Obama draft order calls for closing Guantanamo Bay

Now I'm not so impressed.

Quote :

WASHINGTON - The new Obama administration circulated a draft executive order Wednesday that calls for closing the controversial detention center at Guantanamo Bay within a year and halting any war crimes trials in the meantime.

Closing the facility in Cuba "would further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice," read the draft prepared for the new president's signature.

While some of the detainees currently held at Guantanamo would be released, others would be transferred elsewhere and later put on trial under terms to be determined.

I'll grant the Bush administration should have done something instead of holding them for over six years, but to just release some of these guys- to what?? go hence forth and fight our troops again?

Hell even some of these doofs are willing to plead guilty and get the death penalty.

Okay- bullets are cheap. Target practice anyone?? (I kid, I kid)

I don't know why you guys are surprised at this. Obama campaigned on it. It's part of his plan to restore our standing in the world.

I'm not surprised. Disappointed.

Why not put these prisoners in our prisons? Why is it ok to keep them on a damn island and kept like a dog in a cage? Is this what we want to do with them forever?

party42 wrote:

Why not put these prisoners in our prisons? Why is it ok to keep them on a damn island and kept like a dog in a cage? Is this what we want to do with them forever?

Because then the govt would have to show how they gathered the information

It will be interesting see what happens with these people once they get intot he US court system and the Govt needs to give away how they captured them.

Remember, they dropped all the terrorism charges against the guy who was supposed to launch a dirty bomb because they did not want to have it be known public how they gathered the information

In other words, Obama is going to set them all free to attack our troops again(which is funny considering he campaigned on bringing them home, then flipped sides real quick on that)

I was under the understanding that GWB had decided to close the prison there before, so I guess I am confussed about this whole thing.

Bush: I Would Like To Close Guantanamo
Monday, May 08, 2006
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,194634,00.html

i agree this is likely a mistake to close gitmo.

as i understand it, much of the information that has come to the u.s about these terrorists is not admissable in court. say, a saudi investigation uncovered a suspect was involved in an overseas bombing plot. too bad. a decent lawyer in the states would get that case kicked out of court in no time, based on past saudi practices. no matter if the suspect was caught in the act of planning it. the lawyer would simply argue it was impossible to say whether the suspect was tortured or not.

unfortunately there is little doubt that some of the people that have been in gitmo, are not, as bad as the government suspects. but among them, are the cream of the crop of osama's army. extremists, who have pledged their lives, to killing you, me, and our families, for no other reason than we are not godly enough in their eyes. its an impossible choice. free the 230 or so prisoners because one or two may be truly innocent, and allow them to carry out there deeds that could lead to hundreds...or who knows how many...american deaths? or keep the prisons open?

i disagree with the decision. but understand it as well.

as for obama in general. forgive me for not getting caught up in the hoopla of the inaugeration. i recognize the historical significance. and am proud to live in a country where a black man can as easilly ascend to president as any one else. however, his politics, scare the hell out of me.

yes, the past 8 years has been difficult. and there is no question pres bush was lousy at getting his message across. but i dont think his message was all that bad either, and im concerned, that 8 short years after 9/11 our country has forgotten how important, difficult, and delicate our national security is. based on media accounts, its as if some of the population actually seems to think an occasional terrorist attack is manageable, as long as they dont have to wait in line too long to get on a plane.

and to all who demand that obama, be given a chance to succeed before anyone judges him. while i have disagreed with many of his economic policy promises, and almost all of his international diplomacy plans, i agree, as the duely elected president he has a right to implement and urge various policies, will give him a chance to succeed or fail on his own before judging him. however, how many of you started with such a fresh view of pres bush, 4 years ago on innaugeration day? and how many of you have been simply marking the time until he was gone?

i believe obama is doing what he thinks is right for the country. however i am leery that he may be very wrong. and i am concerned that that could be a disaster for all of us.

party42 wrote:

Why not put these prisoners in our prisons? Why is it ok to keep them on a damn island and kept like a dog in a cage? Is this what we want to do with them forever?

Unless I've been sorely misinformed over the years, our prisons resemble cages, too.
Perhaps allowing them to live in a nice halfway house in your neighborhood would be more to your liking?

happy jack wrote:

party42 wrote:

Why not put these prisoners in our prisons? Why is it ok to keep them on a damn island and kept like a dog in a cage? Is this what we want to do with them forever?

Unless I've been sorely misinformed over the years, our prisons resemble cages, too.
Perhaps allowing them to live in a nice halfway house in your neighborhood would be more to your liking?

It's about denying them their rights.

Which "rights" would that be Artie?
Remember, under the Geneva convention most of them could have been simply executed.
Instead most are treated better at Gitmo than they would be if they were free at home.
After Gitmo is closed they should be transferred to Afghan custody for the afghani gov't to prosecute.

Bill B wrote:

Which "rights" would that be Artie?
Remember, under the Geneva convention most of them could have been simply executed.
Instead most are treated better at Gitmo than they would be if they were free at home.
After Gitmo is closed they should be transferred to Afghan custody for the afghani gov't to prosecute.

That would be the right to a trial and to defend themselves. Instead they were kept there endlessly.

Bill B wrote:

After Gitmo is closed they should be transferred to Afghan custody for the afghani gov't to prosecute.

HA HA HA

I trust the Afghan govt as much as the Pakistani Govt(which knows exactly where Osama is IMO), and as much as I believe the true financiers of 9/11 the Saudi's

Bill B wrote:

Remember, under the Geneva convention most of them could have been simply executed.

Really? I've read it, and I must have missed that part.

Here is a copy of the Convention.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War

Perhaps you would be kind enough to show us where it says that prisoners can "simply be executed?"

That's the point, under article 4 section 2, they do not qualify as prisoners of war. Sabatuers, spies, and guerillas have always been subject to summary execution.

Artie, like so many others you confuse US civilian law with international and military law.
The U.S. Constitution has no authority oustside the territory of the U.S., except over americans

Bill B wrote:

Artie, like so many others you confuse US civilian law with international and military law.
The U.S. Constitution has no authority oustside the territory of the U.S., except over americans

Is the Supreme Court confused too,Bill?

Quote :

Supreme Court: Guantanamo Detainees Have Rights in Court
In Stinging Defeat for Government, Detainees Have Right to Challenge Detentions
June 12, 2008

In a stinging defeat for the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled today that detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have a constitutional right to challenge their detentions in federal court and that congressional legislation has failed to provide a reasonable substitute for such a hearing.
Supreme Court decision is met with passionate support as well as outrage.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/SCOTUS/story?id=5048935

Even in the story cited, the scotus didn't call them pows. And a 5-4 deciscion indicates that there is division there as well as in the public mind.
In some ways it would be better if they were pows. Then they could be kept until the cessation of hostilities.

Oh, and thanks for not getting hung up on my typos. My desktop died and I am using my laptop with a much smaller keyboard.

Bill B wrote:

And a 5-4 deciscion indicates that there is division there as well as in the public mind.

Maybe so, but it really takes a huge event for the Supreme Court to reverse their decision.

Bill B wrote:

That's the point, under article 4 section 2, they do not qualify as prisoners of war. Sabatuers, spies, and guerillas have always been subject to summary execution.

True that, as long as they are "caught in the act." Civilized nations don't just kill people who may be completely innocent.

Many Gitmo detainees quietly freed without charges

Quote :

But through interviews with justice and police officials, detainees and their families, and using reports from human rights groups and local media, The Associated Press was able to track 245 of those formerly held at Guantanamo. The investigation, which spanned 17 countries, found:

Once the detainees arrived in other countries, 205 of the 245 were either freed without being charged or were cleared of charges related to their detention at Guantanamo. Forty either stand charged with crimes or continue to be detained.

Only a tiny fraction of transferred detainees have been put on trial. The AP identified 14 trials, in which eight men were acquitted and six are awaiting verdicts. Two of the cases involving acquittals — one in Kuwait, one in Spain — initially resulted in convictions that were overturned on appeal.

The Afghan government has freed every one of the more than 83 Afghans sent home. Lawmaker Sibghatullah Mujaddedi, the head of Afghanistan's reconciliation commission, said many were innocent and wound up at Guantanamo because of tribal or personal rivalries.

At least 67 of 70 repatriated Pakistanis are free after spending a year in Adiala Jail. A senior Pakistani Interior Ministry official said investigators determined that most had been "sold" for bounties to U.S. forces by Afghan warlords who invented links between the men and al-Qaida. "We consider them innocent," said the official, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue.

All 29 detainees who were repatriated to Britain, Spain, Germany, Russia, Australia, Turkey, Denmark, Bahrain and the Maldives were freed, some within hours after being sent home for "continued detention."

There is no question that there are dangerous people at GITMO. But the majority of individuals rounded up appear to have been innocent. So it's a good thing that they weren't "summarily executed," isn't it? Incidentally, there is nothing in the Geneva Convention that advocates summary execution of individuals not covered by Article 4, section 2...which brings us back to your original contention:

Bill B wrote:

Remember, under the Geneva convention most of them could have been simply executed.

The Messiah is certainly starting off on the right foot - glad to see that He has His priorities straight.
What is even more surprising than the fact that He wants to set this type of person free is the fact that the New York Times actually reported it.
The honeymoon can't be over already, can it?



Freed by U.S., Saudi Becomes a Qaeda Chief
By ROBERT F. WORTH
Published: January 22, 2009
BEIRUT, Lebanon — The emergence of a former Guantánamo Bay detainee as the deputy leader of Al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch has underscored the potential complications in carrying out the executive order President Obama signed Thursday that the detention center be shut down within a year.
The militant, Said Ali al-Shihri, is suspected of involvement in a deadly bombing of the United States Embassy in Yemen’s capital, Sana, in September. He was released to Saudi Arabia in 2007 and passed through a Saudi rehabilitation program for former jihadists before resurfacing with Al Qaeda in Yemen.

His status was announced in an Internet statement by the militant group and was confirmed by an American counterterrorism official.

“They’re one and the same guy,” said the official, who insisted on anonymity because he was discussing an intelligence analysis. “He returned to Saudi Arabia in 2007, but his movements to Yemen remain unclear.”

The development came as Republican legislators criticized the plan to close the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp in the absence of any measures for dealing with current detainees. But it also helps explain why the new administration wants to move cautiously, taking time to work out a plan to cope with the complications.

Almost half the camp’s remaining detainees are Yemenis, and efforts to repatriate them depend in part on the creation of a Yemeni rehabilitation program — partly financed by the United States — similar to the Saudi one. Saudi Arabia has claimed that no graduate of its program has returned to terrorism.

“The lesson here is, whoever receives former Guantánamo detainees needs to keep a close eye on them,” the American official said.

Although the Pentagon has said that dozens of released Guantánamo detainees have “returned to the fight,” its claim is difficult to document, and has been met with skepticism. In any case, few of the former detainees, if any, are thought to have become leaders of a major terrorist organization like Al Qaeda in Yemen, a mostly homegrown group that experts say has been reinforced by foreign fighters.

Long considered a haven for jihadists, Yemen, a desperately poor country in the southern corner of the Arabian Peninsula, has witnessed a rising number of attacks over the past year. American officials say they suspect that Mr. Shihri may have been involved in the car bombings outside the American Embassy in Sana last September that killed 16 people, including six attackers.

In the Internet statement, Al Qaeda in Yemen identified its new deputy leader as Abu Sayyaf al-Shihri, saying he returned from Guantánamo to his native Saudi Arabia and then traveled to Yemen “more than 10 months ago.” That corresponds roughly to the return of Mr. Shihri, a Saudi who was released from Guantánamo in November 2007. Abu Sayyaf is a nom de guerre, commonly used by jihadists in place of their real name or first name.

A Saudi security official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Mr. Shihri had disappeared from his home in Saudi Arabia last year after finishing the rehabilitation program.

A Yemeni journalist who interviewed Al Qaeda’s leaders in Yemen last year, Abdulela Shaya, confirmed Thursday that the deputy leader was indeed Mr. Shihri, the former Guantánamo detainee. Mr. Shaya, in a phone interview, said Mr. Shihri had described to him his journey from Cuba to Yemen and supplied his Guantánamo detention number, 372. That is the correct number, Pentagon documents show.

“It seems certain from all the sources we have that this is the same individual who was released from Guantánamo in 2007,” said Gregory Johnsen, a terrorism analyst and the editor of a forthcoming book, “Islam and Insurgency in Yemen.”

Mr. Shihri, 35, trained in urban warfare tactics at a camp north of Kabul, Afghanistan, according to documents released by the Pentagon as part of his Guantánamo dossier. Two weeks after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, he traveled to Afghanistan via Bahrain and Pakistan, and he later told American investigators that his intention was to do relief work, the documents say. He was wounded in an airstrike and spent a month and a half recovering in a hospital in Pakistan.

The documents state that Mr. Shihri met with a group of “extremists” in Iran and helped them get into Afghanistan. They also say he was accused of trying to arrange the assassination of a writer, in accordance with a fatwa, or religious order, issued by an extremist cleric.

However, under a heading describing reasons for Mr. Shihri’s possible release from Guantánamo, the documents say he claimed that he traveled to Iran “to purchase carpets for his store” in Saudi Arabia. They also say that he denied knowledge of any terrorists or terrorist activities, and that he “related that if released, he would like to return to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, wherein he would reunite with his family.”

“The detainee stated he would attempt to work at his family’s furniture store if it is still in business,” the documents say.

The Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda has carried out a number of terrorist attacks over the past year, culminating in the assault on the American Embassy in Sana on Sept. 16. In that assault, the attackers disguised themselves as Yemeni policemen and detonated two car bombs. The group has also begun releasing sophisticated Internet material, in what appears to be a bid to gain more recruits.

Yemen began cooperating with the United States on counterterrorism activities in late 2001. But the partnership has been a troubled one, with American officials accusing Yemen of paroling dangerous terrorists, including some who were wanted in the United States. Some high-level terrorism suspects have also mysteriously escaped from Yemeni jails. The disagreements and security lapses have complicated efforts to repatriate the 100 or so Yemenis remaining in Guantánamo.

Despite some notable Yemeni successes in fighting terrorist groups, Al Qaeda in Yemen appears to be gaining strength.

“They are bringing Saudi fighters in, and they want to start to use Yemen as a base for attacks throughout region, including Saudi Arabia and the Horn of Africa,” said Mr. Johnsen, an expert on Al Qaeda in Yemen.

happy jack wrote:

The Messiah is certainly starting off on the right foot - glad to see that He has His priorities straight.
What is even more surprising than the fact that He wants to set this type of person free is the fact that the New York Times actually reported it.
The honeymoon can't be over already, can it?

Quote :

“They’re one and the same guy,” said the official, who insisted on anonymity because he was discussing an intelligence analysis. “He returned to Saudi Arabia in 2007, but his movements to Yemen remain unclear.”

Who was President in 2007? Just because Worst President Ever seems to have bungled another responsibility doesn't mean that Obama will do the same.