Posts Tagged ‘Gitmo’

h1

Gitmo North

November 19, 2009

Gitmo North

IBD: 19 Nov. 2009

War On Terror: Sen. Dick Durbin calls a plan to transfer 100 Guantanamo detainees to northwest Illinois “a dream come true.” It would paint a bull’s-eye on America’s heartland in time for the 2012 Iowa caucuses.

It seems the question of where to put the Guantanamo detainees is being settled as we speak, with liberal Democrats in the very blue state of Illinois welcoming them with open arms and outstretched hands for the federal dollars that will come with them.

Federal officials last Friday inspected the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Ill., a town of 500 on the Iowa border, with the thought of transferring as many as 100 Gitmo inmates there. The prison, built to house 1,600 prisoners, now holds around 200, and has fallen victim to state budget problems.

At press conferences held in Chicago, Moline and Rockford, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, who took over from the disgraced Rod Blagojevich, and Illinois’ senior U.S. senator, Dick Durbin, stumped for the plan, calling it “a dream come true.” We call it a nightmare on Main Street.

Read the rest of this entry ?

Advertisements
h1

Important: A Fast One On An Ally

June 19, 2009

Diplomacy: Should the U.S. scrap its special relationship with the U.K. to fulfill an ill-considered campaign vow? That’s the trade-off the Obama administration made by secretly foisting terrorists onto Bermuda. It’s wrong.

The British Foreign Office had a right to be angry at the U.S. transfer of four Uighur terrorists from Guantanamo detention to the U.K. colony of Bermuda without its knowledge.

After all, Britain is a sovereign state and, like any nation, has a right to know who’s on its territory. Instead, it got treated like some banana republic. It didn’t learn of the move until after the four Gitmo detainees were set to land on the island.

Britain is our top ally, having a long-term “special relationship” that has been carefully built over 200 years. Seen in this context, the U.S. move is unprecedented and will likely cost the U.S. more than just Britain’s trust.

Any nation pondering an alliance with the U.S. will think twice after seeing how the U.S. treats its best allies when it’s in a pinch.

The root of this pickle is the Obama administration’s ill-considered campaign promise to shut down Guantanamo detention camp, in a bid to win far-left voters unconcerned about terrorism.

If not for that promise, there’d be no such pickle. The president could make an honest reassessment of the promise in light of the absent alternatives but hasn’t.

Instead, he’s now strong-arming an ally against its own interests, something sure to create resentment.

The four Uighurs now sampling the good life on Bermuda are wanted back in China for terrorism. Britain will now get heat from China — and possibly retribution for a problem it didn’t cause.

No doubt, an angry China could reduce its cooperation with the West in the global war on terror. As China sizes up the West’s tough words about fighting terrorism, it sees a spectacle of Uighurs living high on the hog in “free” cottages, splashing around in blue Bermuda waters, savoring butter-pecan ice cream, going bowling, talking of opening a restaurant and looking forward to their new British passports. It’s the wrong message to send to other terrorists.

Obama’s creation of this situation shows considerable contempt for Britain, and seems part of an escalating pattern of slights.

It started around the time a State Department official said there was no special relationship with Britain, and Britain was just one of 180 nations the U.S. has relations with — a view which, by the way, was first propounded publicly in 2006 by a State Department official now accused of being a Cuban spy.

It then spread to insults directed at Prime Minister Gordon Brown, everything from not holding a joint press conference during Brown’s visit to the U.S., to a cheap and useless range of personal gifts. Foisting terrorists onto Britain takes it to a whole new level.

Sure the Obama administration says it’s just trying to shut down Gitmo and has justified its failure to inform the Brits as an effort to protect them from China’s wrath. Well, it hasn’t.

And as far as diplomatic moves go, it wasn’t worth it if the result is that the Britons will question whether they can ever trust us again.

It’s far more likely to raise bells of recognition that Obama seems willing to throw an ally over the side for political advantage at home.

After all, during his campaign, Obama sent an adviser to secretly assure the Canadians he didn’t mean it when he blasted Canada over free trade in public. Instead of affirming Canada’s long-standing friendly ties with the U.S., he used our closest hemispheric ally as a whipping boy. The Canadians didn’t put up with this and made sure that word of double-dealing got out.

It’s likely the British will get wise to this pattern of slights rooted in selfish political expediency and ask if it’s worth it to have this alliance. They’ll ask if America really wants a special alliance with Britain, and adjust their calculations accordingly.

Make no mistake — if that happens, it will reverberate far and wide.

h1

Cartoon: Terrorists in Palau

June 18, 2009

h1

Gitmo Terrorists moved to BERMUDA!

June 16, 2009

comment: GITMOre Terrorists out of Gitmo. T

A Fast One On An Ally

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, June 15, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Diplomacy: Should the U.S. scrap its special relationship with the U.K. to fulfill an ill-considered campaign vow? That’s the trade-off the Obama administration made by secretly foisting terrorists onto Bermuda. It’s wrong.


Read More: Europe & Central Asia


The British Foreign Office had a right to be angry at the U.S. transfer of four Uighur terrorists from Guantanamo detention to the U.K. colony of Bermuda without its knowledge.

After all, Britain is a sovereign state and, like any nation, has a right to know who’s on its territory. Instead, it got treated like some banana republic. It didn’t learn of the move until after the four Gitmo detainees were set to land on the island.

Britain is our top ally, having a long-term “special relationship” that has been carefully built over 200 years. Seen in this context, the U.S. move is unprecedented and will likely cost the U.S. more than just Britain’s trust.

Any nation pondering an alliance with the U.S. will think twice after seeing how the U.S. treats its best allies when it’s in a pinch.

The root of this pickle is the Obama administration’s ill-considered campaign promise to shut down Guantanamo detention camp, in a bid to win far-left voters unconcerned about terrorism.

If not for that promise, there’d be no such pickle. The president could make an honest reassessment of the promise in light of the absent alternatives but hasn’t.

Instead, he’s now strong-arming an ally against its own interests, something sure to create resentment.

The four Uighurs now sampling the good life on Bermuda are wanted back in China for terrorism. Britain will now get heat from China — and possibly retribution — for a problem it didn’t cause.

No doubt, an angry China could reduce its cooperation with the West in the global war on terror. As China sizes up the West’s tough words about fighting terrorism, it sees a spectacle of Uighurs living high on the hog in “free” cottages, splashing around in blue Bermuda waters, savoring butter-pecan ice cream, going bowling, talking of opening a restaurant and looking forward to their new British passports. It’s the wrong message to send to other terrorists.

Obama’s creation of this situation shows considerable contempt for Britain, and seems part of an escalating pattern of slights.

It started around the time a State Department official said there was no special relationship with Britain, and Britain was just one of 180 nations the U.S. has relations with — a view which, by the way, was first propounded publicly in 2006 by a State Department official now accused of being a Cuban spy.

It then spread to insults directed at Prime Minister Gordon Brown, everything from not holding a joint press conference during Brown’s visit to the U.S., to a cheap and useless range of personal gifts. Foisting terrorists onto Britain takes it to a whole new level.

Sure the Obama administration says it’s just trying to shut down Gitmo and has justified its failure to inform the Brits as an effort to protect them from China’s wrath. Well, it hasn’t.

And as far as diplomatic moves go, it wasn’t worth it if the result is that the Britons will question whether they can ever trust us again.

It’s far more likely to raise bells of recognition that Obama seems willing to throw an ally over the side for political advantage at home.

After all, during his campaign, Obama sent an adviser to secretly assure the Canadians he didn’t mean it when he blasted Canada over free trade in public. Instead of affirming Canada’s long-standing friendly ties with the U.S., he used our closest hemispheric ally as a whipping boy. The Canadians didn’t put up with this and made sure that word of double-dealing got out.

It’s likely the British will get wise to this pattern of slights rooted in selfish political expediency and ask if it’s worth it to have this alliance. They’ll ask if America really wants a special alliance with Britain, and adjust their calculations accordingly.

What do you bet that they SUE us?

h1

Cartoon: Statue of Liberty Poem, Give me your MASS MURDERERS

June 15, 2009

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled mass (murderers) yearning to breath free.

Close Gitmo

h1

Guantanamo’s Repeat Offenders

June 8, 2009

Guantanamo’s Repeat Offenders

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | 08 June 2009

In his Cairo speech, President Obama went out of his way to say the U.S. had disavowed torture, however defined, of those who fly planes into buildings and otherwise plan mass murder.

He reminded the Arab street that the Supermax facility at Guantanamo housing these murderers, past and future, will be closed.

What will happen to these Gitmo residents is still unclear. Not a single member of Congress wants them housed in his or her district, and few countries seem willing to take many off our hands.

Congress still hasn’t funded the closing of Gitmo, and the Obama administration seems to be moving toward rationalizing some form of permanent detention.

Adding fuel to the controversy is a long-awaited Pentagon report, parts of which have been obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by CNSNews.com.

The report was first made available in late May in the form of a fact sheet that did not provide a complete picture of the released detainees who returned to terrorism.

Now we know more, including who they all are and what they did after their release. The stunning statistic in the report is that of the more than 530 Gitmo detainees transferred from the facility, 27 were confirmed to have re-engaged in terrorist activity and 47 were suspected of having done so. That’s a recidivism rate of 14%.

Among those released to return to make war on America are Said Mohammed Alim Shah (aka Abdullah Mahsud), who spent 25 months at Gitmo until his release from such inhuman bondage in March 2004.

While out on his own recognizance, Shah returned to his native South Waziristan, where he rebuilt and led a Taliban cadre estimated at 5,000 foot soldiers conducting cross-border raids from Pakistan. Shah kidnapped two Chinese engineers in October 2004 and directed a suicide attack in April 2007 that killed 31 people, according to the Pakistani government. After the attack, he blew himself up to avoid capture.

Then there’s Mohammed Ismail, one of two “innocent” teens held at Gitmo until he was released last year to great fanfare, holding a press conference thanking the American soldiers there for teaching him to read.

So grateful was he for his release, he tried to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan. After his recapture four months later, he was found carrying a letter confirming his status as a Taliban member in good standing.

Abdullah Salim Ali al Ajmi was originally detained in Afghanistan and spent three years at Gitmo before being released in 2005. Ajmi returned to Kuwait and in April of 2008 went to Iraq to become a suicide bomber. He was successful, taking numerous civilians with him when he blew himself away in Mosul.

At the time of that attack, Rep. Peter Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said it “demonstrates the difficulty of the detainees in Gitmo.”

“Once again,” said Hoekstra, “a detainee may have been given the benefit of the doubt, released and returned to the battlefield and attacked innocent people and our troops. These are dangerous people.”

Those who would close Gitmo, once they figure out how and where to put these guys, would give them all the benefit of the doubt.

During a press conference, President Bush once articulated a common-sense reason such people should be held as prisoners of war at Gitmo and held until the war on terror ends: They will return to kill us again.

“Some have been released to their previous countries, and they got out and they went on the battlefield again,” Bush said. “I have an obligation, as do all of us who are holding office, to protect our people.”

So do we all. Keep them locked at Gitmo and throw away the key.

h1

Cartoon: Top Secret Memos

June 1, 2009

top secret memos

29 April 09

IBD