Democrats Decide To Try And Close Gitmo By Cutting Off Funding…

Ken McCracken • June 30, 2007

…but only after the President has already decided himself to close it.
Which is a hilarious bit of political posturing, isn’t it? For the last several years Democrats have been adamant about the evils of Gitmo. They’ve compared the detention facility there to Stalin-era Soviet gulags, accused the troops there of torture and all but accused them of being worse than the terrorists they detain.
Yet throughout all the years Democrats have been harping on this in Congress (six months of which they’ve actually been in the majority) this is the first time they’ve tried to close the detention facility down. And they were only able to muster the courage to try and do it after the President said he was going to close it himself.
I’m sure they’re hoping that their rabid, far-left, anti-war base will see this as a strong move against the Bush administration (one that possibly makes up for their inability to hold up Iraq war funding earlier this year), but is that base really so stupid that they wouldn’t be able to see through a move as transparent as this one?

Tags: Politics, The Loony Left, War On Terror

Q_Mech

The last time I checked, it was up to Congress to make the law – not the President. Maybe I’m off on some right-wing-conspirator’s flight of fancy here, but I’m pretty sure it says so in the Constitution!

Now, follow me for a minute… Since terrorists weren’t around when the Geneva Convention was written, there is no specific international convention that addresses how to deal with them. US law on how to treat prisoners doesn’t apply, because those gentle poets in Gitmo were all snared on foreign soil. In short, there is no law, US or international, that states explicitly how terrorists are to be treated when captured. Add to this happiness the fact that the Supreme Court decided to overturn the precedent of the Nuremburg Trials (now illegal, apparently!) and declare that the Gitmo goons can’t be tried by a military tribunal. Where does that leave us?

It leaves us with the need for a new law to address how to handle these gomers.

Who makes the law? Congress.

Now – considering that Congress has done exactly jack shit to produce such a law, explain to me exactly how it is that George Bush keeps Gitmo in operation??

Am I off my rocker here? wtf?!
Hawk

Bush has said for three years that he wants to close it. This action needs to be taken.
Neiman

Hawk: Bush is wrong to want to close GITMO, he is submitting to outside pressures in a cowardly manner rather than acting on his core beliefs in the best interests of America. The Democrats don't want to close it because there is anything going on there that is wrong, it is solely to stick it to Bush for petty partisan reasons.

Of course you and the Democrats would like us to leave Cuba so you could give a death bed present to that bastard Castro, one of your heroes, like Che!
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Dove, try reading the article:

The White House says Bush has already decided to close the U.S. prison in Cuba and transfer more than 370 terrorism suspects elsewhere, possibly including the maximum-security military prison in Fort Leavenworth, Kan.
Neiman

Rob: You are correct about the facts in this case, but I totally disagree with Bush and the Democrats about closing the Guantanamo Bay Marine Base, and transferring the terrorists to United States soil where they will bleed us financially for years for free legal representation and I suspect they will get the same special treatment at Leavenworth they get at GITMO.

These are the freaking enemies of America and either directly or indirectly they all played a role in killing United States citizens and soldiers. But, by all means let us give them at least the same rights we give illegal aliens, which is full rights as citizens and make damn sure Mr. & Mrs. taxpayer foot the bill.
Hawk

Dove, try reading the article:

I did. My point is, why should I believe him when he has said the same thing for three years? He has taken no action to do it. If the Congress wants it closed this is the proper action.
http://Array Bat One

Hawk,

Perhaps you could explain, absent the usual hysterical leftwing rhetoric, why the facility at Gitmo should be closed, what should be done with the terrorists being held there, and how doing any of this would enhance American security, which is, after all, the very first responsibility of any national government.

Incidentally, my personal opinion is that those "detainees" who were captured overseas should be "rendered" back to their respective countries of origin… after they've been hung, with their hands and feet bound with pig entrails.
http://ajacksonian.blogspot.com/ ajacksonian

I would like to see the actual activities of the organizations the individuals are a part of in Gitmo addressed by the appropriate part of the US Codeon those things. Of course that would mean actually having to do this thing as: look at the activities, look at the laws involved, and then putting the proper court in charge. Which, strangely enough, is not a Civil Court as the part of the Code dealing with such activities specifies the court involved. After the first few convictions the established precedent would quickly speed things up: being a member of an organization that does the actions specified gets just one sentence via the US Code. Very 19th century and easy to read.

Of course we are too civilized to enforce our own laws…
2Hotel9

Defund Gitmo? Hell yes! No more money for "culturally" appropriate food. No more money for prayer rugs and Qur'ans. No more money for medical care. This is an excellent plan! Who do I call to have this fast tracked?

SayAnythingBlog.com

Democrats Decide To Try And Close Gitmo By Cutting Off Funding…

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments