Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleLetter to the editor:
Hysteria overtakes Gitmo conversation
Friday, May 29, 2009 | 2:04 a.m.
When Gov. Brian Schweitzer in his cowboy hat heard that Hardin, Mont., is willing to take Gitmo detainees, he said “no way.”
Sen. Jim Webb, ex-Marine, said not in Virginia. Not even 15 Chinese Uighurs who were declared innocent.
Republicans say the terrorists will think we are weak because the president is willing to talk to our adversaries. What do they think terrorists are saying now after hearing this panic response to housing 240 detainees?
I’m beginning to think term limits are our only answer. At least every decision a politician makes is not based on the next election.
If we cannot work this out in a legal and practical way, then it’s finally happened, folks. The terrorists have won.
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
- See mug shots of 16 arrested in stolen-property police sting
- Lumberjacks — ‘Where the Big Boys Eat’ — hiring for North Las Vegas location
- Berkley draws stark contrasts with Heller over immigration
- Send your loved one a virtual Vegas Valentine’s Day card right now
- Howard Miller, prominent lawyer and ‘true Las Vegas native,’ dies at 68
- Short memories may serve president
- Saying ‘No mas’ to government
- Police looking for man in white Ford Explorer
- Hispanic Museum of Nevada settles into new home
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.
Roberta,
If you take in a couple, I will!
"labdaddy" attempts to obfuscate the issue by implying (wrongly) that it is a matter of personally housing detainees. He or she knows that it's a matter of a state deciding to take them.
"What do they think terrorists are saying now after hearing this panic response to housing 240 detainees?"
We keep beating ourselves up over the pass.
The Terrorist are LOL.
On 5-21-2009 Obama claimed to be explaining his Guantanamo crisis and his empathy driven torture policies, but spend a large part of his speech with contrived indignation and phony moralization with 28 specific vitriolic statements attacking Bush again.
The actual Obama changes are marginal from the positions that Bush had the day he left office.
As an example Bush had already changed the EIT protocols and had stated the intention to close GITMO (over 300 Terrorist have been released -- 17% of which returned to the fight),
In Obama's EO, he reserved the right to define EITs. Bush had stopped the use of waterboarding.
Campaigner Obama rejected the "Military Tribunals" calling them "legal black holes", yet, will now use them as Congress authorized in the Military Commissions Act. Dismissing his call for tossing out case which the lack the use of Miranda warning.
The biggest no change the keep of the "prolonged detention" detainees the so called "category 5" guys.
Obama can whine all he wants, but Obama is just "Bush Lite" on the issue yet he is still looking back to blame Bush for processes that Obama will use.
What is funny is that the Gitmo thugs will have their quality of life lowered to a significant degree when they go to super max prison in the USA.
Right now, they get tons of fresh air, decent tasting meals cooked according to middle east cultural standards, get to play volleyball and other sports and their jail cells are a decent size.
They will get none of that at a super max. Most likely they will have to be isolated for their own safety and the safety of the nation.
LOL.....bring them in.
Perhaps, they might some of that prison justice that the child rapists get.
You lib clowns do know that once they get their foot on US soverign land that their legal rights probably will go up which will make Obama's job much harder.
Obama's adminstration has said that they are going to use the military tribunal system to process most of the detainees. What do I hear from the libs who whine constantly when Bush did that? The hypocrites are now silent.
Obama adminstration is keeping detainees and trying to prevent them habeas corpus access to the courts. What do I hear from the libs who whine constantly when Bush did that? The hypocrites are now silent.
Obama adminstration is considering and will probably implement a policy of keeping some of the detainees until the end of the terror war without a military tribunal or a regular court case. What do I hear from the libs who whine constantly when Bush did that? The hypocrites are now silent.
Obama is going to push some detainees cases through the regular US court system. What happens if he loses those cases? Most likely the detainees will ask the court to be released on to US soverign land. It will be so wonderful to have a terrorist walking our streets.
lvsundog,
Actually I was being facetious. I'm sure that while Roberta sees no problem with bringing captured enemy combatants onto U.S. soil, she is probably president of her local chapter of NIMBY.
Obfuscate..someone paid attention in school!
First, hundreds of detainees were found to have done nothing and released...under the Bush administration. Second, until proper trials are held with Habeous Corpus rights and all and any of the current detainees in GITMO are found actually guilty they should not and cannot be held in prison. Third, we have many more dangerous citizens loose on the streets with weapons all across the U.S. than there are detainees yet all you brave little conservatives act as if simple human beings without access to resources will destroy us all. What a bunch of wimps.
"Second, until proper trials are held with Habeous Corpus rights "
You do know that Obama is trying to prevent habeous corpus rights to some detainees.
You do know that Obama has embraced Bush's military tribunal process with a few minor chances.
"and any of the current detainees in GITMO are found actually guilty they should not and cannot be held in prison"
What are you saying here?
Are you saying that they should be held at Gitmo or released?
If released then where you release them to?
"Third, we have many more dangerous citizens loose on the streets with weapons all across the U.S. than there are detainees "
I wish that I could put that into a TV ad and broadcast to the entire nation that this is how many Democrats think.
Even Reid,Pelosi and Obama are not that dumb. They will all fight hard to prevent any detainee being released to US soverign land, but the courts might force them to.
If that happens then the Democrats will pay a political price for that.
mscaffer,
When you resort to name calling it indicates to me that those of us who prefer to keep terrorists outside of our borders have struck a nerve. It might be time for some self-reflection.
Also, how having dangerous citizens already on the streets makes it okay to bring more in stymies me.
labdaddy,
You do know there are hundreds of convicted terrorists in prison here in the U.S. already right???
SgtRock,
You really are slow. Why not read the full text of President Obama's speech on GITMO and try to understand the context.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/pol...
So are you dumb enough to think that there are only two choices about what to do with detainees? Really?
As for dangerous citizens with guns on the streets, this is hardly controversial that white guys at gun shows present the most danger to peaceful citizens. The statistics show this to be the case and in fact family members with guns are most dangerous to other family members.
I've always thought that those folks who seemingly hate all that America stands for...and who seriously believe that the most dangerous citizens are "white guys at gun shows" should be airlifted to the nearest nondemocratic country and given a parachute. See how it feels to live in a country where there are no rights...FOR ANYONE!
You should be thankful that there are people who do not want terrorists or even "suspected" terrorists in our country even if in jail. Not sure why their "rights" are more valued than those of true-blooded Americans. You can embrace these nuts all you want, but the fact remains no one...NO ONE...wants these guys! What does that tell you?
The truth is going to come out soon about what really happened at Abu Ghraib. Which will affect how Gitmo is handled. And it is far worse than you could ever imagine. I can understand why Obama changed his mind and does not want to release the pictures. Waterboarding is nothing. Try rape. Gasoline enemas. 'Hit' sqauds that routinely brutalize inmates (IRF).
So in that respect, I totally agree with one simple notion - if Obama does not prosecute the monsters responsible for this behavior, the blood will be on his hands just the same as theirs. He is also allowing much of this stuff to continue. And hearing Gibbs totally brush off the Telegraph article yesterday does not sit well either.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...
http://www.alternet.org/story/140022?pag...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...
http://theragblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/s...
http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/5297...
Campaigner Obama rejected the "Military Tribunals" calling them "legal black holes", yet, Obama will now use them as Congress authorized in the Military Commissions Act.
Why is Obama doing the same thing as Bush - that is the only question.
What did Obama find out in office that Obama did not know as a Senator and a Campaigner - nothing.
"Why is Obama doing the same thing as Bush - that is the only question."
Well now, that's just a lie.
Same thing as Bush? The military tribunals under Obama have several key differences compared to those that Bush used. Under the revised tribunals, information that was obtained by coersion is excluded, hearsay is severely restricted and there's expanded access to lawyers.
Were any of those things present under Bush? Nope!
Is it the "same thing as Bush?" Nope, that's a lie. Are they "as Congress authorized in the Military Commissions Act?" Nope, they've been changed. Another lie.
What does the harshest critic of the Bush-era tribunals think of these changes?
"Nonetheless, the Bush-Cheney administration left President Obama with a limited number of alternatives, all of them bad, and he has made rational decisions, devoid of hysteria or false emotion. The worst aspects of the commissions appear to be on their way to correction. It is impossible to criticize or condemn the president for acting decisively and quickly to restore America's role -- always an aspiration, imperfectly realized -- as an exemplar of transparency and fairness. As someone who has risked his life on the battlefield in Iraq, I can only express support for the commander in chief as he undertakes these enormously complex -- and costly -- decisions. " Lt Col Darrel Vandeveld
mschaffer -
"labdaddy,
You do know there are hundreds of convicted terrorists in prison here in the U.S. already right???"
You still haven't explained how that justifies bringing even more in.
Because, as President Obama beautifully explained in the speech I linked to, it is absurd to think that we can't handle a little over two hundred more people when we have no problems handling the people we already have here. They are just human beings.
"military tribunals under Obama have several key differences"
Big deal on the trival points
Fact is Obama said we will put them in the regular courts and now he has changed his tune.
Why Why Why - what is new or different. Nothing he did not know last year.
"human beings..." Says who? I think you forfeit your right to be considered a member of the human race when you condone the killing of innocent people for nothing more than religious beliefs. And, please don't confuse fighting for democracy as anything close to the same thing. What we are accomplishing, or trying to, in the Middle East is amazing...especially if you are a woman.
mschaffer
It only takes one of those two hundred to make it a tragic mistake on a grand scale.
indythinker,
Please remember that many of these people have been shown to be innocent and until proper evidence and court procedures are followed all you have done is paint with a broad brush. When you dehumanize people you are no different than the worst of humanity and not to be taken seriously by civilized people.
labdaddy,
Your fear is not rational. Your odds of dying are far higher from driving than from someone in custody. Do you harp on not driving?
Only when Obama is in town on my dime screwing up the freeway traffic.
labdaddy,
Cheap shot and shows you have no class. Not to mention being patently untrue.
mschaffer...I am very well aware of the facts and sadly, there will always collateral damage. Having said that, I think our country owes it to us to keep us as safe as possible. And, unfortunately some toes are probably going to be stepped on.
I will hold my ground on what constitutes a human being and add that I believe you must have a soul to be one. I think terrorists or possible terrorists are soul-less...how else can they do what they do??? I am likely rationalizing my view as compared to the more liberal point of view...but what if you are wrong? What if it were your family killed in a terrorist attack? Would you still feel so generous towards a "suspected" terrorist. These people weren't just randomly picked up off the street. The govt. had reasons which neither you nor I probably know the whole truth about. Is it sad? Very. Do they deserve what they are going through? I guess that would be between them and their maker. I think you should have more faith in our government. We all need too. Not necessarily an endorsement of the prsent administration...but the fundamental values of being an American.
My family is fighting/fought in Iraq and my perspective is likely different than yours. They 100% believe that we are providing valuable quality of life changes for these poor people. If we can keep one of those terrorist wanna be's away from the radical extremism they flock to, then keeping them incarcerated is a good thing in my opinion.
Believe me... I wish life were Pleasantville all the time. And, yes I harp on Vegas driver's (if we can call them that) all the time. LOL.
Libs on Bush: "Bush is evil. Bush broke the Constitution. Bush is a war criminal."
Obama does similar things as Bush.
Libs on Obama: "Uhhh...mmmm...excuse, excuse, blah, blah...excuse..excuse..uhhh...mmmm..blah, blah, blah."
Libs on their FDR hero that did 1,000x's worst things than Bush: "Uhhh...mmmm...excuse, excuse, blah, blah...excuse..excuse..uhhh...mmmm..blah, blah, blah."
"What do they think terrorists are saying now after hearing this panic response to housing 240 detainees?"
You clearly have no idea how these irrational human beings think. Their culture and religion consist of a death cult that teaches it youth that:
1 - Sharia is the only legitimate law for the world
2 - Allah has mandated that Sharia be implemented worldwide
3 - The infidel must submit or be killed
These are only 3 of many irrational values of the death cult. The terrorists see people like Roberta and they laugh; their culture does not understand reason and negotiation; it understands force; check out the 13 hundred years since its founding. It spread its power by the sword and 13 hundred years later, which is the legacy, backward nations, some of who sit on oil reserves and still cannot function without western technology and know-how.
Umm...mschaffer...
What part of my last post was untrue?
Um, "SgtRock"? (Good Lord, nance.)
What is with your FDR crap? Who CARES? You are so funny!
"Obama does similar things as Bush." Yes, I guess he should have used his "Magic Wand" to fix all of G.W.'s failed policies on DAY 1!, but Unfortunately, Sarge, as you know, it's a teensy bit more complicated to make the ship right. er, left. How about center? Then she'll float!
Indythinker,
What you wrote is what you feel. The first paragraph is a euphemism with no factual content.
The second waxes about the existence of the soul, for which there is no evidence and just makes you foolish, especially when you claim to understand what makes us human. What special knowledge do you have? The rest is even more nonsensical and makes me glad you aren't in an authority position within goverment. I am sorry your family is suffering for the lies of the previous administration and hope they all return alive.
As for labdaddy,
The reason what you wrote was untrue is because I was discussing the death rate from driving which did not increase when President Obama visited Las Vegas. My point which you did not understand was that you have not shown concern about the much higher probability of you dieing while driving than from the remote possibility of the actions of an incarcerated suspect. Do you understand now or must I simplify it yet further?
mschaffer,
Actually, more than driving, it would have been more risky to fly on the morning of 9/11 or work in the World Trade Center. Very few cars can kill more than 3,000 American citizens in one event. And your pals who caused it were not driving cars. Of course that was 12 terrorists. Not 200.
p.s. - It's spelled dying, not "dieing" or must I simplify it yet further.
"it's a teensy bit more complicated to make the ship right. er, left. How about center? Then she'll float!"
The Daily Obama Excuse machine is high gear.
In 3 years, it will be in OVERDRIVE.
mschaffer: I don't think you really get it... you are so worried about stepping on toes that you are missing the greater point which is these allah-loving,jihadists do NOT share in our beliefs which in their eyes makes us something to dispose of. Not just get along...DO AWAY WITH. KILL. As an example let's just look at the Muslim station owner back east who just DECAPITATED his soon to be ex-wife...merely because she was divorcing him. Can I tell you that I think you and your ideas are irrational? It's an east meets west philosophical chasm that CAN NEVER BE BRIDGED! So letting these guys out is not a exactly good idea. Likewise putting them in a position where they might influence other disgruntled Americans might not be considered a great idea either. Furthermore, I will also say that I think it would be a healthy decision for the U.S. to restrict the immigration of further Muslims. I'm just not convinced that 100 decent Muslims can undo the wickedness of one Muslim extremist. And, if that makes me a racist, so be it. I have no desire to watch the country that I love be taken apart limb by limb in order to appease the left wing with it's ... "can't we all just get along mentality." Because the answer is emphatically NO. I will never embrace their radical ways on any level. Never once in my home growing up did my Catholic father tell my Protestant mother should die for her beliefs. This is not so with Muslim extremists. And, frankly, if you can tell the difference between a peaceful Muslim from a radical one...I wish you would share your intel. Go right ahead and slam the conservative perspective. It's because of our great country and it's military might that you can sleep at night without fear and that you can have this diaglog without fear of retribution of anything harsher than my personal opinion. Do you get that these people kill each other without reservation...all the time. HOW IN THE HECK CAN YOU DEFEND ANY OF THEM? To that end...triple dog dare you to join 'em. If the idea of having extremists in your country doesn't scare the heck out of you, all I can say is...hope that works out for you!
indythinker,
You have not been reading some of my other posts. All religions are irrational nonsense. ALL. So don't refer to "our" beliefs because I am not dumb enough to waste my life believing any christian mythology or any other.
There are a large number of Muslims currently living peacefully in the United States. Or did you not think of that?
Your jingoism is uninteresting and pathetic.
Labdaddy,
Forget it. You just don't understand even rudimentary statistics. On the day of 9/11 how many people were flying all over the country and of that how many died? What is the percentage? When people stopped flying after 9/11 and instead switched to cars what happened to their death rate? What was the single most effective action taken after 9/11 to make flying safer? If you work in a lab just please don't do any math as all your results are suspect from the dumb things you have written.
machaffer - I'm not sure how many people were flying all over the country on 9/11 but I do know that 12 of them, the type of people you love to defend, took 4 jumbo jets and turned them into missiles with innocent Americans aboard and crashed them annihilating thousands more. Why are you so damn anxious to replace those 12 with another 200 ?
Labdaddy...mshaffer doesn't care because well...
he/she isn't "dumb enough to waste my life believing any christian mythology or any other" even while religion is at the root of this issue. So does that mean mshaffer is incapable of of actually "getting it?"
So,the atheistic, liberal thinks they have cornered the market on what works. Go figure.
Mshaffer...I'm sorry you find my "jingoism" uninteresting and pathetic...ironically, the very same words I would use to describe you and your ideals.
Also, that guy back east...he was considered a NICE, PEACEFUL MUSLIM which begs the question???? If he is a nice guy...do we really want to know what the bad guys are like?
Enough said...
indythinker -
If mschaeffer comes face to face with someone hell bent on bringing death to America and Americans, he'll become educated to the fact (albeit too late) that they don't give a rat's behind if he does or doesn't believe in religion or a god of any kind.
I wonder what his last fleeting thought would be. "Wish I had a higher power to save me", maybe?
Probably...LOL!!!
Well I have to give it to you two losers for your inability to think at all.
labdaddy,
The type of people I "love to defend" are human beings who bigots like you assume are guilty when they merely stand accused. You, obviously, don't believe in the Constitution since you assume they are guilty while the Constitution says they are innocent until proven guilty. You really are as stupid as a stone if you think anyone is talking about releasing suspects into the public sphere here in the U.S. The Bush administration has already released over 500 people who were wrongly held in GITMO. If this does not give you pause as to the guilt of the rest of these human beings you are indeed pathetic.
indythinker,
How many United States citizens are murdered by fellow citizens each year versus how many dying at the hands of Muslims? Seems to me your fellow idiots are more of a threat to your life than Muslims in general.
As a former military person I helped maintain the nuclear armed B-52's that faced down the U.S.S.R. If you really think terrorists represent more of threat than the total annihilation of that era you are, again, stupid.
You may now continue your intellectual circle jerk love fest with each other. Have fun.
Just once...JUST ONCE...I would love to have a disagreement with a liberal without them calling me names. Grow up already! I'm just as entitled to my thoughts and opinions as the next person. Including you.
It would be nice if you could play in the sandbox without throwing sand.
mschaffer,
Please be a little more careful when calling people stupid. You need to read the Constitution before accusing others of not believing in it. Let me help get you started with the very first sentence. Once you read it, maybe you will realize that you are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution. (Please take caution to note the following: We the people, domestic tranquility, common defence, general welfare, etc.)
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
You see, Stupid, enemy combatants, aka terrorists, are not "we the people of the United States." Although I'm guessing if you had your way they would be.
mschaffer -
One last post and I retire from this subject.
America...Love it or Leave it!
I'll help you pack.
friday:
No need for gun fights, but let me point out that mschaffer was addressing the point that narrow mindedness is at the root of all prejudice, not that he is defending terrorist acts or lawlessness.
There are many posts by all parties and to only read the last ones, or allow emotion to play a role in ones thinking is elementary.
The defense of innocent people is paramount to our constitution, better that 10 guilty men go free than for one innocent man be incarcerated (paraphrased).
The mantra "Can fight well with others" is better said than "Can play well with others" for most people, and to this end is what mschaffer is about (not that he needs me to defend his point) just that he looks for facts not emotions to rule upon.
mschaffer:
I happen to agree with your points and albeit they are hard to understand for some they are clear for others. Sweet
Gunslinger:
Are you for real telling me "no need for gun fights." Please look above to see who opened that dialogue by calling people losers, bigots, and stupid. It was your buddy mschaffer. I'm sure your intentions are good, no matter how misplaced or misdirected.
friday:
I meant, no gun fighting with me, I was just making an observation from the peanut galary.
What part of this statement is addressed to anyone in partiular " you brave little conservatives act as if simple human beings without access to resources will destroy us all. What a bunch of wimps". mschaffer post # 5.
Then labdaddy wrote "mscaffer, "When you resort to name calling it indicates to me that those of us who prefer to keep terrorists outside of our borders have struck a nerve. It might be time for some self-reflection.
labdaddy post # 7.
The question is where in the #5 post was it addressed to a single person. Unlike the #7 post which was directed by name to mschaffer.
Can you understand that friday?
Oh and by the way, what would you call the guys who blasted Oklahoma, terrorist (McV).
I think he is one of the so called "We the People" if my memory serves me right.
America will defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic.
I think those are rather direct points.