alphabet soup of terrorist organizations aren’t looking to cut any deals. Liberals thinking like children. Peace at all cost is the mentality of the weak and foolish
When the next terrorist attack occurs–and it will occur–the Democrats will own it. Lock, stock, and barrel. I offer my congratulations to the 60+ million who voted for this administration–you just shot yourselves and the entire country in the foot.
But as all liberals insist, we will reason with our adversaries (they aren’t really enemies you know) and point out the error of their ways–they don’t really want to cut our throats. Hillary can tell them that when she shows up to collect Bill’s next check. Spit!
Nice evasion Mr. Hurley. The FBI chases criminals after the commission of a crime. They have other means of acquiring forensic evidence to connect a person to a crime. The Army Field Manual contains techniques of interrogation of lawful combatants captured in combat. The purpose of the interogation is ascertain unit IDs, enemy tactics, techniques and procedures, battle plans ande other military related information.
The FBI techniques don’t work unless a crime has already been committed and the Army field manual procedures will yield no information from a committed AQ operative. By bestowing superior rights to an unlawful combatant increases the likelihood of terrorism since there is now an advantage to fighting in an irregular manner. Lawful combatants are subject to the law of armed conflict. Giving terrorists superior rights allows them to circumvent the law of armed conflict since it is virtually impossible to gather evidence against an individual in a war zone.
So I repeat what should be done with KSM? Evasion of an answer with boilerplate rhetoric shows once again that you only capable of arguing with talking points.
By the way we stopped multiple terrorist attacks because of the methods applied to KSM.
Good idea: “Take them to their favorite Cuban beach and instruct them, at gunpoint, to begin walking back to Afghanistan.” -Saltherring
We should “accidently” let them escape Gitmo. This would pay Cuba back for the Mariel Boat Lift, and solve our worldwide “image problem”.
jerryofva – Since Bush already screwed up any hope of using the evidence gather by his torture, I am not sure how you handle his case. I somehow doubt he will be free to rejoin his terrorists friends – All this is further proof how stupid the policy of torture was. Let me remind you that we prosecuted Japanese troops during World War II becasue they used torture. Let me ask you – are we a country where the rule of law is paramount?
Obama: If I shutdown Gitmo and just close my eyes the problem goes away. Yippie the terrorists are gone – problem solved
@35. Robert Hurley:
They were war criminals (illegal combatants under international law) when they were captured.
The information derived during their captivity is not germaine to that status. Intel Ops looks for connections; they were not likely extracting “confessions” from these persons but looking to find who they knew, where those persons were, any operation underway or planned and how the terror cell was organized and supplied etc.
Any admissions under duress do not change the original circumstances of their detention. The penalty implied under international law for engaging in combat while wearing civilian clothing extends all the way to execution.
On the other hand the remaining option is to extend to them the dignity (entirely undeserved) of POW status. That way when AQ signs a peace treaty with all of the nations that they have attacked they can be released as per international agreements.
If AQ fails to sign peace agreements will any of the aggrieved parties we would be required, by international law, to hold these persons in detention until such an event occurs as they would still be party to an armed conflict (see what Switzerland did with Axis and Allied airmen that came down on their soil during WW2).
Now, if some of the internees were on US soil when taken into custody, a different set of rules apply. They are then subject to all the protections against self-incrimination afforded by our legal system and should be tried in the US civik court system. If they were working on behalf of a foreign power they should be tried as spies. If not convicted and they are foreign citizens they would still be expelled and returned to their home country.
But remember that US law stops at our borders.
Here is the difference. The Japanese tortured lawful combatants and civilians protected by existing international law. KSM is an unlawful combatant with no rights under the law of armed conflict. Under customary international law he can be summarily shot. When Allied Forces entered Germany beginning in late 1944 troops were confronted by such unlawful combatants and they were stood up against the wall and shot. Are you claiming that these soldiers and the officers who allowed it are war criminals? Unlawful combatants do not have superior rights to lawful combatants. The harsh interrogation tactics used on KSM were no worse then techniques currently used in Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) school used by the US Armed Forces.
The only evidence linking KSM to 9-11 came through the use of harsh interrogation tactics. Without using those methods he would not have talked and thousands of Americans would have died as a result.
#41. Waho, you forgot about singing Kumbyah and holding hands.
I have a great idea on where to put the prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. How about we use some of the stimulus money to renovate Alcatraz? I’m sure Nancy Pelosi would think it was her patriotic duty to have those killers in her district, I’m sure the people of San Francisco would love to welcome anti-American terrorists to their city (especially since they don’t want the US Navy or the ROTC anywhere near the place), and I’m sure Californians wouldn’t mind having these illegal aliens because, this time, the Federal Government would be paying for their housing and health care. What’s not to love?
Since nobody wants them why don’t we ship them to the only place on the planet that doesn’t belong to any country, a perfect place for these “stateless” persons. Antarctica!
Nobody around to bother them. Nobody for them to bother.
None of the sewer-holes they came from have the ability (or desire) to recover them from there.
A dozen or so buildings on the central plain would hold them all and we would only need to drop supplies on a regular basis. Nine hundred miles of frozen wasteland is a better prison than any number of walls or miles of razor wire.
They would be free to consume themselves with hate all day long and there wouldn’t be any Jews, Christians or women with civil rights in sight to anger them.
Why hold trials at all? All members of al-qiada are unlawful combatants: They do not wear uniforms, do not follow the generally accepted laws of war, deliberately target civiians, do not carry weapons openly, etc; – in other words, they are the textbook definition of people who do not follow the Geneva convention.
So, that being the case, why not convene military tribunals to verify that they are unlawful combatants, then build a gallows and hang them like the vermin they are?
Anton:
US laws do not stop at our borders – as any member of the military knows. Even if they did, morality does not stop at our borders
Jerryof va – There is no way to prove that torture was the only way of getting information. Does the end justify the means. As a Christian, I ws taught that the end never jsutifies an immoral means
Robert Hurley repeatedly demonstratea the cluelessnes of the Democrats on this issue. There is zero chance of any of these terorists being convicted in a criminal court.
The choice is to kill them (as authorized by international law) or hold them until they convincingly renounce jihad or the war ends. Tough for them but they should have considered the consequences before taking up arms in suppor of jihad. The job of POTUS is to protect the American people, not the jihadist who want to kill them. The notion that jihad can be appeased is delusional.
Even if there was legally admissible evidence that could be used against them no jury would convict knowing the fate which would await their loved ones at the hands of these fanatics.
This Gitmo closure announcement is nothing but anti-Bush posturing. They don’t have a clue what to do with these people.
There is, however, no point in arguing with Hurley. He thinks we are being attacked because of Gitmo. Who would have known that they have a Gitmo in India, Spain, England, The Philippines, Algeria, Jordan, Canada etc etc etc. Utterly clueless.
Robert Hurley – I agree completely.
Unlawful combatant is a term that has been constructed by the Bush Administration in order to get legal standing for using torture.
From the Times of London
“Missiles fired from suspected US drones killed at least 15 people inside Pakistan today, the first such strikes since Barack Obama became president and a clear sign that the controversial military policy begun by George W Bush has not changed.”
–
In the interest of consistency Robert Hurley issues this statement: “I condemn these kiling ordered by war criminal Barack Obama, who just yesterday gave us great hope that these provocations would stop. I think the case can be made that this action today has created more terrorist than almost any other action by the US. By all means bring them all to justice, but show the world we are a country of laws. This killing people without a trial must stop. Sob.”
If only we had the courage to serve these criminals “legal papers.” The guilty would be in a Supermax or a grave. The innocent would be vindicated. Justice would be served.
Why anyone would prefer a system that ensnares the innocent and lets the guilty go unpunished, I have no idea.
If the ‘unlawful combatants’ are truly men who attacked US troops, then no doubt, they should have a trial, show evidence, and be convicted. The problem is that many people who have been detained are not part of any terrorist group. Abu Graib showed that, they were rounding up any men from 10 to 50. Many are victims of our strategy in Afghanistan to pay bounties for the capture of or information leading to the capture of al-qaeda members. People were being turned over for reasons as simple as some people didn’t want to pay a debt, so they would call their debtor an al-qaeda sympathizer. Once a non-combatant has been termed an ‘unlawful combatant’ the ‘interrogations’ can begin. I don’t think anyone can be innocently locked up and then tortured physically and mentally and not harbor hatred for those who held them captive. If all the detainees were actually combatants then sure, they should be detained, but this is not the case. The original strategies are what needs to be looked at in order to stop the dumb questions that have to be answered later.
sounds like the whiners phil graham was referring too…oh the terrorist are coming..yeah and charles manson is escaping all the time you bunch of ditto heads…as pres obama said he will kill osoma bin laden cause bush didn’t feel that he needed to be and the use of fear is so dramatic and all my heart is bleeding for all you wimps out there
“The problem is that many people who have been detained are not part of any terrorist group”
–
You have no clue. The Bush administration erred on the side of giving these people nevery benefit of the doubt. 61 have returned to the battlefield. Those not released are the worst of the worst.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
No wonder these words stuck in his throat. He’s already in breach – for stupid partisanBush bashing purposes. But this is to be expected. He’s a Democrat. Partisan politics always takes precedence over the interests of the country.
Actually, Former Senator Obama need do nothing of the sort. He has no need to “show the American people” ANYTHING whatsoever. He has a veto-proof Congress, and a national media filled with sycophants; not to mention millions of worshippers. The man COULD rape Condaleeza Rice in the Capitol Rotunda and chances are pretty good that we’d never hear a word about it, or that half the population would even care!
C’mon, Matt. Wake up and smell the coffee. Your BDS is preventing you from seeing what’s right in front of your face. These are ALL men who’ve been captured on the battlefield waging war against us and they wore no uniforms nor did the pretend to represent some country (MOST are Yemenis, captured in Afghanistan, for Pete’s sake!) They are not covered by the Geneva Conventions but even if they were, how many POWs during WW II were given “trials” while in captivity? The only ones were Rickenbacker’s bunch that bombed Tokyo and Yokohama shortly after Pearl Harbor and THEY were uniformed soldiers of the U.S., and the NON-uniformed Nazis that were caught after being smuggled into the east coast from a U-Boat, intent on blowing stuff up and committing other mahem.
We have no obligation to “try” these people…just hold ‘em until the war is over and they can be “repatriated” to their home countries…who, by the way, have refused to take them so far.
So; This guy bombs the Smithsonian Institute and kills seven classrooms of kids on a field day. His name Waheed Yukuk, and claims he did it because his religion says the Smithsonian is sacreligious, and his religion is Qulibism; He is arrested after a long search because he dressed as a business man in New York. He snuck into the U. S. without any paper trace, and has no country of origin;
He should be treated with the accordance of the Geneva Convention? You are patently stupid.
The Geneva Convention ONLYpertains to “Conventional Soldiers”.They wear a recognizable uniform, and other identifying material. And they will affirm that they are a national of a valid country.
Since these “terrorists” do not choose to comply with any provisions of the Geneva Convention, Thus their “Illegal” stature.
The Geneva Convention is outdated, and outmoded in today’s military engagements. Any valid government, (Especially the United States) should contrive a treatise that deals with these “illegal/unlawful combatants”. And any sympathizers should be imprisoned with them.
56. Pappadave:
You got that right; “Not guilty by a jury of his “peers”.
@48. Robert Hurley:
US civil and criminal law stops at our border. The Military Code does not. Only members of our Armed Forces are bound by the code.
Charging someone who is not a citizen and has never been in the US with a crime under any law of the US or it’s subdivisions carries no legal weight. The only extraterritorial laws are all embodied in trade agreements, which cause the legal systems of the participating nations to come into congruence on the specific point covered by those treatries.
We can no more criminally charge them than write Englishmen traffic tickets for driving on the wrong side of the road, or charge a Omani with polygamy. This is the reason for the Geneva Conventions, they establish an internationally approved code of conduct. The residents of the detention facility at GITMO have taken it upon themselves to violate those standards.
There is no law in the US Code that they have broken, and I have checked the Michigan Criminal Code (where I live) and can find no chargable offense. We have no law that says that it is illegal for a Saudi to shoot at US troops while in Afghanistan and dressed as a civilian.
The constant refrain “put them on trial here” doesn’t recognize this legal problem. The only law that applies is the Geneva Conventions, no US court has standing to hear those cases. The Conventions spell out in detail how to proceed, and that is with military tribunals. Let the rule of law go forward and these person will be found guilty and executed for their crimes.
Hurley:
I see that you have given up rational argument and have gone for pure emotion. I do know for certain that the information obtained from KSM by the methods chosen to extract it.
But back to basics. The President is going to have to make decision on how to deal with unlawful combatants. He can either continue the present policy. Go back to the Clinton era rendition policies or release those held because we can’t prosecute them. My guess is that he will chose to continue Bush Adminstration policies including the use of harsh interogation techniques when necessary.
Matt: Please stay out of adult discussions. An unlawful combatant is defined under international law as an irregular soldier not wearing a uniform and having no chain of command leading to an established and recognized civil authority. International law is not a set statutes. It is made up of equal parts custom and treaties. Those who stand outside law of armed conflict are not treated as criminals with a set of rights. Unlawful combatants are literally outside the law and have to rights associated that are associated with a social contract.
“Missiles fired from suspected US drones killed at least 15 people inside Pakistan today, the first such strikes since Barack Obama became president and a clear sign that the controversial military policy begun by George W Bush has not changed.”
–
Theses attacks are most unfair. These guys most liely felt that at worst they would be picked up on the battlefield, sent to a nice climate, fattened up and then released. What kind of values permits the killing of people who were provoked by George Bush to enage in jihadism?
sarcasm off
Jerry – wow – You don’t know the difference between logic and emotion. Obama will return us to the rule of law – as hard as it is for you to understand what that is
The rule of law means that we will abide by our laws and the treaties we have signed like the Geneva Conventions. The prisoners that we can convict will be tried and punished under either military or civilian laws. Those that we can’t will be sent back to countries that will accept them
Robert Hurley:
I think the case can be made that Gitmo today has created more terrorist than almost any other action by the US. By all means bring them all to justice, but show the world we are a country of laws.
Similar to the Leftist idea that the more Nazis you bomb the more Nazis you create…err…no, that’s wrong..The more terrorists you kill and bomb, the more terrorists you create. History confirms that! (As long as you don’t open a history book on warfare).
By the Leftist logic, Muslim Jihadis who torture and kill almost all their captives – real mutilating torture, real head-sawings – would have created waves and waves of anti-Muslim Western, Hindu, Black African, and Thai terrorists and counter-Jihadis.
*************
Hurley – Let me remind you that we prosecuted Japanese troops during World War II becasue they used torture. Let me ask you – are we a country where the rule of law is paramount?
1. The difference between waterboarding, panties on the head, humiliation of being guarded by female soldiers, Bon Jovi music, and too hot or cold cells – and Japanese torture techiques applied in China and against Allies and other conquered Asian populations later in WWII is like night and day. Japanese, or more accurately Chinese water torture, was applied to give a long, excruciating death. Not so waterboarding. Japanese interrogations applied true torture, but not any of the techniques Lefties try asserting make us “the same, and morally equivalent”.
2. And it is infinitely amusing that Lefties, of all people, are screaming about “rule of law” as the paramount American virtue when for most of the existence of the Left, they lionize people who say moral values, security of the oppressed, and ideals ALWAYS matter more than Rule of Law. (as long as they hold defiance of the law is politically correct.
1. Members of the underground railroad, stealing lawful property and violating law? Lefty heroes all.
2. Lincoln violating laws to win a war? A hero.
3. Blacks during Reconstruction up to the 20s violating gun control laws to secure their communities? Heroes.
4. Unions that violated laws during strikes, committed violence to persons and property 1880-1915? Heroes.
5. Various violent anarchists violating US law? Heroes.
6. Massive civil disobedience of the law during prohibition? Citizens of superior conscience to the law.
7. Illegal abortionists and women violating paramount rule of law to get abortions? Incredibly laudable people while they waited on “court-ordered reproductive freedom”.
8. Massive flouting of rule of Jim Crow law, paramount in the land, by civil rights protestors? An age of heroes, to Lefties.
9. 200,000 violators of Draft laws during Vietnam? Heroes.
10. Number of lawbreaking marijuana smokers turned in by Leftists who believe in the rule of law being paramount?
Effectively Zero.
No, for the Left, they love to try and intimidate others into strict obedience to the laws and court decisions they like.
But laws and court decisions they don’t like? Well, then the paramount nature of “rule of law!!” quickly yields to “dissent is patriotic”, “those laws are unconstitutional and we don’t have to follow them”, “we will have our way, by any means necessary, and no immoral or oppressive law will stand in our way”
1.
al Qaida will reciprocate our following the rules of law by using sharper knives for beheadings.
Hurley:
More emotion and not rational thought on your part. If you bothered to read the Geneva Conventions you would find out that they only bind signatory powers. Al Qaeda terrorists and other unlawful combatants are outside the scope of the conventions and other customary rules of international law as pertaining to warfare. Unlike statutory law, where the law breaker has rights and privileges, anybody outside the scope of the law of armed conflict is not entitled to any of its protections.
President Obama has made no real departure from the Bush Administration on the handling of unlawful combatants. We will continue to hold them with out trial. He has not ruled out harsh interrogations in all cases and what you call return them to their country of origin is called rendition. No civilized country will take a KSM or similar high level AQ terrorist except those would execute them.
You apparently gain some emotional satisfaction that Obama will be doing these things instead of Bush. How childish of you. President Obama will not be returning us to the rule of law because President Bush did not depart from the rule of accepted international law as pertaining to unlawful combatants.
If AQ fails to sign peace agreements will any of the aggrieved parties…
It’s integral to Islam that any kind of agreement signed with or made with the infidel would only be done for pragmatic, short term purposes and is non-binding. In other words, meaningless.
(I guess that’s how Iran pursues a nuclear weapon despite being a signatory (1968 !) to the Nonproliferation Treaty and an additional protocol in 2003)
Or how Hamas makes a hudna (suspension of hostilities) which is really just an excuse for a period of time to re-arm.
What’s really galling in all this Guantanamo mess (besides the hypocrisy of Leftists who have been wringing their hands over detainees simply as another means of needling the Bush administration)…what’s really galling is the perfect absurdity brought to us by many hundreds of legalistic minds that put us in a position that, if “tried”, KSM (& others) could get off because he was waterboarded !
This country is perfectly insane. It has more lawyers (reportedly) than all the other countries of the world combined and, apparently, they don’t have enough to do and have brought us into the theater of the absurd.
SEND THEM AND THE ACLU LAWYERS TO DNC HEADQUARTERS IN DC TO DICUSS THEIR CASE.
KSM & others don’t consider themselves subject to anything to do with the Constitution of the US of A, which he has declared to be “evil”.
He (KSM)said he was governed not by US laws, but by religious law, and he read passages from the Koran in Arabic, and then translated them in English.
He doesn’t want any self-righteous, pompous ACLU type defending him in court or to allow some ridiculous display of proof of his deeds when he has already admitted them.
Saddam’s trial(s) (on a laundry list of separate charges) turned into a dog and pony show and were, ultimately, suspended.
For a long time, he has said he wants to be “martyred”.
I say grant him his wish and quit using him & his cronies for some pompous, legalistic display purposes inside the American justice system.
Ensuring that humans get fair trials is an honorable act. This is his goal. Having secret trials is unamerican. Blame ACLU lawyers or liberals or whatever you wish but a fair trial used to be the hallmark of being American.
The worst of our society are the ones that need protection. Who would question that mother Theresea or some other saint should be afforded a fair trial? No one. But the hated, the underdog is where the underdog must be vigilantly protected not because of any affection for him but for loyalty to our system of laws. If they waiver in accordance with whos on trial then they are not laws at all but merely subterfuge and window dressing to executing or incarcerating humans.
These are not the least (or the worst) of our society who need protection. They are foreign enemy combatants picked up in Afghanistan 7 years ago, for whom rising to a burden of proof in an American court of law would be impossible as well as absurd.
It has been determined that the remaining 245 or so detainees still at Guantanamo are the most dangerous.
The machinations on behalf of the detainees are being conducted by legal wonks seeking their own 15 minutes of fame, and, in most extreme terms, an argument can be made that some of these lawyers are themselves dedicated to undermining this country. You cannot risk a trial in the case of, for example, KSM, as these wonks would seek to get his multiple confessions thrown out on grounds he was subjected to waterboarding.
Ramsey Clark was just such a traitorous wonk who got himself named to Saddam Hussein’s legal defense team. Even Saddam eventually dumped him.
For the Robert Hurleys out there:
BO cares ZILCH about the rule of law.
The obvious solution is to send some of them to Crawford and Austin, Texas, some to Cheney’s and have them deal with them. Cheney knows how to shoot. Let them run around their properties and organize a hunting party. Lots of accidents can happen and after a trial, Obama can pardon the accused.
Another solution is to put them all in a cruise ship, which accidentally floods and sinks.
Or, open a new jail in Antartica and have a heating malfunction.
Or . . .
15. Sarah:
“Well if nothing else this will teach our troops not to bother bringing people in for questioning, they can just go ahead and shoot them where they find them!”
How could Cheney miss this one??
AT GITMO, INTERROGATION IS NOT TORTURE
Torture typically involves physical pain and long term if not pernament injury. Using psychological interrogation techniques sometimes resembles what goes on within families!
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/01/interrogating-enemy-combatants.html
I can envision certain countries agreeing to take on their “fair share” of prisoners – and then releasing them in a few months based on technicalities within their own legal systems. Sending these people to “Norway and Sweden and France” would be a very bad idea.
On the other hand, I think the good ol’ American justice bureaucracy is more than capable of keeping many of them in limbo – and therefore in jail – pretty much indefinitely.
Historian: You can tell the truth until you’re blue in the face – but in politics (as in history) the truth doesn’t matter if you can’t make people believe it. The Left has successfully implanted the idea in many minds that “interrogation at Gitmo = torture.” THAT is the reality we have to deal with – not the “real” reality. I’m hoping Obama is dealing with it and not caving in to the ideologues.
Putting these creatures on trial in civilian courts is a very very bad idea. All that is needed for a hung jury or mistrial is to have one libtard with a Ward Churchill mentality or a sympathetic towelhead on the jury.
They could also walk based on the CIA not being willing to share confidential sources or methods of intelligence gathering in open public courts.
Actually, the burden is on us, not Obama, to show why we cannot allow terrorists to take another shot. A majority gave Obama the power to do stupid things, largely because we were unable to make our case of an immenent threat from a clear and present danger to that consensus majority. That is our problem, not Obamas. He does not have to make any case to us, only to his majority.
Westguard#79,
Worse yet, these jihadies would have to have Muslims on the jury, in order to make it a jury of his peers.
What I’d like to know, are these detainees that are tried in a court of law, will they be open to psychiatric evaluation? You know it wasn’t too long ago the USA was performing lobotomies on our own citizens. We were doing the procedures with ice picks
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/lobotomist/program/
I was wondering if it would be considered cruel and unusual punishment to have that option on the table for combatants found guilty of harm to themselves and others? This would serve as huge deterrent to possible future would be suicide bombers, and also possibly solve the threat of future attacks. IMO
Here is a modern version of how a lobotomy is now being administered:
http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/10/26/DBS/
Excuse my mistake, I meant to state this as:
You know it wasn’t too long ago the USA was performing lobotomies on our own citizens, “in a crude way.”