Mr. Al-Qaeda, Meet Mr. American Inmate
For example, take Mohammed Rashed, a terrorist aligned with the infamous Abu Ibrahim. Rashed is currently behind bars in a maximum-security prison in Colorado, but is scheduled for release in less than four years. Upon his release, will Rashed rendezvous yet again with Ibrahim, who is now seeking safe haven in Lebanon? There is no way of telling and following Rashed’s post-prison journey will require heavy resources for our domestic and foreign intelligence services. Now imagine having to do that for hundreds of newly freed al-Qaeda prisoners.
Would al-Qaeda inmates be able to escape? Probably not. But what if they did? Inmates escape from prison all the time. Sure, the likes of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be under tighter security, but would al-Qaeda conduct terrorist attacks to free their brethren? For years, al-Qaeda carried out attacks under the guise of freeing Omar Abdel Rahman, “the blind sheikh,” from his American prison cell. Would they replicate such a strategy for Ramzi Binalshibh? Would foreign adversarial governments lobby on behalf of the detainees? Would the Saudis apply geopolitical or economic pressure — read: oil withholdings, propaganda efforts in Saudi-controlled U.S. academia, etc. — for the release of certain detainees close to a specific Saudi prince? Would the Iranians attempt sabotage operations to free one of their operatives, as they have tried so many times in U.S.-run Iraqi prisons?
So utterly and pathetically reactionary against all that is “Bush” and so eager to placate his left-wing base after multiple disappointments, these are serious problems President Obama clearly has not thought through.
How would regular inmates mix with al-Qaeda inmates? Any al-Qaeda detainee who came into contact with a run-of-the-mill convicted murderer or gang member is ironically in greater danger than at any point during his stay at Gitmo. An American prison is a dangerous place; anyone with the safety of al-Qaeda inmates high on their agenda should oppose integrating “special” prisoners — like terrorists — with regular ones. Imprisoned cop-killers and psychopaths will do to al-Qaeda inmates what they do to imprisoned child molesters: they will kill them very slowly and very painfully. On a personal note, I wouldn’t lose much sleep. On a practical and moral note, this would be a disaster, not to mention terrible PR for the United States abroad.
Putting al-Qaeda trash in regular prisons would not only endanger them, but would also needlessly endanger the lives of prison guards and corrections officers — with wives, sons, and daughters at home — who would have to devote precious time and effort to protecting the terrorist convicts from abuse and assault.
The opposite is possible, too: the likelihood that al-Qaeda inmates could actually win over converts from the regular prison population. Recent studies show that an unusually high number of inmates convert to Islam during their incarceration, either due to Wahhabi-backed “missions” or the conveniences of religious exercise (rugs, sticks for incense, etc.). For example, Jose Padilla, who plotted to detonate a dirty bomb in the United States, was converted and radicalized while in prison. As Steven Emerson puts it:
That President Obama now wants to transfer hundreds of hardened jihadists into American prisons is a guarantee that they will serve as emissaries and proselytizers of jihad to the thousands of prisoners they are exposed to. In virtually no time, it is all but certain — based on past patterns of radical Islamic growth in jails that we have investigated — that we will witness the number of radical Islamic inmates multiply by thousands, maybe more.
Unlike Europe, the United States has been very lucky in that we have successfully managed to prevent the rise of an uncontainable homegrown jihadist threat. Should al-Qaeda be allowed to mingle with the most violent, vulnerable, and impressionable of our prisoners, we will most definitely have to address this problem somewhere down the road. And it wouldn’t be pretty.
Closing Guantanamo Bay and trying al-Qaeda terrorists as if they were mere criminals is symbolic gobbledygook and nothing more. It is certainly not practical, which is why most Americans now oppose closing the facility. One can only hope the administration recognizes this and offers us one final flip-flop, exuding what would constitute real leadership: keeping the prison open and defending its crystal-clear integrity and legality to any and all who would question otherwise.
Yeah. Good luck with that.
Lets see how many terrorists were recruited
while in prison? How many thugs and gangsters
were given “meaning” to their lives by radical
Islam…given murderous ideology to go along with
their already pathological character? In fact
has is their any more fertile recruiting ground
for hate groups than a late night discussions in a
sweaty prison cell? But never mind all of that..what really counts is that “feelgood” moment Liberals crave. Even if others have to bleed and die for their delusions.
There is one best place in the U.S. for the Guantanamo terrorists,and that is the White House. Obama will have them handy so that he can talk to them without preconditions. Michelle and his children will have guards to protect them and the wives and children of America won’t,and besides the terrorist are victims and harmless. The terrorists won’t be able to recruit Michelle and Barack to hate America and try to destroy it because they already do and are trying.
Bringing terrorists to this country seems like deliberately swallowing a tapeworm.You know its a parasite and will sicken you,but you do it anyway.
Any elected official who advocates extending our rights to an enemy has lost the capacity for rational thought, and is unfit for office.
There are a great many Americans (myself included) who don’t want their tax dollars spent to house, clothe, feed, or defend terrorists. We would prefer instead that they be treated as the rabid animals that they are.
No matter what happens it will be Bush’s fault.
We can hope that some of the American inmates will be people who lost friends on 9-11 and will arrange accidents for these ‘poor misunderstood freedom fighters’.
At its most simple, the debate can be divided along two fields:
A. It is a criminal matter, suitable for U.S. courts
B. It is a military matter, subject to international conventions
If A, then the terrorists, no matter their nationality or uniform, or lack of uniform must be tried with rights equal to U.S. citizens
If B, the terrorists or man made diaster makers, must be tried like soldiers of a foreign government even though no such foreign government exists, and the Geneva Convention is unclear as to soldiers without uniforms and signers of that convention. Government balks at calling them pirates, violent free-lance political advocates, or criminals of anarchist persuasion.
If A, then by extention, all citizens of the planet earth are accorded American constitutional rights.
If B, then, all legal rights are invalid except those rights granted by the captors or professed by the nation of origin.
this whole “episode” is symbolic of the incompetence, inexperience, and blind idealogical thinking of this man posing as president. he is acting out the role beautifully, from a look and feel perspective. but step by step destroying this country, piece by piece. will we ever recover from the damage he is creating? much of which will not be evident for years. and he will escape blame because of this reality. examples – Carter – Community Reinvestmemt Act, 1977. Frank Church-evisceration of CIA and US intelligence, 1970′s. My God, this man can not be removed from office too soon. he makes Clinton (Bill) look like an amateur when it comes to lying, looking slick, and telling folks what they want to hear.
meanwhile the GOP continues to dissolve like old jello. si there NO leadership on the right? they have a world-class opportunity to contrast the far-far left with a conservative position. yet they continue to do nothing. wow. we are so toast!
These folks should be freed immediately, but only in Blue cities,where their future terrorist activities will hopefully decrease the number of libtards infesting the nation.
International law already has a very simple solution to this problem;
Unlawful combatants (which terrorists are) are supposed to be receive a military trial in the field. If found guilty they are to be executed immediately.
OK, lets begin with:
How do we know they are terrorists?
Because the government says so.
Well, except for the ones that the government says are NOT terrorists, like the Uighurs, but wants to keep imprisoned anyway, because, well, we goofed up, and now nobody wants to take them off our hands.
But lets consider the others- those who were picked up far away from the battlefield, in the streets, based on a 100% reliable tip from a rival clan leader. Has Mr. Guariglia seen the ironclad evidence against them? No? Didn’t think so, because no one else has either. Could they be innocent, wrongly accused?
HELL NO, the government said they are guilty! And that should be good enough for all of us sheep, er citizens who know we can always trust the government to tell us the truth and get the facts right.
How dare these men ask to be given “trials” and be confronted with “evidence” against them.
These are rights reserved, as Mr. Guariglia says, for American citizens.
When the Founding Fathers wrote the Declaration of Independence, they didn’t write that “All Men are entitled to certain inalienable rights”…they wrote that “Some persons who are duly naturalized citizens of this nation are entitled to certain inalienable rights- everybody else is only entitled to whaever mercy we choose to grant them”.
Human rights are precious, and scarce, and cannot be wasted on people who are not Americans.
There is a reason for the introduction of terrorists between the general inmate population being specially dengerous: in Islam, no matter hos horrendous your sins and crimes, you are _guaranteed_ to go to Paradise if you make jihad. No indulgencies, no 99% chances, 100%. That is why criminals are particularly vulnerable to islamic predication and that is why, if they fall for it, they are particularly likely to become jihadists.
Now, IMHO, victims’ relatives either of liberated terrorists or of criminals converted by jihadists have a right of retalition not mereley agaisnt the perpetrators but also against the people who enacted the legislation who made the crime possible.
Chip – Do you get the OBTs, Obama talking points, sent to you daily or is there a meeting? What part of unlawful combatants during wartime are you having touble with? Even if I were to take your points seriously, heck, very few countries, if any, treat even their fellow citizens as well as these scumbags. I wonder how well they’d do across the line in a glorious Cuban gulag … er … jail.
I have worked in prisons. These inmates will be protected and lionized by the Black Muslim inmates. They will continue their recruitment and training while in our institutions. Our net result will be more terrorists in the US.
These new terrorists will be nearly impossible to track because they’ll be us. Not some foreign born easily identifiable zealot who stands out, but a child of America who has gone bad.
How do we know they are Terrorists eh?
1. Their names were found on terrorist camp
registries.
2. They were caught on the battle field bearing weapons.
3. They were implicated by by the testimonies of multiple persons and their own confessions.
4. Their conversations were bugged, their laptops infiltrated, their passports examined.
yes yes..its all a US Government conspiracy to
label them terrorists arbitrarily. After all doing such a thing costs Billions of dollars and puts thousands at risk of the real terrorists..why sure..the Govt is making it all up.
Filthy Screw..gets it 100% correct. These guys will heroes in prison. They will be adored.
Their military style of organization will be copied once their converts are released on the streets. Bomb making will become a new skill acquired in prison and used on the outside. Connections will be established from inside the USA with Groups in the larger muslim world.
The end result will be car bombs on US streets, suicide bombers in US shopping malls, and the infiltration of every nook and cranny of our society by a mindset of pathological hatred.
BRILLANT MOVE Barrack Hussein Obama….remember to always use his full name when referring to him.
I guess that should have read OTPs, proving I didn’t get the memo.
This is a non-starter. None of them will end up in American jails. It is political death for any politician to allow them into his State/district/whatever. There is a jail in MT built just for hem by enterprising individuals to fill the need. It sits empty. The tumbleweeds gather. Why? Because the Governor said, “No way are they coming to this State!”
This is why it is so hard to find a country to take them. If we won’t why should they?
I like the quote from Pancho Villa when his soldiers brought prisoners to him and asked what should be done with them. “Shoot them for now” was his response. This is the likely result of battlefield decisions if every prisoner is treated with complete constitutional rights. Should we take them in, read them their rights, get a lawyer for them, take a chance of them going free and coming back to kill us? No, I don’t think that will happen. Shoot them for now is the more likely battlefield expediency.
One wonders why the ACLU did not press for the rap sheets of the detainees while they were sueing for the torture photos? Also, what political/legal obfuscation took place to halt the tribunals, besides the stuffings that we read in the press?
Excellent points and have been a reader of WorldThreats for some time.
Also been harping on this for a while…refer to it as Obama’s failure of imagination
Stand them up against a wall and shoot them.
As is our indefeasible legal right to do.
The terrorists are attacking the seam between our internal Law and our tools of Strategy, specifically our military. And while we have police and investigative forces that may be the envy of the world, and a military that certainly is, that seam is a weak point.
For a serious discussion of the matter, try reading Bobbitt’s Terror and Consent or Willful Blindness by the prosecutor who got the Blind Sheik convicted.
“Well, except for the ones that the government says are NOT terrorists, like the Uighurs, but wants to keep imprisoned anyway, because, well, we goofed up, and now nobody wants to take them off our hands.”
It is my understanding that they were certified as not a threat to the U.S., which is a little different from saying they are not terrorists.
From ehunter:
“How do we know they are Terrorists eh?
1. Their names were found on terrorist camp
registries.
2. They were caught on the battle field bearing weapons.
3. They were implicated by by the testimonies of multiple persons and their own confessions.
4. Their conversations were bugged, their laptops infiltrated, their passports examined.”
Well, no, that’s not quite right-
Here is an item from USA Today, dated March 19, 2009
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — A former Bush administration official says many Guantanamo detainees are innocent, and have been held only because U.S. officials hoped they would know something important.
Lawrence B. Wilkerson was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell. He says only two dozen or so of the roughly 800 men held at Guantanamo are terrorists. About 240 prisoners remain at the US military prison.
“There are still innocent people there,” Wilkerson told The Associated Press on Thursday. “Some have been there six or seven years.”
Wilkerson says he learned of their innocence through State Department briefings and military commanders. He first made the allegations in an Internet posting this week.
The Pentagon has said the detainees are dangerous enemy combatants.
The fact is, SOME of the detainees were actually captured ont hebattlefield; SOME had evidence against them and SOME are probably guilty.
But others, and no one knows how many, might be innocent.
Innocent, and held without trials, or charges, for years. No one reading this blog has seen any evidence personally- the only evidence anyone has seen is what the government has released, without any way to cross examine, or check it for inaccuracies.
And to Davod’s point, the Uighurs ARE a threat- to the Chinese Communist government.
And so we have come to the point in America where our government is doing the dirty work of imprisoning Chinese dissidents on behalf of the Communist regime.
This is exactly what the Founding Fathers fought against.
shoot them in the head,then feed them to the pigs, but before doing so let them know that the last living thing they’ll come in contact with will be a pigs ass! swinegate: to pass from one realm to another by way of a pigs rectum.