Done: Obama signs order closing Gitmo within a year; Update: McCain, Graham support

posted at 1:00 pm on January 22, 2009 by Allahpundit

Just one of four you’ll see executed here; the second ends enhanced interrogations by the CIA. Note the third, though, establishing a task force to review all detention policies and procedures. If that “classified loophole” ends up being quietly carved out later, I assume that’s where it’ll come from.

WaPo’s touting its new poll showing that 53 percent support closing the prison, a perilously slim majority for so momentous a decision. Gallup, in fact, finds that 45 percent support keeping it open compared to just 35 percent who want it closed; among independents it’s 48 and 32, respectively. The stakes for Obama from Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen:

During the campaign, Obama described the techniques used to prevent these attacks as “torture.” He promised that if elected, he would “have the Army Field Manual govern interrogation techniques for all United States Government personnel and contractors.” If he follows through, he will effectively kill a program that stopped al-Qaeda from launching another Sept. 11-style attack. It was easy for Obama the candidate to criticize the CIA program. But as president, what will he do when the next senior al-Qaeda leader — with actionable intelligence on plots to strike our homeland — is captured and refuses to talk? Will the president allow the CIA to question this terrorist using enhanced interrogation techniques? If Obama refuses and our country is attacked, he will bear responsibility.

Well, no, Al Qaeda will bear responsibility, a point to which the left will suddenly awaken after blaming Bush for every IED that went off in Iraq. But not everyone will see it that way, and they won’t all be Republicans: Remember, even a progressive as enlightened as Madam Speaker was cool with “torture” after 9/11.


Update: Right out of the chute, cover from Maverick and his crony-in-chief.

“We support President Obama’s decision to close the prison at Guantanamo, reaffirm America’s adherence to the Geneva Conventions, and begin a process that will, we hope, lead to the resolution of all cases of Guantanamo detainees,” McCain and Graham said in a statement…

“Present at Guantanamo are a number of detainees who have been cleared for release but have found no foreign country willing to accept them,” the senators said. “Other detainees have been deemed too dangerous for release, but the sensitive nature of the evidence makes prosecution difficult. The military’s proper role in processing detainees held on the battlefield at Bagram, Afghanistan, and other military prisons around the world must be defended, but that is left unresolved. Also unresolved is the type of judicial process that would replace the military commissions. We believe the military commissions should have been allowed to continue their work.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6

This man is going to get people killed.

blatantblue on January 22, 2009 at 4:45 PM

Due Obama’s ordered delay in the trials, a federal court wants Obama to define what an “enemy combatant” is within the week, not 4 months. The detainee’s lawyers just changed all their cases from “vs Bush” to “vs Obama”.

Ahm it makes the heart glad. Let’s see where Obama’s re-election ambitions trump his stated ideals. As we learned with FISA and campaign finance, his word ain’t worth much if the price is his ass.

Chuck Schick on January 22, 2009 at 4:49 PM

“MSNBC political analyst Patrick Buchanan says the GOP is all but dead and wonders whether it can even be called a national party anymore.”

Perhaps ya’ll should start a conservative party.

Or you can join me in being a proud Independent.

getalife on January 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Or you can join me in being a proud Independent.

getalife on January 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM

I’d rather chew my own arm off. Are you always ‘proud’….

HornetSting on January 22, 2009 at 4:51 PM

I want my money back from the McCain campaign. How in the hell did he end up as the GOP nominee?

Someone better take the bull by the horns quickly, I’m telling you.

What ever happened to the RNC chairmanship? Has that been resolved? Did they all back out? WTH?

Oink on January 22, 2009 at 4:53 PM

“MSNBC political analyst Patrick Buchanan says the GOP is all but dead and wonders whether it can even be called a national party anymore.”
getalife on January 22, 2009 at 4:50 PM

LOL
Pat’s been saying this for years! (Doesn’t make it true.)
getalife and Chris Matthews are about the only ones who pay attention to what he says.

I’m a proud Republican, BTW, thanks.

Jenfidel on January 22, 2009 at 4:55 PM

The GOP is not dead. But it is certainly on life support until it gets its act together and becomes conservative again.

McCain and Graham do not represent the future of the GOP-they are the past.

technopeasant on January 22, 2009 at 4:58 PM

technopeasant on January 22, 2009 at 4:58 PM

We can re-establish. We can win everything back. In 2004, the Democrats were considered brain dead and a national party no more. We can totally win back what ground we have lost if we just run on:

liberty, small government, responsibility, low taxes, strong defense.

Oh, and the GOP needs better PR people as well. A ten year old could do a better job of making the case for the GOP than the GOP itself.

blatantblue on January 22, 2009 at 5:01 PM

This man is going to get people killed.

blatantblue on January 22, 2009 at 4:45 PM

And George W. didn’t?

trailboss on January 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM

Do we need any more proof that Obama likes terrorists?

VolMagic on January 22, 2009 at 5:15 PM

And George W. didn’t?

trailboss on January 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM

No, he didn’t.
Americans killed on Bush’s watch were mostly killed by Islamist murderers.

Jenfidel on January 22, 2009 at 5:16 PM

I said I am a proud Independent that knows both parties suk.

Now, I read BD say “Conservatives are not wedded to the Republican Party.”

That is Independent my friends.

getalife on January 22, 2009 at 4:12 PM

Despite the mere technicality that you (a die hard leftist) may be a registered Independent, the fact is that you began the theme of party loyalty when you said this:

I find it amusing they are dissenting against their party.
getalife on January 22, 2009 at 3:55 PM

I guess it was just a Freudian slip, or something. It certainly reveals a lot about your subconscious thinking (if thinking even begins to describe what goes happens when your brain attempts to function). Indeed, it would never occur to a conservative that expressing concern and providing alternative viewpoints is “dissent”.

Buy Danish on January 22, 2009 at 5:18 PM

The only place for the young pranksters is the Fool’s old neighborhood in Chicago.

In a few months, they will all be addicts or male prostitutes.

notagool on January 22, 2009 at 5:28 PM

Ha! I guess its kind of ironic then because one of my first political lessons of my life came about the day I was going to take my SATs. I remember a bunch of people protesting outside, ranting and raving about how the test was biased against minorities.

The tests are culturally biased.

They favor the cultures that study.

DeweyWins on January 22, 2009 at 5:32 PM

The more I hear from McCain now, the more I am convinced he tried to lose this election.

jdoubleu on January 22, 2009 at 5:36 PM

Come on McCain. How can you use that R with a straight face?

oakpack on January 22, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Powerline has a good write up on this, its our job to rub the faces of the Libtards in the fact that this is all talk and no walk.

jp on January 22, 2009 at 5:44 PM

Well BD,

Since you cut and ran from the AJC, I just had to say hello.

getalife on January 22, 2009 at 5:54 PM

We can re-establish. We can win everything back. In 2004, the Democrats were considered brain dead and a national party no more. We can totally win back what ground we have lost if we just run on:

liberty, small government, responsibility, low taxes, strong defense.

Oh, and the GOP needs better PR people as well. A ten year old could do a better job of making the case for the GOP than the GOP itself.

blatantblue on January 22, 2009 at 5:01 PM

+1… I’d also suggest they run on the corruption angle too… Obama’s already mired in corruption and he’s barely gotten started. It’s easy to see where all of that tasty stimulus pork is going to be sitting by 2010. A cleaned-up, disciplined GOP can run strong and hard against that, especially since the electorate will be reeling from either massive tax hikes, unbelievable deficit spending, or a mixture of both. They’re not going to be amused to hear the stories about where that money is being spent. Obviously, people like McCain are unwilling, or unsuited, to tell that story.

Political narratives change in a hurry, especially if the cumulative effect of a party’s mistakes strengthens into a gale-force wind, as it did in 2006 and 1994. Today’s unbeatable messiah is tomorrow’s footnote, and the only way one team wins permanently is if the other team doesn’t show up to play.

The major weapons in the Democrat arsenal are going to look a bit dull and shopworn by 2012, if not 2010. They’ve already lost a lot of the air in the racism balloon, and the endless carping about “greed” is going to ring pretty hollow when it comes from people sitting on top of a trillion dollars in “stimulus” loot. If nothing else, it may dawn on the voters that Democrat corruption means ripping money out of the taxpayers’ hides and giving it to their friends and allies, while Republican corruption means giving larger tax cuts to their friends. One of those things is a lot easier to swallow.

Doctor Zero on January 22, 2009 at 5:55 PM

Come on McCain. How can you use that R with a straight face?

oakpack on January 22, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Easy, it stands for RINO.

Laura in Maryland on January 22, 2009 at 5:59 PM

The jihadist movement is gonna gain so much ground with this tool in office.

Pasalubong on January 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM

and, as I said the other day, when Spc Steve tried to me castigating me for labelling Barack HUSSEIN Obama (PBUH)(SWT)(SAW) as being a “Jihadi”, and I issued him this challenge:

After 4 years, or God Help us 8 years of Obama in the Oval Office, who will have done more to advance the cause of Jihadism in the world: Obama (PBUH)(SAW)(SWT) or Osama Bin Laden?

Well, let’s see, after only 2 days in office Obama has:

a) rescinded Bush’s Executive Orders that helped keep us safe these past 7 years
b) did away with enhanced interrogation techniques, ditto above
c) his FIRST call of Statecraft, was to a Muslim Teorrists Leader…nice signal sent there!
d) in his various inaugaral addresses, changed “Christians and Jews…” to “Christians and Muslims…..”

the significance of which is not lost upon either community!

e) No Bible needed at his Re-Swearing in; Hmmmmm? Wonder why?

f) been to “Church” once in the past 3 months or so! Hmmmmm?

And all this after only TWO days!

Imagine 4 or 8 more years of this crap!

All of those who have criticized me for pointing out the fact that Obama (PBUH)is in fact, a very Closetted Muslim practicing “Taqiyah”.

Slowly but surely, all will be revealed, and I will be proven to have been correct all along, unfortunately. And the Brain-addelpated idiots who put him in office, will be walking right off the cliff like the lemmings they are, to cheer him on, all along the way.

I will also be proven correct on my original statement: after 4 or 8 years, Obama (PBUH)(SWT)(SAW), he will have done infinitely more to have advanced the cause of Jihadism than Bin Laden in the same timeframe!

Two days people, and he’s already doing it!

Two days…

Dale in Atlanta on January 22, 2009 at 6:08 PM

It’s all on Obama after today. The next terrorist attack, the next Hamas rocket the next dead American soldier.

Will anyone in the GOP show enough courage to call him on it?

kcewa on January 22, 2009 at 6:13 PM

Save that picture of him signing this Executive order…………..

………… it reminds me of a bunch of “kids” who are “playing” at politics.

This is going to blow up in all of our faces………

……. and everyone who did everything in their power to get Mr. Obama elected will feign ignorance and cry unaccountability.

Seven Percent Solution on January 22, 2009 at 6:14 PM

they’re going to cut to a commercial any minute now..

the next take won’t have any of this business about calling the palestinians as the first official foreign phone call, closing gitmo, suspending terror trials, etc…

when the final film is packaged for theaters, you’ll see a no nonsense CIC w/some juevos…

not the empty suit you see now ‘playing’ president.

gatorboy on January 22, 2009 at 6:17 PM

gatorboy on January 22, 2009 at 6:17 PM

And the commercial will last 4-12 years?

kcewa on January 22, 2009 at 6:27 PM

One can only HOPE that the released murderers thank their benefactors in the usual Islamofascist manner.

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 6:31 PM

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 6:31 PM

And move next door to Drywall or Benny.

kingsjester on January 22, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Come on McCain. How can you use that R with a straight face?

oakpack on January 22, 2009 at 5:38 PM

I wonder if the RINO bastard is going to show up at CPAC this year and once again tell us how he’s a Reagan conservative? In all honesty, there isn’t room in the GOP for traitors like McCain and Graham and me. Either they go or I’m registering independent and stop enabling these people.

highhopes on January 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM

kingjester at 6:37 PM-

The only way these jihadists should be “released” is through a trapdoor, with a rope necktie, to do the last air dance.

Obama is a dangerously delusional fool.

Taking the “Moral Highground” in wartime is about as smart as telling your terrorist enemies what techniques of interrogation you will use against them.

This whole team is a bunch of Candyland jackasses.

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Now, how about signing one ordering Olbermann to close his mouth.

flyoverland on January 22, 2009 at 6:44 PM

highhopes on January 22, 2009 at 6:38 PM

No, no….a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution, my friend.

HornetSting on January 22, 2009 at 6:47 PM

Come on McCain. How can you use that R with a straight face?

oakpack on January 22, 2009 at 5:38 PM

It means nothing to him. The same way my driver’s license still reads 115 lbs. Why bother with changing the details? Too much of a hassle.

sherry on January 22, 2009 at 6:56 PM

The GOP is not dead. But it is certainly on life support until it gets its act together and becomes conservative again.

McCain and Graham do not represent the future of the GOP-they are the past.

technopeasant on January 22, 2009 at 4:58 PM

They are dead.

We can re-establish. We can win everything back. In 2004, the Democrats were considered brain dead and a national party no more. We can totally win back what ground we have lost if we just run on:

liberty, small government, responsibility, low taxes, strong defense.

Oh, and the GOP needs better PR people as well. A ten year old could do a better job of making the case for the GOP than the GOP itself.

blatantblue on January 22, 2009 at 5:01 PM

They will never run on that again. They will continue to run like Nixon, Ford, Bush, McCain. Its over for that party.

True_King on January 22, 2009 at 7:05 PM

I am beginning to believe that McCain has never read the articles of the Geneva Conventions.

Johan Klaus on January 22, 2009 at 7:05 PM

Taking the “Moral Highground” in wartime is about as smart as telling your terrorist enemies what techniques of interrogation you will use against them.

It’s not about the moral high ground – don’t let them tell you that. It might be for McCain, but Obama and his type honestly believe that terrorists are just misguided freedom fighters who have legitimate grievances against the US.

They think if we change our behavior and give them what they want (Israel on a platter and pulling our troops out of Saudi Arabia for starters)they won’t attack us.

Think “chickens coming home to roost” and the Bill Ayers.

kcewa on January 22, 2009 at 7:10 PM

It’s going to be entertaining to watch all the McCain defenders react once he starts on his across the aisle, expand the government routine.

Once amnesty, with the help of McCain, becomes law, it will truly be over for the Republicans. And who will drive the final nail in the coffin? McCain of course. Amnesty will provide a permanent majority for the Dems. Texas will turn blue.

True_King on January 22, 2009 at 7:15 PM

True_King on January 22, 2009 at 7:05 PM

Did Oprah endorse green tea as a weight loss tool before or after she blew up like a balloon? It’s a fair question to ask before take your claim that the GOP is “dead” seriously.

Buy Danish on January 22, 2009 at 7:16 PM

Johan Klaus on January 22, 2009 at 7:05 PM –

Frankly, I doubt most have even glanced at them…

In an act of “kindness” and in effort to garner actionable intelligence, we failed to comply with Geneva as regards bandits, pirates, saboteurs and terrorists…shoot them.

Instead, we offered them a quasi-POW status previously unknown to the military-legal world, and established Camp Delta as a field expedient location, where civilians are not covered by ANY US law (but are subject to the Cuban magistrate at Santiago, according to treaty) and went about obtaining intelligence and keeping these detainess off the battlefield. (Limited success on that one, about 60 detainees returned home after release, and eneded up attacking US troops again.)

If we were to follow Geneva to the letter…there would be NO Gitmo detainees…they’d have been legally executed shortly after capture.

But, seems there are few, pretty damn few, who understand that little bit about Geneva.

coldwarrior on January 22, 2009 at 7:18 PM

It’s all on Obama after today. The next terrorist attack, the next Hamas rocket the next dead American soldier.
kcewa on January 22, 2009 at 6:13 PM

Nah, according to conservatives’ 9/11 calculus a President has at least a nine month “free pass” to blame any attack on the previous administration.

benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Arghh. It’s a fair question to ask before we take your claim that the GOP is “dead” seriously.

Buy Danish on January 22, 2009 at 7:21 PM

Nah, according to conservatives’ 9/11 calculus a President has at least a nine month “free pass” to blame any attack on the previous administration.

benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Exception: void if the new president starts dismantling the anti-terror system with a 7+ year run of success on day one with no other plan in place.

Chuck Schick on January 22, 2009 at 7:33 PM

coldwarrior AT 7:18 pm-

The Third Geneva Convention, which is the one that defines who is to be considered a legimate soldier/ combatant, and therefore to be afforded POW status, has four conditions which must be met.

(Not following any one of these stipulations voids the captive’s right to considered a POW.)

The four are:

1)”-that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates.”

[So vague as to be essentially meaningless.]

2) “-that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance.” (E.G. a Uniform, shoulder patch of your unit, helmet with rank insignia, etc.)

[FAIL]

3) “-that of carrying arms openly

[FAIL... ask Johnny Spann]

4) “-that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.”

[FAIL]

All of the Gitmo scum FAIL at least two of them (those hiding grenades, etc. under this shirts FAIL three of the four conditions), and thus are not eligible for the treatment mandated by the POW Convention, and should have been executed years ago as “spies, saboteurs and terrorists“.

Bush and his team utterly and pathetically failed to explain this simple fact of warfare, and we now will all suffer the consequences thanks to Obama’s suicidally-naive wishful thinking and legal imbecility.

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 7:45 PM

benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Your idoicy is delicious. I want to eat your idiocy is what I’m trying to say.

VolMagic on January 22, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Nah, according to conservatives’ 9/11 calculus a President has at least a nine month “free pass” to blame any attack on the previous administration.

benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Heh, no kidding. That damn dubya did everything in his power to thwart Clinton’s serious efforts in curbing terror. In fact in his first day of office after steam cleaning his chair his first order of business was to give all terrorists Hello Kitty pins.

Oh wait, actually that is not the way it happened at all. I forgot Chimpy actually killed terrorists that Clinton ignored for 8 years. See it is totally different, but then that would make your comment base and childish? Hmmm…

ClassicCon on January 22, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Nah, according to conservatives’ 9/11 calculus a President has at least a nine month “free pass” to blame any attack on the previous administration.

benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Well Benny, your messiah is simply wonderful. On his first day in office his first act is not directed to helping any citizens of this country, instead he decides to give AID AND COMFORT TO OUR ENEMIES.

Hope you are happy when the mushroom clouds start popping up.

Yep, let’s look out for the rights of those terrorists. I also heard, but haven’t confirmed that he is suspending the war trials of the terrorists and that the families of the 911 victims are up in arms. Also, wasn’t BarryOs first phone call to some Hamas Leader??? Great guy you love there.

bullseye on January 22, 2009 at 8:01 PM

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 7:45 PM –

That’s one of two major points missed or glossed over by most…we were under no legal (and I’ll suggest moral) obligation to do anything with AQ captees other than execute them…but, and I’ll grant the guys at DIA and CIA this one, in order to obtain much needed intelligence, we had to permit them to live a bit longer, and the Conex containers at Baghram were insufficient (the human rightys folks jumped on the Conex prisons within days of our arrival in Afghanistan, for example) as were several of the mud and wattle “prisons” (of the type where Spahn was murdered).

There was no government within Afghanistan in the early part of that war to assume cognizance over these captees, and likewise, in Iraq for those AQI captees…and a number of other AQ members taken other places faced immediate execution by the host governments. And neither Afghanistan nor Iraq after forming recognized governments wanted to deal with these detainees. Why should they?

A quandry, to be sure. But, the total lack of communication to Americans the why’s and wherefore’s of the need to set up Camp Delta at Gitmo cost us plenty, and will for another generation. Obama hinted in his remarks that terrorists would be prosecuted. In court? Which courts? In US courts for acts committed in areas not under US jurisdiction where no Americans were killed, or in other countries whose laws are insufficient to allow for any sort of actual trial? Prosecuted? Where no legal (and sanitary) chain of evidence can be established to satisfy prosecutorial needs and also to somehow protect “rights” afforded non-US persons?

Prior to 9-11, we used rendition, a lot under the Clinton Administration, to a lesser extent in prior Administrations, where terrorists were fobbed off to friendly governments or sympathetic intelligence services…don’t ask, don’t tell…and more than a few such captees simply disappeared after a short while, all inquiries as to their “availability” for further debriefing met with vacant stares or mumbled apologies that Ahmed or Farook was no longer “available.” (We knew, from other channels that Ahmed and Farook were long long prior…dead.)

Does Obama wish to go back to “rendition” as a matter of US policy…that little white lie….we didn’t kill them, the (insert your country of choice) executed them, isn’t that terrible?

Unless the Cuban magistrate in Santiago wishes to exercise his treaty obligations, and have these detainees made subject to Cuban law…a tough sell since none committed acts illegal under Cuban law, and not on Cuban soil.

Perhaps it is time we do allow our spec ops personnel to offer captees a blindfold and a cigarette after a hasty interrogation?

Obama is out of his league. But, this is what the “American people” want. Regardless of consequences, apparently.

coldwarrior on January 22, 2009 at 8:03 PM

Who will this asshat and his bleeding heart supporters blame when asshat undoes every policy we had in place that kept us safe.

SoldiersMom on January 22, 2009 at 8:04 PM

Nah, according to conservatives’ 9/11 calculus a President has at least a nine month “free pass” to blame any attack on the previous administration.

benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

One other thing Benji…. There are a couple of things that wipe out any ‘free pass’

1. Closing Gitmo
2. Suspending the trials
3. Putting a 1st Lieut in charge of the CIA. A guy whose daughter sucks up to Hugo Chavez
4. Putting a Clown like Holder in his cabinet.

GBW inherited a disaster from Clintoon who was too busy shoving cigars in the orifices of interns just a year older than his ‘daughter’. You know, the Gorelick Wall, The continuation of the castration of the Cia, A wimpy assed foreign policy that emboldened our enemies.

Obamaramdingdonga on the other hand inherits a robust intelligence service and a system that was working. I don’t remember any Beslan type incidents here since GWB went on the attack.

With the availability of NBC weapons and the amount of soft targets in this country, any weakness can mean the death of millions of americans. You liberals live in a rose colored, starry eyeed, latte swilling, kumbaya singing fantasylyand. This is the real world bozo. Take a look at Pics of DResden to see what happens when leaders screw up.

bullseye on January 22, 2009 at 8:09 PM

Does Obama wish to go back to “rendition” as a matter of US policy…that little white lie….we didn’t kill them, the (insert your country of choice) executed them, isn’t that terrible?

I’m sorry to tell you, coldwarrior, that Obama’s indicated he wants to close the CIA’s secret overseas prisons (those used for rendition), too.
The man’s trying to trash every tool that we have to fight these evil terrorist scum.

BTW, coldwarrior, love your comments. They’re always so smart and insightful.

Jenfidel on January 22, 2009 at 8:15 PM

The “prisons” that everyone seems to refer to are normally an isolated house in a “friendly” country with several Agency officers and one “terrorist,” sometimes an apartment in an out of the way part of a major city abroad. After the Spahn murder and the Human Rights outcry over Baghram, “the sand pit,” and other places closer to the battle area, no CIA prisons were built anywhere. Might be a cute plot line for “24″ or “the Unit” but far far from reality.

Obama trashing every tool we have? Seems so. Those awful terrible un-American tools have done a lot to keep AQ off balance, off their game, and has also worked to craft working arrangements with a large number of other governments to deal with the terror threat. Not a lot of AQ newsworthy stuff coming out of the Philippines, or Mlaysia or Indonesia of late…but they are (as are others) still working intently to hunt down and destroy AQ and AQ-wannabee’s with a healthy dose of American assistance.

Once Congress starts looking at the so-called “prisons” and it becomes public, as it will, Congress has a habit of using intel to get in to the right parties and social gatherings, or garner press play, a lot of foreign governments are going to be held to the light of day and many many currently successful ops are going into the toilet.

What plays well in the Chicago Tribune, or at Bill Ayer’s lawn parties, doesn’t necessarily play well in foreign capitals that matter…and you’d be amazed at some of the governments who are actively assisting us. Much of that assistance is going to end if and when the Obama Administration makes it all public, as it will, in order to satisfy a juvenile need to be “better” than Bush.

coldwarrior on January 22, 2009 at 8:26 PM

I posted some of this above and it should have been here.

Did anyone hear or read Rush’s take on this event?

Greg Craig, Our 44th President
January 22, 2009
??

Unbelievable.

INC on January 22, 2009 at 8:27 PM

Nah, according to conservatives’ 9/11 calculus a President has at least a nine month “free pass” to blame any attack on the previous administration.
benny shakar on January 22, 2009 at 7:19 PM

The pass is invalidated if you remove any of the programs or procedures that kept the nation attack-free for the previous seven years OR if you ignore a threat which is hitting national assets all over the globe.

Bishop on January 22, 2009 at 8:41 PM

That hardly qualifies as an update. Those smucks have been of that persuasion for ever, and they have always sought out ways to endorse “progressive” positions.

burt on January 22, 2009 at 8:47 PM

What’s a Moby?

Alana on January 22, 2009 at 9:05 PM

What’s annoying about McCain is his need to get out in front of the cameras and provide the sound bite. He presents himself as spokesman for the GOP being supportive of this abominable, ill-judged political sop by Obama.

McCain may delude himself that he has taken a principled, reasonable statesmanlike stand, but his need to express his opinion, nevertheless, is truly against our national security interests.

onlineanalyst on January 22, 2009 at 9:07 PM

What’s a Moby?

Alana on January 22, 2009 at 9:05 PM

A leftist or progressive, or dyed-in-the-wool Dem, who comes on a blog and impersonates a Conservative to defame, rile, or engage in a baited trap to try to discredit Conservatives. Or do it just for the fun of it. Goes back to Moby, circa 2004 or so, who suggested that Left bloggers go to traditional Conservative blogs and engage in this sort of childish behaviour.

Often starts with “I voted for Bush in 2000, but Bush is a war criminal…” or “I’m a life-long conservative but Governor Palin is no conservative…” That sort of thing.

[Sorry ya asked, aren't ya?] :-)

coldwarrior on January 22, 2009 at 9:13 PM

Alana at 9:05 PM-

What’s a Moby?

A Moby is a dick.

Taking a covert pose.

Posing as a raging “true believer” [in any cause, or for any position], when it is really a non-believer trying to make actual believers look crazy by exaggerating their positions to the point of parody, if not psychosis.

Saying things like:

I love George Bush, but when he approved of torture at Gitmo he should have also nuked Gaza for good measure…” etc.

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 9:21 PM

And George W. didn’t?

trailboss on January 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM

Wouldn’t have been a problem if Clinton didn’t let the middle east get away with bombing embassies and Navy ships.

leetpriest on January 22, 2009 at 9:56 PM

I see. Thank you, coldwarrior.

(Yeah, kinda!)

Alana on January 22, 2009 at 10:09 PM

and profitsbeard.

Alana on January 22, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Update: McCain, Graham support

Yellow dog republicans were unavailable for comment.

Zorro on January 22, 2009 at 10:24 PM

Total B.S.

What’s lost in all of this is the simple fact that there is an inherent coercive element to the Geneva Convention which is based on reciprocity. In short, it requires something from combatants if they are to receive the benefits conveyed by those protective provisions. Implicit in this new interpretation of the Convention is that we will simply ignore all of those bad behaviors which were historically grounds for denying protections. No longer will the US face illegal enemy combatants, rather, anything goes. It is like a NIJA mortgage, everyone is accepted regardless of your qualifications.

As such, the US will explicitly make no distinction between POWs who have comported themselves in accordance with Convention requirements and mass murdering terrorists. Gone is the coercive element which seeks to induce good behavior on the part of our enemies (not specifically radical jihadists, but unimagined wars in the future). In this way, the POW and terrorist will be afforded the same benefits without regard to behavior. In time, this undiscerning approach to dealing with enemy combatants will put American lives at risk.

Moreover, as beneficiaries of Convention status, our capacity to induce cooperation will be greatly limited, regardless of what the President and his sycophants in the media and Senate say.

moxie_neanderthal on January 22, 2009 at 11:28 PM

McCain is a damned coward and has always been a spoiled rotten child of priveledge his entire life. He never would have rose to the level of street sweeper had it not been for his Admiral father and Admiral Grandfather. He never would have been a pilot, he never would have graduated the Naval Academy. He’s piece of egotistical crap. He doesn’t give a damn about anyone but himself and never has. Don’t give me that garbage about a brave prisoner. There are lots who will claim thats bunk too.

Bikerken on January 22, 2009 at 11:29 PM

in order to satisfy a juvenile need to be “better” than Bush.

coldwarrior on January 22, 2009 at 8:26 PM

I think it is a little more shallow than that. The left in this country are more worried about their perception of what the rest of the world thinks of the US, and they want the rest of the world to like us again. They want to be able to take their bag of marshmallows to the UN and sit around a campfire with the rest of the UN stooges making smores and singing Kum-By-Ya.

belad on January 22, 2009 at 11:33 PM

Moreover, as beneficiaries of Convention status, our capacity to induce cooperation will be greatly limited, regardless of what the President and his sycophants in the media and Senate say.

moxie_neanderthal on January 22, 2009 at 11:28 PM

Moxie, you sound like one of the five percent of people squacking on these blogs that has even a minimal knowledge of what the Geneva Convention really says.

The irony of the current situation is that the US is actually putting itself in a position of violating the Geneva Convention by giving these illegal warriors any rights whatsover. In the Convention, non-uniformed combatants can legally be shot. By not enforcing those rules, the US is in fact encouraging and abetting those who defy the GC to begin with.

Bikerken on January 22, 2009 at 11:36 PM

moxie_neanderthal on January 22, 2009 at 11:28 PM

+100

Making the hard fought distinctions of Geneva fuzzy in order to play some sort of “fairness” game with an enemy or potential enemy that has no qualms about unilaterally abrogating recognized rules of war…see Hamas in the most recent Gaza episode…using “civilian” deaths to demonize a nation that is going out of its way to limit such casualties…can in short order make it impossible to implement or adjust according to conditions rules of engagement under which our troops are bound via the UCMJ, and thus lead to more not less American lives lost in any battle area. Further, once we tweak Geneva, what is to prevent any or all other signatories from tweaking Geneva to suit their needs? In the twink of an eye, the savagery and barbarity that the current Obama Administration claims to want to put forever aside in the name of “American Ideals” will assume massive proportions across the board, with deadly results for more of our own.

coldwarrior on January 22, 2009 at 11:39 PM

I seem to recall an incident early on in the Afghan war when the threat of rendition was used to great effect to induce cooperation from a Saudi prisoner.

Obama is putting political considerations before intelligence and military needs. He owns whatever comes next.

moxie_neanderthal on January 22, 2009 at 11:41 PM

He doesn’t give a damn about anyone but himself…

Bikerken on January 22, 2009 at 11:29 PM

John McVain proved your point and exposed himself as a self-centered narcissist when he suspended his campaign to go back to Washington to take care of the meltdown. Instead of living up to his self proclaimed persona of ‘maverick’, and voting against the “money pit” he went along to get along. In doing so, he told all the conservatives, ” Don’t bother getting out to vote for me, I would rather talk the talk than walk the walk.”.

belad on January 22, 2009 at 11:41 PM

Bikerken on January 22, 2009 at 11:36 PM

Agreed and you make a good point.

I’m an Army vet so I’m perhaps a little more familiar with the convention than someone who never served.

moxie_neanderthal on January 22, 2009 at 11:45 PM

Political showmanship must stop when lives are at stake. There is no reason to do this so publicly…even if you do it…don’t do in such a public way that diminishes what has been accomplished. He is only making his job harder.

tomas on January 22, 2009 at 4:41 PM

The left in this country don’t see it as a problem because when those that want to kill us see how nice we are they too will want to be nice and just tell us what we need to know.

They also don’t have any guilt about anonymously leaking classified information that tips off our adversaries.

You have to remember, the left sees America as the cause of all that is wrong in the world and believes that if we just get rid of all those weapons and bombs the rest of the world will do the same.

belad on January 22, 2009 at 11:55 PM

The fact that Leon Panetta is heading up CIA is the Coup de grâce on anything and everything Obama can’t squash via executive order. I suspect that Panetta will proactively revisit the Church Commission as a paradigm from which to reign in and realign the CIA.

Panetta would do well to remember the observation of his better.

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
~George Orwell

*Below is a worthy repost from earlier. This issue really sticks in my craw.
___________________
coldwarrior AT 7:18 pm-

The Third Geneva Convention, which is the one that defines who is to be considered a legimate soldier/ combatant, and therefore to be afforded POW status, has four conditions which must be met.

(Not following any one of these stipulations voids the captive’s right to considered a POW.)

The four are:

1)”-that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates.”

[So vague as to be essentially meaningless.]

2) “-that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance.” (E.G. a Uniform, shoulder patch of your unit, helmet with rank insignia, etc.)

[FAIL]

3) “-that of carrying arms openly”

[FAIL... ask Johnny Spann]

4) “-that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.”

[FAIL]

All of the Gitmo scum FAIL at least two of them (those hiding grenades, etc. under this shirts FAIL three of the four conditions), and thus are not eligible for the treatment mandated by the POW Convention, and should have been executed years ago as “spies, saboteurs and terrorists“.

Bush and his team utterly and pathetically failed to explain this simple fact of warfare, and we now will all suffer the consequences thanks to Obama’s suicidally-naive wishful thinking and legal imbecility.

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 7:45 PM

moxie_neanderthal on January 23, 2009 at 12:03 AM

Obama has been spewing “close Gitmo” rhetoric since he first announced he was running for President two years ago. Then, he comes in and on day 2 he issues the order to close Gitmo, while at the same time admitting that he doesn’t know what to do with the detainees and they will study it. Wow, way to think it through over the last two years. Only now has it become a “complex, difficult issue”.

Here’s a question: what if they study the issue and come to the conclusion that every other option besides Gitmo and military tribunals is actually worse and might make America less safe. How do you climb down from that position when you have already announced to the world that you are going to close Gitmo? He’ll have to go with a worse option all for the sake of having his “symbolic” gesture and tossing a little red meat to his base and the global community.

Advice to team Obama: come up with a plan FIRST and then announce a major policy change.

Also, banning the use of enhanced interrogation techniques and mandating that the CIA follow the Army field manual is pathetic. The field manual was not meant to cover the interrogation of terrorists by trained CIA interrogators.

All in all, Obama is rolling the dice big time. He better pray we are not hit with another major terrorist attack. Even if an attack had nothing to do with a terrorist we had in custody or at Gitmo, the public will see that regarding the war on terror Obama had a choice between keeping “strong” policies in place or weakening them and he chose weakness. He’ll be toast.

JohnInCA on January 23, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Thanks, Mr. President, all you did was weaken a nation today. That’s all you did.

(apologies to Jack Nicholson)

JohnInCA on January 23, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Breaking News-

Obama signs a two-part executive order mandating that
A) the non-consentual tickling of a captive’s instep shall henceforth be considered torture and will be banned.

~and
B) women’s underwear shall be forbidden in all Theaters of War to prevent them ending up on the heads of Al Qaeda prisoners.

Plus, a new gratis Koran, to be handed to all Muslim detainees, will have Obama’s iconic face on the cover.

Motto for the next four years:

Yes, we’re screwed.

profitsbeard on January 23, 2009 at 12:27 AM

A president who thinks closing Gitmo will make America safer. This is the best day for Al Qaeda since 9/11.

Basilsbest on January 23, 2009 at 1:03 AM

Then, he comes in and on day 2 he issues the order to close Gitmo, while at the same time admitting that he doesn’t know what to do with the detainees and they will study it.

It’s all about making an impression on his leftist friends in the MSM. He’s too stupid and arrogant to understand that the people who are most impressed are al Qaeda. This is a recruiting boon. And Bush had them on the ropes.

Basilsbest on January 23, 2009 at 1:07 AM

As usual, I began to turn blue holding my breath waiting for someone in the media to give out a few more details about Gitmo. This place is a naval base with a place for detainees. It is not a prison. Is Obama just closing the detainee area or the whole base. Its not surprising to me that no one knows this because, as usual, the lazy media doesn’t even bother to use Wikipedia to check their facts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_Naval_Base

gordo on January 23, 2009 at 1:31 AM

gordo on January 23, 2009 at 1:31 AM

It is a Navy base, but we’re there by force, the Cuban government does not want us. Because it employs so many of its citizens, they “tolerate” it. He could just be closing Gitmo the base as a ruse to keep the detainees there. Lots of bases get “closed”, but some essence of the original mission lives on to some degree in the town/city/municipality/airport that absorbed it.

uh…or something…

long_cat on January 23, 2009 at 2:06 AM

This man is going to get people killed.

blatantblue on January 22, 2009 at 4:45 PM

Only a matter of time. When it happens we MUST let him know IMMEDIATELY that we hold him directly responsible.

Mr Purple on January 23, 2009 at 2:35 AM

long_cat on January 23, 2009 at 2:06 AM –

We “own” Guantanamo Naval Base…giving it to the United States was a pre-condition for Cuban independence. Can’t remember the year, in the late 60′s, I believe, but at that time the Castro government cut off all water and electricity to Gitmo, and forbade any Cubans from working there. A triple wall of wire surrounds the base where it meets Cuban land. All access to Cuba is cut off, save for one gate from which a US liaison officer and team at times/some times enter Cuba for short/terse meetings with local Cuban officials. We pay a “rent’ for Gitmo, a sort of lease, but the Cuban government since Castro took over has refused to cash any of the checks, which are still sent to the Cuban government annually. US military members there are subject to US law…the UCMJ. Because of a quirkiness to the rules regarding our obtaining/maintaining Gitmo, “civilians” are subject to Cuban law, not US law, hence the legality issue of the non-US military detainees at Gitmo, they are not subject to US civil law, and Cuba cannot enforce Cuban law upon them, for to do so would require the Castro government to recognize American hegemony over the Guantanamo Naval Base, a de facto recognition of the US government as a legitimate owner of Gitmo. Being extra-territorial ground, it has the unique character of not being subject to any national law, at least for the non-military personnel there. We use it as a naval training base from time to time, though this mission has waned significantly over the decades. We maintain it simply because we can…and Cuba cannot do anything to remove us, treaty or no treaty.

gordo on January 23, 2009 at 1:31 AM –

The footprint of Camp Delta is about one city block, perhaps two, out of about 40-50 square miles of space. At one point during the 1970′s we housed Cuban refugees there to screen them prior to their being moved elsewhere as legal immigrants.

coldwarrior on January 23, 2009 at 2:44 AM

Wow, less than three days in office. I like most of you peruse other sources to corroborate HA. If this was the leader of another country most of us would probably be laughing our butts off at the idiocy going on in our government. Well, after a short groan, I do find my self laughing. This has got to be one of the best comedy of errors that we will ever witness. Thankfully I have no offspring that will have to suffer through the mess that will be left behind. Terrorist be damned, they won’t have to lift a finger, we are doing it to ourselves.

N4646W on January 23, 2009 at 2:47 AM

Turn Gitmo into a Club Med!!!

Water Boarding is an activity!!!!

Harsh language will not be tolerated.

Kini on January 23, 2009 at 3:16 AM

………. Mr. Obama is a child playing in a man’s game.

Seven Percent Solution on January 23, 2009 at 5:05 AM

Maybe we should start an “Adopt a Terrorist” program. Families could become foster homes for Guantanamo inmates and show them how much we average Americans care for them. That way they won’t want to kill us…..

Gotcha on January 23, 2009 at 7:32 AM

profitsbeard on January 22, 2009 at 7:45 PM

You’re right about Bush’s failure to communicate. However, if we had executed them all years ago we would have lost invaluable intelligence about AQ operations and sleeper cells which has saved lives.

This and this are must reads about GITMO, by Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu.

Buy Danish on January 23, 2009 at 7:51 AM

………. Mr. Obama is and the rest of his liberal moron associates a child are children playing in a man’s game.

Seven Percent Solution on January 23, 2009 at 5:05 AM

Brilliant!!… I took the liberty of some minor adjustments but your original thought is a classic

bullseye on January 23, 2009 at 8:59 AM

Never trust someone who writes with his left hand. Especially a leftist.

keep the change on January 23, 2009 at 12:09 PM

However, if we had executed them all years ago we would have lost invaluable intelligence about AQ operations and sleeper cells which has saved lives.

Naahh, it means you just don’t start asking questions until you get close to the end of the line.

moxie_neanderthal on January 23, 2009 at 12:14 PM

Good News!

REPORT: EX-GITMO DETAINEE NOW AL-QAIDA LEADER IN YEMEN

CAIRO, Egypt – An Internet posting purportedly by al-Qaida in Yemen says the group’s No. 2 is a Saudi national who is a former Guantanamo detainee.

The Yemeni group – known as “al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula” – posted the statement this week on a militant Web site that regularly carries al-Qaida messages.

It says the man returned to his home in Saudi Arabia after his release from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba about a year ago and from there went to Yemen to join the terror group.

The Internet statement identified the man as Said Ali al-Shihri and says his prisoner number at Guantanamo was 372.

The posting could not immediately be verified, and Yemen and Saudi Arabian authorities would not immediately comment on it.

moxie_neanderthal on January 23, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6