Where to Put Gitmo Prisoners...

[Detroitej72]

I was listening to this topic discussed today on the radio and kept hearing all these folks screaming how they don't want them in their backyard.

What, do they think they'll be camping on their front lawns? I mean, seriously folks, they will be locked up in maximum security prisons. There is even one town, I think in Montana, who has offered to house them because it will create jobs for the towns folks.

I find it rather amusing how some fear mongering right wingers are elevating them to supervillan status, like Lex Luther or the Joker. Do they think so little of our correctional facilities that they think they will escape easily?

I read a piece recently in the Freep where John Engler thinks putting them up in Marquette Prison would be a good idea. The warden there said the few who escape, usually are caught quickly because the terrain is too rough in the winter and the bugs are too tough in the summer. I can just see some terrorist from the Middle East lasting about 2 hours in the frigged winters!

Another thing people seem to forget, we have Ramzi Yusiff, Terry Nichols, the blind sheik from the first WTC bombing, and many other Islamic terrorists rotting away currently in our prison system. Have any of them escaped yet?

What are some of your thoughts?

[mjs]

Another Daily Show clip that hits the mark exactly. "They're not Warlocks . . . Look where we're holding them now . . . Its a glorified Home Depot gazebo kit!"

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=228017&title=Guantanamo-Baywatch---The-Final-Season

[firstandten]

Another thing people seem to forget, we have Ramzi Yusiff, Terry Nichols, the blind sheik from the first WTC bombing, and many other Islamic terrorists rotting away currently in our prison system. Have any of them escaped yet?

No, and if I am a betting man I bet they will go off the deep end mentally before any of them would escape. The Super Max prison at least at the Federal level is felt by many to be close to cruel and unusual punishment. The ones at the state level can't be far behind. What is more critical is that we find out if these people are truly terrorists or are they goatherders who just got caught up in a sweep because they were at the wrong place at the wrong time. The problem we have now is can we really convict any of these people for terrorist crimes in a court of law since we know that many were tortured

[ccbatson]

Having them held in the US is one more step in giving them the rights of US citizens....THEY ARE NOT US CITIZENS and must not be treated as such.

[barnesfoto]

It seems to me that if ordinary Americans can't afford a trip to Cuba right now, we should not be funding the lodging of "furriners" in Cuba...
How about the MCS or perhaps one of the vacant DPS buildings?

[ccbatson]

Not rights conferred to Americans in exchange for the responsibilities required for those rights.

[firstandten]

I worry more about that 5th bucket that you put the Gitmo prisoners into per the president statements. Those are the guys who you know are dangerous but because of Bush's torture policies these people can't be tried for criminal acts so we will need to put them into indefinite detention. The idea of indefinite detention hits a lot of people the wrong way, but given the state of warfare today and the type of person we are fighting we have better start building at least one more super max prison to hold the terrorist that we catch. As I stated before physically holding these guys are the least of our problems. In supermax they live in a state of permanent lock down in there own cells, with very little human contact on a day-to-day basis.

My concern is that even though you know a detainee is dangerous how can you justify locking him up in a place like supermax, maybe for the rest of his life if he hasn't been convicted of any criminal charges

[Flanders]

Build a five acre version of Afghanistan's terrain with faux caves and Gitmo next to Bush's library in TX, and reenact the detainees' capture by the US war hero CIC, one can grow a beard like Osama bin Laden and the coWboy can get on his horse and lasso him, then tie him up like a little doggie. Then Cheney can take over in the next act, reenacting some of the famous Gitmo "advanced interrogation techniques". He could even get the audience involved, asking for volunteers and the curious to participate in getting waterboarded, crouched into small wooden boxes, electrically shocked or slammed headfirst into plywood walls.

Sort of like Buffalo Bill's turn of the century Wild West show.

Fun and re-educational for budding young conservatives and RWers of all ages.

[rb336]

just a simple note to bats --

the constitution does NOT restrict rights to American citizens

[oladub]

Not rights conferred to Americans in exchange for the responsibilities required for those rights.

Bats, Perhaps you chose inappropriate wording. As you are aware, Jefferson wrote that certain unalienable rights are granted by a Creator. You inferred, instead, that governments 'confer' rights. Governments are created to secure rights not allocate them.

However, since these are not US citizens, I suggest trying some of these hostages in US courts for crimes committed against the US, or Iraqi courts, or the courts of their respective home countries, since they can't be held as prisoners of war because we never declared war. The remaining prisoners that are pretty obviously innocent should be temporarily put into something like a illegal alien holding center and offered to the world community for humanitarian reasons with a deadline. After the deadline, the remaining individuals should be sent back to their home countries with the explanation that no fault could be found with them.

[Bobl]

Give them a trial. Send those "evil doers" who are convicted of crimes to prison, or execute them. Send those who are not convicted of anything back where they came from. Do it now. Take action.
Let the history books condemn the Bush administration for diverting our resources to an unnecessary war in Iraq, creating the Gitmo mess, elevating the status of Iran, and destroying our economy.
Now is the time to solve each of these problems.

[firstandten]

Give them a trial. Send those "evil doers" who are convicted of crimes to prison, or execute them. Send those who are not convicted of anything back where they came from. Do it now. Take action..

Thats the easy part, but whats not so easy is the guy you know is guilty but you can't convict in a court of law because he was tortured. If he is found not guilty then you have to let him go, to have him go back and join the battle. If the guy is just a soldier then its no big deal, but if he has some specialized skills or has contacts in the Muslin world, that could really come back to haunt us. The idea of indefinite detention is distasteful to some but maybe a reality we have to consider.

[mjs]

Thats the easy part, but whats not so easy is the guy you know is guilty but you can't convict in a court of law because he was tortured.

You keep saying this. Cite a source that supports this claim. All I've ever heard is that we can't use evidence that came from torture and the torturer could face civil and criminal charges subject to certain limited immunities. Sounds fair to me.


. . . they can't be held as prisoners of war because we never declared.

Interesting legal theory. That might just work. I also agree on the interpretation of the Bill of Rights. Those that opposed them said they were god given rights that couldn't be taken away and weren't Federally listed powers so the Bill of Rights wasn't needed. Those that supported them said they'd feel better if it was written down anyways. Good thing they did seeing how the second President signed a law that attempted to undermine the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment which is simply a written version of why some thought we didn't need the Bill of Rights in the first place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts

[4real]

Since NO country wants the terrorist in Gitmo, maybe house them in say Feinstein's house Pelosi's mansion, Obama's Florida house, and let THEM pay for it.
How does that sound
Other than that the only option is Colorado.

[mjs]

You know, despite how its portrayed in Dirty Harry movies, the exclusionary rule isn't really a burden on good cops. It just made life easier for innocents and made the laziest cops put in a little work and act within the Constitution.

A current drug bust goes like this: "Judge I need a drug warrant for this house". "What makes you think they're selling drugs?" "A reliable informant told us and we watched the house at three different times of the day. Every few minutes someone comes to the house, stays only a few minutes, and leaves." "Ok, here you go."

An old school drug bust: "Hey partner, those SOB's just gave us the evil eye on the way into that house." "Looks like a drug house to me, lets kick in the door and then kick in some heads." Then if they got lucky, the guys got time. If not, that showed them not to look at the cops.

Whether its local cops or federal intelligence officers, accountability and notions of fair play doesn't undermine justice.

[firstandten]

You keep saying this. Cite a source that supports this claim. All I've ever heard is that we can't use evidence that came from torture and the torturer could face civil and criminal charges subject to certain limited immunities. Sounds fair to me.

The president said it himself in this interview with George Stephanopoulos about closing Gitmo

OBAMA: It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize (http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/01/obama-closing-g.html) and we are going to get it done but part of the challenge that you have is that you have a bunch of folks that have been detained, many of whom who may be very dangerous who have not been put on trial or have not gone through some adjudication. And some of the evidence against them may be tainted even though it's true. And so how to balance creating a process that adheres to rule of law, habeas corpus, basic principles of Anglo American legal system, by doing it in a way that doesn't result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up".

Some people have summarized the presidents statements in this way !

we cannot release detainees whom we're unable to convict in a court of law because the evidence against them is "tainted" as a result of our having tortured them, and therefore need some new system -- most likely a so-called new "national security court" -- that "relaxes" due process safeguards so that we can continue to imprison people indefinitely even though we're unable to obtain an actual conviction in an actual court of law.

That is the dilemma that the Bush policies put the president in. Thats why I said the fifth bucket of detainees as the president indicated is going to provide the greatest challenge in the closing of Gitmo

The relaxing of due process goes against the very foundation of law in this society

To me that is more of an issue than where we will physically put people

[rb336]

gitmo costs at least 120 million/year to operate, not including the no-bid contract to KBR that is over 100 million/ year. 220 million a year 16 million more go to another company, the dick corporation. that was just what the bushies actually put ON the budget. double or triple it for the real cost

[mjs]

He was answering whether it could be done in 100 days and said we were going to get it done. To me, its says that it may take more than 100 days to clean up the gigantic mess left by the Bush administration and sort out what information is usable. Are you saying we should convict even if the only evidence was derived from torture? Consider that torture is notorious for getting false confessions and that 25% of the Project Innocence cases that were disproven by DNA evidence had false confessions elicited under less harsh methods. . http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php

[firstandten]

He was answering whether it could be done in 100 days and said we were going to get it done. To me, its says that it may take more than 100 days to clean up the gigantic mess left by the Bush administration and sort out what information is usable. Are you saying we should convict even if the only evidence was derived from torture? Consider that torture is notorious for getting false confessions and that 25% of the Project Innocence cases that were disproven by DNA evidence had false confessions elicited under less harsh methods. . http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php

I am just pointing out the situation the president is in this because of the Bush administration trying to justify illegal actions as being legal. In no way am I suggesting that we should convict based on evidence gotten by torture , BUT I am just relating a very real fact that indefinite detention in an american prision may be a very real possiblity for some detainees. What I don't know, is if you can legally justify that sort of action without a official declaration of war.

[d.mcc]

I am just pointing out the situation the president is in this because of the Bush administration trying to justify illegal actions as being legal. In no way am I suggesting that we should convict based on evidence gotten by torture , BUT I am just relating a very real fact that indefinite detention in an american prision may be a very real possiblity for some detainees. What I don't know, is if you can legally justify that sort of action without a official declaration of war.

How many are ACTUALLY terrorists? Now answer...How many if released would probably be terrorists...

[firstandten]

How many are ACTUALLY terrorists? Now answer...How many if released would probably be terrorists...

According to the president the detainees fall into 5 buckets, the only bucket that concerns me are the ones that are known to be terrorists but can't be tried. I believe that is a small number but still a concern.

I heard a number that 1 in 7 detainees released to this point went back to fight again and I guess thats to be expected. I think the U.S. doesn't want to release someone who may have specialized skills such as in explosives but your foot soldiers you would just have to live with that.

[mjs]

Why do we have to release foot soldiers? If they are indeed Taliban soldiers, we can hold them as prisoners of war, and treat them as such, according to the Geneva Convention. However, we do have to release civilians that we can not charge with a crime.

Do a sanity check on what you heard. How did this source determine that 1 in 7 are fighting? Have more than 7 been released?

There's no such thing such as a known terrorist that can't be tried. If they can't prove it, then they don't know it.

[firstandten]

Why do we have to release foot soldiers? If they are indeed Taliban soldiers, we can hold them as prisoners of war, and treat them as such, according to the Geneva Convention. However, we do have to release civilians that we can not charge with a crime.

For the most part thats what we did, however we are talking about an undeclaired war, so I believe the Geneva Convention was worked around by the Bush administration in that fashion.



Do a sanity check on what you heard. How did this source determine that 1 in 7 are fighting? Have more than 7 been released?.

The source is the pentagon, however they could be blowing smoke as well.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/pentagon-releas.html



There's no such thing such as a known terrorist that can't be tried. If they can't prove it, then they don't know it.

How about they knew it but they tortured him also, which effectively tainted the evidence that they had. Or they know it, but he represents more of a potential threat because he was caught before he could do anything harmful.

What I mean by they know it, is that there is actionable intelligence gotten on these people by the military, CIA, FBI etc. proving it in a court of law might be a different story.

[mjs]

An April 7th Defense Intelligence report that even reports the names. Since thats what they do for a living, you found a pretty damned good source and 5% confirmed and 9% suspected definitely provides something to think about.

Of the more than 530 Guantanamo detainees transferred from Department of Defense custody to Guantanamo Bay, 27 were confirmed and 47 were suspected of reengaging in terrorist activity.
What you define as "they knew it", the report defines as "suspected", but I get your point now.

Significant reporting indicates an individual is involved in terrorist activities and analysis of that reporting indicates the individual's identity matches that of a specific former Guantanamo detainee. Or, unverified or single-source, but plausible, reporting indicates a specific former detainee is involved in terrorist activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-U.S. propaganda alone does not qualify as terrorist activity.

[ccbatson]

They are not soldiers in uniform, and they are not soldiers of a sovereign state with whom we are at war...therefore, they are not prisoners of war.

[mjs]

"Sticking a feather up your but DOES NOT make you a chicken!"- Fight Club

[rb336]

I know --

instead of closing Gitmo, let's open it -- a nice little gate to Cuba and let Raoul deal with them

[Detroitej72]

I've yet to see a right winger offer up one solution as to where to put these prisoners. All they say is how the terrorists will be setting up a tent on the front lawn of our schools, trying to recruit new members. Again, they just try to play to people's fears, never really solving the problem that they, themselves have created in the first place.

[ccbatson]

Correct, many were not soldiers (maybe none were)...that is my point.

[ccbatson]

They were mostly violent terrorists (and combatants) intent on killing westerners.

[ccbatson]

The US military personnel that took them into custody after being shot at by them.

[rb336]

Untrue for a number of cases, which is why they have already released so many. The fact is, you don't know who these people are or who they aren't, you are just told to "trust us" from the same people who have already made mistakes.

not so much "made mistakes" as lied to us and set this whole thing up in a very deliberate scheme to do an end-run around international law AND our constitution. The people who set this up SHOULD by tried for treason, and if found guilty, given the proper death sentence

[Pam]

I've yet to see a right winger offer up one solution as to where to put these prisoners


I think CC has got some room in his basement.

[Det_ard]

Thank God Obama is going to shut down Gitmo (and start up Gitmo 2.0 somewhere else), end military commissions (and replace them with more military commissions) and has a well-thought-out plan for all this (just like the legislature in MI did when they eliminated the business tax before figuring out how to replace the revenue).

Well done sir!

[ccbatson]

Our constitution doesn't apply to enemy combatants. Has anyone provided proof of soldiers indiscriminately invading homes of innocent people and taking them into custody? If so, why haven't we seen/heard/or read about it?

Now that Obama is all for the same approaches, do liberals think it is a good idea?

Hypocritical, no?

[rb336]

Our constitution doesn't apply to enemy combatants. Has anyone provided proof of soldiers indiscriminately invading homes of innocent people and taking them into custody? If so, why haven't we seen/heard/or read about it?

Now that Obama is all for the same approaches, do liberals think it is a good idea?

Hypocritical, no?

Our constitution applies to all, citizen or not. where do you get the, as usual, mistaken idea it doesn't?

[jams]

So where in the Constitution is "enemy combatants" defined?

It is a bullshit term, dug up by Bush-Cheney to validate their violation of International treaties and laws.

Orwellianism in reality.

[mjs]

Has anyone provided proof of soldiers indiscriminately invading homes of innocent people and taking them into custody? If so, why haven't we seen/heard/or read about it?

Good try, but who said indiscriminantly? We said unjustifiably. A cop runs drug raids based on claims from smacking around random mumbling bums. Thats unjustifiable. A cop runs drug raids on every house on the block. Thats indisciminate.

You heard of unjustifiable detentions on this thread. Defense Intelligence reported that of the 530 detainees we didn't have evidence to charge with a crime, 95% still can't be convicted of terrorist activities and 86% aren't even suspect. If we released them after a prolonged detention, the prolonged detention couldn't have been justified.

Is former POW John McCain qualified to speak on detention, torture, and where America should stand on it?
http://www.newsweek.com/id/51200/page/1

[Linda from Detroit]

I live just a few miles from a max security federal prison and escapes are pretty rare. They have huge horns that go off so that the people in the area are alerted. The thing that concerns me at the Gitmo guys is that prisons are ripe for all kinds of recruits. After all, the people in there aren't exactly nice guys that happened to cheat a little on their taxes or littered once too often.

[Jimaz]

From today's DetroitNews:

Montana town seeks Gitmo prisoners: Empty $27M jail awaits (http://www.detnews.com/article/20090601/NATION/906010304/1020/Montana-town-seeks-Gitmo-prisoners--Empty-$27M-jail-awaits)
On Capitol Hill, politicians are dead-set against transferring some of the world's most feared terrorists from Guantanamo to prisons on U.S. soil. But at City Hall in this impoverished town on the northern Plains, the attitude is: Bring 'em on.

Hardin, a dusty town of 3,400 people so desperate that it built a $27 million jail a couple of years ago in the vain hope it would be a moneymaker, is offering to house hundreds of Gitmo detainees at the empty, never-used facility.

[jams]

According to data provided by Traci L. Billingsley, spokeswoman for the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, federal facilities on American soil currently house 216 international terrorists and 139 domestic terrorists. Some of these miscreants have been locked up here since the early 1990s. None of them has escaped. At the most secure prisons, nobody has ever escaped, period.

http://www.slate.com/id/2219268/

[mjs]

But, hasn't that made our prisons ripe for recruits into terrorism? (Sarcasm)

[jams]

Do you mean prisoners who are delighted with their treatment?

[firstandten]

I live just a few miles from a max security federal prison and escapes are pretty rare. They have huge horns that go off so that the people in the area are alerted. The thing that concerns me at the Gitmo guys is that prisons are ripe for all kinds of recruits. After all, the people in there aren't exactly nice guys that happened to cheat a little on their taxes or littered once too often.

Funny thing is the "club Fed" type prisions that the income tax cheats and white collar criminals go are actually pretty good by prision standards. I don't think however you want to go anywhere near a "supermax" type of facility.

"Supermax" is short for "super-maximum security." It is a
place designed to house violent prisoners or prisoners who might
threaten the security of the guards or other prisoners. Some
prisons that are not designed as supermax prisons have "control
units" in which conditions are similar. The theory is that
solitary confinement and sensory deprivation will bring about
"behavior modification."

In general. Supermax prisoners are locked into small cells
for approximately 23 hours a day. They have almost no contact
with other human beings.
There are no group activities: no work, no educational
opportunities, no eating together, no sports, no getting together
with other people for religious services, and no attempts at
rehabilitation.
There are no contact visits: prisoners sit behind a
plexiglass window. Phone calls and visitation privileges are
strictly limited. Books and magazines may be denied and pens
restricted. TV and radios may be prohibited or, if allowed, are
controlled by guards.
Prisoners have little or no personal privacy. Guards
monitor the inmates' movements by video cameras. Communication
between prisoners and control booth officers is mostly through
speakers and microphones. An officer at a control center may be
able to monitor cells and corridors and control all doors
electronically.
Typically, the cells have no windows. Lights are controlled
by guards who may leave them on night and day. For exercise
there is usually only a room with high concrete walls and a chin-up bar. Showers may be limited to three per week for not more
than ten minutes.
"Prisoners are confined to a concrete world in which they
never see a blade of grass, earth, trees or any part of the
natural world".


Thats why I said in previous posts that prisioners have a better chance of getting mentally ill than they do escaping.

[Blarf]

If we are going to keep them locked up, than actually charge them with something and give them their trial. If they are found guilty, keep them locked up. If they are found not guilty, let them go. Problem solved.

[firstandten]

If we are going to keep them locked up, than actually charge them with something and give them their trial. If they are found guilty, keep them locked up. If they are found not guilty, let them go. Problem solved.

We wish it were that simple, review the thread for some of the problems

[ccbatson]

In your back yard Blarf?

[rb336]

in any of a number of supermax facilities. have you not been paying attention?

[ccbatson]

After they are found guilty....what if they get off on a technicality?

[mjs]

Innocence isn't a technicality.

[mjs]

People getting off on technicalities. You've obviously never spent any time in a real court room. Go down there and watch. Its free. The prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges will all answer questions. The criminal justice system works just fine.

[rb336]

After they are found guilty....what if they get off on a technicality?


oh, because they confessed to something they didn't do under torture?

[vetalalumni]

...what if they get off on a technicality?
This warns of why it is so very important to get it right. Don't belittle technicalities - they protect everyone. This is where to the old adage "don't sweat the small stuff" (technicalities) is inappropriate.

[ccbatson]

Never heard of OJ? Ever talk to an attorney whose job it is to get their clients off this way?

[jams]

Funny, how someone constantly demanding less government intrusion into the "rights of inviduals" is so quick to demand the government to ignore an individual's rights.

[rb336]

Never heard of OJ? Ever talk to an attorney whose job it is to get their clients off this way?

well, the cops should never have been so overzealous to pin it on OJ. It is very clear that the cops tainted the evidence, and had they not blatantly messed with the evidence, OJ would have been convicted.

[ccbatson]

I didn't say I was opposed to these rights...just that the reality is that puhlenty of guilty folks walk free. Now, thanks to liberals, they will be walking free in the continental US, and subsidized with our tax dollars.

[ccbatson]

Sorry...by they, I mean the Gitmo detainees....in case I wasn't clear.

[gibran]

They are not soldiers in uniform, and they are not soldiers of a sovereign state with whom we are at war...therefore, they are not prisoners of war.

not even in the war on terrorism?:confused:

[mjs]

I didn't say I was opposed to these rights...just that the reality is that puhlenty of guilty folks walk free. Now, thanks to liberals, they will be walking free in the continental US, and subsidized with our tax dollars.

Give me the name of one former Guitanimo detainee walking free in the continental US. I won't even ask that you prove they are living on government subsidies.

[ccbatson]

No, not even in a war on terrorism. By their choice, they decide to hide amongst human shields and surrender the possibility of POW status.

Hasn't happened yet MJS. Only because Obama is having second thoughts.

[mjs]

When you threaten more of something that hasn't happened, its called fear mongering. Cite the time Obama said he wanted the detainees to be walking free in the continental US.

I would think they would want to go back home. I know if I were dragged off to Iraq or Russia and held captive for a few years before being sent back home, I wouldn't be asking them for a visa so I could return. If an islamic extremist wants to kill Americans, they would do better in Iraq or Afghanistan where Americans aren't as well protected and they have the home field advantage.

Tell Rush I said its just pure fear mongering.

[gazhekwe]

Tell you what. Offer them to the people of Standish, Muskegon and the Eastern UP. I bet you will hear some positive comments on keeping three of the largest employers in the area open with federal dollars.

[Lorax]

Put the prisoners, (if they are even really "terrorists" anyway) in Batts basement. Just living under the noise of that constant knuckle dragging should drive them insane, or to suicide. :eek:

[ccbatson]

Fear that Obama will do as he says he will? That is fear mongering? Splain how please.

[Lorax]

Only a paranoid irrational repugnican would "fear" Obama, however, it's in our best interest you do, since it serves our purposes of dividing and conquering your fascist leaders.

Who are you planning on running in 2012?

Saracuda?

GinGrinch?

Lintball?

Mittens?

[mjs]

Fear that Obama will do as he says he will? That is fear mongering? Splain how please.

If he said it, its not fear mongering, but if he didn't, it is fear mongering. So, again . . .


Cite the time Obama said he wanted the detainees to be walking free in the continental US.

[ccbatson]

Logic helps...Clearly, not all detainees from Gitmo will be found guilty (whether correctly, or not), if they are held here in the US, and not deported when they are not convicted, where will they go?

given the very high recidivism rate for former/released detainees to return to terrorist organizations and activities, at least some of these people will be on our streets and with the intent to do further harm. It is inescapable logic based on Obama's words and intended policies.

[mjs]

First, why would they want to stay in the US? Second, none of them are Amercian citizens. They will all be deported. We'll put them back where we kidnapped them.

[ccbatson]

Check your premises MJS...that isn't how it is proposed by Obama and company.

[mjs]

I keep telling you to point me to the exact quote, speech, whatever you have.


Cite the time Obama said he wanted the detainees to be walking free in the continental US.

[vetalalumni]

Standish, Michigan?

[ccbatson]

That is the proposed site. As I have said elsewhere...Michigan is the most hopelessly socialist and destitute state. Dumping this problem here is less likely to hurt the liberals politically (at least in this state), so they take the path of least resistance.

[Lorax]

I say house them on the derelict Crawford "ranch" of ex pres. Tush.

This so-called ranch would be the perfect place, since the temperature will remind them of the scorching desert they came from, and it would send a clear message- you broke it, you fix it.

[lilpup]

I'd rather have Gitmo prisoners in Michigan than California's prisoners. Unlike California, the Feds will be able to pay their bill and it's unlikely that relatives of Gitmo detainees will move to the area to be near them, whereas California's felonious families might.

[ccbatson]

So, you don't want them in Michigan Lorax? Who should you complain to/who is responsible?

Being in the same state as Dearborn, the largest islamic population outside of the middle east, is one strange coincidence....or is it?

[firstandten]

I'd rather have Gitmo prisoners in Michigan than California's prisoners. Unlike California, the Feds will be able to pay their bill and it's unlikely that relatives of Gitmo detainees will move to the area to be near them, whereas California's felonious families might.

The biggest problem you would have with the Gitmo prisoners would be keeping them from committing suicide. I bet as long as you respected their religion and treated them decent you wouldn't have a lot of problems from them.

The last thing you would want is a bunch of gang-banging riot causing, shank using prisoners from Cali or anywhere else in the states.

[ccbatson]

There we go...send them to Fistandten's house.

[Lorax]

So, you don't want them in Michigan Lorax? Who should you complain to/who is responsible?

Being in the same state as Dearborn, the largest islamic population outside of the middle east, is one strange coincidence....or is it?


LOL!!!

Yeah, it's a coincidence, only a coincidence.

I really don't care where they are, if it's Michigan, fine, it really doesn't matter, a prisoner is a prisoner, is a prisoner.

Better yet, we can shove them into the dark and diseased Batcave.

[firstandten]

Better yet, we can shove them into the dark and diseased Batcave.

If thats the case we would be better off leaving Gitmo open

[Vcalibur]

Detroit has enough problems, people homeless, people out of work, children committing crimes, many people without health care, the drop out rate. We do not need anymore help bringing the State of Michigan down.

[Danny]

There are some concerns about shipping 9/11 detainees from Gitmo to ordernary county jail-like prison at some some northwestern Michigan town:

1. Will the Al-Qaeda planed a terror attack in that small town?

2. Will there be homeland security agents gaurding the detainees?

3. Will the residents of the small Northwestern Michigan town protect themselves if they were under attack by Al -Qaeda?

4.Will the detainees ever escape from the county jail-like prison?

[firstandten]

There are some concerns about shipping 9/11 detainees from Gitmo to ordernary county jail-like prison at some some northwestern Michigan town:

1. Will the Al-Qaeda planed a terror attack in that small town?

2. Will there be homeland security agents gaurding the detainees?

3. Will the residents of the small Northwestern Michigan town protect themselves if they were under attack by Al -Qaeda?

4.Will the detainees ever escape from the county jail-like prison?

Are these really concerns or is this fear-mongering by the opponents of this plan

Lets go thru this:

If Al-Qaeda was going to attack a town or a prison it would be at the small Colorado town where SuperMax is located and that hasn't happened.

Escape while not impossible is difficult and I believe Michigan's state (not county like) prisons has a good record in that regard.

We have the local, county, state police that would protect them, plus we have a national guard that could be used as well.

Like I said before I would be more concerned with the highly organized gang bangers from Cali than with the Gitmo prisoners.

There will probably be military guards at the prison, plus they would bring their families to live in the area

[elganned]

Shoot 'em all in the head.
Problem solved.

[firstandten]

Shoot 'em all in the head.
Problem solved.

Yes !!! but maybe not legal

AHHHH so what!! the Bush crime family doesn't do legal, so it might work.

[ccbatson]

Legal according to what law and jurisdiction? Sadly, now, with full rights of US citizens.

[Lorax]

Legal according to what law and jurisdiction? Sadly, now, with full rights of US citizens.

LOL!!!!

What a buttload.

Batts has been flying with his mouth open again.

Full rights as US citizens? LOL!!! Not in the real world.

They will have rights to a fair trial, as is the law, since the Tush Administration decided to suspend Habeus Corpus in an effort to stop any trials, or even charges from being leveled against these people. Only fascist states do this.

They picked up too many cab drivers and breadmakers to make their case. These people aren't even terrorists.

[ccbatson]

"As is the law"? Which law? Applicable to whom? US law, applicable (now) to terrorist enemy combatants.

[rb336]

"As is the law"? Which law? Applicable to whom? US law, applicable (now) to terrorist enemy combatants.

ok, since you apparantly need to be hand fed basic common knowledge:

US law and international law. are we not a nation of laws? are not those very laws you wish to restrict the ones that actually guarantee our freedoms? the answer, btw, to both of those is YES.

[ccbatson]

No, US law does not apply to non US citizens. Non US citizens should not have the constitutional rights of citizens as they have not fulfilled their half of the contract.

[Lorax]

You really know nothing of our Constitution.

Just give it up, already, even you don't have the ability to make the case for abandoning our treaties in order to render and torture people.

[elganned]

Charge 'em or let 'em go.
Certainly enough time has passed to build a case against them; if no case can be made, they should not be held. That was written into the Bill of Rights not because the founders felt it should be a perquisite applying only to US citizens, but because they felt that it was the only just and honorable way to treat anyone.

[rb336]

No, US law does not apply to non US citizens. Non US citizens should not have the constitutional rights of citizens as they have not fulfilled their half of the contract.


they certainly DO bats. show me where it says that they only apply to US citizens. anywhere. in the body of the constitution, court opinions, anything that validates your position

[Lorax]

Batts is incapable of providing any evidence, since it's in his intellectually lazy nature not to do so. Typical Rethuglican- swallow the dogma of the Reich, learn to goosestep and party on.

[elganned]

"Here, you can always find a party. In Russia, the Party can always find you."
~ Yakov Smirnoff

[Lorax]

I say dump the prisoners on the SS MuMu, the rough seas of Christofascism should seem like Islam's version of hell- no better punishment. :eek:

[Bong-Man]

Am I the only one who pulled a gut muscle when the locals were discussing the Dearbornites coming up in mass for an attack on Standish to free their relatives ? That would be the Tunguska of terror attacks. I can invision the Michigan Militia sharpening their bayonets as we speak.

[MCP-001]

Since Pres. B.O. feels so strongly about freeing them, then why doesn't he put the Gitmo detainees up at the White House?

Free room & board in government funded housing.

It's a secure location so no one outside of the White House will be hurt, killed or taken hostage.

He can have them sleep in the same room as him and his wife, or with his kids.

Put up or shut up time, Pres. B.O.!

[Lorax]

Put up or shut up time, Pres. B.O.!


Back at ya, MCP! Try taking your own advice.

[MCP-001]

Why should I take them in?

Gitmo is working fine so far.

There isn't any need to bring them into America.

Unless you're Pres. B.O. trying to keep a campaign pledge...

[rb336]

Why should I take them in?

Gitmo is working fine so far.

There isn't any need to bring them into America.

Unless you're Pres. B.O. trying to keep a campaign pledge...

Gitmo is very expensive. put them in dah UP. maximum security, jobs for americans, money for michigan. that, my friends, is a win-win-win situation with no downside.

[ccbatson]

Once they are extended rights as US citizens, it doesn't much matter where you put them. I think it would be ideal if they could be housed in Washingtion DC, next to the White House, or in Chicago in Rev Wright/Bill Ayers/Rezcko/Obama's old neighbourhood. If it needs to be MI, then the Governor's Mansion is the ideal spot.

[rb336]

congrats on your most moronic post of the month, Bats

[ccbatson]

Solid work again Rb....make sure you continue your tradition of making dismissive remarks without backing them up.

[MCP-001]

Gitmo is very expensive. put them in dah UP. maximum security, jobs for americans, money for michigan. that, my friends, is a win-win-win situation with no downside.

Those prisons in the UP are no more than over-glorified summer camps.

When your Al Qaeda "guests" walk off and wreak havok in the Mainland US then what'll you do?

[Lorax]

Those prisons in the UP are no more than over-glorified summer camps.

When your Al Qaeda "guests" walk off and wreak havok in the Mainland US then what'll you do?


LOL!!!!!

Delusions of grandmanure.

We can house Charles Manson, and a million more violent criminals, but not a couple of cab drivers and pastry chefs trained to build an IED?

They'd be more afraid of your moth farm, and MuMu's Jesus talk.

Got any spare dungeons?

Boot the chick with the roomy hips and give 'em the hole with the wicker lotion basket.

That would scare the hell out of them.

[elganned]

Like I said. Shoot 'em all. Problem solved.

[rb336]

Those prisons in the UP are no more than over-glorified summer camps.

When your Al Qaeda "guests" walk off and wreak havok in the Mainland US then what'll you do?


are you truly that delusional? they ain't walking away from Standish (no escapes since it opened). Maximum Security -- and they mean it. Don't think if the Gitmo boys are sent there that they won't up at least a section to Super Max status.

[Bong-Man]

Lol....Good to see some Macomb County paranoia rearing it's ugly head. Those black people from Mt. Clemens will be floating down the Clinton River and the spillway for an attack any night now. Load the guns !

[MCP-001]

are you truly that delusional? they ain't walking away from Standish (no escapes since it opened). Maximum Security -- and they mean it. Don't think if the Gitmo boys are sent there that they won't up at least a section to Super Max status.

Um, Standish isn't in the UP.

And based on Lorax's comments, (s)he has never been to the UP or drove by their prisons.

[Lorax]

um, standish isn't in the up.

And based on lorax's comments, (s)he has never been to the up or drove by their prisons.


lol!!!!!!!

[rb336]

Um, Standish isn't in the UP.

And based on Lorax's comments, (s)he has never been to the UP or drove by their prisons.


you are right, standish isn't in the UP. my bad. Standish is still remote, fairly isolated and VERY secure

[MCP-001]

you are right, standish isn't in the UP. my bad. Standish is still remote, fairly isolated and VERY secure

Check again.

Standish is about five miles from I-75 and practically right next to US-23. So it's not exactly "isolated".

As for being secure. I'll grant you that it's better than what they have in the UP, but nowhere near as secure as Gitmo.

But what about the surrounding town?

If they are transferred to Standish, when the pissed off islamists show up for their comrades, that town would make a great place to pick up hostages.

Just something to think about...

[Bobl]

Just give them a damned trial. Place the guilty in secure prisons. Move the rest to where they came from, or where we kidnapped them. Get it done.

[elganned]

Charge 'em or release 'em or shoot 'em in the head.
I'm sick of hearing about them.

[MCP-001]

Charge 'em or release 'em or shoot 'em in the head.
I'm sick of hearing about them.

Absolutely no debate there.

And all of that can be done down in Gitmo where they cannot harm American civilians.

[rb336]

Check again.

Standish is about five miles from I-75 and practically right next to US-23. So it's not exactly "isolated".

As for being secure. I'll grant you that it's better than what they have in the UP, but nowhere near as secure as Gitmo.

But what about the surrounding town?

If they are transferred to Standish, when the pissed off islamists show up for their comrades, that town would make a great place to pick up hostages.

Just something to think about...

no, just a line of extreme stupidity not even worth thinking about.

what is the population of standish? (around 1500) how far from the city is it?

fyi, Arenac county has less than 17,000 people in it. one of the least populated counties in the lp. That IS isolated. also, the town does not surround the prison

http://tinyurl.com/myblf5

[MCP-001]

no, just a line of extreme stupidity not even worth thinking about.

what is the population of standish? (around 1500) how far from the city is it?

fyi, Arenac county has less than 17,000 people in it. one of the least populated counties in the lp. That IS isolated. also, the town does not surround the prison

http://tinyurl.com/myblf5

Unless your name was Chris Carter, eight years ago, most people didn't even give a second thought to some islamofacist taking over an airliner and crashing it into a building.

So bury your head in the sand and keep thinking happy thoughts.

[Bong-Man]

I'm seriously concerned the Islamists might try that during deer hunting season. I can see them now......wearing their Elmer Fudd hats and flannel shirts for cover. God forbid...they might target the new casino.

[elganned]

If the Islamists wanted to cause serious trouble they'd only have to drop off five people with Bic lighters up and down the California coast in the dry season.

Concern yourself with something that might prove a real threat, not the bogey-men under the bed.

[MCP-001]

If the Islamists wanted to cause serious trouble they'd only have to drop off five people with Bic lighters up and down the California coast in the dry season.

Concern yourself with something that might prove a real threat, not the bogey-men under the bed.

Whose to say that they haven't done that already?

But I'd rather not give their buddies a target to hit where they can increase their numbers.

Keeping them down in Gitmo keeps us safe here.

[rb336]

Unless your name was Chris Carter, eight years ago, most people didn't even give a second thought to some islamofacist taking over an airliner and crashing it into a building.

So bury your head in the sand and keep thinking happy thoughts.

Actually lots of people thought about that possibility. the difference? the guys who did it weren't in a maximum security prison

my head isn't in the sand, i'm just not a chickens___, especially over something as irrational and paranoid as what you posted

[MCP-001]

Keep thinking happy thoughts.

[firstandten]

Don't worry about those folks in Standish. I bet a significant portion of that population can recite the 2nd amendment chapter and verse. If anybody would be in trouble it would be "those Islamist" troublemakers.

[MCP-001]

Don't worry about those folks in Standish. I bet a significant portion of that population can recite the 2nd amendment chapter and verse. If anybody would be in trouble it would be "those Islamist" troublemakers.

I'm pretty certain that they can.

But why put them in harm's way?

[ccbatson]

What is wrong with the Governor's Mansion? Once she is out of office, we can consider moving it to wherever she goes.

[bailey]

Fairly interesting rebuttal by people who actually know what they are talking about.....

A group of former national security officials and military officers who have worked on the Guantanamo Bay military tribunals have written a letter to Rep. Pete Hoekstra criticizing him for “politicizing” the debate over a possible plan to transfer Gitmo detainees to a maximum security prison in Standish, Michigan.
The writers of the letter include Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, a highly decorated retired military intelligence officer and JAG attorney who was assigned to the military tribunals at Gitmo and blew the whistle on what he called trumped up charges against many being held there; Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, former deputy national security adviser; and Michael Kraft, a former senior adviser to the State Department Counterterrorism Office. The full text of the letter below:

Representative Hoekstra:
As military and national security officials who have spent our entire careers fighting to protect the American people and the defend country from attack, we all agree that the prison facility at Guantanamo Bay needs to be closed-as do five former Secretaries of State, Gen. David Petraeus, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates. We also agree with you that the discussion over closing Guantanamo and moving the detainees to a new facility needs to occur, as you have said, in a “civil and rational way.” That is why we were disappointed last week-during a town hall meeting in Standish, MI, whose prison is a possible site to detain terror suspects -to hear you politicize such a critical national security issue and disseminate misrepresentations and exaggerations about closing Guantanamo and the possibility of housing terrorist suspects on American soil. In doing so, you spread fear in order to score political points, and perpetuate the Bush/Cheney era strategy of seeking political victories instead of doing what’s right to protect the country.
According to reports, you said there was “much to fear” if the detainees came to Standish. Standish tavern owner Dave Munson stated your comments “scared the heck out [him]…soft targets and safe zones, that if they came to this country they would have rights, visitors and friends would come who could be jihadists.” But you also acknowledged that the Supermax Facility in Florence, CO-which houses terrorists like Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the first World Trade Center attack who was captured in Pakistan, Zacharias Moussaoui, convicted in connection to the attacks on 9/11, as well as the East Africa Embassy bombers-has never had a major incident or attempted jailbreak. And indeed American prison facilities-and the men and women who work there-have proven themselves extremely capable of protecting American lives while also imprisoning dangerous terrorists; even after decades, we have never had a major incident tied to the domestic imprisonment of terrorists.
The former warden of the Supermax facility said prisoners “spend up to 23 hours a day in their cells, every minute, every meal. The window in their cell is blocked so they can’t see the mountains.” Yet you stated that detainees housed in America “would have greater opportunities to command and control their networks through outsiders and to spread radical jihadist ideology.” The Supermax warden also stated that Ramzi Yousef has never left his cell. If the same-if not stricter-standards are applied to Guantanamo detainees held domestically, then how exactly would they command terrorist networks overseas?
You also said in the past that you “have no doubt that we could move these folks into a prison in Michigan. We could move them into a maximum security prison perhaps anywhere around the country. And there’s no doubt in my mind that we could probably contain them and hold them and they wouldn’t escape.” Do you still believe this to be the case?
You also stated in testimony to the Michigan Senate Judiciary Committee that “making Michigan home to the world’s most dangerous terrorists will not make it more attractive for tourists, families or potential job providers.” We ask if you can say with certainty that Colorado’s economy has been negatively affected by housing terrorists in the Florence facility-or the economies of Illinois, New York City, or North Carolina, for that matter-which have all held or detained some of the world’s most dangerous terrorists?
The bottom line is while the Administration should provide a clear plan for closing Guantanamo and transferring detainees, we should also not allow the destructive politics of fear, which tarnish America’s national security imperatives, to dictate the debate. By stirring up panic and distorting reality for political purposes, you do a disservice to the people of Michigan and the United States. Politicizing national security for partisan gain has dangerous consequences for effectively defending this country and protecting American lives.
You yourself once demanded that “partisan political games have no place when it comes to national security.” We ask you to live up to your own standards when it comes to discussing Guantanamo Bay and detainees. Whether it’s in Standish Michigan or the halls of Congress, politicizing national security is always dangerous. We ask you to return the debate to the “civil and rational” in order to stop the spreading of fear that plays into the very hands of the enemies we are trying to defeat.
Sincerely,
Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham (US Army Res. Ret.), Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants at Guantanamo Bay, 2004-2005
Maj. Gen. Paul D. Eaton (USA, Ret.), National Security Network Senior Adviser
Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, Jr. (USA Ret.)
Vice Admiral Lee Gunn (USN, Ret.)
Lt. Gen. Donald Kerrick (USA, Ret.), Former Deputy National Security Adviser
Richard Clarke, Former head of counterterrorism at the National Security Council
Margaret Henoch, Retired Senior Officer, Central Intelligence Agency
Jonathan Winer, Former Deputy Assistant Sec. of State for International Law Enforcement
Vic Comras, Former State Department Minister Counselor
Michael Kraft, Former Senior Advisor, State Department Counterterrorism Office

[firstandten]

I guess because Pete Hoektra and Mike Rogers are on the select committee on Intelligence that gives them the right to dictate what the people of Standish want, while ignoring Bart Stupak who is responsible for that area.

Why should anyone pay attention to Hoektra he's just another crazed RW'er from the west side of the state who wants to be governor. He and Rogers will oppose anything coming from a democrat because they been directed by their fearless leader John Boner.. er Boehner to "just say no".

They are so good at fear mongering they would have you afraid to go to sleep at night instead of the boogey-man its the Islamic jihadist thats coming to get you !!

Besides the real hard core guys are at super-max, while you might have some hard core guys at Gitmo you have a lot of goat-herders and taxi-drivers that just got swept up

[ccbatson]

Welcome Bailey...additional rational thought to counter the incessant leftist banter on Dyes is always welcomed (by other rational people here).

[firstandten]

Welcome Bailey...additional rational thought to counter the incessant leftist banter on Dyes is always welcomed (by other rational people here).

incessant leftist banter can't have rational thoughts attached ???

I guess only the folks on the right have rational thoughts.

[ccbatson]

Unless they can prove otherwise, you have hit the nail on the head Firstandten.

[firstandten]

Unless they can prove otherwise, you have hit the nail on the head Firstandten.

If what you say is true Cc, I missed the nail completely and hit my hand instead...

ouch... thats hurts:D

[ccbatson]

Better get some ice on that then.

[elganned]

Did you check his insurance before issuing that medical advice, bats?
And get his billing address?
Are you sure you don't want to run a few tests, first? An MRI, or an ultrasound at least?
And don't forget to prescribe some pain-killers; your buddies over at Pharma will be disappointed if you don't.

[Lorax]

Good post, Elganned.

I can't add anything to make it more spot-on. Cheers!

[bailey]

Welcome Bailey...additional rational thought to counter the incessant leftist banter on Dyes is always welcomed (by other rational people here).

Thanks for the kind words, and quite frankly, I would consider myself to be a centrist....however, I think you may have missed the jist of the letter I posted. The drafters were specifically decrying and rejecting the politicizing of the Gitmo debate by right wingers like Hoekstra.

[elganned]

Bats isn't a right-winger. He's a "ME!"-winger.

[ccbatson]

Thank you Elganned, that is nearly accurate...more precise would be to say that I am an individualist (or objectivist if you like).

[firstandten]

Thank you Elganned, that is nearly accurate...more precise would be to say that I am an individualist (or objectivist if you like).

Ayn Rand follower ??

[ccbatson]

Very much so (but not in lock step 100%...for instance on abortion and religion...I think I could have given her a run for her money debating those areas if she were alive)