Page 1 of 5 12345 Last
  1. #1
    janelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    20,772
    Thanks
    1,739
    Thanked 2,527 Times in 1,527 Posts

    'Close Guantanamo'?

    'Close Guantanamo'?
    Our politics fiddles while London burns.

    BY DANIEL HENNINGER
    Friday, July 8, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

    London's images of blood, toil, tears and sweat were seen by all the world's civilized people yesterday, and I think there is one thing they would agree on: You don't blow up the bus.

    In cities everywhere men and women board buses daily for work or school, and you don't need a U.N. declaration on human rights to understand that part of the deal is that no one blows up the bus. You don't blow up the office building. You don't blow up the train. It's too easy. It is the most cowardly cheap shot one can imagine. But they keep doing it.

    So maybe for starters, we don't want to close Guantanamo.

    The U.S. seems to have experienced a post-9/11 fall from seriousness. As the reality fades of a September 11 in America, a resort in Bali or a train station in Madrid, it somehow seems "safe" to propose setting a deadline to remove our troops from Iraq, to close Guantanamo, to dump the Patriot Act. We in America can do any of these things, and it will still be OK. We can believe that Islamic terrorism is less than it is, and get away with it.

    One more time? Should one assume that July 7 in London--the ripped-open double-decker buses, the stunned, bloody faces of those who lived--will in time fall in the queue of concerns to make it safe to argue, again, that all of this will go away if George Bush goes away?





    Every Islamic terrorist, from bin Laden and al-Zarqawi down to the next suicide bomber, knows how politics in the West works now. They know that many people of the West react to acts of violence differently than they did in 1940 when Winston Churchill demanded "Victory in spite of all terrors. Victory, however long and hard the road may be."
    But there were no cameras and satellite feeds set up on every corner of that death-strewn road. Yesterday's attack produced another new-media first: Grainy video images fed by a cell phone from a bombed subway tunnel. If the American people had seen daily the up-close reality of every battle and bomb in 1943, might we have "withdrawn" before June 1944?

    For bin Laden and al-Zarqawi, the relatively small bombs they set off in Iraq or London are a second-grade weapon. Their large-bore weapons in the terror war are modern electronic news technology and, ironically, open democratic societies.

    We think we're merely observers of events such as London's awful scenes yesterday or the Baghdad car bombs. No, if you watch television, you're on the battlefield. And some of us don't want to be there. Bin Laden and al-Zarqawi set off these bombs to pound the combatants at home, or in Congress, to make them put their hands on their head and, in effect, surrender. Suffering living-room shell shock, some do. The experience of seeing battlefield death or blown-up people from the couch is not normal.

    What happened yesterday in London was an attack on the modern world by pre-modernists. Tony Blair said, "Our values will outlive theirs." Maybe. Ours might not, though, if against theirs of wanton murder, our answer is "close Guantanamo." But there is a better example of the fundamental inability of our politics to sustain seriousness against such a threat: the Bolton nomination to the U.N.





    We know that Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and the Senate Democrats believe Mr. Bolton is temperamentally unfit to represent us at the U.N. Less well known is that in April 2004, the Security Council passed Resolution 1540 to prevent proliferation of "nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and their means of delivery"--what the terrorists will ultimately win with if they can get it.
    Resolution 1540 outlaws A.Q. Khan-type networks, including state participation. It is a Chapter Seven action, and thus binding. It requires members to report their compliance measures in detail. It requires member states to "establish, develop, review and maintain appropriate effective national export and trans-shipment controls over such items."

    We should want this if we indeed believe that a complex, globalized threat exists. Its success, however, depends on the will of the Security Council and whether its five Permanent Members will punish with sanctions any country not in compliance. Are you already ahead of me on this?

    The one person in the world with the knowledge, experience and will to conceivably make 1540 work is John Bolton. At State Mr. Bolton ran the Security Proliferation Initiative, whose goals precisely parallel those of Resolution 1540. The SPI under Mr. Bolton, for example, helped to shut down the A.Q. Khan nuclear-weapon materials network.

    Mr. Bolton is famous for his views of North Korea, but he is expert in the activities of one other incorrigible proliferator--Iran. Yesterday I asked a high international official, whose job is to develop global anti-terror structures, which states are still actively supporting terrorism. He said, "There are two, Syria and Iran."

    If the U.S. Senate wanted to send a signal of resolve and seriousness to whoever bombed London, Democrats would join with Republicans their first day back to dispatch proven anti-terror warrior John Bolton straight to the U.N. They won't. They'll keep playing political fiddles while London burns.

    The standard response to all this is that if George Bush and Tony Blair hadn't done Iraq, we'd all be as one in the war on terror. The standard response before September 11, was that if we weren't so close to terror-beset Israel, none of this would ever happen. For 30 years, the standard response to this terror has gotten many of us killed.

    Mr. Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. His column appears Fridays in the Journal and on OpinionJournal.com.

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement 'Close Guantanamo'?
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    not the middle of nowhere but I can see it from here.
    Posts
    3,852
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 164 Times in 90 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    And this writer seems like he thinks its great the Brits are going through this. He seems to see it as a reason for the war and also a reason to detain people without a trial for extended periods of time with no access to a lawyer friend or family. Its a sad day for America when we clap with applause for this kind of treatemtn of anyone. Al-Qaida they seem to strike at the most peculiar times, they gave Bush an excellent reason to follow a plan made by many in his administration long before he took office and now just when it looks like the Brits are going to pull their troops out of this war suddenly they al-Qaida gives the Brits a reason to stay and immediately takes credit. No matter what you say even you got to admit they got peculiar timing.
    Last edited by mesue; 07-08-2005 at 11:35 PM.
    Ignorance is bliss but the question is can we afford it?

  4. #3
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    The truth about Guantanamo Bay
    Michelle Malkin
    June 1, 2005



    The mainstream media and international human rights organizations have relentlessly portrayed the Guantanamo Bay detention facility as a depraved torture chamber operated by sadistic American military officials defiling Islam at every turn. It's the "gulag of our time," wails Amnesty International. It's the "anti-Statue of Liberty," bemoans New York Times columnist Tom Friedman.

    Have there been abuses? Yes. But here is the rest of the story -- the story that the Islamists and their sympathizers don't want you to hear.

    According to recently released FBI documents, which are inaccurately heralded by civil liberties activists and military-bashers as irrefutable evidence of widespread "atrocities" at Gitmo:

    A significant number of detainees' complaints were either exaggerated or fabricated (no surprise given al Qaeda's explicit instructions to trainees to lie). One detainee who claimed to have been "beaten, spit upon and treated worse than a dog" could not provide a single detail pertaining to mistreatment by U.S. military personnel. Another detainee claimed that guards were physically abusive, but admitted he hadn't seen it.

    Another detainee disputed one of the now-globally infamous claims that American guards had mistreated the Koran. The detainee said that riots resulted from claims that a guard dropped the Koran. In actuality, the detainee said, a detainee dropped the Koran then blamed a guard. Other detainees who complained about abuse of the Koran admitted they had never personally witnessed any such abuse, but one said he had heard that non-Muslim soldiers touched the Koran when searching it for contraband.

    In one case, Gitmo interrogators apologized to a detainee for interviewing him prior to the end of Ramadan.

    Several detainees indicated they had not experienced any mistreatment. Others complained about lack of privacy, lack of bed sheets, being unwillingly photographed, the guards' use of profanity, and bad food.

    If this is unacceptable, "gulag"-style "torture," then every inmate in America is a victim of human rights violations. (Oh, never mind, there are civil liberties chicken littles who actually believe that.)

    Erik Saar, who served as an army sergeant at Gitmo for six months and co-authored a negative, tell-all book about his experience titled "Inside the Wire," inadvertently provides us more firsthand details showing just how restrained, and sensitive to Islam -- to a fault, I believe -- the officials at the detention facility have been.

    Each detainee's cell has a sink installed low to the ground, "to make it easier for the detainees to wash their feet" before Muslim prayer, Saar reports. Detainees get "two hot halal, or religiously correct, meals" a day in addition to an MRE (meal ready to eat). Loudspeakers broadcast the Muslims' call to prayer five times a day.

    Every detainee gets a prayer mat, cap and Koran. Every cell has a stenciled arrow pointing toward Mecca. Moreover, Gitmo's library -- yes, library -- is stocked with Jihadi books. "I was surprised that we'd be making that concession to the religious zealotry of the terrorists," Saar admits. "[I]t seemed to me that the camp command was helping to facilitate the terrorists' religious devotion." Saar notes that one FBI special agent involved in interrogations even grew a beard like the detainees "as a sort of show of respect for their faith."

    Unreality-based liberals would have us believe that America is systematically torturing innocent Muslims out of spite at Guantanamo Bay. Meanwhile, our own MPs have endured little-publicized abuse at the hands of manipulative, hate-mongering enemy combatants. Detainees have spit on and hurled water, urine and feces on the MPs. Causing disturbances is a source of entertainment for detainees who, as Gen. Richard Myers points out, "would turn right around and try to slit our throats, slit our children's throats" if released.

    The same unreality-based liberals whine about the Bush administration's failure to gather intelligence and prevent terrorism. Yet, these hysterical critics have no viable alternative to detention and interrogation -- and there is no doubt they would be the first to lambaste the White House and Pentagon if a released detainee went on to commit an act of mass terrorism on American soil.

    Guantanamo Bay will not be the death of this country. The unseriousness and hypocrisy of the terrorist-abetting Left is a far greater threat.



    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/m...20050601.shtml
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  5. #4
    janelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    20,772
    Thanks
    1,739
    Thanked 2,527 Times in 1,527 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    Quote Originally Posted by mesue
    And this writer seems like he thinks its great the Brits are going through this. He seems to see it as a reason for the war and also a reason to detain people without a trial for extended periods of time with no access to a lawyer friend or family. Its a sad day for America when we clap with applause for this kind of treatemtn of anyone. Al-Qaida they seem to strike at the most peculiar times, they gave Bush an excellent reason to follow a plan made by many in his administration long before he took office and now just when it looks like the Brits are going to pull their troops out of this war suddenly they al-Qaida gives the Brits a reason to stay and immediately takes credit. No matter what you say even you got to admit they got peculiar timing.
    Never thought terrorists were smart, just lethal and killing machines. You would have been more on your high horse in WWll with how America treated prisioners but then you would have been a traitor if you took the side of the enemy like you do now. IMO

  6. #5
    tngirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Out of Memphis!!
    Posts
    5,860
    Thanks
    500
    Thanked 1,926 Times in 860 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    This post is a highly volatile subject. But I will put in my 2 cents worth anyway. First, we are at war. What are we to do? Let our enemies go so they can go and blow up some more innocent people? The author of the above article is NOT "clapping with joy" over London being attacked. He is simply stating facts.....how many of us have already forgotten the attacks of 9/11? Maybe they haven't yet found WOMD in Iraq....but look how long it took for them to find that bunker last month. I am not saying that there are WOMD.....but who is to say there aren't?

    These individuals that are being held at Gitmo are not protected under the Geneva Convention and you can bet your bottom dollar that if they were set free they would return to strike us again! The prisoners at Gitmo are members of the Taliban that support Bin Laden and will do so with their dying breath. They do not need to cry now and think that I will feel sorry for them.

    We had prison of war camps on US soil during WWII with German and Japanese prisoners (and no I am not talking about German or Japenese Americans that were unjustly held....but that is another story) Those individuals were held until war's end without trials or charges.

    War is ugly!! I do NOT like war and would like to see all things settled without the distructiveness of war. Unfortunately, that is not the way of man. But we can not just sit on our hands or twiddle our thumbs and truly believe that the injusticeness of the world will just disappear without show of force. WE DID THAT! And look what happened...thousands of people were killed, mutilated and injured on the infamous day of 9/11. Are we so ready for that to happen again? Our love of our own freedom is what allowed us to be such an easy target for terroism on our own soil. Within 6 months of the attacks on TWTC, people were complaining about the long waits at airports. We are such a self-centered lot of people....it is all about the moment....not the future and not the past. If we forget history it is sure to repeat itself.

    I live in Memphis. We would be such a great and easy target for a terriost strike. And yes, I am afraid of that but carry on every day in a normal fashion...but, I HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN!!! I cried for the victims and their families and the terror of 9/11. I cried 7/8 for the people of London and it was a heartbreaking sight to see the leader of a Great Nation on the verge of tears.

    You can bash me and my comments all you want. But this is my humble opinion and nothing you or anyone can say or do that will change this. I was listening to Sean Hannity the other day and he had a caller, a soldier from Fort Bragg that was present at the President's speech. This was his statement and question..."We (the armed forces) support our Commander In Cheif 100%. How can people say that they support us, and not support him?" I have a nephew that has been to Iraq (5 yrs of service), a nephew in the Navy (4 yrs of service), a sister in the Air Force (25 yrs of service) and a brother-n-law that is a Green Beret out of Ft Bragg NC (23 yrs of service). So in my humble opinion....you should thank your lucky stars for them and all the others just like them that put their lives on the line for our freedoms. And while you are at it....take a little bit of your time to check out the good things that are happening in Afganistan (sp?) and Iraq. We don't hear about these things....the media and democrats (that have already started trying to win back the presidency and the hill) only want to report on the subjects that are volatile and ugly. AND THAT IS WHAT THE ABOVE ARTICLE IS STATING!!

    Thank you and sorry that this was soooooo long! I will now step down off my soap box.

  7. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    Only problem with the John Wayne approach is terrorism increased three-fold in the last year alone. We are accomplishing nothing with this so-called war. In the mean time we are literally selling away our place as the only superpower in the world and will probably end up a very poor second. Quite a legacy for our children and grandchildren.

    Fighting terrorism with military might is like pouring boiling water on a sunburn to cure it. The only way to fight terrorism effectively is covertly which is how we should have deposed Saddam, without selling our children's future. Problem is our intelligence agencies suck and have since the end of the cold war.

    One thing the terrorist leaders do like however is the fact all we do in this country is point fingers and name call, blaming the left, blaming the right and not paying attention to really solving or even recognizing the horrendous problems this country faces. They started the ball rolling but they don't even need to attack us again (though they will) we are very effectively destroying ourselves and they will just sit back and laugh; it won't matter at all whether it was the "looney left" or the "revolting right."
    You can't get ahold of water by clutching it but let your hand relax & you can experience it..Dyer

  8. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    9,635
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    Guantanamo won't close until Castro is dead and there is a new democratic government in place. Why else keep troops there without end? Yes, we do have these detainees that are in limbo but it serves no purpose to send fighting men back to their own country to kill our troops. Cuba is very important logistically to keep an eye on some South American governments that are not stable.

    Terrorism has increased because of the presence of military forces in the Middle East. This is not a stable part of the world. These things might have happened with or without the presence of the military. But the fact that several nations still have troops in Afganistan and Iraq is going to be a continuing problem. They have poorly educated or ignorant people who will believe what they are told as opposed to educated people who will read and make up their own minds. There will always be those so fanatical that they will kill themselves for a cause.

    I don't think that what we saw in London was anything different than we will see at some time again in the US. The only think that we have to hope for is that those who are loyal Americans will reveal information if they know that their lives or the lives of others are in danger. I also realize that there will be those who have come to this country to better their lives and those of their children who may be the target of police and FBI investigations. If they have nothing to hide grand. But if they do have something suspicious, I can only pray that they will be found out before they take lives.
    I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints.

  9. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    284
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    Our own intelligence info has shown that terrorism has actually increased under Bush's presidency. Are we fighting a war or creating terrorism? Facts don't support the war.

  10. #9
    YNKYH8R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    RedSox Nation
    Posts
    3,813
    Thanks
    266
    Thanked 903 Times in 403 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    I don't believe they have to actually close the base, I think they should just give them (the prisoners) legal recourse. I'm not saying let them go just try them, charge them with something. The problem is we can't we have no evidence a case can't be made. If it was a US citizen that was being held there would be uproar, but they're not so who cares.
    We want to to dish out democracy to only those we feel truly deserve it. The people in Gitmo don't according to some.
    And you're right we shold be fighting these terrorists covertly, but we aren't. Terrorists dumb? Must be pretty smart to be adapting there attacks in Iraq and have the ability to bomb 4 seperate times in less than half an hour in England, and fly planes into sky scrapers. I think we are seriously underestimating them.

    But don't worry. They (the terrorists) are in their final throes.
    Looking for Sympathy? It's in the Dictionary between Sh!t and Syphilis.

  11. #10
    janelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    20,772
    Thanks
    1,739
    Thanked 2,527 Times in 1,527 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    Who says we aren't fighting the terrorists covertly? I think we have numerous spys on the ground in Iraq and they have done a great job in ferriting out numerous terrorists---just look at Gitmo for proof.

    We still have bases in Germany and look at how long WWll has been over. I think we will be in the Middle East for a very long time and we should be. Those "ignorant" people need to see American soldiers up close so they will see they are not the devil like they are being told. Sorry, sending in the Peace Corp at this time would only get them slaudered cause they do not carry weapons.

    And we just may lose this war if the Dems do not get on the band wagon instead of postering for power in the next election. It's time for our country to come together when we are in a war. This is not a party people, these terrorists are serious when they say they want to anillate us. The more the Dems talk about treating the terrorists like they are wayward children the more the American people will think they are nuts and not vote for them.

    Gitmo will never close and it shouldn't even when Castro dies. Too many crazies just like him who want to take us out. We need to thank God we have brave men and women who are willing to protect us and fight.

    It's shameful more men are not bellying up to do their duty. I met a woman soldier on my last pland trip. She is afraid she and her husband may both be sent to Iraq. They have an eighteen month old baby and her mother will be taking care of him if both go. She was coming back from training and wanted to get home to visit her family and see her baby. Then her hubby and baby are going back to the base and wait orders.

    She and many other women who are mothers of babies will go to protect us cause we have a volunteer army and if the president re-instates the draft the Dems will raise a stink about how horrible the president is to send all those young people to war. Well people, we now have young mothers going to Iraq to protect our sorry butts. And we cry for the terrorists who would kill us as soon as look at us. How backward is this?????

  12. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    284
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: 'Close Guantanamo'?

    OMG! This has to be a parody response like those "The Onion" articles.

    Quote Originally Posted by janelle
    Who says we aren't fighting the terrorists covertly? I think we have numerous spys on the ground in Iraq and they have done a great job in ferriting out numerous terrorists---just look at Gitmo for proof.

    We still have bases in Germany and look at how long WWll has been over. I think we will be in the Middle East for a very long time and we should be. Those "ignorant" people need to see American soldiers up close so they will see they are not the devil like they are being told. Sorry, sending in the Peace Corp at this time would only get them slaudered cause they do not carry weapons.

    And we just may lose this war if the Dems do not get on the band wagon instead of postering for power in the next election. It's time for our country to come together when we are in a war. This is not a party people, these terrorists are serious when they say they want to anillate us. The more the Dems talk about treating the terrorists like they are wayward children the more the American people will think they are nuts and not vote for them.

    Gitmo will never close and it shouldn't even when Castro dies. Too many crazies just like him who want to take us out. We need to thank God we have brave men and women who are willing to protect us and fight.

    It's shameful more men are not bellying up to do their duty. I met a woman soldier on my last pland trip. She is afraid she and her husband may both be sent to Iraq. They have an eighteen month old baby and her mother will be taking care of him if both go. She was coming back from training and wanted to get home to visit her family and see her baby. Then her hubby and baby are going back to the base and wait orders.

    She and many other women who are mothers of babies will go to protect us cause we have a volunteer army and if the president re-instates the draft the Dems will raise a stink about how horrible the president is to send all those young people to war. Well people, we now have young mothers going to Iraq to protect our sorry butts. And we cry for the terrorists who would kill us as soon as look at us. How backward is this?????

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in