Gitmo’s Days are Numbered

by Sean Hackbarth

The White House moves closer to closing down Guantanamo Bay and moving Islamist terrorist prisoners to prisons on the U.S. mainland. Supreme Court and military court rulings have forced the Bush administration to completely revamp how to legally process these prisoners.

President Bush’s national security and legal advisers had been scheduled to discuss the move at a meeting Friday, the officials said, but after news of it broke, the White House said the meeting would not take place that day and no decision on Guantanamo Bay’s status is imminent.

“It’s no longer on the schedule for tomorrow,” said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council. “Senior officials have met on the issue in the past, and I expect they will meet on the issue in the future.”

Three senior administration officials spoke about the discussions on condition of anonymity because they were internal deliberations.

Expected to consult soon, according to the officials, were Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace.

Previous plans to close Guantanamo ran into resistance from Cheney, Gonzales and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. But officials said the new suggestion is gaining momentum with at least tacit support from the State and Homeland Security departments, the Pentagon and the Intelligence directorate.

Administration critics domestic and international have hyperventilated claiming Gitmo is an American gulag. Newsweek spread a false story about a Koran flushed down a toilet to demonstrate how awful conditions are in the prison camp. If they’re so bad how about the prisoners’ weight gain?

Putting prisoners in Cuba made perfect security sense. Why take the risk of placing people willing to launch planes into buildings on U.S. soil? Sure, the chance of breaking out of Leavenworth are about nil, but why take the chance?

The Bush administration has had over six years to put together a legal process for these prisoners. Their botching has opened the door to anti-American smears using Gitmo as the focal point. Chalk up another bit of mismanagement on Bush’s watch.

Moving prisoners to Leavenworth and the naval brig in Charleston, S.C. won’t silence the critics. Amnesty International won’t shut up if an Islamist terrorist is sitting in Kansas instead of Cuba. To them it’s not about the prisoners’ location but what country is holding them and who the President is.

“White House Near Decision to Close Gitmo

Save and Share: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • NewsVine
  • Furl
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Fark

9 Responses to “Gitmo’s Days are Numbered”

1

The Newsweek story turned out to be true, you know - confirmed by the Justice Department.

But I guess it could be different in the alternate reality you guys live in.

2

The only confirmation I read in the NY Times story I linked was other Gitmo prisoners claimed the Koran was flushed–a claim dropped by Newsweek. You may believe terrorists set to discredit the U.S. to advance their war, but I won’t.

3

Hey, Sean, why not deal with these guys correctly under the Geneva Convention - they’re armed, non-uniformed combatants, correct?

4

But they’re not abiding by the laws of war under the Geneva Convention. They’re more than criminals but not part of an organized force sponsored by a nation-state.

Using Geneva Convention rules might be the least worst of all options because Bush’s lawyers haven’t been smart enough to put together a better solution.

By treating these prisoners like criminals I worry the government won’t be able to meet the level of “beyond reasonable doubt” during trial. The “fog of war” is just that. Many of these prisoners should never be released. They would simply return to attacking the use (with the Left blaming America for imprisoning them in the first place).

The other option I’ve been saying for a few years is “just shoot them.” We’re better off with them dead.

5

“The other option I’ve been saying for a few years is “just shoot them.” We’re better off with them dead.”

Since we’ve taken them from the battleground it’s a little late for that solution….unless you’d like to blur the line between the U.S. and the countries we designate as our enemies. Personally, I value our moral superiority over a country like Iran.

6

If the choice is letting them go because they can’t be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or shot to prevent them from killing more Americans I choose the latter.

We’re in this situation because the Bush administration couldn’t figure out a legal process that even satisfied military lawyers and blind Bush-bashing critics who don’t realize the struggle this nation faces.

7

If the choice is letting them go because they can’t be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or shot to prevent them from killing more Americans I choose the latter.

Do you realize what the hell you are saying? Seriously? Do you? Do you realize how this sounds?

8

The other option I’ve been saying for a few years is “just shoot them.” We’re better off with them dead.

That would be following the Geneva Convention. They are armed, non-uniformed combatants.

Return the remaining unarmed ones to Afghanistan to face trial there.

9

The only confirmation I read in the NY Times story I linked was other Gitmo prisoners claimed the Koran was flushed–a claim dropped by Newsweek.

Did you forget that the claim was based on a pre-release version of a DoJ investigation?

Newsweek retracted the claims because some doubt emerged that the DoJ report was actually going to say that; but a week after the retraction when it was released, the DoJ confirmed that Korans had been mistreated by American guards. Newsweek retracted their retraction.

They’re more than criminals but not part of an organized force sponsored by a nation-state.

They’re not? Then what’s all this talk about Iran sponsoring Al-Queda?

But they’re not abiding by the laws of war under the Geneva Convention.

They don’t have to, to be afforded the protections of the Geneva Conventions. The GC prohibits the mistreatment of all persons, not just those following the laws of war. All persons, not just the soldiers of GC signatory nations.

There’s no provision under the articles of the GC that you can just execute people because you don’t recognize what nation they’re soldiers of.

Many of these prisoners should never be released.

Many more of them have never been accused of any crime or terrorist act. It’s factually inaccurate of you to portray Gitmo as being 100% full of terrorists. A lot of those people have never, ever been linked to any terrorist act, organization, or training camp. A fair number of people are there simply because of a neighbor with a grudge.

Leave a Reply




You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>