Obama signs order to close Guantanamo Bay facility
* Story Highlights
* President Obama signs orders to close detention facility, ban torture
* Sen. John McCain issues statement supporting facility's closure
* Some congressional Republicans slam "politically correct" security policies
* GOP congressman says he's worried about where to house detainees
What they should do is build a prison right next to Obama at the White House. Then they can build other prisons around Hollywood stars homes. Another idea, send those Gitmo prisoners over here to California where prisons are busting at the seems. They will make some good company for those lonely days. LOL!!! Seriously, closing Gitmo is a HUGE mistake.
What they should do is build a prison right next to Obama at the White House. Then they can build other prisons around Hollywood stars homes. Another idea, send those Gitmo prisoners over here to California where prisons are busting at the seems. They will make some good company for those lonely days. LOL!!! Seriously, closing Gitmo is a HUGE mistake.
Here are my concerns....
Terrorism used to be legally handled under international criminal law because terrorist groups are not official nation state agencies. They typically have their own agenda be it radically religious or criminal. There are laws and protocols in place that have bee abided by for years. The FBI has traditionally handled terrorists and terrorist threats with the cooperation of the CIA, the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), the United Nations, G8, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Organization of American States (OAS), the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the International Civil Aviation Organization (OCAO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and the World Customs Organization (WCO). This would also include 13 additional UN-sponsored terrorism-related international conventions that address specific terrorist acts under international criminal law.
For example, after the 1993 WTC attacks (which killed six and injured 1,000) the United States brought the perpetrators to justice through international criminal law. Those behind the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia (which killed five U.S. military personnel) were also brought to justice through international law enforcement measures, prosecuted in Saudi Arabia, and were later beheaded by the Saudis. Those behind the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa (which killed 224 and injured 5,000) were also brought to justice and are in prison today through international law enforcement cooperation. All were tried for acts of terrorism under international law. All were afforded trials and evidence was presented against them leading to their conviction. We don't treat terrorists as enemy combatants (enemy regulars). Even if taken into custody by military forces they have been traditionally been turned over to international law enforcement agencies. Also the FBI and the CIA have far greater capability to deal with terrorism appropriately than the United Army. A lot of the resources that could have been used to bring Bin Laden to justice was used to conduct the war in Iraq (which is open to debate regarding its necessity in the Global War on Terrorism). The Administration’s treatment of prisoners at Gitmo violates international laws and protocols that have long been abided by. The international community has been bewildered by the Administration’s acts. Sadly, in the end, the new Administration can’t just pretend that Gitmo doesn’t exist. Bush ignored the problem so that he could throw it into the lap of the next President because it's a legal mess.
The Obama Administration will have to sort out how to legally deal with those in custody at Gitmo. Odds are, these will have to be given their day in court per international criminal law and afforded legal defense. Even more upsetting is the fact that since their custody may be proven to have been in violation of international law and protocol there will be a lot of technicalities preventing legal prosecution. Also due to the lack of cooperation between international criminal investigations units and the military, evidence against them may be lacking. We might see a lot of these detainees who deserve to be brought to justice released due to the previous Administration’s mishandling of this situation.
Terrorism used to be legally handled under international criminal law because terrorist groups are not official nation state agencies. They typically have their own agenda be it radically religious or criminal. There are laws and protocols in place that have bee abided by for years. The FBI has traditionally handled terrorists and terrorist threats with the cooperation of the CIA, the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), the United Nations, G8, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Organization of American States (OAS), the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the International Civil Aviation Organization (OCAO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and the World Customs Organization (WCO). This would also include 13 additional UN-sponsored terrorism-related international conventions that address specific terrorist acts under international criminal law.
For example, after the 1993 WTC attacks (which killed six and injured 1,000) the United States brought the perpetrators to justice through international criminal law. Those behind the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia (which killed five U.S. military personnel) were also brought to justice through international law enforcement measures, prosecuted in Saudi Arabia, and were later beheaded by the Saudis. Those behind the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa (which killed 224 and injured 5,000) were also brought to justice and are in prison today through international law enforcement cooperation. All were tried for acts of terrorism under international law. All were afforded trials and evidence was presented against them leading to their conviction. We don't treat terrorists as enemy combatants (enemy regulars). Even if taken into custody by military forces they have been traditionally been turned over to international law enforcement agencies. Also the FBI and the CIA have far greater capability to deal with terrorism appropriately than the United Army. A lot of the resources that could have been used to bring Bin Laden to justice was used to conduct the war in Iraq (which is open to debate regarding its necessity in the Global War on Terrorism). The Administration’s treatment of prisoners at Gitmo violates international laws and protocols that have long been abided by. The international community has been bewildered by the Administration’s acts. Sadly, in the end, the new Administration can’t just pretend that Gitmo doesn’t exist. Bush ignored the problem so that he could throw it into the lap of the next President because it's a legal mess.
The Obama Administration will have to sort out how to legally deal with those in custody at Gitmo. Odds are, these will have to be given their day in court per international criminal law and afforded legal defense. Even more upsetting is the fact that since their custody may be proven to have been in violation of international law and protocol there will be a lot of technicalities preventing legal prosecution. Also due to the lack of cooperation between international criminal investigations units and the military, evidence against them may be lacking. We might see a lot of these detainees who deserve to be brought to justice released due to the previous Administration’s mishandling of this situation.
Those are my concerns.
This is what should have happened from the beginning.
Cautiously, I repeat what has already been said by many, "Mistakes have been made."
I support the closing of GITMO and the "secret" prisons.
I support the relocating of the guilty to their place in eternity.
I support the freeing of the innocent.
However, their trials should be held by the U.S. Military, not by the International Community, IMO.
__________________
"The choices we make reveal the true nature of our character."
I agree with Jermyn, the trials should be held by our military.
__________________
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
2 Chronicles 7:14 KJV
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Micah 6:8 KJV
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 1 John 3:2 KJV
Aquila, the Clinton Administration treated the terrorists as criminals and what did it get us? One terrorist act after terrorist act. We may have prosecuted and jailed a handful of individual terrorists, but it did not disrupt the terrorist actions. You say the FBI and CIA are better equiped to handle terrorism than our Armed Forces? Let's see: the Bush Administration dealt with terrorism with the brute force of our military and we haven't had any terrorism here or any similar to the actions leading up to 9/11 since.
Closing Gitmo is pandering to the extreme left in this country and is merely symbolic. I don't believe President Obama will bring the terrorists on American soil. I don't believe he wants to see many of these terrorists to walk only to return and kill a bunch of Americans as a result of hisd actions.
Sleep deprivation, water boarding, making life uncomfortable for these terrorists is not torture. Permanently physically or mentally injuring someone is. Our professional interogators have not been guilty of such actions. None of those tactics above do permanent damage to the body or psyche.
Closing Gitmo is popular with liberals b/c of their irrational hatred for President Bush. Closing Gitmo is a symbolic way to undo something President Bush did in the War on Terror, which to liberals has been a disaster, in spite of our victories in Iraq, Afghanistan and the fact that terrorism is in steep decline around the world. Its a political move that has the potential to do much damage to the War on Terror.
You can't win a war if politics dictates your strategy. Remember Vietnam anyone?
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
Aquila, the Clinton Administration treated the terrorists as criminals and what did it get us? One terrorist act after terrorist act. We may have prosecuted and jailed a handful of individual terrorists, but it did not disrupt the terrorist actions. You say the FBI and CIA are better equiped to handle terrorism than our Armed Forces? Let's see: the Bush Administration dealt with terrorism with the brute force of our military and we haven't had any terrorism here or any similar to the actions leading up to 9/11 since.
Bush didn’t use the military to attack terrorists. He used the military to attack the regimes of Saddam and the Taliban, both were governments of nations (Iraq and Afghanistan). Terrorists from all over the globe have descended into these countries to engage our forces.
The mastermind behind the first WTC attack was brought to justice by cooperation of international law enforcement agencies. I think that it’s fair to ask, where’s Osama bin Laden?
Much of the gains in the GWOT hasn’t be achieved by the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, it’s the cooperation of international law enforcement agencies that are freezing accounts and tracking money used by terrorists. These agencies also cooperate by tracking the travel of these men in conjunction with agencies overseeing aviation and maritime travel and immigration. To say that the invasion of two countries has kicked the knees out from under terrorism is a fundamental failure to give credit where credit is due. The FBI, CIA, and INTERPOL, in conjunction with countless other international law enforcement agencies, have done far more in the past 8 years to thwart the terrorists than the United States military.
I would like you to provide some additional information if you would. Is there evidence that acts of terrorism are on the decline? And if you’re specifically talking about terrorist attacks against the U.S., again, thank the FBI, CIA, and INTERPOL.
Quote:
Closing Gitmo is pandering to the extreme left in this country and is merely symbolic. I don't believe President Obama will bring the terrorists on American soil. I don't believe he wants to see many of these terrorists to walk only to return and kill a bunch of Americans as a result of his actions.
I think it is a bit symbolic. However, there are laws and precedents that govern how we deal with terrorists. We can’t just pick up suspected terrorists and lock them away forever without any form of trial or providing evidence against them. Sadly, many of these guys are still only “suspected” terrorists and haven’t been proven legally to be terrorists. There is a legal process that must be followed. Most of them aren’t even from Iraq. They are from all over and they aren’t fighting for a nation as official soldiers, they’re fighting for an ideal under the banner of an independent group of extremists. They are more akin to international thugs or criminals, not soldiers. So Obama can’t just pretend they don’t exist. This has to be dealt with legally.
Quote:
Sleep deprivation, water boarding, making life uncomfortable for these terrorists is not torture. Permanently physically or mentally injuring someone is. Our professional interrogators have not been guilty of such actions. None of those tactics above do permanent damage to the body or psyche.
We agree on the above. Water boarding comes close to torture in my opinion… but I think it might be necessary in some cases.
Quote:
Closing Gitmo is popular with liberals b/c of their irrational hatred for President Bush. Closing Gitmo is a symbolic way to undo something President Bush did in the War on Terror, which to liberals has been a disaster, in spite of our victories in Iraq, Afghanistan and the fact that terrorism is in steep decline around the world. Its a political move that has the potential to do much damage to the War on Terror.
Again, we have to deal with Gitmo legally. The Supreme Court addressed this already. We can’t just pretend it doesn’t exist and allow the problem to continue. We have to address it. Since Bush wouldn’t Obama has to.
Quote:
You can't win a war if politics dictates your strategy. Remember Vietnam anyone?
I honestly don’t think you know what you’re talking about. You believe that the military is the best way to thwart terror. Bro… the military doesn’t have the ability to monitor banking, financing, travel, arms deals, immigration, etc. Bro, America hasn’t seen an attack on her soil in 8 years because of the FBI, CIA, and all the countless international law enforcement, travel, immigration, and financing agencies working in cooperation. The military kills people and breaks things. It’s responsive; the international immigration monitoring and law enforcement measures are preventative.
Bush didn’t use the military to attack terrorists. He used the military to attack the regimes of Saddam and the Taliban, both were governments of nations (Iraq and Afghanistan). Terrorists from all over the globe have descended into these countries to engage our forces.
The mastermind behind the first WTC attack was brought to justice by cooperation of international law enforcement agencies. I think that it’s fair to ask, where’s Osama bin Laden?
Much of the gains in the GWOT hasn’t be achieved by the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, it’s the cooperation of international law enforcement agencies that are freezing accounts and tracking money used by terrorists. These agencies also cooperate by tracking the travel of these men in conjunction with agencies overseeing aviation and maritime travel and immigration. To say that the invasion of two countries has kicked the knees out from under terrorism is a fundamental failure to give credit where credit is due. The FBI, CIA, and INTERPOL, in conjunction with countless other international law enforcement agencies, have done far more in the past 8 years to thwart the terrorists than the United States military.
I would like you to provide some additional information if you would. Is there evidence that acts of terrorism are on the decline? And if you’re specifically talking about terrorist attacks against the U.S., again, thank the FBI, CIA, and INTERPOL.
I think it is a bit symbolic. However, there are laws and precedents that govern how we deal with terrorists. We can’t just pick up suspected terrorists and lock them away forever without any form of trial or providing evidence against them. Sadly, many of these guys are still only “suspected” terrorists and haven’t been proven legally to be terrorists. There is a legal process that must be followed. Most of them aren’t even from Iraq. They are from all over and they aren’t fighting for a nation as official soldiers, they’re fighting for an ideal under the banner of an independent group of extremists. They are more akin to international thugs or criminals, not soldiers. So Obama can’t just pretend they don’t exist. This has to be dealt with legally.
We agree on the above. Water boarding comes close to torture in my opinion… but I think it might be necessary in some cases.
Again, we have to deal with Gitmo legally. The Supreme Court addressed this already. We can’t just pretend it doesn’t exist and allow the problem to continue. We have to address it. Since Bush wouldn’t Obama has to.
I honestly don’t think you know what you’re talking about. You believe that the military is the best way to thwart terror. Bro… the military doesn’t have the ability to monitor banking, financing, travel, arms deals, immigration, etc. Bro, America hasn’t seen an attack on her soil in 8 years because of the FBI, CIA, and all the countless international law enforcement, travel, immigration, and financing agencies working in cooperation. The military kills people and breaks things. It’s responsive; the international immigration monitoring and law enforcement measures are preventative.
I agree with you on almost every point. The military is not the end all be all of solving terrorism around the globe. They aren't the best means available at thwarting plots and capturing terrorists.
This is where people like DB and I disagree. He believes that it's acceptable to put suspected terrorists away for 7 years or longer and never give them JUSTICE. The United States of America should represent core values around the world if we want to show leadership and be democracy's last best hope in those regions of the world.
We MUST administer justice to these thugs, but do it in a respectable, legal manner. We must LEGALLY gather evidence and interviews and then preserve it in a way to present later in a U.S. military court or some other legal form of trial. That means good forensics and other CSI trained people on the site when these people are apprehended. This means giving them access to legal advice at least and then preceding to bring the evidence before a legal court and allowing them access to justice.
The problem with the Gitmo detainees is that the Bush administration bungled their incarcerations to the point that if they enter the federal justice system after being denied proper access to legal advice and a quick trial, they could be released. For the 40 dangerous killers at Gitmo, that's not an option.
What shouldn't be an option for the U.S. is throwing people into prison for years without a trial. Bring them to justice with some semblance of legality and then put the killers to death.
__________________
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity. Augustine
aquila, the clinton administration treated the terrorists as criminals and what did it get us? One terrorist act after terrorist act. We may have prosecuted and jailed a handful of individual terrorists, but it did not disrupt the terrorist actions. You say the fbi and cia are better equiped to handle terrorism than our armed forces? Let's see: The bush administration dealt with terrorism with the brute force of our military and we haven't had any terrorism here or any similar to the actions leading up to 9/11 since.
Closing gitmo is pandering to the extreme left in this country and is merely symbolic. I don't believe president obama will bring the terrorists on american soil. I don't believe he wants to see many of these terrorists to walk only to return and kill a bunch of americans as a result of hisd actions.
Sleep deprivation, water boarding, making life uncomfortable for these terrorists is not torture. Permanently physically or mentally injuring someone is. Our professional interogators have not been guilty of such actions. None of those tactics above do permanent damage to the body or psyche.
Closing gitmo is popular with liberals b/c of their irrational hatred for president bush. Closing gitmo is a symbolic way to undo something president bush did in the war on terror, which to liberals has been a disaster, in spite of our victories in iraq, afghanistan and the fact that terrorism is in steep decline around the world. Its a political move that has the potential to do much damage to the war on terror.
You can't win a war if politics dictates your strategy. Remember vietnam anyone?
Linear Mode
