Jan 21 2009
Obama’s First Act – Protect The Terrorists In GITMO
Update: From Gateway Pundit and our readers we find that most Americans (i.e., the 70% or so who don’t support liberal policies) reject the idea of closing GITMO:
Only 35% support Obama’s first move in office. I heard an interesting theory this morning, that the 120 day suspension is meant to kick this ridiculous act down the road and give President Obama time to shift his position away from his campaign promises to close GITMO. Not sure I buy it – but it would fit his MO. - end update
In February 2006 I predicted that liberals would attempt to coddle terrorists by shifting our policies if they won office. I coined it The Democrat Contract With al-Qaeda (a parody on the GOP’s 1994 Contract With America). It was a series of outrageous predictions I hoped would never come true – sadly almost all of them have.
Today President Obama plans as one of his first acts the suspension of legal efforts against those terrorists we have in custody who have or planned to attack us. No economic reprieve for the nation, no help for Americans. Obama’s first act is to come to the rescue of admitted killers:
In one of its first actions, the Obama administration instructed military prosecutors late Tuesday to seek a 120-day suspension of legal proceedings involving detainees at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba – a clear break with the approach of the outgoing Bush administration.
The instruction came in a motion filed with a military court in the case of five defendants accused of organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. The motion called for “a continuance of the proceedings” until May 20 so that “the newly inaugurated president and his administration [can] review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically.”
This is a complete waste of time and resources. These cases have been poured over many times. But Obama thinks he needs to appease the left wing nuts who think terrorists are just wayward people with a reasonable beef against America.
In 2006 I noted that the liberals would make two promises (out of 9):
SECOND, We will enact legislation to release all Al Qaeda members now held in custody in the GITMO Gulag, while providing legal counsel to all who have been unfairly detained during this unfortunate international misunderstanding between Al Qaeda and America. We will ensure all detainees have options for bail and parole so they can continue with their life’s efforts while the legal issues surrounding their detention are worked out. Every ex-detainee will be provided the services of an ACLU lawyer.
…
EIGHTH, we will submit and pass legislation that will mandate any questioning by US agents of Al Qaeda members to (a) be done in the presence of an ACLU lawyer, (b) never last more than 30 minutes, (c) be done indoors, in climate controlled conditions, (d) include an offering of proper food and beverage and (e) require every question to use the word ‘please’.
Liberals are now on the precipice of achieving these goals. And Bin Laden and his crew are licking their chops because they perceive a weakness of will on our part. Mr. President, there are factions in your base you can never support fully because their views are dangerous and wrong. Leaders know this. Inexperienced politicians typically have to learn this the hard way. If you want to waste your political capitol on these scum and their warped supporters that is your call. But it will cost you support when the next attack comes.
And it is still coming if al Qaeda has anything to say about it.
40 Responses to “Obama’s First Act – Protect The Terrorists In GITMO”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The “hard way” in this case means one of our cities is going to get nuked before the current crowd figures out they may have made a mistake. Although NYC is still the most likely, San Fran is probably the softest target.
Slow old container ship of no note, nuke hidden in the hold, shielded in lots of lead to mask the signature, slowly chugs into that protected harbor and – boom. Or hide it inside an oil or refined product tanker coming from the middle east, suicide jihadi crew – it’d never be suspected.
Oh, but everyone loves us now so this can never happen.
Exactly what I keep saying…they’ll never learn until it happens to them. As long as it happens to somebody else or elsewhere, they don’t see how this indirectly affects them.
So they will simply excuse these attacks and fawn Obama as if he is still doing the right thing.
The Era of Hope and Change, Day One…
As one of his first acts as president, Barack Obama gives succor in these trying times to … the jihadis awaiting trial at Gitmo? Oy, vey. Technorati tags: Barack Obama, Guantanamo Bay, terrorists, jihad, trials……
AJ:
“It was a series of outrageous predictions I hoped would never come true – sadly almost all of them have.”
Really? Okay, let’s go down the list, and see which have come true:
1 – nope, in fact we have the PAA now
2 – nope, we still have detainees in Gitmo
3 – nope, we still monitor phone calls
4 – nope, no driver’s licenses for terrorists
5 – nope, still a pain in the ass to get through an airport
6 – nope, still have no-fly lists
7 – nope, still in Iraq
8 – nope, none of those 5 have happened
9 – nope, no impeachment
Hmm. Well, you certainly have an interesting definition of “almost all” — unless of course, you meant to type “none” there.
[...] AJ Strata: This is a complete waste of time and resources. These cases have been poured over many times. But Obama thinks he needs to appease the left wing nuts who think terrorists are just wayward people with a reasonable beef against America. [...]
AJ:
“If you want to waster your political capitol on these scum and their warped supporters that is your call.”
From the WaPo article:
“But the action was cheered by military and civilian defense attorneys.
“We welcome our new commander-in-chief and this first step towards restoring the rule of law,” said Army Maj. Jon Jackson, a military defense attorney for Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, one of the Sept. 11 defendants.”
So help me out, AJ: which category are you saying that Major Jackson falls into — “scum”, or “warped supporters”?
The rule of law exists because of those who respect the law. It is a two way street agreed upon by the citizens of this country. It is civil. It is decent.
War has NOTHING to do with the rule of law.
As the Dalai Lama said, terrorists are closed minds. They do not respond to civil discourse. And the Dalai Lama is one of the Masters promoting non-violence.
He gets it. The “stuck at 6 yrs old” global socialists get it, too. They WANT America brought to her knees, imho. Sick, sick people…
and people that I DO NOT want protecting my family.
This whole pseudo-idealist notion of “rule of law” is a cover up for what is really a dismantling of America. It is outrageous.
AJ – You have some tough, tough people following your blog. It is almost as if they are assigned to sneer at every word you write. I don’t comment much – but I agree with you a lot of the time. Just wanted you to know it…
djl130,
Many thanks! While there are a lot of folks bleating, many fail to past muster IMHO.
Cheers, AJStrata
Do I muster?
AJ, check the Gallup poll. The majority of Americans reject closing of the GITMO.
I’m more interested in which of the two categories GuyFawkes falls into.
I think opening Gitmo was a stroke of genius. Why would anybody bring these monsters to American soil. They could have been shot, but we needed information, hence Gitmo. When we picked these people up in 2002 and 2003, what were we to do with them? Keep them in Pakistan or Afghanistan? Look at the options? Gitmo is perfect!
When will these “feel good” politicians understand the true threat Al Qaeda poses to America? Sitting down to tea with these terrorists will change nothing. They want to destroy America. They want to kill us, our children and our grand children.
The only reason these terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was because they did not yet have the capability of deploying a nuclear weapon here. It’s irresponsible and dangerous for our elected officials to pretend this could never happen.
Al Qaeda will stop at nothing. They have no rule of law. I want our politicians to protect America at all costs, no matter what it takes. To hell with the “rule of law.”
[...] AJ Strata: This is a complete waste of time and resources. These cases have been poured over many times. But Obama thinks he needs to appease the left wing nuts who think terrorists are just wayward people with a reasonable beef against America. [...]
Gman,
the “feel good” politicians were able to blame the 9/11 attacks on Bush. They didn’t have to directly deal with the issue or solve the problem or try to implement a preemptive response. Sadly, they will change there tune when they have to deal with it. It is sad that they are not willing to learn from history.
GuyF
1 – nope, in fact we have the PAA now
2 – nope, we still have detainees in Gitmo
3 – nope, we still monitor phone calls
4 – nope, no driver’s licenses for terrorists
5 – nope, still a pain in the ass to get through an airport
6 – nope, still have no-fly lists
7 – nope, still in Iraq
8 – nope, none of those 5 have happened
9 – nope, no impeachment
what? your guys been in for 24 hours and hasn’t overturned any of your pet projects yet? kinda disappointing from the Libs point of view? eh?
aitch:
I’m more interested in which of the two categories GuyFawkes falls into.
which? both.
I have to disagree.
The 120 day delay really serves no purpose but to delay.
I see it as POTUS Obama voting “Present” on the issue.
I did not vote for President Obama mainly b/c of concern about his approach to our war on terrorism, but have begun to wonder if my skepticism was without a basis. Watching the Inaugurals, etc….got all emotional. But now, reading this, I’m thinking I was on target.
I see it as POTUS Obama voting “Present” on the issue.
Change we can believe in. So what else is new?
Redteam:
“your guys been in for 24 hours and hasn’t overturned any of your pet projects yet?”
Thanks for proving my point, genius.
What’s wrong with Gitmo GUY? Other then upsetting European sensibilities? With the proper explanation that the MSM would surely publish…….NOTHING! IT WAS A STUPID COMMITMENT ON OBAMA’S PART IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I think that Bush himself would have closed Gitmo if there was a safe way to do it.
Congress has tried on two occasions to pass legislation to provide trials or tribunals for these people. Thus far the Obama people have not answered these legal questions either. The Court was good at telling Congress and the President what they could not do, but not so good at telling them what they can do. Until the issue of how to try these people is resolved it will be difficult to close Gitmo.
I know that McCain talked about moving the men to military prisons and trying them in tribunals, that might work,
But if Obama ends up turning them lose and they kill a bunch of people I think he can kiss that approval rating of his goodbye.
As for the polls, it kind of makes you wonder who people thought they were voting for.
And by the way, we do not really know what this means, Obama could turn them lose or just find them a new cell. We will have to wait and see.
Needless to say the reflexive Bushbashers will rejoice. If Gitmo had been established by Clinton instead of Bush this would not even be an issue. it is pure politics on the part of the left.
Shut down “black holes”, rendition spots, a Clinton idea, use the UMJ for CIA interrogations, close Gitmo, bring the troops home in 16 months, the new way Obama wants to fight these criminals. When we put pressure on al Queda in Pakistan and they go back to Iraq, then what? Well who cares, there is no war anyway and we need to love all Muslims. We need to extend our hand and if a fist comes back we will try again. Even the Dali Lama says these people can’t be deterred, but then Obama thinks he is the Messiah, and maybe the Messiah knows better. I say believe everything Obama has said and all that we know about his associates, because Gates and General Patraus are smoke screens for knocking centrists off balance.
kathie:
“What’s wrong with Gitmo GUY?”
Well, maybe you should ask John McCain, Robert Gates, Henry Kissinger, James Baker, Warren Christopher, Madeleine Albright and Colin Powell – since they’ve all called for the closing of Gitmo too.
Tell you what, kathie – if you can bear to read through this entire article, then I will debate with you on what’s “wrong” with this prison.
But, do I really need to explain what’s wrong with a system that beats a confession out of a 15 year old, and then holds him in an 8 foot square cell for 6 years, isolated from anyone that even speaks his language, with no chance of even knowing what he is being charged with? Do I need to given a better explanation than the fact that the JAG assigned to prosecute him — “the Bronze-Star-recipient Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, who since 9/11 has served in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Africa ” — QUIT in disgust over his treatment rather than continue the case?
You all love to accuse me of “loving the terrorists”. Are you going to also declare that a Bronze Star recipient, a Lt. Col. in the army – that *HE* also “loves the terrorists”? Do you need God himself to declare from the heavens that the treatment of these detainees is inhuman before you will allow yourselves to believe it?
kathie:
“When we put pressure on al Queda in Pakistan and they go back to Iraq, then what?”
“back to Iraq”? The Al Qaeda group in Pakistan/Afghanistan was never IN Iraq – so it’s impossible for them to go “back”.
“Well who cares, there is no war anyway and we need to love all Muslims.”
From the inauguaration speech:
“We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.”
GuyFawkes,
If he was determined not to waver, he would not be dismantling a crucial component of our defenses against terrorism.
He talks a good game, but he doesn’t walk the walk.
Obama to close terrorist ‘black sites’ on thursday
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/21/obama-close-terrorist-black-sites/
9/11 Families Outraged by Obama Call to Suspend Guantanamo War Crimes Trials
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/21/families-outraged-obama-suspend-guantanamo-war-crimes-trials/
GuyF Tell you what, kathie – if you can bear to read through this entire article, then I will debate with you on what’s “wrong” with this prison. But, do I really need to explain what’s wrong with a system that beats a confession out of a 15 year old
First, why would anyone want to read anything Salon has to say.
2nd: Do you consider that person to have been mistreated?
Do you consider him to have been mistreated more or less than the 3000 people killed on 9/11?
Poor little bleeding heart lib.
This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 1/21/2009, at The Unreligious Right
What Obama says today will not be the same in 120 days. Hopefully, he will delay this and let it die. There is no solution for these thugs. Guantanomo was a good idea and it was a shame to let the left and the Europeans make such a production out of it. It was all political in order to bash Bush. Of course, not closing it will be a handy dandy reason to continue to blame Bush for this and other sins.
I registered just so I could reply to GFawkes. When I heard the news that Obama would sign the Executive Order to close Gitmo my first thought was, he’s already sending a message to the terrorists that he is foolhardy and can be trusted to cave when pushed to make a difficult decision. Apparently making tough decisions is not in his nature. I hope he doesn’t actually close Guantanamo but I believe he will to appease his lefty followers.
AJ, I read your blog daily and I want to thank you for your insight and diligence for detail in your writing.
JDavis,
Thanks for the comment. Please feel free to post more of your thoughts. We need to send messages to our leaders when the wander outside what people believe is safe or expected behavior.
JDavis:
Welcome! Now, see if you can answer me this:
Obama has been stating for months and months that one of his first actions was going to close Gitmo. The American people (if they paid any attention at all to the campaign) knew he was planning on doing this. And he won the election – with everybody knowing he was going to do it. (Of course, McCain said he was going to do the same thing – but that’s somewhat irrelevant here.)
Upon arriving in office, this was one of the first things he did. No one “pushed” him to do it – he had been saying for months that he was going to do it, and then he did it.
So, exactly what part of “keeping a campaign promise” says that he “can be trusted to cave when pushed to make a difficult decision”?
GF, you twisted my words. I said: “When I heard the news that Obama would sign the Executive Order to close Gitmo my first thought was, he’s already sending a message to the terrorists that he is foolhardy and can be trusted to cave when pushed to make a difficult decision. Apparently making tough decisions is not in his nature. I hope he doesn’t actually close Guantanamo but I believe he will to appease his lefty followers.”
I made no mention of campaign promises. Apparently he is able to make mindless decisions so I will acknowledge his ability to do so.
I said he’s sending a message to the terrorists that he cannot make DIFFICULT decisions. A difficult decision would be to take the time to learn the facts about the terrorists incarcerated at Guantanamo.
A difficult decision might be that Guantanamo is the best and safest place for these people who cannot be tried, they will be freed as has been pointed out many times because the evidence against them cannot be used.
It’s one thing to make campaign promises when you are not getting daily briefings and are not privy to all the facts and another to keep a promise that could be so dangerous to the people and country.
BTW, I apologize for being rude. Thanks for the welcome AJ and GF.
JDavis:
(First off, no need to apologize – considering the usual treatment I get around here, that was nothing.)
I think I see what you’re saying – but in that case, weren’t both Obama and McCain sending that same message, back when they were promising to do so on the campaign trail? Were Robert Gates, Henry Kissinger, James Baker, Warren Christopher, Madeleine Albright and Colin Powell all sending that same message to the terrorists – since they’ve all called for the closing of Gitmo too?
I guess I just don’t understand the sudden reaction now- we all knew (and/or hoped, at least in my case) that it was coming. It’s not like we’re letting them go free or anything – they just won’t be in this one specific place anymore. Why does that, in and of itself, send such a strong message?
And why is it that the “difficult” decision is keeping Gitmo open (the decision you wanted), and the “easy” decision is closing it (the decision you don’t want)? Wouldn’t the easiest choice just no choice at all – just to do nothing and keep everything the same?
GuyF
It’s not like we’re letting them go free or anything – they just won’t be in this one specific place
the daily laugh.
The whole deal (with the fools of the world) is that these people are being imprisoned unfairly without trials, etc. now you’re saying “It’s not like we’re letting them go free or anything – they just won’t be in this one specific place ” So the ONLY change is that the cell will be located ’somewhere else’ ?
If so, I hope it is in the city where you live, it’ll make you safer, I’m sure. Then I hope they let them out on bail to inhabit your fine neighborhood. After all, they’re gonna live in some American neighborhood, may as well be yours since you are the one calling for it. Good luck on your bid for housing the detainees there.
Redteam:
You are a pathetic human being.
We have terrorists currently being held in U.S. prisons, who were tried and convicted during the Bush Administration.
What is so special about these folks in GITMO that they can’t go through the same process? What makes them into super villians?
If you knew a single thing about the U.S. legal system – then you might suddenly know how blindingly ignorant you are.