Cheney Assails Obama Decision to Close Gitmo; Expresses Concern That Democrats About to Take Over Don’t Realize World Has Changed
In a radio interview with Bill Bennett this morning, Vice President Dick Cheney said that President-elect Barack Obama’s pending executive order to shut down the Detention Center at Guantanamo Bay is a "bad decision."
"I used to have the impression this is a classic case where they campaigned so hard against Guantanamo that now they don’t have any choice but to try to close it," the vice president said of the Obama team. "But that’s too bad; they’ve got a lot of tough questions to answer first.
"Guantanamo is sort of a symbol, I guess, to the left in this country and maybe to some of our critics overseas," the vice president said. "But the fact is it’s a very well-run facility. The Red Cross is down there all the time checking on it; reporters are free to go down, members of Congress and so forth, to look at it and see what kind of facility it is. And the fact is, it’s first-rate."
Mr. Cheney said too many people have already been freed from Guantanamo.
People forget "we’ve got a couple hundred very bad actors down there," said the vice president. "We’ve been through, several times, a scrub of the population in Guantanamo. And a good many more have been returned than we still hold, have been returned to their home countries. Now, out of that group, some number has, in fact, gone back onto the battlefield against us." He said the Bush administration has "erred a bit on the side" of "letting the wrong people go on a few occasions."
Those left in the facility, he said, are "the hardcore."
"These are al Qaeda members," Mr. Cheney said. "These are people that we captured on the battlefield. These are folks whose main objective in life is to kill Americans." Cheney said the remaining detainees "are unlawful combatants, terrorists, and by definition, their objective is to achieve their political goals by killing as many civilians as possible. They don’t abide by the laws of war."
Mr. Cheney noted that "there’s never yet been a congressman come forward and volunteer to take 250 al Qaeda members in his district … So then the question is, where are you going to put them? And you’ve got to sort that all out before you close Guantanamo."
At a different point in the interview, Mr. Cheney said there "are a lot of people who did good work and were honorable civil servants and public servants during the Clinton administration coming back in. One of the things I worry about, though, is they’ll assume they can pick up right where they left off. And the fact is the world has changed in major ways since January of ’01 when we took over. And that break in service of some eight years, I think, they will find has been a period of time when the threat to the nation has changed in fairly dramatic ways."
- jpt

Email
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
My question for Cheney: Why on earth would they want to kill us? Surely we make their lives full of bliss.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 11:40 am 11:40 am
Why did Osama carry out 911, Mr. Cheney? One big reason is US allegiance to Israel in the face of Palestinian suffering. You know the blockade of Gaza, ongoing settlement expansion, increasing number of checkpoints in the occupied territories, etc. Do you care about those things Mr. Cheney? Bin Laden specifically pointed to those things as being core reasons for 911. I hope that Obama actually looks at both sides. Too bad Ron Paul didn’t have a chance. He was the only one I heard say it like it is.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 11:49 am 11:49 am
You mean Cheney the draft dodging, hate and fear mongering war criminal? He’s got to figure out a way to spin things on his way to hell.
Posted by: CaffeineHat | January 13, 2009, 11:50 am 11:50 am
I agree….good riddance . Actually, Obama might want to consider keeping it open….it would be a great place for Cheney, Bush and Rumsy to finish out their worthless lives…they all need to be tried for the war crimes they have collectively committed, along with their violations of the US constitution and rule of law….put them on trial, convict them all, and sentence to them to spend the rest of their lives there….complete with daily waterboarding sessions.
Posted by: Phil | January 13, 2009, 11:52 am 11:52 am
Cheney will be the first to say “I told you so” when something happens under Obama’s watch. He doesn’t care that he ruined the image of the US worldwide or that he trampled the Constitution–only that he kept Guantanamo closed and there were no attacks on US soil. He might have even forgetten that 9/11 took place under his and Bush’s watch. And he’s certainly not ready to admit that Bush and Cheney, with their policies, have created far many more terrorists than they has locked up.
Posted by: perumal11 | January 13, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am
CaffeineHat – Nice copy and paste. Unfortunately, we have to deal in the present. There has been a two state solution in the works for years now, and for years Israel has continued to expand their settlements. It really appears that Israel is not interested in peace.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 11:57 am 11:57 am
Yes I agree with the person posting here, who says Gitmo should be kept open as a museum of war crimes by those entrusted to defend American human decency but abused it. It would be fitting if the very same domestic terrorists who failed to uphold the constitution and International laws on human rights and committed war crimes are made the new inmates of Gitmo. While the current inmates are tried and convicted or released (if not guilty).
Posted by: gjkotw01 | January 13, 2009, 12:10 pm 12:10 pm
Huh,
if you believe in their ideology and be a martyr by killing your neighbor using women and children as shields,
hiding your face like the clan, then your safe, but if you disagree then watch out.
Posted by: Lizzie | January 13, 2009, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
I don’t think Israel is interested in peace either….what really needs to happen is a “We talk…they listen” avenue of diplomacy…either find a way to live in peace with your neighbors or you’re on your own….and we won’t sit back and let you start up World War III…
They have a right to exist…but not the right to deprive others in the region of the same basic rights.
Posted by: Phil | January 13, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
perumal11 You need to remember we had other attacks before 911 and not on Bush’s watch 911 wasn’t the only time they tried to blow the World Trade Center. They hated the US way before Bush.
Posted by: realstory | January 13, 2009, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm
Lizzie – oooohhh so scared. Actually, I have no reason to fight anyone since I am not fenced in an enclosure. I can move about freely for the most part, and I am able to protect my land without anyone coming and taking it from me….at least so far.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 12:27 pm 12:27 pm
Huh,
Israel left Gaza to the Palestinien, no expansion of settlements, but you tell a LIE often enough some will believe you.
Posted by: Lizzie | January 13, 2009, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
So, who wants them, each one of you screaming about war crimes and the constitution, do you want them in your local area???? I know for a fact Kansas is fighting it with everything they have, to keep them out of Leavenworth. I don’t want them in my back yard. So those of you who want Gitmo closed so badly, lets send them to your area.
Posted by: samhiguchi | January 13, 2009, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
The ignorance displayed in the posts thus far is frightening. Apparently, everyone has forgotten that the first attack on the World Trade Center was under the Clinton administration. The Iranian hostage standoff for 444 days was under the Carter Administration. Fundamentalist Islam declared war on the west long before Bush took office. The methods used by the Bush administrationb were approved by a Democratic Congressn and your beloved Obama recently voted in favor of keeping warrantless wiretapping. Try learnng the facts before spouting off.
Posted by: J.T. | January 13, 2009, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm
Lizzie – Israel left because the Gaza settlements were too costly. Israel didn’t do it because they wanted to do what is right. Israel has continued to blockade Gaza even during the truce. They have cut off power and water on a number of occasions. Israel has continued to expand settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. These settlements require checkpoints for protection. This means the Palestinians have to spend even more of their day sitting at road blocks within their own territories. The checkpoints in the West Bank have taken the best land as well including much of the land along the Jordan River. I don’t know what you mean by lies. These facts are easily verifiable.
Posted by: huh | January 13, 2009, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
so much for FREEDOM OF SPEECH on this site.
Posted by: becky (the real one) | January 13, 2009, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm
J.T. – The hostage crisis happened because we were intervening in their internal affairs. We overthrew Mossadeque (sp?) in 1953, I believe and installed the Shaw. Iranians were a bit angry at our intentions and the Iranian hostage crisis came about. Mostly because the Shaw was corrupt and cruel.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
realstory – Hopefully our intelligence agencies are able to stop these attacks you speak of. Our sanctions on Iraq in the 90′s killed 500,000. That is a whole lot of their family members that probably want us dead.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 12:41 pm 12:41 pm
Cheney is right!!!! The Democrats don’t care. If this does happened, it going to be Obama’s fault. Not Bush. That why I didn’t vote for Obama. He doesn’t have enough experience. He is going to pay more attention with his Chicago friends in the White House. Just like another Clinton Admin.
Posted by: anonymous | January 13, 2009, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
Huh – I don’t disagree. My point was, this all started long before 9/11. Yet everyone wants to blame Bush and Cheney for things that have been going on for decades. Clinton had the opportunity to take out bin Laden and didn’t.
Posted by: J.T. | January 13, 2009, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
I prefer him quietly sitting in his undisclosed location. All of these interviews are making my skin crawl.
Posted by: hang | January 13, 2009, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm
J.T. – Agreed. My beef is with American profligacy through military means. I understand that it is because of oil with regards to the Middle East. I guess energy independence can’t come soon enough, if that is even a reasonable goal at current consumption levels.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 12:47 pm 12:47 pm
Go away, Cheney! The Democrats DO understand that the world has changed and it is you and your kind who keep up the turmoil unnecessarily. America has lost face; it is distrusted and scorned because of the attitude and lack of respect the Bush Administration has demonstrated.
Posted by: two-cats | January 13, 2009, 12:52 pm 12:52 pm
“Our sanctions on Iraq in the 90′s killed 500,000. ”
That shows you how the cards would have played out without Bush.
Hussein (the other one) stalls the inspectors, troops sit in the desert doing nothing, diplomats make speeches at the UN, Oil for Food gets exploited as a backdoor slush fund, the world press does stories about people dying because of sanctions. Repeat.
Eventually President Gore instructs Secretary of State Jamie Gorelick to with draw troops and make sanctions self enforced- to restore Americas image in world opinion. Queue dancing in arab street, queue “US out of Saudia Arabia” insurgency.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm
Obama will never be forgiven if he allows the terrorist to attack America again. He is trying to dismantle the eavesdropping program through RAPTOR and other intelligence gathering means as well. Quit simply, he is a fool to make these changes and must be held accountable if a new attack comes.
I think Obama believes that if he is nice the terrorist will be nice. Look where that got Jimmy Carter. And by the way, it was Obama that was being burned in effigy just this week in Iran. He better come to his senses – radical Islam is not going to be impressed by his weakness.
Posted by: James | January 13, 2009, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm
BertieW – Interesting posts. The sanctions happened on Clinton’s watch, and Albright said all those deaths were worth it on national TV. The problem with stating that is that the Arab world heard our elected leaders say it, basically saying their lives are secondary to our interests.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm
Cheney and Bush will never get it. Places like Guantanamo and so many of their other policy decisions fly in the face of the noble ideals and moral strength of this country. America is not America if it is not also good and decent and an inspiring example to the world. If we drop into the gutter to defeat our enemies and lose our identity then our enemies have won and we are more vulnerable.
Posted by: hopesprings52 | January 13, 2009, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm
“Cheney and Bush will never get it. Places like Guantanamo and so many of their other policy decisions fly in the face of the noble ideals and moral strength of this country.”
Ok, tell me. Our servicemen are fighting on the ground in Afganistan and some of the people trying to “KILL THEM” are captured. What do we do with them??
1. Let them go?
2. Shoot them on the spot?
3. Invite them to join our side?
……… what?
Posted by: ajax | January 13, 2009, 1:09 pm 1:09 pm
It amazes me how stupid people are. No one can name any single instance of any US citizens constitutional rights have been violated by Bush Chaney or anyone in our government. Excuse me but i didn’t know non US citizens had any rights under OUR constitution. Since when do terrorists who want to kill us have any rights? You nut bags who are still alive today because of Bush and Chaney owe them thanks and who cares what the rest of the US hating world thinks about us.
Posted by: DSimms | January 13, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
DSimms – Actually members of the NSA were accused of recording phone s*x conversations between our soldiers oversees and their spouses here in the US. That is a fundamental violation of privacy on our servicemen and women. People that want to kill us need to be stopped no doubt, but we need to ask the questions pertaining to why they want to do us harm, and is their anger and resentment justified.
Posted by: Huh | January 13, 2009, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm
“No one can name any single instance of any US citizens constitutional rights have been violated by Bush Chaney or anyone in our government.”
The Bush administration on Tuesday will try to convince a federal judge to let stand a law granting retroactive legal immunity to the nation’s telecoms, which are accused of transmitting Americans’ private communications to the National Security Agency without warrants.
“Excuse me but i didn’t know non US citizens had any rights under OUR constitution”
Of course not as your ignorance seems to be only exceeded by your belligerence.
The Constitution calls for us to honor treaties.
Like the Geneva Conventions.
And barring that maybe you are familiar with the Declaration of Independence
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
That would be all not just Americans.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm
“Ok, tell me. Our servicemen are fighting on the ground in Afganistan and some of the people trying to “KILL THEM” are captured. What do we do with them??”
Put them on trial as criminals.
Holding them indefinitely as prisoners of war while not declaring them such and denying them the rights of POWs seems to have been counter-productive.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 1:33 pm 1:33 pm
Sent cheney out to do some quail hunting, but this time he should use the wii.
Posted by: pt | January 13, 2009, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
There is something deeply flawed in ABC’s system re: censoring comments, even though ABC tries to blame type Pad. This is not a legitimate site if censoring ideas is the only way ABC can handle “other ideas”. We are going to make these censored comments available to other sources.
Posted by: Miguel | January 13, 2009, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm
“Put them on trial as criminals.
Holding them indefinitely as prisoners of war while not declaring them such and denying them the rights of POWs seems to have been counter-productive. ”
Oh I dont know… seems to have been pretty productive. They havent been killing anyone which is their raison d’être.
What do you want to do about these CIA predator strikes that have been killing AQ leaders left and right? Talk about violating habeous corpus.
Should we stop those too?
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm
Im so sick of hearing this liberal BS. Of ALL you liberal bloggers, who can stand up and say their right have been violated?
ANYONE????????
Posted by: Mike_C | January 13, 2009, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
“Oh I dont know… seems to have been pretty productive. They havent been killing anyone which is their raison d’être.”
Yes because terrorists haven’t used Gitmo to recruit thousands of new fighters.
Black and white thinking may work for conversations among right wingers but its does not work so well in the real world.
“What do you want to do about these CIA predator strikes that have been killing AQ leaders left and right? Talk about violating habeous corpus.
Should we stop those too?”
The field of battle vs within our custody.
Perhaps you are aware of the Geneva Conventions.
Then again that may be asking too much.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:00 pm 2:00 pm
“Im so sick of hearing this liberal BS. Of ALL you liberal bloggers, who can stand up and say their right have been violated?”
Any American who sent an email or made a phone call overseas could have had their rights violated.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 – Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.
Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible “dirty numbers” linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.
The linguists said National Security Agency interceptors routinely monitored and recorded the private calls of U.S. military personnel, Red Cross and other humanitarian workers; personal discussions that had entertainment value — pillow talk or phone sex —were shared among intercept operators, they said.
The USA Patriot Act becomes law. Among other things the law: makes it a crime for anyone to contribute money or material support for any group on the State Department’s Terror Watch List, allows the FBI to monitor and tape conversations between attorneys and clients, allows the FBI to order librarians to turn over information about patron’s reading habits, allows the government to conduct surveillance on internet and email use of US citizens without notice. The act also calls for expanded use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records of US citizens without a court order, exempts the government from needing to reveal how evidence against suspected terrorists was obtained and authorizes indefinite detention of immigrants at the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:07 pm 2:07 pm
If you want to know who is on the correct side of history consider that right wingers on this blog are for torture and think people stating that their rights have been violated are whiners.
And these people claim to be the defenders of American values.
Which American value does torture fall under?
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
“Cheney and Bush will never get it. Places like Guantanamo and so many of their other policy decisions fly in the face of the noble ideals and moral strength of this country. America is not America if it is not also good and decent and an inspiring example to the world. If we drop into the gutter to defeat our enemies and lose our identity then our enemies have won and we are more vulnerable.”
—————————————
hopesprings52,
Do you have any idea what it takes to protect the nation? ANY CLUE AT ALL?
It is downright scary that anyone could so nieve & blantly stupid after we have expereinced Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, etc.
You CANNOT defeat an enemy that plays by NO rules if you are going to handcuff yourself with set of moral rules of engagement!
The enemy here thrives on creating chaos by creating a maximum amount of collateral damage. Most of their “foot soldiers” are happy to die for the cause, and believe that the more of us & local innocents they can kill in the process, the better.
NEWSFLASH – That is not going to change because Obama srolls into the Oval Office on 1/20. These terrorists were here long before Bush & they will be here long after him.
First Attack on World Trade Center – 1993
Debacle in Somalia – 1993
USS Cole attack – 2000
Multiple Embassy Bombings
These were all under Pres. Bill Clinton’s watch. Where is the liberal outrage about those attacks.
Posted by: Mike_C | January 13, 2009, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm
“Holding them indefinitely as prisoners of war while not declaring them such and denying them the rights of POWs seems to have been counter-productive.”
“counter-productive” to WHO??
We could have killed them on the battle field. They would not have to sit in jail and they would be no problem to us.
Posted by: ajax | January 13, 2009, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm
“Should we stop those too?”
The field of battle vs within our custody. ”
Its the same thing. We have enough evidence to blow them up from a distance with Predator strikes but we dont have enough evidence to detain them in a cushy jail? We captured these guys in the battle field and decided not to kill them then and there. Thats how the issue arises now.
“If you want to know who is on the correct side of history…”
By your standard all of history is on the wrong side of history. The people who are on the right side of history are the ones who left themselves be killed.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm
“Put them on trial as criminals.”
LOL, this is funny. I think we all see who has the most rights when it comes to trials in this country. The Criminals.
Posted by: ajax | January 13, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
By the way, the so-called rules/right of a POW…. Those were created for soldiers in a army controlled by a government.
They were created to allow for proper treatment of soldiers who are simply following order of superior officers.
Oh, and do not kid yourself, EVERY country that has ever engaged in a war of any kind has used torture on people they felt had critical information. EVERY COUNTRY!
Posted by: Mike_C | January 13, 2009, 2:25 pm 2:25 pm
“Its the same thing. We have enough evidence to blow them up from a distance with Predator strikes but we dont have enough evidence to detain them in a cushy jail? We captured these guys in the battle field and decided not to kill them then and there. Thats how the issue arises now.”
And how were these guys captured?
Oh yeah they were taken prisoner in the heat of battle.
That you seem unable to understand killing on the battlefield and torturing within our custody is not a shock.
And that’s why right wingers are incredibly poor caretakers of American ideals.
“By your standard all of history is on the wrong side of history. The people who are on the right side of history are the ones who left themselves be killed.?”
Right wingers shed a tear for the Nazis and their brutal treatment by history.
As a principle, Americans do not torture.
Is that so hard to understand?
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
“Instead of BEING the whiner, please tell us what right of your have been violated?”
Mike instead of being a good little brownshirt who thinks warrantless wiretapping violates no one’s rights, think about the supposed bad guys who we now emulate thanks to the Bush admin.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
“Perhaps instead of playing the bleeding heart for the bad guys, you might want to consider the lives of the people who protect this country and provide you your freedom to be a whiner.”
Now I supposedly hate the troops!
How utterly predictable from the Keyboard Fightin 101st!
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm
“”counter-productive” to WHO??”
Gitmo and the torture done there has provided a recruiting boom to terrorists.
“We could have killed them on the battle field. They would not have to sit in jail and they would be no problem to us. ”
Exactly.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm
“By the way, the so-called rules/right of a POW…. Those were created for soldiers in a army controlled by a government.”
What a shock that you do not know the extent of the Geneva Conventions.
“They were created to allow for proper treatment of soldiers who are simply following order of superior officers.”
Mike_c invokes the Nuremburg defense…is anyone surprised?
And that is not why Geneva Convention was created.
“Oh, and do not kid yourself, EVERY country that has ever engaged in a war of any kind has used torture on people they felt had critical information. EVERY COUNTRY!”
So are you saying that Americans are hypocrites when we claim we have moral standing and that we are a beacon of freedom & liberty?
Why do you hate America?
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm
“That you seem unable to understand killing on the battlefield and torturing within our custody is not a shock.”
So then you are in favor of leaving Gitmo open indefinitely to house the guys we know are guilty but cant convict under American rules of evidence.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm
“So then you are in favor of leaving Gitmo open indefinitely to house the guys we know are guilty but cant convict under American rules of evidence.”
My issue is with torture and the legal classification we have applied.
If we choose to hold people, they should be treated like POWs.
Its that simple.
Therefore I think Gitmo should be closed and the prisoners transferred to a military prison.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
Cheney is an craven coward, who would not meet his military obligation to this country but is living vicariously through the bravery of our troops. Mr. Morally-Bankrupt Tough Guy. Hopefully, he will be prosecuted for the war criminal he is.
Posted by: Sammy | January 13, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
“Therefore I think Gitmo should be closed and the prisoners transferred to a military prison.”
POWs are supposed to be returned when their state arranges a cessation of hostilities. The Afghan government was defeated years ago.
However the prisoners’ allegiance really belongs to the stateless AQ. Is it possible this is a situation not anticipated by the Geneva Convention?
Note that you still have the dilemma of what to do with people you are confident are guilty but cant convict through legal channels. The point of this stroy is that the vice President says keep them locked up while O’s base wants them released.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 3:03 pm 3:03 pm
“POWs are supposed to be returned when their state arranges a cessation of hostilities. The Afghan government was defeated years ago.”
So pursuant to any treaties signed with the Taliban their prisoner should be returned.
“However the prisoners’ allegiance really belongs to the stateless AQ. Is it possible this is a situation not anticipated by the Geneva Convention?”
The GC makes allowances for guerillas, militias, partisans etc. Basically stateless actors. And it has guidelines for their treatment.
“Note that you still have the dilemma of what to do with people you are confident are guilty but cant convict through legal channels.”
Which is why they should be held as prisoners of war vs some extraneous legal definition that allows us to ignore Geneva Convention rules.
“The point of this stroy is that the vice President says keep them locked up while O’s base wants them released.”
Yes the war criminal loves his torture.
Thankfully we have a true American coming in as President who believes in American principles and values.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
I don’t know why anybody is interested in Cheney’s opinion on anything.
Posted by: Skip | January 13, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
“Cheney is an craven coward, who would not meet his military obligation to this country but is living vicariously through the bravery of our troops. Mr. Morally-Bankrupt Tough Guy.”
Add to the above, the Flight Suit who told the terrorists to bring it on.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
“So pursuant to any treaties signed with the Taliban their prisoner should be returned.”
I don’t think the Taliban has surrendered or signed any treaty. I think we are still fighting them.
Posted by: ajax | January 13, 2009, 3:27 pm 3:27 pm
WASHINGTON — The number of Guantanamo Bay detainees who rejoined terrorist missions after being released is on the rise, the Pentagon said.
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that 61 detainees are believed as of last month to have returned to the fight against the United States since being released.
That’s up from 37 detainees who were either known or suspected of rejoining terror efforts, although Morrell did not immediately know since when.
Posted by: REALSTORY | January 13, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
“Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that 61 detainees are believed as of last month to have returned to the fight against the United States since being released.”
ROFLMAO
“Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said 18 former detainees are confirmed as “returning to the fight” and 43 are suspected of having done in a report issued late in December by the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Morrell declined to provide details such as the identity of the former detainees, why and where they were released or what actions they have taken since leaving U.S. custody.”
Rights advocates contend that many Guantanamo detainees have never taken up arms against the United States and say the Defense Department in the past has described former detainees as rejoining “the fight” because they spoke out against the U.S. government.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
“I don’t think the Taliban has surrendered or signed any treaty. I think we are still fighting them.”
Yes we are stillfighting the Taliban (thanks to a diversion of resources to the wrong war)
So if we choose to hold fighters as POWs, we would be within our rights to.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 3:56 pm 3:56 pm
“Rights advocates contend that many Guantanamo detainees have never taken up arms against the United States and say the Defense Department in the past has described former detainees as rejoining “the fight” because they spoke out against the U.S. government.”
Thanks- I’ll take the Pentagon’s word over self appointed “rights advocates”.
You still have no rationale why these POWs (of a non-existent country) shouldnt continue to be housed at Gitmo.
But we do have evidence why they should not be released.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
“Thanks- I’ll take the Pentagon’s word over self appointed “rights advocates”.”
Of course you would.
BTW where are those WMD’s?
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm
“You still have no rationale why these POWs (of a non-existent country) shouldnt continue to be housed at Gitmo.”
Simple.
Gitmo was created to provide legal buffers for illegal actions resulting from not treating these terrorists as POWs.
Treat them as POWs and the need for them to be housed at Gitmo ceases to exist.
Close Gitmo and you remove a recruiting tool for the terrorists while engendering good will with the allies we need in the fight against terrorism.
The only logic for keeping Gitmo open is for Bush deadenders who are looking to rehab his legacy.
If you look at Cheney’s remarks that is exactly the context for it.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm
Where is Bush’s invasion of Iran I was promised?
What happened to Bush canceling the election and declaring Martial law like progressive claimed was going to happen?
What happened with the wacky Loose Change guys ready to proven 9/11 was an inside job?
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 4:09 pm 4:09 pm
“Where is Bush’s invasion of Iran I was promised?
What happened to Bush canceling the election and declaring Martial law like progressive claimed was going to happen?”
No idea. Perhaps you should ask people who said such things.
Which reminds me….how many predictions you have made just within the last month that were complete BS.
“What happened with the wacky Loose Change guys ready to proven 9/11 was an inside job?”
Apparently they believe Obama was born in Kenya.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm
Yeah, all those things came from ‘progressives’ before they got on to the current Crystal Pepsi kick.
These rights activists are the ones who post their expert analysis of planes crashing into the Pentagon to prove it never happened.
No thanks.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm
I like the part where Cheney enlightens us to the fact that the world is a much more dangerous place since his administration took over.
Posted by: Skip | January 13, 2009, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
“Yeah, all those things came from ‘progressives’ before they got on to the current Crystal Pepsi kick.”
Which had to do with this discussion how?
Oh yeah, you were getting humiliated so you changed the subject to a progressive bogeyman.
“These rights activists are the ones who post their expert analysis of planes crashing into the Pentagon to prove it never happened”
The ACLU and Amnesty were not part of the 9/11 tinfoil hat brigade.
Not sure where that came from expect for your desperation to change the subject.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
“I like the part where Cheney enlightens us to the fact that the world is a much more dangerous place since his administration took over.”
Nice pickup.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
History will judge the Bush administration very harshly. Cheney will go down as one of the most evil people ever to be in public service.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | January 13, 2009, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm
“History will judge the Bush administration very harshly. Cheney will go down as one of the most evil people ever to be in public service.”
Who would have thought the actions of the Bush administration would improve the perception of the Nixon administration in comparison.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
I don’t know what the Obama team will do with the Guantanamo inmates, but I suspect they do, that they have thought it out very well, and that their solution to the problem will be an effective one.
My own speculative response to “who would take the inmates” is that the Representative and the voters in SE Colorado, E. of Pueblo, would have no fear about their ability to handle (maintain, staff, live with, etc.) a facility for these prisoners. There is already one, and perhaps two such facilities in that area. Though the facility(s) may not have spare capacity available, the folks in that area seem well capable of dealing with them, and might well be willing to take another one.
A personal note to Ryan C. Thanks for your capable and balanced comments here. Too often I see comment strings captured by nonsense from the right, and sometimes from the left. The contribution you make to sense and reason here is important and I want to acknowledge it.
Posted by: Jim Pivonka | January 13, 2009, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm
“”Yeah, all those things came from ‘progressives’ before they got on to the current Crystal Pepsi kick.”
Which had to do with this discussion how? ”
Because you said ‘who are you going to believe’. Progressive believe all sorts of preposterous, irrational things. In 2004/2005 there were months of intellectual gymnastics about trying to prove that the morning exit polls were right and Kerry couldnt have lost Ohio by 120,000 votes. Bush is declaring martial law, Palin didnt really have he baby, Bush planned Katrina- those are all mainstream thoughts for you wacky Dems.
If you plan on keeping these guys locked up then there is no reason to close Gitmo. If you are afraid that they will be released on legal technicalities, which is the way Barry O framed things yesterday, then you dont let them out.
Posted by: BertieW | January 13, 2009, 5:14 pm 5:14 pm
“those are all mainstream thoughts for you wacky Dems.”
ROFLMAO.
Sure Foxnews and other right wingers likes to portray such as mainstream liberal or Democratic opinion.
I am guessing that is to draw attention away from the free republics behind the curtain.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
“A personal note to Ryan C. Thanks for your capable and balanced comments here.”
I thank you for the compliment though I think you erred by calling me balanced if referring to political bias.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 13, 2009, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
If the prisoners are guilty of something, send them to a fair trial, not some bogus, top secret military kangaroo court. Cheney et al don’t want to take the chance that many of their bogus charges will be seen for what they are.
The Bush admin. believes that they can do ANYTHING under the excuse that we might be under a threat. I, for one, am not willing to surrender the Constitution that way. I don’t want to become what thugs like Bush and Cheney would make us into.
Posted by: hjp | January 13, 2009, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
What buffoons the Cheneys and Bushes are. Cheney has a big fat mouth that he can’t control. Maybe when he leaves office next week and still makes idiot comments, no one will listen to him. Like no one pays attention to Rove either now that he’s out. Don’t they realize how they look like fools to honest, thinking, decent Americans. Ugh!
Posted by: buzziea | January 13, 2009, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
Since Cheney feels Gitmo is a first rate kind of facility to stay in, maybe he should have a vacation or retire there.
Posted by: kat | January 14, 2009, 12:03 am 12:03 am
From what I’ve read in major news stories, too many innocents have been incarcerated at Gitmo and in Iraq. Firstly, it would seem we can’t be the good guys if we are going to go against the Geneva Convention. And at the end of the day, the only way to win over the people is to be the good guys. Without the people’s support wars can go on and on,… just ask the Russians about Chechnya.
Secondly, as in Huh’s comment at 11:40, we need to step back and review why the Palestinian’s suffering is continuing for decades. ‘You know the blockade of Gaza, ongoing settlement expansion, increasing number of checkpoints in the occupied territories, etc.’ If any injustice is going on there, it will just fuel the anti-Israeli sentiment which feeds the violence. Dealing with the poverty in Palestine can be the much of the answer to end the violence there. Poor and disenfranchised people that feel they have nothing to lose are breeding grounds for terrorists.
Cheney’s attitude of ‘it’s us against them,’ actually made many countries look at us negatively for the first time. His brand of foreign policy should be shelved permanently.
Posted by: Lydia | January 14, 2009, 11:11 am 11:11 am
ajax—
“1. Let them go?
2. Shoot them on the spot?
3. Invite them to join our side?”
POW camps. not rocket science. Guantanamo Bay is not a POW camp. just set up a POW camp in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Paul | January 14, 2009, 11:19 am 11:19 am
Perhaps they’ll release the 110 really, really bad guys into Nancy Pelosi’s custody.
This is going to be fun to watch.
When you hunt for a bear, you have to be ready to catch a bear.
Posted by: drjohn | January 14, 2009, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm
“When you hunt for a bear, you have to be ready to catch a bear”
Is this right from Cheney’s handbook of hunting safety tips?
Others might include: “Don’t get popped and shoot your buddy in the face accidentally.”
Posted by: Skip | January 14, 2009, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has ordered the military to release a Guantanamo Bay detainee who was arrested in Pakistan when he was 14.
Mohamed el-Gharani was one of the first people to be sent to the U.S. military prison in Cuba in 2002, where he has been held ever since.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled on Wednesday that el-Gharani, who is also known as Yousuf and is now 21, is not an enemy combatant and must be released.
El-Gharani’s lawyer says he was accused of being a member of al-Qaida in 1998, when he would have been 11 years old.
El-Gharani was arrested at a mosque in Pakistan by police when he was 14. He was then turned over to U.S. forces.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 14, 2009, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
Cheney STILL thinks we will buy his fear-mongering…He doesn’t get it…There were no flowers at the feet of our military when they marched in to Baghdad, there is no connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda (there is more links between HE and Saddam and illegal weaponry than Al Qaeda and Saddam) and GITMO did nothing but create more hatred of the US in the world…Time for him to goose-step himself into prison for the war crimes he committed in OUR NAME
Posted by: Cosmic Surfer | February 4, 2009, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm
Why does Cheney worry about what Pres. Obama is doing with Gitmo, when the Bush Admin. released over 60 prisoners from there already? Some of which went right back to their terrorist ways. Was the people of this nation made aware of the release of these prisoners when each one was sent back to be in the public?
Posted by: Devan | February 5, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
Clinton (Democrat) had every chance to get Bin Laden, but HE didn’t. So now a lot of people are wanting to point their finger at Bush and Cheney. Wake up and smell the roses. Obama is the evil one here!!!!!!!! You want Gitmo closed, then you house these terrorists! Obama has enough rooms as does Oprah; we’ll just send them there!Wait and see. We are going to have more attacks on us now than ever before because of who some voters voted for. I’m glad that I didn’t vote for him.
Posted by: Kimberly | February 5, 2009, 5:02 pm 5:02 pm