Posted 9 months, 24 days ago in 
Loading ...
Why not give Sheriff Joe Arpaio, of Maricopa County, Ariz. money to build another tent city for these prisoners from Gitmo? He has cut Arizona’s cost for keeping criminals.
These prisoners could grow their own food and eat bologna sandwiches and care for discarded pets. This could also save our government money in the long run.
SU DODGE
Olathe
28 Responses to “Put Arpaio in charge of Gitmo prisoners”
Posted January 30th, 2009 at 1:11 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
And besides all of that, terrorists would look pretty in pink, but of course political correctness would dictate we could not feed them anything containing pork. Everyone knows by now there are “special rules” for the incarceration of terrorists and illegal aliens.
You can’t just go around suggesting that we treat them like Americans or some other second class citizen group.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 11:53 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
ap. exactly
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 12:59 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think we should treat the accused just as we would Americans. Like actually charging themwith a crime before incarcerating them, giving them a fair trial, and even serving them meals that they can eat without violating their religious beliefs. American Muslims or Hindus can ask for these same conveniences and get them as well. You act like we are housing terrorists in 5 star resorts. One more thing, Americans don’t get tortured either, it would probably be a good idea to give those rights to ALL people, not just Americans.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 1:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
You don’t get out much, do you kakuni1977? If you think Americans aren’t tortured in America, and that they are charged before being jailed and that trials are fair, you should talk to people who work in or have been the “guest” of the system.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 1:22 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Nope, I am the indoors type.
What I meant was we should try to treat all people like we should be treating Americans. People are people and we should not treat them badly just because they are foreigners. AP acts like the people in Gitmo are being given favortism. I think that idea is absurd. I am sure Americans get sodomized by their guards too, but I don’t think it is right either.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 1:58 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
They are war criminals, plain and simple. They should have been or should be subjects of a military tribunal, not a civilian court system. They had no consititutional rights to begin with nor should they be afforded any now. Coddling them will only result in them being set free to join another terrorist organization and attack. History will repeat itself, we never learn.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 2:18 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
They have the right to be tried fairly no matter what system is used. Some of them were not in terrorist organizations and they deserve to be free. I could make a case for George Bush being a “war criminal” too, but that doesn’t mean he should not be fairly tried. You should read some of the ACLU cases for some of these people, it is amazing how bad they were treated although they did nothing wrong. They just wanted to get them convicted instead of trying to find out the truth. It is sad when people believe that they deserve better treatment than anyone outside their group.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 2:25 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Defense Secretary Robert Gates long has advocated closing Guantanamo. As President Barack Obama signed the executive order last week, he was surrounded by 16 retired admirals and generals who’d urged the action. Major Gen. Paul Eaton, who has a son on duty in the Middle East, told the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer that “torture is the tool of the lazy, the stupid and the pseudo-tough. It’s also perhaps the greatest recruiting tool that the terrorists have.”
http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2009/01/29/opinion/doc49812f5e507e2308342549.txt
• Numerous experts have stated that very little “actionable intelligence” was obtained from Gitmo interrogations. Further, the detainees have been there for five years; any information they may have is obviously outdated.
• Many government officials have stated that the majority of people still held in Gitmo are not high value detainees (as was once claimed) but of low intelligence value and pose no threat to U.S. security. The large majority of detainees already released to Great Britain for example, were not held or tried by that country due to lack of any evidence that they were terrorists.
• In October of 2008, Army Lt. Col. Darrell Vandeveld resigned as a prosecutor at the Guantanamo Bay military commissions, citing he had “grave doubts” about the integrity of the system. Vandeveld was at least the fourth Gitmo prosecutor to resign on the same basis.
• World opinion is overwhelmingly against the U.S. on Gitmo; even our staunch ally in the war on terror, Great Britain, has repeatedly refused to endorse Guantanamo Bay.
www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/jan/26/sad-chapter/?opinion
Darrel Vandeveld, a former U.S. Army Reserve
lieutenant colonel, filed the statement in support of a petition for the release of Mohammed Jawad, an Afghan national held at the military prison for six years, The Washington Post (NYSE:WPO) reported Wednesday. Jawad was transferred to the facility after being detained in Kabul in 2002 following a grenade attack that wounded two U.S. Special Forces soldiers and their interpreter.
Vandeveld was lead prosecutor in the case until he asked to be relieved, citing a crisis of conscience. He said the case was rife with problems, including allegations of abuse upon Jawad by Afghan police and the U.S. military, as well evidence later determined to be missing or faulty.
Vandeveld told the Post evidence in Guantanamo Bay cases often was so disorganized “it was like a stash of documents found in a village in a raid and just put on a plane to the U.S.”
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/01/14/Ex-prosecutor_says_Gitmo_evidence_ill-kept/UPI-29401231952410/
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 6:05 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oliver,
How about we hear what you have to think instead of all your post from websites and links and others opinions. Interesting point made on “world opinion”. We are not in this for a popularity contest. Our volunteer military goes into harms way to defend the belief that as world citizens we all have liberty. Great Britain, France and many others soon forget the sacrifice we made for them. They have no right to be in our business to begin with so I have no regard for what they say. They have a right to their “opinion”. As an example Abraham Lincoln was a very unpopular prersident in his day and history proved otherwise. We will defend ourselves based on leadership and doing what is right, not based on popular “opinion”. Taking a leadership role means making tough decisions that are unpopular with everyone and it means having a greater purpose for the good of all. My opinion, I agree Gitmo probably needs to be closed. As for the terrorist prisoners who played a role in attacking our country, they deserve none of our consitiutional rights. They will show their gratitude for such a kind gesture of having been giving rights and freedom by joining back up with other terrorists and attacking us again. You need to get some perspective. As for torture, you will be begging for it to be reinstituded when we are attacked again this time in a more violent way, like what occurred in Beslan when a middle school was taken over and innocent children are killed. In these violent times we need to be diplomatic from a position of strength not weakness. Speak softly and carry a big stick.
From you dear friend and my new name as given to me by you - those who think that their ignorance somehow constitutes reasoned discourse
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 6:37 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
twtttisrd-
I am quite prolific in posting my opinion. I have plenty of vets in my own immediate family. Bless them all. Most are liberals and very happy that Obama won. My, how they thought the last president was a disaster for this nation–make me feel like a moderate!
Like many military folks–active and retired–they think that torture is unamerican, that it carries significant more threat to our nation by undermining the very things our country stands for, and what they risked their lives for. I appreciate their service and I happen to agree with them as well as the references and blurbs I posted above. How’s that, oh bothersome one?
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 7:04 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oliver not bad. You need not justify yourself to me, we are all on an equal playing field here and in this country, that is what makes it so great to be a citizen here. By the way thanks for the new nick name I wil wear it like a badge of honor. Tell all of your immediate family who are former military thank you for serving our country - they have a right more than any other to express their opinion in my book. I will only continue the discourse because that is what made this country so great to begin with.
Further thought on the opinion of other countries regarding our affairs - Britain, great example there. One does not have to look too far back in history at the great example brittish social reformist prime minister Neville Chamberlain set at the begginning of WWII. He is a great example of what negotiation does from a point of weakness. Look where we ended up with that ideology. For anyone here wondering what happened with Chamberlain and Hitler, in short - Chamberlain negotiated with Hitler from a stand point of weakness and wanting to be peaceful and just let Hitler have parts of other countries without a fight. Chamberlain proclaimed “I believe it is peace in our time” Hitler signed a treaty promising he would not then invade further into countries he already had taken for their naturual resources. Hitler knowing Chamberlain was so weak invaded the rest of western europe knowing he could so easily and the Brittish would never stop him. Well, the rest is history, we had to save the Brittish from the ineptness of Chamberlain. Winston Churchill hit the nail on the head when he described Chamberlain as sheep in sheeps clothing. It doesn’t get any better than that. This is not not unlike what I am begginning to see in our current administration and president. BO Going on Arab television and indirectly apologizing for us dictating to others instead of sitting down and talking. I am sorry, when you want make nuclear weapons as Iran does and threatene us you don’t grovel or apologize. Iran’s leader now only feels even more emboldened and powerful by such nonsense, the same way Hitler did after Chamberlain’s great idea of diplomacy.
Posted January 31st, 2009 at 7:30 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Anyone see any similarities with my post above?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.073ba2ee2f1f00668848a4655420fedc.411&show_article=1
Posted February 1st, 2009 at 8:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
twtttiscrd–
Chamberlain’s mistake was not engagement it was agreeing to sacrifice Czechoslovakia, I don’t think Obama is making that mistake. Certainly I see nothing to suggest that.
I don’t trust Iran, which is why I think their statements in the article you cite cannot be believed. I think that Bush did more to strengthen Iran’s position in the region by his blustering and by the war in Iraq. Iraq was Iran’s biggest enemy in the (immediate) region. The war replaced a strong (albeit despicable) Sunni government with a weak Shiite-dominated one; the Iranian government is also Shiite (and Malaki has made quite a few trips to Iran).
The hardliners in Iran need a blustering enemy, which they had in Bush. The article you post shows me that what they fear most is diplomacy, because the forces in their own country that are more moderate might prefer diplomacy themselves, and that–more than anything–would undermine the hardliners.
This is what the quote in the above article is hoping to accomplish–undermine support in the U.S. for diplomacy so that the hardliners won’t be undermined by their own moderates. If it is more as you suggest–that they recognize diplomacy as their means to conquer the region (or whatever) they would be saying the opposite.
On a side note, your claim re: Obama and coal also misses the mark. Obamam has always been a supporter of ‘clean coal’ (something that doesn’t yet exist BTW). Had you posted his entire statement rather than just a single sentence out of context that would be clear. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that this was unintentional, and certainly on the various right-wing sites etc. only this single sentence appears. Many of them are trying to be intentionally deceptive but I’ll cut you slack and consider it an honest mistake.
I might get around to responding directly to that and provide the context and other things he has said–but for now suffice it to say that it is not a flip-flop, it is in fact what he said throughout his campaign. Obama’s position on coal is actually one of the main points of disagreement that a lot of environmentalists have with him.
Posted February 1st, 2009 at 12:38 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oliver,
You put the cart before the horse regarding the statement about Chamberlain, you should reword your sentence to this - Chamberlain’s mistake was to sacrifice Czechoslovakia because he was a coward and did not want engagement. You know like Churchill put it, a sheep in sheep’s clothing.
Posted February 1st, 2009 at 8:18 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
It looks like Sheriff Joe may be taking a trip abroad. Obama just signed an executive order OK’ing CIA ‘Renditions’ (‘renditions’ is kidnapping of terror suspects by CIA operatives and then transferring them for “interrogation” to foreign countries cooperating with the US). Many of these “cooperating countries” have been known to use physical torture far beyond water-boarding to extract information.
So this is what Obama meant when he said we could get the information we needed to protect America without compromising our values. Outsourcing torture, yeah, that’s the ticket. That should keep Obama’s hands lily white. So that is what he meant by transparency, or perhaps he just sees this as another exception, similar to the no lobbyist in my administration rule exceptions. It would appear that the ‘expected one’ intends to keep up his physical conditioning by the use of backpedaling.
Renditions were used extensively during the eight years of the Bush Administration and such tactics were severely criticized by the Democrats who labeled all that condoned them as accomplices to torture. I wonder what their verdict will be now that the “expected one” is the enabler.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 12:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
AP, you act like Obama started the program, he didn’t. From what I have read, Clinton started it and Bush showed us why it is a horrible idea. As far as Obama using it, I think it should be discontinued and for the first time in a long time I think I agree with you. Although you were probably against it when Clinton started it, for it when Bush used it, and against it now that Obama has kept it… I see partison politics driving your views.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 2:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Americans don’t get tortured? Seems to me you could make a case that close to 3,000 Americans were feeling pretty tortured when they burned alive or got crushed to death when three planes flew into buildings and the ground. Kinda what started this whole thing, isn’t it?
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 2:34 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oops, make that four planes.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 3:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I can’t believe you are equating a terrorist act with air planes to torture in prison systems. I think these are very different situations.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 4:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Kakuni1977,
No, Kakuni, what you are seeing is a full color panoramic view of liberal hypocrisy. You are witnessing the Mahdi Obama trying to hide his bloody hands. You are seeing an exhibition of Democratic elitist whose lack of moral values lead them to believe that if they hire the killing done, it is not murder.
At least George Bush did not hide his hands, which compared to the Obama administration is somewhat honest. I was no fan of the Bush administration and I have said so publicly on several occasions, but at least he acted like a man, and took responsibility for what he did, and took the action that he took because he believed that it was necessary to protect the American people.
The ‘expected one’, Obama would have us believe that he is stupid enough to think that the terrorists will be mollified by the CIA turning over detainees to Israel of Egypt or maybe he is just that much of an idiot.
One thing is for certain, like most far left liberals, he refuses to take personal responsibility for authorizing torture. He is most certainly NOT the kind of man I would want watching my back. The ‘anointed one’ is not a deliberate man. He does not say what he means nor does he mean what he says. For an example of how quickly he flip flops on his words, you may go to “Obama signs order to close Gitmo in a year (AP report) by Lara Jakes, Jan 22, 2009, which says in part that Obama will; “_End the practice of “extraordinary renditions” that transfer detainees to countries where they can be tortured.”
When you have finished reading this, take into consideration that you and I have disagreed more than we have agreed, but ask yourself, would you rather have me or Obama watching your back in a foxhole? Yeah, it’s that important. If I gave you my word, you can bet that I would charge the gates of hell to keep it. Yeah, it is that important, at least to me.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 5:14 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
You’re right, Kakuni. My bad. They are very different. The terrorist act with airplanes was far worse.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
AP, No he just didn’t change the current policy. He has done nothing as far as this is concerned. Inaction does not equate to the actions you are accusing him of.
Llickers, crashing a plane into a building is terrorism just like blowing up buildings in other ways. It is trying to make people feel scared by making a big bang. Torture is making an individual feel pain for any reason. There is a big difference. I agree with you that terrorism is worse, but it is not like that makes torture ok.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 5:43 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
With regard to the rendition issue, and Obama’s decision to keep current policy in place, I for one, am relieved. Obama said many things during his campaign aimed at getting votes from folks who do no live in the real world.
Now that he has won the election, and has the world on his shoulders, president Obama has to do what he believes to be the responsible thing.
The same thing can be said with regard to all his campaign rhetoric about getting out of Iraq yesterday. He got the liberal vote for saying that, now, hopefully, he will do what he believes to be the responsible thing and withdraw at a rate that will not put in danger the victory that has been attained there.
With regard to Gitmo, he said during the campaign that he would close it. Now he says he will close it in one year. Stay tuned. That too may be subject to change whe he realizes that there was a very good reason for Gitmo in the first place.
So I will not criticize him for changing his mind on these issues. Hopefully he will do a lot more of that.
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 6:26 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullish,AP,llickers,publisco; Do you still think Iraq attacked us on 9/11? Do you think Osama Bin Laden hates us because we are free? Do you think the constitution is a tradition to be upheld, or what constitutional principles do you agree are worth sacrificing for our security? If democracy is a good idea, should we impose it through more invasions, with a privately operated military?
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 7:01 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
davinci:
I don’t think Iraq attacked us on 9/11.
I believe having an Arab Democracy in the world is a big step forward in combating terrorism over the long-term. I was very glad to see the Iraqis voting freely yesterday. As opposed to what some may believe, I never believed that Arabs do not have the right to be free or that they are genetically incapable of living in a free society.
I think Bin Laden hates us, and all those who do not believe in Islam and that he wants the world to be ruled by Muslims.
Why do you, davinci, believe Bin Laden hates us? Or maybe you believe he doesn’t hate us.
Do you, davinci, believe we can come to an agreement with Bin Laden, that YOU would accept, that would make him our friend?
Posted February 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Peter Bergen in his book entitled The Osama bin Laden I know, lists Osama’s actions in response to our 1) infidel presence in holy land in Saudi Arabia, 2)our imbalance of support to Isreal and our 3)our support worldwide of corrupt regimes for corporate greed. I just wonder why so many folks accepted such a shallow explanation for terrorism, and were so easily manipulated into invading Iraq by the events of 9/11.
I was introduced to a couple from Iraq before the first invasion. They were very western in their values, valued women’s rights, education and pictures of Mosul looked just like Grand Junction. They were Sunni. I have not heard from them since the second invasion.
Posted February 3rd, 2009 at 8:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
And, davinci, you agree with Peter Bergen? And if you do, what do you propose the US should do to gain favor with Bin Laden?
Posted February 6th, 2009 at 8:23 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oliver what do you think about this?
A New York woman was killed in a terrorist attack at the U.S. Embassy in Sana, Yemen, in September. And U.S. counterterrorism officials have now confirmed that Said Ali al-Shihri, 35, who was released from the Guantanamo Bay prison center in 2007, is the deputy leader of Al Qaeda in that Mideast country and is a suspect in the attack.
Now the one that bombed the U. S. S. Cole is having his charges dropped? Great mesage we have sent to the world, blow us and kill us, its ok we will turn you loose to do it again not only to us but others.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.