Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleEnsign: Hold Gitmo detainees until war on terror ends
Friday, May 15, 2009 | 4:39 p.m.
John Ensign
WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. John Ensign said Friday that even if military detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are not charged with any crimes, they should remain at the military detention facility and can be held there until the war against terrorism ends.
Ensign acknowledged that the Guantanamo facility is not helpful for the United States’ standing overseas, especially in Middle Eastern and European countries.
But after returning from a congressional day-trip to the camp on Friday, Ensign argued that the terror suspects are being treated well and are too dangerous to be transferred to facilities in the U.S.
“They are like having Charles Manson times whatever factor – these people are so dangerous,” Ensign told reporters on a conference call from Washington.
“It is permissible to hold people until the military conflict is over,” Ensign said. “Does anybody think this global war on terror is over? It’s not even close. If these people get out they’re coming back to kill Americans."
As the Obama administration works to close the facility by early next year, Republicans and some Democrats are escalating their criticism, saying it should remain open until there is a full plan for what to do with the detainees.
The Senate next week is expected to take up Obama’s request for funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that will also deal with the Guantanamo issue.
“It is hard to imagine why we would ever think about closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility,” Ensign said. “I walked away very proud of what our troops are doing down there. I think any American would be proud as well.”
Ensign said the facilities at Gitmo are nicer than prisons in the United States, and said the food detainees were served was better than what he and the traveling lawmakers ate.
“They get better health care than the average American citizen does,” Ensign said.
Ensign visited with Republican Sens. Sam Brownback of Kansas, John Barrasso of Wyoming and Mike Johanns of Nebraska.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Coolican: Henderson officials out of loop on police brutality case, raising red flags
- Lumberjacks — ‘Where the Big Boys Eat’ — hiring for North Las Vegas location
- Berkley draws stark contrasts with Heller over immigration
- Howard Miller, prominent lawyer and ‘true Las Vegas native,’ dies at 68
- Short memories may serve president
- Two dead after accident in downtown Las Vegas
- Instant Analysis: Debating whether UNLV should continue series with San Diego State
- Superstar Whitney Houston dies at 48
- Police looking for man in white Ford Explorer
- Saying ‘No mas’ to government
Blogs
The Kats Report
Live color from the scene at Thomas & Mack Center: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Please oh PLEASE tell me Sen. Einstein did NOT actually say this.
I'm so proud.
NOT.
Let's see, he's been spending loads of time giving speeches in Iowa and is now taking vacations to Cuba?
Must be excellent golf weather in the Caribbean.
Hmmmm.....I wonder if you dudes will apply those to words to Obama when he might suggest the same thing.
Nope....Hypocrites....like always.
"It is permissible to hold people until the military conflict is over," Ensign said. "Does anybody think this global war on terror is over? It's not even close. If these people get out they're coming back to kill Americans."
Okay, so how long will it be before the "war on terror" is over Senator? 10 years? 20? 100?
How about just telling me how you can define a war against a tactic as being "over"? We're not fighting an organized army, or another nation-state. So is it when all of them are dead? In that case, will we be holding these people (without trial and without charges) until they die of old age long after you've shuffled off this mortal coil?
Don't stop Nance from jumping the gun and calling people hypocrites before they've said anything. He's so filled with hatred, he's already made up his mind after consulting his crystal ball.
Has Obama said we need to keep detainees indefinitely? No, he hasn't.
Have we criticized Obama for something that he hasn't done? No, we haven't.
That makes me a hypocrite in Nance's hypothetical world. That strikes me as stupid in a very peculiar way.
Nance, the Black Hole of Logic, weaves another one for us all to laugh at.
Here is some crow for you to chow down on theBS.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12422328...
"The Obama administration is weighing plans to detain some terror suspects on U.S. soil -- indefinitely and without trial -- as part of a plan to retool military commission trials that were conducted for prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The proposal being floated with members of Congress is another indication of President Barack Obama's struggles to establish his counter-terrorism policies, balancing security concerns against attempts to alter Bush-administration practices he has harshly criticized."
Hmmm...your hero is having his staff pitch to Congress the idea of holding some of the bad guys indefinitely and without trial.
Why would he dare pitch an idea that you are making fun of? Oh.....it goes back to the whole R vs D label thing.
What do I hear?
Yep...the ole excuse machine is getting cranked up by the big o'hypocrite crowd.
It was soooooo funny to hear you all hypocrites defending Obama denying habeas corpus rights to
detainees. I had a good time with that one. Just a few years ago, it was Bush was violating the Constitution, but when Obama does it then it is A-OK.
Also, it is soooooo funny to see you all run and hide when Obama is sending in the drones to bomb the terrorists and their wives and children who resided in a allied country without giving them any due process of law.
He is ramping a war where there is no strategy to win. We will be there for decades. Again silence from the hypocrites.
The whole Pelosi thing is just one party after another.
When has it ever been the American way to hold anybody indefinately? This is proof that the U.S. is going through the dark ages. No charges,no trial, no conviction. Just keep them in lock-up forever. Sweep Habeas Corpus under the carpet.
Now any citizen and/or foreigner can be picked up and "suspected" of terrorism and they will be indefinately detained. No charges, no trial, no conviction. This is an unconstitutional precident to set for our future generations.
Presidents have their bosses to answer to. They have their scripts they deliver to the public written for them. All they have to do is deliver. Obama is quite the orater.
That old saying really is true: "Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss."
Ensign, you're a traitor. The oath you swore to be a senator promised us you'd support and keep to the Constitution. You've just committed perjury against that oath.
killer8:
Obama, you're a traitor. The oath you swore to be a president promised us you'd support and keep to the Constitution. You've just committed perjury against that oath.
Nance, again, you're jumping the gun. No decisions have been made, according to your own article deliberations are still underway. You're calling people hypocrites because you're ASSUMING he will make the call to hold people indefinitely.
Furthermore, the article you cited mentions other options, such as judicial oversight of the detainees. That's just as likely, if not moreso, than indefinite detention.
Citing a news article that says indefinite detention is being 'considered?' Are you really that desperate to call others hypocrites?
Hypocrite excuse machine is in high gear.
Crank it up!!!!!!!!
Republican promotes the idea of keeping the bad guys detained indefinitely without a trial. OMG!!!! He is evil.
Obama adminstration promotes the idea of keeping the bad guys detained indefinitely without a trial and all we hear is....excuses....excuses....excuses.
What hypocrites.....you guys have zero credibility.
It is all about R vs. D and nothing about prinicples.
glad he's your senator, what a joke, is he giving a graduation speech at a neo-nazi camp this weekend.
Nance, you'll have a point IF the Obama administration decides to hold all detainees indefinitely.
As it stands, you're accusing people of being hypocrites with no evidence.
Some might say that's... hypocritical.
Yes, it is very hypocritical to critize a Republican for promoting the idea of holding detainees indefinitely without a trial and then punt when the Obama adminstration is doing the same thing on Capital Hill.
It clearly says that in the news article. It says, "The proposal being floated with members of Congress " ....so Obama is trying to get buy-in on the plan with Congress.
Hypocrites......yes.....if you trash a Republican for promoting the idea then you (if you have ANY principles) should be trashing Obama for promoting the same idea.
Nance if the Democratic Party or the Republican Party could each show the citizens of the United States that they are "of the people, for the people", maybe at that time they can declare a party.
But until that day comes, they are just "of the corporate, for the corporate". When did the corporate become a Party? Oh, its one of those invite only.
fremmasmind -- good point, good reminder.
Until then those parties can be described as a bunch of people who think they're in charge, desperate to keep their jobs.