Guantanamo North

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Guantanamo North

Postby Don » Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:13 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8413230.stm

Image

US President Barack Obama has ordered the federal government to buy a prison in Illinois to take a number of inmates from Guantanamo Bay.

The move is a key part of Mr Obama's plan to close the Cuba-based jail.

The number of inmates for transfer to the Thomson Correctional Center has not been given officially, but US media report it could be between 35 and 90.

Senior officials said security would be upgraded, making Thomson the most secure jail in the country.

Obama administration officials have said that closing Guantanamo Bay is "essential" in removing a key al-Qaeda recruiting tool.

Mr Obama had given himself one year to achieve this, but with officials still trying to work out what to do with about 215 inmates at the camp, he admitted in November that a 22 January deadline had slipped to later in 2010.

A letter signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defence Secretary Robert Gates says: "The president has directed, with our unanimous support, that the federal government proceed with the acquisition of the facility in Thomson."

A briefing by senior administration officials said the move represented "an important step to achieve our national security objectives".

Thomson would "go beyond even maximum security prison standards".

An improved perimeter fence would make the prison "the most secure in the country", officials at the briefing said.

They said the number of Guantanamo inmates at Thomson would be "limited".

There remain questions on the legality of transfers to US soil but the briefing officials said it was permissible to bring in detainees for prosecution.

The briefing heard: "It would be a violation of current law to transfer individuals for anything but the purpose of prosecution - that's the [legal] change we'll be looking for."

There have been concerns in the US about inmates escaping or eventually gaining the right to live on American soil.

However the Clinton/Gates letter says: "The president has no intention of releasing any detainees in the United States."

Another letter, from Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to Congress, and obtained by the Associated Press news agency, says a detainee will be treated as though he is at the border trying to obtain entry, but will not do so.

No timeframe has been given for the first transfer.

The BBC's Adam Brookes, in Washington, says that the prison transfer might go some way to addressing the problem of Guantanamo but it will not solve it.

Our correspondent adds that European nations - who have until now taken the attitude that if the US will not house the detainees, they will not either - may be softening their stance to accept small numbers of prisoners.

The near-empty Thomson prison, about 150 miles (240km) from Chicago, was promoted as an alternative by Illinois Senator Richard Durbin.

The prison, built in 2001, has the capacity for 1,600 inmates, but due to budget constraints only houses 200 prisoners.

It would be sold to the Federal Bureau of Prisons and then part of it leased to the Department of Defense, reports say.

Federal prisoners would be held at the facility, as well as the former Guantanamo inmates, officials said.

Of the remaining Guantanamo inmates, some are expected to be sent to other countries, while others could face military tribunals or be tried in US courts.

Prisons in Colorado, Montana and elsewhere in Illinois had expressed an interest in housing Guantanamo inmates.
Don
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 24896
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:01 pm

Postby Arkansas » Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:52 am

Somebody please tell me why there's such a great need to close Guantanamo? Why did Obama pledge to close it? Are we getting rid of everyone there? I mean, why just move these guys around? Do we really need to spend more money on their security?

Keep them in frickin Cuba! I for one don't necessarily want them on heartland soil.


later~
Arkansas
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2565
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:23 am
Location: duh?

Postby StoneCold » Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:21 pm

Hollywood wheels turning at this very moment.

Escape from Guantanamo North

Kurt Russell, Bruce Willis, Tommy Lee Jones and Steven Seagal fight, capture and rustle escaped terrorists back by Plane, Train, Helicopter and Go Kart.
User avatar
StoneCold
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6310
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:32 pm

Re: Guantanamo North

Postby rockinfayrose » Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:19 pm

Gunbot wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8413230.stm

Obama administration officials have said that closing Guantanamo Bay is "essential" in removing a key al-Qaeda recruiting tool.
Prisons in Colorado, Montana and elsewhere in Illinois had expressed an interest in housing Guantanamo inmates.[/i]


Sounds real smart to me Mr. President, remove al-Qaeda from Cuba and bring it straight to the States. How could anyone ration this as a good idea?
Live. Laugh. Love...And Never Stop Rockin'!!!

...and go visit www.soulinspireddesigns.com
User avatar
rockinfayrose
8 Track
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:58 pm
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Postby Lula » Fri Dec 18, 2009 6:22 pm

rockinfayrose wrote:Sounds real smart to me Mr. President, remove al-Qaeda from Cuba and bring it straight to the States.

When you round people up in raids, shove them in an extra-constitutional prison, and deprive them of a trial, how do you know who Al Qaeda is and isn't?

rockinfayrose wrote:How could anyone ration this as a good idea?

Closing Gitmo was supported by both Bush, Obama, and McCain, so this isn't even an issue of who's in charge, just a matter of when.
User avatar
Lula
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4561
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: santa monica

Postby RossValoryRocks » Fri Dec 18, 2009 8:59 pm

Lula wrote:When you round people up in raids, shove them in an extra-constitutional prison, and deprive them of a trial, how do you know who Al Qaeda is and isn't?


Are you sure you are a teacher? These are the facts: American Citizens have Constitutional rights, vistors to our country are afforded the blessing and protections of our Constitution because in a passort from another country the State Department (or equivelent in each country) ASKS that those rights be given TEMPORARILY, terrorists captured while trying to kill our soldiers have no standing in regards to the Constitution, at all.

The Bill of Rights DOES NOT apply to them.

They should be tried in military courts, and sentenced accordingly.
User avatar
RossValoryRocks
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 4:47 pm

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Sat Dec 19, 2009 3:22 am

RossValoryRocks wrote:Are you sure you are a teacher? These are the facts: American Citizens have Constitutional rights, vistors to our country are afforded the blessing and protections of our Constitution because in a passort from another country the State Department (or equivelent in each country) ASKS that those rights be given TEMPORARILY, terrorists captured while trying to kill our soldiers have no standing in regards to the Constitution, at all.

The Bill of Rights DOES NOT apply to them.

Whoa, no need to impugn Lula’s profession...
As she correctly mentioned, closing Gitmo has the broad support of people like Robert Gates, Colin Powell, and even Bush. This isn’t just some Daily Kos wet dream.
Fact of the matter is, the Supreme Court has granted Gitmo detainees some legal rights while denying most others.
Guantanamo is legal terra incognita; we’re just making up the rules as we go along.
As in most wars, the laws are an ad-hoc mess. History will have to sort it out later.
RossValoryRocks wrote:They should be tried in military courts, and sentenced accordingly.

The military commission process if fine as long as it’s above board, but plenty of JAGs have resigned in disgust saying the trial are rigged, and don’t even meet minimal due process.
Combine that with prisoners who have languished in captivity for seven years without charge, and reports of torture, and you have a tremendous eyesore for this country.
Personally, if Colin Powell says shut it down, that’s good enough for me.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby RossValoryRocks » Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:28 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
RossValoryRocks wrote:Are you sure you are a teacher? These are the facts: American Citizens have Constitutional rights, vistors to our country are afforded the blessing and protections of our Constitution because in a passort from another country the State Department (or equivelent in each country) ASKS that those rights be given TEMPORARILY, terrorists captured while trying to kill our soldiers have no standing in regards to the Constitution, at all.

The Bill of Rights DOES NOT apply to them.

Whoa, no need to impugn Lula’s profession...
As she correctly mentioned, closing Gitmo has the broad support of people like Robert Gates, Colin Powell, and even Bush. This isn’t just some Daily Kos wet dream.
Fact of the matter is, the Supreme Court has granted Gitmo detainees some legal rights while denying most others.
Guantanamo is legal terra incognita; we’re just making up the rules as we go along.
As in most wars, the laws are an ad-hoc mess. History will have to sort it out later.
RossValoryRocks wrote:They should be tried in military courts, and sentenced accordingly.

The military commission process if fine as long as it’s above board, but plenty of JAGS have resigned in disgust saying the trial are rigged, and don’t even meet minimal due process.
Combine that with prisoners who have languished in captivity for seven years without charge, and reports of torture, and you have a tremendous eyesore for this country.
Personally, if Colin Powell says shut it down, that’s good enough for me.


I don't care if they shut Gitmo down, I do care they are giving rights our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have died to ensure we have to the very people who kill them. That is the point of my post.
User avatar
RossValoryRocks
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 4:47 pm

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:40 am

RossValoryRocks wrote:I don't care if they shut Gitmo down, I do care they are giving rights our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have died to ensure we have to the very people who kill them. That is the point of my post.

From what I gather, the detainees will go from being indefinitely detained in Cuba to being indefinitely detained in Illinois.
What most liberals fail to realize is, in war, civil liberties always take a dive.
Glenn Beck, on the right, also suffers from this myopic view, characterizing Woodrow Wilson and FDR as anti-freedom jackboot fascists, without ever mentioning they were wartime presidents.
It's war, shit happens.

Fox’s Judge Napolitano recently wrote an interesting piece saying that without an official declaration of war, all detainees must be tried in federal civilian courts.
Lots of debate over this.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la- ... 4004.story
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Postby strangegrey » Sat Dec 19, 2009 10:01 am

RossValoryRocks wrote:I don't care if they shut Gitmo down, I do care they are giving rights our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have died to ensure we have to the very people who kill them. That is the point of my post.


Stu,

this is a distinction not many on the left have the brain capacity to comprehend. Don't bother. Really. The right sees it for what it is. The left will bury their heads in the sand until they can't breathe anymore....
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby Arkansas » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:09 pm

So, if these 'bad guys' are gonna be tried & treated in the same prescribed way, no matter where they are, then why do we need to shut down Gitmo? Will having them in Illinois expedite anything?


later~
Arkansas
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2565
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:23 am
Location: duh?

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:15 pm

Arkansas wrote:So, if these 'bad guys' are gonna be tried & treated in the same prescribed way, no matter where they are, then why do we need to shut down Gitmo? Will having them in Illinois expedite anything?


later~


No.
It's all window dressing.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca


Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests