Page 1 of 15 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 224
  1. #1
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    18,414

    Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Its my view that Obama's decision to shut the detention facility down at Guantanamo Bay was purely a political one that was used in the campaign for POTUS to garner votes, and after elected, used as a false indication of his "leadership ability" and that it was not carefully conceived, no real plan was ever considered and the timeline was pulled out of thin air.

    Its now come to light that our POTUS is playing backwards, convening meetings with people to arrive at a solution to a stated plan by creating a plan that never really existed in the first place. To peons like myself, that's an indication of piss poor executive and management skills. We've all had a crappy boss or two who wanted something done that wasn't gonna work well, so they dumped it on our lap knowing we would be responsible for the crappy outcome.

    OK, I'll stop venting.

    But here's an interesting response to Eric Holder's request to participate in the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy. I think everyone who's the least bit interested in the subject of Guantanamo Bay should read it.

    Opinions?
    Last edited by Dutchcedar; 05-01-2009 at 01:34 PM.

  2. #2
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    38
    Posts
    6,499

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Fair enough, I think the guy makes some decent points.

    The debate needs to be had, and it needs to be put down on paper so we can determine what we as a society are going to do with these people.

    Our justice system is built around the notion that it is better to allow 100 guilty men to go free rather than incarcerate one innocent one. The question then becomes, how do we treat the worst of the worst? Do they have a special court, similar to a military tribunal? Do we treat them the same as any other lawbreaker?

    Some congruence on this issue is needed. I doubt that we will all agree, but it would be nice to have a legal definition.

    The problem I have with Guantanomo and all that went on there is that rather than address this issue in the manner that I have above, the previous administration thought they knew the answer and instead of seeking out legal definitions of what is and is not acceptable, they sought to manipulate the justice system into providing cover for them. This is why you are hearing about all of these legal memos coming out now in which the administration was trying to get lawyers to basically cover their asses in case the shit hits the fan.

    I don't have the answer for Guantanomo as to whether or not it should be kept open. Way above my pay grade

  3. #3
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Richland, WA
    Posts
    6,397

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    They are more than just criminals. Some are terrorists and some are basically prisoners of war. Regular criminal law does not apply, esp. since they are not citizens. Regular POWs are held until the end of the war. Last I checked we are still at war so they should still be held.
    Brian

  4. #4
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    Its my view that Obama's decision to shut the detention facility down at Guantanamo Bay was purely a political one that was used in the campaign for POTUS to garner votes, and after elected, used as a false indication of his "leadership ability" and that it was not carefully conceived, no real plan was ever considered and the timeline was pulled out of thin air.

    Its now come to light that our POTUS is playing backwards, convening meetings with people to arrive at a solution to a stated plan by creating a plan that never really existed in the first place. To peons like myself, that's an indication of piss poor executive and management skills. We've all had a crappy boss or two who wanted something done that wasn't gonna work well, so they dumped it on our lap knowing we would be responsible for the crappy outcome.

    OK, I'll stop venting.

    But here's an interesting response to Eric Holder's request to participate in the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy. I think everyone who's the least bit interested in the subject of Guantanamo Bay should read it.

    Opinions?
    McCarthy as you know is one of my favorites.
    I dont agree with every position he takes? But hes right
    on with this.
    I read the piece at NRO early this morning.
    And for guys not familiar with McCarthy?
    Ill get a brief bio for you. He knows his stuff with this issue

  5. #5
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    18,414

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Quote Originally Posted by bk94si View Post
    They are more than just criminals. Some are terrorists and some are basically prisoners of war. Regular criminal law does not apply, esp. since they are not citizens. Regular POWs are held until the end of the war. Last I checked we are still at war so they should still be held.
    You have a way of saying things shortly and succinctly and you're right on the mark. Why people have been making excuses to treat these people like anyone other than they are is beyond my understanding.

  6. #6
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    McCarthy bio

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_C._McCarthy

    Andrew C. McCarthy is a former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. He was most notable for leading the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks.[1] He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, resigning from the Justice Department in 2003.

  7. #7
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    E n g l a n d
    Posts
    10,979

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Quote Originally Posted by bk94si View Post
    Regular POWs are held until the end of the war.
    And some. We (British) didn't release the final German POWs until late 1948. The Russians released their last prisoners in 1955.

  8. #8
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    36
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Why some of you are comparing Iraq to WW2 is beyond me

    Who cares about Guantanamo.

    Bushy boy promised to find Bin Laden right after 9/11 and he didnt.

    So let someone with brains do it.

  9. #9
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Ill explain how I think about any comparison....between WW2 and anything after....specifically what were involved with at the moment.
    The most popular argument Ive heard is we didnt do a formal "declaration of war".
    For me? Thats essentially a semantic argument.
    An authorization to use force is an authorization to use force.
    Worked for Korea. Worked for Nam.
    So lets put that to the side.

    Were talking about a new "type" here. Guys that are every bit at war with us as the guys that destroyed Pear Harbor back when.
    How are they different? They represent no country and wear no uniform.
    A new breed if you get my thought.
    They arent bank robbers or check forgers. They took down buildings
    in NYC. They have no place in our regular Justice system.
    They are "different".
    Without a uniform?
    Some questions arose as to Geneva Conventions and how they might apply.

    Hence? GITMO

  10. #10
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    And if you read what McCarthy has said over the years? The absolute bull shit involved in prosecuting one of these guys like a "criminal"? Youll get his position on the issue.

  11. #11
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,684

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elec...uantanamo-bay/


    But officials who work on the Guantanamo issue say administration lawyers have become concerned that they would face significant obstacles to trying some terrorism suspects in federal courts, the Times said.
    "The more they look at it," an official told the Times, "the more commissions don't look as bad as they did on Jan. 20."
    Obama previously said the commissions had "been an enormous failure" and during the campaign said he would "reject the Military Commissions Act."
    Last edited by jimzinsocal; 05-02-2009 at 08:48 AM.

  12. #12
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Richland, WA
    Posts
    6,397

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    I was against them before I was for them.
    Brian

  13. #13
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    25,135

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elec...uantanamo-bay/


    But officials who work on the Guantanamo issue say administration lawyers have become concerned that they would face significant obstacles to trying some terrorism suspects in federal courts, the Times said.
    "The more they look at it," an official told the Times, "the more commissions don't look as bad as they did on Jan. 20."
    Obama previously said the commissions had "been an enormous failure" and during the campaign said he would "reject the Military Commissions Act."
    Obama continuing GWB policies... again. But it's different now... Governing is teh hard...

    Last edited by AMDScooter; 05-02-2009 at 02:28 PM.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  14. #14
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    25,135

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Great read... well said and addresses points many have brought up right here in TLR.

    BAM !! Andrew McCarthy "Smacks" Eric Holder



    The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.
    Attorney General of the United States
    United States Department of Justice
    950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, D.C. 20530-0001

    Dear Attorney General Holder:

    This letter is respectfully submitted to inform you that I must decline the invitation to participate in the May 4 roundtable meeting the President’s Task Force on Detention Policy is convening with current and former prosecutors involved in international terrorism cases. An invitation was extended to me by trial lawyers from the Counterterrorism Section, who are members of the Task Force, which you are leading.

    The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith. Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.

    Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government.

    Beyond that, as elucidated in my writing (including my proposal for a new national security court, which I understand the Task Force has perused), I believe alien enemy combatants should be detained at Guantanamo Bay (or a facility like it) until the conclusion of hostilities. This national defense measure is deeply rooted in the venerable laws of war and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2004 Hamdi case. Yet, as recently as Wednesday, you asserted that, in your considered judgment, such notions violate America’s “commitment to the rule of law.” Indeed, you elaborated, “Nothing symbolizes our [adminstration’s] new course more than our decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay…. President Obama believes, and I strongly agree, that Guantanamo has come to represent a time and an approach that we want to put behind us: a disregard for our centuries-long respect for the rule of law[.]” (Emphasis added.)

    Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting. After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself.

    For what it may be worth, I will say this much. For eight years, we have had a robust debate in the United States about how to handle alien terrorists captured during a defensive war authorized by Congress after nearly 3000 of our fellow Americans were annihilated. Essentially, there have been two camps. One calls for prosecution in the civilian criminal justice system, the strategy used throughout the 1990s. The other calls for a military justice approach of combatant detention and war-crimes prosecutions by military commission. Because each theory has its downsides, many commentators, myself included, have proposed a third way: a hybrid system, designed for the realities of modern international terrorism—a new system that would address the needs to protect our classified defense secrets and to assure Americans, as well as our allies, that we are detaining the right people.

    There are differences in these various proposals. But their proponents, and adherents to both the military and civilian justice approaches, have all agreed on at least one thing: Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted. We have already released too many jihadists who, as night follows day, have resumed plotting to kill Americans. Indeed, according to recent reports, a released Guantanamo detainee is now leading Taliban combat operations in Afghanistan, where President Obama has just sent additional American forces.

    The Obama campaign smeared Guantanamo Bay as a human rights blight. Consistent with that hyperbolic rhetoric, the President began his administration by promising to close the detention camp within a year. The President did this even though he and you (a) agree Gitmo is a top-flight prison facility, (b) acknowledge that our nation is still at war, and (c) concede that many Gitmo detainees are extremely dangerous terrorists who cannot be tried under civilian court rules. Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried. Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy. It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that’s what it takes to close Gitmo by January.

    Obviously, I am powerless to stop the administration from releasing top al Qaeda operatives who planned mass-murder attacks against American cities—like Binyam Mohammed (the accomplice of “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla) whom the administration recently transferred to Britain, where he is now at liberty and living on public assistance. I am similarly powerless to stop the administration from admitting into the United States such alien jihadists as the 17 remaining Uighur detainees. According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, the Uighurs will apparently live freely, on American taxpayer assistance, despite the facts that they are affiliated with a terrorist organization and have received terrorist paramilitary training. Under federal immigration law (the 2005 REAL ID Act), those facts render them excludable from the United States. The Uighurs’ impending release is thus a remarkable development given the Obama administration’s propensity to deride its predecessor’s purported insensitivity to the rule of law.

    I am, in addition, powerless to stop the President, as he takes these reckless steps, from touting his Detention Policy Task Force as a demonstration of his national security seriousness. But I can decline to participate in the charade.

    Finally, let me repeat that I respect and admire the dedication of Justice Department lawyers, whom I have tirelessly defended since I retired in 2003 as a chief assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. It was a unique honor to serve for nearly twenty years as a federal prosecutor, under administrations of both parties. It was as proud a day as I have ever had when the trial team I led was awarded the Attorney General’s Exceptional Service Award in 1996, after we secured the convictions of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and his underlings for waging a terrorist war against the United States. I particularly appreciated receiving the award from Attorney General Reno—as I recounted in Willful Blindness, my book about the case, without her steadfastness against opposition from short-sighted government officials who wanted to release him, the “blind sheikh” would never have been indicted, much less convicted and so deservedly sentenced to life-imprisonment. In any event, I’ve always believed defending our nation is a duty of citizenship, not ideology. Thus, my conservative political views aside, I’ve made myself available to liberal and conservative groups, to Democrats and Republicans, who’ve thought tapping my experience would be beneficial. It pains me to decline your invitation, but the attendant circumstances leave no other option.

    Very truly yours,

    /S/

    Andrew C. McCarthy
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  15. #15
    Joined
    Feb 2003
    Location
    SC
    Age
    63
    Posts
    314

    Re: Shutting down Guantanamo Bay

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Why some of you are comparing Iraq to WW2 is beyond me

    Who cares about Guantanamo.

    Bushy boy promised to find Bin Laden right after 9/11 and he didnt.

    So let someone with brains do it.
    So who is the person with the brains?

    Surely your not saying the person with the brains is Bozo Obama, cause he is as dumb as they come.
    Dr. Seuss for 2011:I do not like this Uncle Sam, I do not like his health care scam. I do not like these dirty crooks, or how they lie and cook the books. I do not like when Congress steals, I do not like their secret deals. I do not like ex-speaker Nan, I do not like this 'YES WE CAN'..I do not like this spending spree, I'm smart, I know that nothing's free. I do not like their smug replies, when I complain about their lies. I do not like this kind of hope. I do not like it. Nope, nope, nope!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •