Good. It might have been useful at one time, but it's been misused, and it's become an embarassment and a liability.

I say we release them to some location in the Middle East and have Murtha there by himself waiting to greet them upon their release.

Murtha seems to be suffering from dementia. No purpose? Those people housed in Gitmo are illegal combatants, terrorists.

We can't release them to work their evil again. That leaves execution, which works for me, and is eminently allowable under Geneva Conventions.

The anti-war left suffer from intellectual dishonesty and intellectual poverty.

The only embarrassing thing about Gitmo is how many people bought the lies of the misuse. John, you are aware that every story of abuse at Gitmo has been debunked right? But of course, if you repeat the lies long enough people will believe it.

"but it's been misused, and it's become an embarrassment and a liability."

I agree. It's been misused by the left and the Media as a way to continue their attack on President Bush while giving aid and comfort to our enemies. The dishonorable actions of a hand full of idiots has allowed left wing political hacks and the then out of power cry baby liberals to behave in the most despicable way. They disgrace themselves , mouths drooling as they engage in a fiendish frenzy of weaseling their way back to power by stirring up hate and blaming everything on the United States of America and the Current Party in Power. ( This traitorous behavior and hate displayed by the Democrats is the most Grotesque display by an incompetent complete Minority political Party I have ever seen).

It's a liability alright. Following the Al Qaeda handbook not much different from the Democrats book of perpetual outrage they tag team and the Democrat media is always behind the scenes in this Three ring circus eagerly awaiting the results of their latest polls to gage the effectiveness of the latest deceitful fraud they are feeding to the masses. These murderous animals are treated and fed better that our soldiers and even better than many Americans can feed themselves.

Ya , it should be shut down and the remaining human waste should be assigned to the democrat leadership so they can give them even more love only they know how to give. Lets see them put their money where their mouth is and transform these beheading butchers into pansy ass tin foil wearing burnouts who just feel good about themselves. I'd like to see a democrat actually do some "REAL" work and actually accomplish something worthy of merit as apposed to just running their mouths , lying and deceiving their way into power.

What a shame it was to see that corrupt imbecil
ABSCAM Okinawa Murtha disgrace the House of Rep. on CSPAN yesterday. Yet not nearly as pathetic and laughable embarrassment Pelosi has made of herself this past week.

Most ethical , honest and transparent ? in the History? LOL, ha ha ha , oh my , your killing me larry! I believe that promise was broken even before they were sworn in. Keep up the good work Lee ands friends, I got two years stock of popcorn and a waterproof keyboard. Let the party begin. (Howard Dean Scream!)lol.

Faith+1,

No no no , Not all has been debunked. I flushed my entire Encyclopedia Britannica in just one flush. No really , I did , I did , I did! lol.

Hey did you catch that standing ovation and wave the Black Caucus gave William Jefferson? Made me jump up and do the "Cabbage Patch". Can I get a whoop! whoop! Why?

That officially killed the notion that the Queen of Hypocrisy and her PelosiCrats had any intention of keeping any of their promises they made as they begged , pleaded and lied their asses off to be let back in power. She has failed already. Game over, fine her another $21,000.00.

Good. It might have been useful at one time, but it's been misused, and it's become an embarassment and a liability.

Posted by: John at January 10, 2007 02:31 AM

And then what, release them all into the wild?

". . .he is willing to cut funds to do it."

It's always Vietnam with these asshats, isn't it?

And John, a serious question: you call Gitmo "an embarrassment and a liability." On what do you base that characterization? Please don't tell me you're concerned about "world opinion" when it comes to Gitmo - a world which turns a blind eye to UN rapists and lauds dictators like Chavez and Castro isn't one whose opinion I care to have.

Sure - let's put all the current inmate in Murtha's house.

I find the most embarrassing aspect of Gitmo the world outcry to release these "innocent" people, and the immediate denial by those same detractors to take back the prisoners.

when are Khalid Sheik Mohammed, et al being held there going on trial under the newly passed Military Commissions Act?

Seems to me Bush said it had to be passed quickly to put these criminals on trial, but now no rush to actually put them on trial. Makes you wonder what might be brought to light if they are allowed to defend themselves in a court of law.

Then again, they were being held in the CIA secret prisons, not Gitmo, for the first few years of detainment, so that doesn't exactly mean abuses took place at Gitmo. However, Gitmo is the face of the US policy of extraordinary rendition, where there have been several accounts of abuses that have already come to light. (By the way, I think I remember some in the right blogosphere saying the CIA prisons didn't exist, instead it was a plot by Bush to find leakers in the gov't - wow, how wrong were they!)

I'll make the over/under on the 14 high value prisoners that were moved to Gitmo a few months ago actually going on trial 1 year. Do I have any takers?

Such a travesty that the real perpetrators, financiers, and planners of 9/11 have not been brought before a court (of any kind, military tribunal or whatever) and been convicted of these horrendous crimes. Pisses me off just thinking about it, as it should any patriotic American.

Absoulutely. Every Gitmo detainee is guilty of something every one of them, due process be dammed. There is absolutely no evidence of abuse.

How about instead we close the UN we sure dont need the UN and its band of tyrants,despots,crinimals,and terrorists and we give that stupid jackass MURTHA a new job picking up the trash in central park

Is it My Pet Gloat or Their Pet Propagandist?

MyPetGloat,

Everyone in prison is innocent, didn't you know? Ask them, or their lawyers, they'll tell you.

Seriously though, I'm sure there are some in Gitmo, who just had the extremely unfortunate luck to take a vacation in a warzone and get captured as enemy combatants. What would you prefer...that they were executed on the spot...or captured and detained?

You're all criticism, and no answers.

CMD writes;

And John, a serious question: you call Gitmo "an embarrassment and a liability." On what do you base that characterization?

OK, here's what I base it on...

The Guantanamo facility holds something like 500 prisioners. After holding them for 4 years, we've managed to successfully try how many of them? Hmmmm.... Well, none actualy.

Now, if your local district attorney had 500 suspects, a virtualy unlimited budget and 4 years to work on the case, but never managed to complete even ONE single trial, I'd call that an embarassment. I think you would too.

Out of the prisioners in Gitmo, many (a hundred or two, perhaps) have been released with no charges. Ooops... We held you for 3 or 4 years, but you can go now. No appology. No new suit and $20 bucks. I guess it's better than the treatment the Wiztard above recommended. Just execute them.

Anyway, if you held one of my family members for three or four years, it'd be ON, baby. In this country, I'd call my lawyers. In other countries where their legal system has little leverage with our legal system, I might pick up a rock or a stick or a bomb. You would too. That's why I consider the lack of due process when rounding up and detaining people to be a liability.

The next logical question is what do you do with them? That's tough because they've got a bit of an attitude by now. Even if they didn't when they went in, I'm pretty sure they do now. Anyway, the answer is not all that hard. You do the same thing you allways do to suspects. You give them a fair trial, and you eiether punish them, or you let them go, based on the facts. We do this all the time, everywhere accross the country. It's a proven system that works, and passes legal muster. No great mystery on what to do...

John

Release the terrorists from Gitmo and then they can march in the NAAMBLA parades with Ms. America, Nancy Pelosi.I'm sure they'd all love that.

nikkolai, or, what passes for reasoned discourse from the average Wizchoir member.

In your former life, you must have walked the halls w/ Plato.

Lets start with a few facts...
After 5 years over 400 of these "most dangerous" have been released.

After 5 years only 4 have specific charges against them.

"Harsh Methods" have been used against those who have not been charged.

Gitmo is U.S. Terrority

........................................
Now for opinion...How did we change from a nation of laws and liberty to a nation where we hold people indefinitly without specific charges?

I tell you how...for a brief time we were a nation griped in fear. I never thought I would see the United States afraid. People in fear want to be protected. We were told that Gitmo would protect us.

But now that fear has subsided. We are looking around with clearer minds. Do we need protection from those whose threat to us has not been established? Yes there are dangerous people there..but we have a wonderful SuperMax here in Colorado (John Walker lind is here) where some of them are being held..we have room for more..

As long as gitmo prison is open we have lost the right to be critical about the abusive treatment of people in other countries. It is not right.
It is not who we are..(well maybe it is how some of you are)

nogo postal

The US typically is critical about "human rights" abuse only when it serves as a club to bash some "undesirable regime."

It's pretty difficult to gain much high ground in the eyes of the rest of the world when they are fully aware of the Gitmo abuse, rendition, a fraudulent Iraqi war, not to mention a whole list from our glorious past like the Shah, Pinochet, Diem and a host of so many other unsavory characters who happened to serve our purposes.

Trolls again miss the facts. 1- The club gitmo crowd was not afforded the tribunal for a few years because the inmates LAWYERS put a hold on them until it went through the courts. 2- Many detainees would have been released sooner but there home countries would not take them. Pesky little facts get in the way of trolls. ww

Bull puckey, nogo. Gitmo is a reasoned reaction to unlawful enemy combatants, ones that do not pay any regard whatsoever to the strictures civilized nations have agreed to bind them among themselves.

They are not petty criminals, as the other John suggests, they are not prisoners of war per the Geneva Conventions, they are terrorists who fought by hiding among civilians, using them as shields, and among them are some of the "civilians" who aided them in this manner.

Both of you give far too much weight to a presumption of innocence to these prisoners, without consideration for the threat they were and the danger they can still pose. This is not a condition created by their imprisonment at Gitmo, it is their actions that have resulted in them being imprisoned.

It is telling that none of the opposition here have had an answer to "okay, we close Gitmo. What do we do with them?" The snarky comments about letting them march with Pelosi or live with Murtha are meant to reflect that glaring non-answer.

"Many detainees would have been released sooner but there home countries would not take them. Pesky little facts get in the way of trolls. " Can you provide any pesky facts on how many and the countries involved?..also in regard to the lawyers..are we not a nation of laws...it seems some of those lawyers involved sit on the Conservative dominated Supreme Court.
Trash talk involving opinions is what blogs are are about...but real facts must be recognised and made avaliable to support our opinions..as for troll I have been posting here(with one name I abandoned because it was usurped for two years)...

Rudy in 2008...

I say release em all to Berkeley, SanFran, Wisconsin, etc.

Lets see how libs will help them assimilate.

Shall I even bring up the supreme idiocy of the concept of having civilian trials for POWs, let alone illegal combatants? It's never been done, POWS have never had that right, it's lunacy to think so.

Historically, throughout the world, prisoners have been held until the end of the war. For those that have been through trials, those have always been military tribunals.

So the lunatic claim that they should be tried in criminal courts is beyond belief! Good grief!

The Guantanamo facility holds something like 500 prisioners. After holding them for 4 years, we've managed to successfully try how many of them? Hmmmm.... Well, none actualy.

Numbers:

Approximately 775 detainees have gone to Gitmo.
About 340 have been released.
110 are set to be released.

So there are 325 detainees that we need to put on trial.

No one seems to be trying very hard to develop a way or offer a workable solution to getting them fair trials. Much like the Palestinians, the Guantanamo prisoners are more valuable to the world in their current state than they would be free. As long as they're detained they are the "victims". As long as they are detained, they add a little weight to the baseball bat used to consistantly attack the president and the U.S.

One example cited by The Washington Post:

Other detainees cleared of terrorism charges have also languished for years at Guantanamo Bay, but all have been sent home or are in the process of being transferred. For the Chinese Uighurs (pronounced WEE-gurs ), there is no end in sight. About 20 countries -- including Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Turkey and a Latin American country -- have turned down U.S. overtures to give them asylum, according to U.S. officials.

When it comes time for them to be released without trial, some countries are a little less than excited about it.

I can't imagine why.

It's a mystery.

But John, as you said, it's not because they were guilty and should not have been released it's because they were detained in the first place.

So naturally, a Pakistani native found in a warzone warzone with enemy forces should be put on trial in the U.S. by the standards set for prosecuting U.S. citizens? Makes perfect sense.

The point is, you seem to see the situation as cut and dry, black and white with plenty of legal precedent, when it is not.

I guess it's better than the treatment the Wiztard above recommended. Just execute them.

You're not saying that I said that are you?

"What would you prefer...that they were executed on the spot...or captured and detained?"

Because that is what I said.

The next logical question is what do you do with them? That's tough because they've got a bit of an attitude by now. Even if they didn't when they went in, I'm pretty sure they do now.

Yes, it's our fault now. Innocent puppy lovers tranformed into cold blooded killers.

Jesus, Weegie... You're a moron.

Q) How many of the detainees in Gitmo are POW's?

A) None of them.

POW's have rights under international law, rights the gitmo detainees are denied.

I'd be just as happy if we would give the "illegal enemy combatants" the POW designation, instead of this poorly defined, never used black hole of a legal definition, IEC.

What, you didn't like Saddam's civil trial?

Is it My Pet Gloat or Their Pet Propagandist?

No.

Judging from your response, you would be the 30 percentile asshat who agrees in lockstep with the uninformed opinions of those whose military experience is based on the number of hours they have spent on the newest release of Halo.

So who else is a Gitmo propagandist?

Military lawyers? Clergy? Britain? Germany?

Them, and especially Jack Murtha- with those bothersome 38 years experience in the military.

But, according to K-street funded right wing thinktanks, Murtha is a bribe-taking treasonous moonbat!
And thats all the whiznuts need to know and they swallow it like a ten dollar crackwhore.

Heralder,

I appreciate your presenting some numbers on the Gitmo discussion.

So what we've got is just about 60% of the detainees don't have enough evidence to hold. That's a huge error rate.

Out of the remaining 40% some will be successfully prosecuted, some will be vindicated. Let's say that perhaps a quarter of those taken to trial can prove their innocence.

That's a 70% failure rate. We will have held those people for over 4 years, longer for those going to trial. A 70% failure rate is not acceptable.

The US screams about human rights violations when this happens in other countries.

I am no longer surprised by the blatant hypocrisy of liberals anymore. They should direct their anger at the UN, whose troops sexually abuse Sudanese refugees! If they truly care, they would have asked the Dem congress to cut off or reduce funding to this corrupt organization.

John,

So what we've got is just about 60% of the detainees don't have enough evidence to hold. That's a huge error rate.

Indeed it is, but the options of what to do with them upon capture is very very limited. They must first be taken prisoner where a fate will be decided. The malfunction is the correct mechanism in which to try them. Military Tribunals have been ruled out, and U.S. civilian trials seem woefully inappropriate.

The US screams about human rights violations when this happens in other countries.

I'm actually unsure as to where else in the world something directly comparable to Guantanamo Bay has happened that we've criticized. Could you help me out with a link?

Also of interest may be Patterico's five part interview with an Army Major the dealt directly with many detainees in his time at the Base.

Heralder,
Thanks for the link to Patterico. I saw this before. Our friends on the left wouldn't care less about these. They seem to be interested only in finding something to criticize our military. They don't seem to care much about the brutality of the terrorists and their determination to behead people in a cold-hearted fashion. They want to give these people all the benefits of the doubt while holding our military to most stringent (almost perfection) standard. Despite the fact that we have military tribunal and the people involved have been prosecuted, the liberals continue to make a big deal of it. At the same time, they willingly ignore the UN troops abusing Sudanese refugees. This is the most recent abuse in a long string of abuse by the UN. The hypocritical double standard of the left is to be expected. I am waiting for these folks to condemn the UN just 1/10 as much as they have done wrt Guantanamo.

Presidents (and their delegates) have detained enemy combatants in every major conflict in the Nation's history, including recent conflicts such as the Gulf, Vietnam, and Korean wars. During World War II, the United States detained hundreds of thousands of POWs in the United States (some of whom were U.S. citizens) without trial or counsel.

Then as now, the purposes of detaining enemy combatants during wartime are, among other things, to gather intelligence and to ensure that detainees do not return to assist the enemy.

... the POW designation, instead of this poorly defined, never used black hole of a legal definition, IEC. Posted by: John at January 10, 2007 12:32 PM

Supreme Court of the United States in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 37-38 (1942)

Quoted from Quirin, 317 U.S. at 37-38:Blockquote>Lawful combatants receive prisoner of war (POW) status and the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. Unlawful combatants do not receive POW status and do not receive the full protections of the Third Geneva Convention.The recent Hamdi v. Rumsfeld decision did apply the Third Geneva Convention to Gitmo detainees.

However many in the legal community believe that decision will be overturned when another related case hits the S Court.

Its also important to note nothing in the Hamdi v. Rumsfeld decision said Gitmo was illegal or should be closed, in fact Scalia said in his written opinion that the US could could maintain the Gitmo detainees foreever if deemed necessary.

CONSERVATIVES, HAVE YOU NOT EVEN A SHRED OF HUMAN DECENCY????

PLEASE TEAR DOWN YOUR GULAG, I'M BEGGING YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Herm,one, quit yelling. Two, if you think Gitmo is truly a gulag, why the hell are the prisoners getting fatter by the day?