A Courtroom-Within-a-U.S.-Prison-Complex for Gitmo Detainees?

So, it will be exactly like Gitmo in every respect, only it won’t be called Gitmo. How much is this fig leaf going to cost? Oops. I forgot, money doesn’t matter anymore.

I am inclined to agree with you, mesquito. “Camp Snugglebunnies” is an appropriate and reasonable name for this option/farce. Plus, it makes me smile.

mesquito . ..
Well at least it won’t be called “Camp Torture and Illegal Detention” which is why Guantanamo Bay was widely despised and ridiculed.

“DO NOT BRING PRISONERS TO US; BUILD A PRISON SOMEWHERE ELSE…”
_____________________________________
They’re America’s prisoners, why should any other country have to house them?

Gee danita. You mean, when they build Snugglebuniies, people will be held there legally? What the hell is the difference, besides the zip code?

We already have finished courtroom/tribunal and detention facilities fully outfitted and available…..in GITMO. Special kitchen facilities for their halal menus are also already built up.
Do we need to spend even more money re-creating facilities we already have? It’s going to cost ALOT more money to re-create up here what we already have down there.
Moreover, you have the problem of cross-pollination with civilian prisoners when terror detainees– with the help of international NGOs and “human rights groups” — succeed in getting more and more communication privileges and less secure environments. Local communities would also no doubt demand additional security measures, which only add to the cost.
Additionally, the jihad they’ve fought from inside their cells have, in some respects, been their most effective and successful. (lawfare, or jail house jihad)
As Michelle Obama noted below, military, including the Gitmo guards, make extraordinary sacrifices, both personal and familial. There are personal risks for security guards at Gitmo, as well as their families (until name tags were covered up). There are also female security guards among the Marines. If there’s any abuse going on, it’s the detainees doing it to the guards.

The military should save us all a lot of trouble and follow the Geneva Convention-treat them as ununiformed combatants and lawfully execute them upon capture.

“Do we need to spend even more money re-creating facilities we already have?”
________________________________________
Obama ran on a platform that included the closing of the Guantanamo Bay facility.
That is what is taking place.
I’m sure there were other detainment facilities in the history of the world that were very efficient for their purposes – but that were mothballed when their use became abhorrent to ethical standards.
The torture and illegal detainment of individuals ‘suspected’ of al qaeda or taliban involvement inevitably tainted and doomed the facility in the eyes of the majority of Americans.

Atlas … .
I had already found and checked out those two. Please outline to me what about those items makes them racist or race baiting or rants.
And anything else you have that is more convincing?

re: Gitmo… I should probably note that while my sarcasm about the name might imply that I am in opposition to Gitmo to some, I have to say that I’m not. I WAS being sarcastic about it because what Obama portrays to the public about his stance and supposed actions with regard to Gitmo and ‘torture’ is rather different that what his actual executive orders and actions are.
In other words, the facts, the ACTIONS, do NOT match his words. The actions simply aren’t much different so far than the policies that were in place under President Bush. Why? Because President Obama is discovering that while its awfully easy to castigate and promise during a campaign out of naivety and ignorance, the reality of the situation is far more difficult to deal with.
I believe it would be a waste of tax dollars and makes no sense to close Gitmo or to release those who were captured on the battlefield or clearly involved in terrorist acts in Iraq or Afghanistan. Already the recidivism rate for those released has proven to be pretty high.
As best I know, every investigation into treatment of the prisoners there shows that they are quite well treated for prisoners of war. This is particularly true when you consider that they could have simply been shot dead where they were rather than taken prisoner.
I AM all for ensuring humane treatment, and for ensuring that there aren’t any rogue guards acting illegally. That’s a given. It makes zero sense, however, to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to close Gitmo, transfer those prisoners all over the world, introduce some of them into our max security prisons allowing them to convert other felons, etc. etc.
I’m sick to death already of the Obama hypocrisy and bait and switch on these sorts of issues, however. I want some of that promised transparency, accountability, and honesty.

Atlas . ..
You seem unable to back up your accusations. You would get nowhere in a court of law. Any better examples? Surely over the man’s 35-year career you can come up with more and better than that?

And Atlas . . .
Gitmo is going to be closed and the detainees are going to be dealt with in as fair a manner as possible. That’s what was promised, that’s what’s going to happen.
President Obama has called this area one of the most difficult in terms of procedure and law, but he has promised to address it.

And Atlas . ..
I have to head out, should give you lots of time to back up you accusations, and find some other examples.

Hi Skip,
I don’t know what he’s like on a day to day basis. He might be a nice guy for the most part. I shouldn’t have said ‘he’s racist’ but ‘he’s racist AT TIMES’ or ‘he’s said some very racist things.’
Have you seen his yale application, the rap lyrics, and watched the full (3 min 26 sec at least) the 1996 ‘rant?’ If not, I’d encourage you to do so — you’d understand where I’m coming from a lot better if you did. Danita clearly either hasn’t actually seen/watched them, or she’s one of those types misguided enough to think racism only works one way.
Unfortunately, bigotry has everything to do with being human and little to do with the color of one’s skin. Its every bit as distasteful, shameful, and harmful no matter who its coming from.

Gitmo was an attempt to use semantics to make an end run around our Constitutional system of checks and balances. The ONLY reason it exists is because the Bush Administration wanted to locate a permanent facility outside the oversight of Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution (technically not on US soil, but in our permanent control).
It has to go. The President is not a king who gets his own private dungeon. If people really have to be disappeared for the good of our nation, then Congress and (eventually) the Supreme’s have to sign on too, not just one guy going from his gut.

Atlas:”Because President Obama is discovering that while its awfully easy to castigate and promise during a campaign out of naivety and ignorance, the reality of the situation is far more difficult to deal with.”
President Bush CREATED this unprecedented mess. And the Supreme Court is very slow, but it is going to FORCE it to be closed; Obama may want to take credit for it with his base, but he fact is that Gitmo is not going to be allowed to stand.
“I believe it would be a waste of tax dollars and makes no sense to close Gitmo or to release those who were captured on the battlefield or clearly involved in terrorist acts in Iraq or Afghanistan. Already the recidivism rate for those released has proven to be pretty high.”
Please define pretty high, bearing in mind the hundreds that Bush cycled through there.
“As best I know, every investigation into treatment of the prisoners there shows that they are quite well treated for prisoners of war. This is particularly true when you consider that they could have simply been shot dead where they were rather than taken prisoner. ”
What amazing ignorance. So now random Chinese turned in for a buck by bounty hunters in Pakistan – people who never raised a weapon against us nor every intended to – could have been shot dead, unarmed and in cold blood? That is a disgusting statement and an insult to our service men. They are not cold blooded murders who kill innocent men and 13 year old children (both demographics that have been clearly represented in Gitmo at times).

Wow, Atlas. Yikes. I’m with Danita. There are shades of difference between racism, bigotry prejudice and discrimination, and, to be perfectly frank, I’ve never actually seen your definition in a real dictionary without ones like this preceding it, or at the very least alongside it–
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
I’m hoping you didn’t purposely leave out the whole “we’re superior ” attitude at the heart of racism just to be able to continue overusing the word.
Like Skip said, Gates may have a chip on his shoulder, and he may have prejudices or biases– I’ve actually never met anyone who doesn’t– but racist? I don’t think either he OR Crowley are racists. And I think one would have to do much, much better than the evidence offered up to back up a charge of racism. I find it particularly disingenuous when people claim that the thoughts of a twenty year old somehow define him for life. Really? At twenty I was a Friedman-praising Libertarian who wanted dope legalized and never, ever wanted to be tied down by the shackles of being married with children. Things change.
I suppose the point could be that there is a pattern with Gates but I’m apt to suspect that the whole racist charge against Gates reflects an inability to really grapple with context in full and maybe even the notion that racism against blacks has existed, still exists, and it ticks some people off– as it fricking should!! I find it silly to think no resentment would exist. To me, Gates sounds like one of my fave professors from grad school, a sociology professor.
Gates may feel suspcious of white cops. He may not trust white institutions. But that isn’t racism. That’s bias, prejudice, preconception.

Atlas:”You think that since Gitmo is still open, Obama is guilty of being a King with his own private prison for the past 6 months, with the report on closing Gitmo now delayed another 6 months I believe it is – so he’ll be a king with a private prison for a year at least? Or does that only apply when its either Bush and/or a Republican?
There was no end run around Congress, Supreme Court, Checks and Balances or Constitution. ”
If Obama were to keep Gitmo open, I would not support him in 2012. It is a dangerous power grab by the Executive and cannot be allowed regardless of who is in the Whitehouse.
The Supreme Court is notoriously slow to act on curbing the Executive during times of war, but despite Republican’s attempt to create a perpetual war footing, it is clear the courts are getting around to it. Over 200 cases are pending, and the one over Mohammed Jawad in the coming days is viewed by many to be pivotal.
As for ‘no end run around Congress, the Supreme Court’ etc that is utter nonsense. The ONLY reason it is in Cuba is to keep the detainees out of the US jurisdiction. There is no security justification to keeping them in Cuba, only a game of legal technicalities. The US has never had trouble with holding, trying, and executing prisoners of war on our own soil under our Constitutional system.

Supreme Court cases regarding Gitmo to date:
Rasul v. Bush: Bush lost 6-3. Prisoners seized as potential terrorists and held for more than two years at a U.S. military prison camp in Cuba have the right to challenge their captivity in American courts.
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: Rumsfeld lost 5-3. The Supreme Court held that the military commissions system established by President Bush to try detainees at Guantánamo Bay is unfair and illegal.
Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States: the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the U.S. Constitution applies to the government’s detention policies at Guantánamo. The Court concluded that detainees held at Guantánamo have a right to challenge their detention through habeas corpus.
Yes, the Supreme’s have ruled on Gitmo. But the Executive has to this point ignored them.

And Atlas Shrugs Yet Again | Aug 2, 2009 9:57:14 PM
Well I certainly won’t claim that you oversimplified that time. Others may but I’m not really willing to defend Gates beyond a certain point. But even if I conceded that he’s a crazy old radical race-baiter it still doesn’t justify him getting arrested on his own front porch. That’s what makes me suspicious of Crowley though his misjudgment was probably nothing more than agitated spite.

BH:”This what happens when Ivy League theories meet what the rest of us call the real world.”
Huh, similar words were spoken in Europe a few centuries ago, as they swore those idiot liberals in America would see their country fall within a generation. Tocqueville’s Democracy in America is a fascinating read seen through the prism of European aristocracy coming to grips with the non-failure of the ‘absurd’ American experiment (after all, everyone knew the average man would cease work and simply vote for the government to take care of him)(sound familiar?).

Another case of a President shooting his mouth off to get elected with no plan for execution.

“Its pretty clear that Obama has found closing Gitmo far more difficult than he had a clue would be the case”
Yes he clearly underestimated Cheney’s continued ability to frighten the US public that these detainees are so dangerous that we can’t possibly move them here.

Wow, Atlas. Yikes. I’m with Danita. There are shades of difference between racism, bigotry prejudice and discrimination, and, to be perfectly frank, I’ve never actually seen your definition in a real dictionary without ones like this preceding it, or at the very least alongside it–
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
I’m hoping you didn’t purposely leave out the whole “we’re superior ” attitude at the heart of racism just to be able to continue overusing the word.
Like Skip said, Gates may have a chip on his shoulder, and he may have prejudices or biases– I’ve actually never met anyone who doesn’t– but racist? I don’t think either he OR Crowley are racists. And I think one would have to do much, much better than the evidence offered up to back up a charge of racism. I find it particularly disingenuous when people claim that the thoughts of a twenty year old somehow define him for life. Really? At twenty I was a Friedman-praising Libertarian who wanted dope legalized and never, ever wanted to be tied down by the shackles of being married with children. Things change.
I suppose the point could be that there is a pattern with Gates but I’m apt to suspect that the whole racist charge against Gates reflects an inability to really grapple with context in full and maybe even the notion that racism against blacks has existed, still exists, and it ticks some people off– as it fricking should!! I find it silly to think no resentment would exist. To me, Gates sounds like one of my fave professors from grad school, a sociology professor.
Gates may feel suspcious of white cops. He may not trust white institutions. But that isn’t racism. That’s bias, prejudice, preconception.
Posted by: Alyson | Aug 2, 2009 10:21:37 PM
————————-
Hi Alyson,
Yes, of COURSE there are huge differences in degrees of racism and race-baiting too. I’ve even said that several times. I said that Gates WaPo account is minor — NOTHING compared to his Yale Application, his 1996 rant, the rap lyrics he defended… and even those are NOTHING compared to racial incidents that include actual violence. That doesn’t mean that its not still racism or race-baiting however. Or, if you prefer, call it bigotry. Or what would you call it?
As to the definition…. I just googled: definition racism
I did omit the number 1) – and left number 2) numbered 2) so it was clear I’d omitted 1). That’s because in a definition, each numbered item stands alone providing different applicable uses of the term. 2 was applicable and lord knows the post was too long as it was. Then I googled ‘race-baiting’ and the first thing that popped up was a wikipedia page.
So, from your examples, Alyson, 1 stands separate from 2, and each of those separate from any numbered uses that come below it. I didn’t omit the ‘superior’ issue for any reason other than in this case, the applicable definition appears to be the other VERY BASIC definition of racism, which is the ‘us vs. them, we get treated differently or we treat them differently based on xyz group dynamics’
A feeling of superiority is not necessary for racism or bigotry to occur, not at all.
Here, if you go to Merriam-Webster, an awfully well respected dictionary I think all would agree, the definition of racism provided, with NOTHING omitted is:
Main Entry:
rac·ism Listen to the pronunciation of racism Pronunciation: \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\ Function: noun Date: 1933
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
So 1 the more common usage, 2 just as valid separate definition without the superiority aspect.
Alyson, PLEASE. I did NOT say, ANYWHERE, that the thoughts of a twenty year old define him for life. I didn’t even say that a man who mad very racist comments at 20, and again at whatever age he was defending the rap lyrics and again in 1996 makes him a day in and day out rabid racist. What I said was that over a number of years, he has made some very racist statements. And he has, its in the public record. Its that simple. Alyson, have you seen & listened to those? You can’t even post direct quotes from them here, they’re so egregious the blog filter blocks them from ever posting.
His approach to Crowley showed at least, lets call it, racial bias. Is that better? It appears, by his own account, that from the get go he was convinced that because the policeman was WHITE and because he himself was BLACK, he was being racially profiled and treated differently than a WHITE person would have been. That’s racial profiling.
Even so, I’ve said that on a day to day basis he may be quite nice. There may be only certain things that bring out this ‘chip on his shoulder.’ I don’t know. All I’ve said is that the record shows that at times, he’s fit the definition of behavior that is racist.
Alyson — you talk about surprise and resentment…I’m not surprised that resentment exists either. However, when it is turned around such that one ASSUMES that one will be mistreated before anything has occurred, then its reverse racism, and it harms race relations too.
As to your last sentence: “Gates may feel suspcious of white cops. He may not trust white institutions. But that isn’t racism. That’s bias, prejudice, preconception.” Alyson, all of that, based solely on WHITE, IS the very definition of RACISM!!! Every bit as much as if white people didn’t trust black institutions, and were biased, prejudiced, and had preconceptions about blacks. That’s RACISM!!

jhw: If Obama were to keep Gitmo open, I would not support him in 2012. It is a dangerous power grab by the Executive and cannot be allowed regardless of who is in the Whitehouse.
—————————–
Atlas replies: Ok, jhw, I’ll give you that one.
—————————–
jhw: ….but despite Republican’s attempt to create a perpetual war footing, …
——————————
Atlas: Democrats in charge of Congress last two years of Bush Admin, and HUGE majority last 6 months, and Obama intends to continue at least 50,000 troops in Iraq indefinatly (per agreement reached during Bush Admin, although I don’t know if the NUMBER was set then) and to ramp up Afghanistan.
So…. is this the Democrats attempting to create a permanent war footing, and why did you single out Repub, but fail to mention Dems??
——————————
jhw: …Over 200 cases are pending, and the one over Mohammed Jawad in the coming days is viewed by many to be pivotal.
——————————
Atlas: 200 pending to the Supreme Court??!!
——————————–
jhw: As for ‘no end run around Congress, the Supreme Court’ etc that is utter nonsense. The ONLY reason it is in Cuba is to keep the detainees out of the US jurisdiction.
————————————-
Atlas: When have war detainee’s or POW’s EVER been tried in US courts?
There also is a difference between an end run around Supreme Court vs. avoiding difficulties of individuals and the regular criminal court system.
Clearly, as there ARE cases the Supreme Court has heard and will be hearing about this, and you yourself cite 200 pending cases, there isn’t and hasn’t been any ‘end run’ around the court system.
———————————–
jhw: There is no security justification to keeping them in Cuba, only a game of legal technicalities.
———————————–
Atlas: Here I disagree with you, and as I understand it, so did the Bush Admin, the military, and the Obama Administration. That’s why they haven’t simply transferred them to max. security prisons in the US already or to other facilities in the US.
————————————-
jhw: The US has never had trouble with holding, trying, and executing prisoners of war on our own soil under our Constitutional system.
————————————-
Atlas: Here I admit to not having a good knowledge of the history of how we’ve dealt with war criminals, terrorists, and POWs in the past. What I DO know, is that its not a typical situation, as these are not uniformed soldiers and I don’t care what the Supreme Court ruled, they don’t meet the definition of POWs according to the Geneva Convention. The SC may have ruled that we will treat them as tho they do, and that’s fine, but prior to that the fact is that they didn’t/don’t technically meet the requirements for protection as POWs under the Geneva convention. That makes things unusual and difficult.
Even so, several hundred detainees were processed and released prior to Obama — he’s got the worst 200+ left to deal with, as did Bush.

“…that they could have simply been shot dead where they were rather than taken prisoner”
I have to agree that this is a remarkably callous, and I would consider indefensible position to take.
Posted by: Skip | Aug 2, 2009 10:22:48 PM
——————————-
Oh please. I didn’t AT ALL suggest that is what SHOULD be done. Only that in war, the opponents often are shot. Its WAR for heavens sake. Our troops work very hard to take prisoners LIVE when they can and even give extensive medical care if needed to save their lives or prevent pain and suffering or permanent damage. Our troops often put their OWN lives on the line to try to spare the opponents lives if possible or to give someone who may be an opponent or may be an innocent civilian the benefit of the doubt. Our actions in this regard are ADMIRABLE and FAR FAR better than many other countries. The treatment in Gitmo is VASTLY better than that in many other countries — better by far even than many countries treat their own citizens in prison. When you consider these things, the charges being laid against Gitmo start paling in comparison. That’s the point that you folks are missing and/or twisting out of all recognition.

And Atlas Shrugged Again
Okay, so with a background in sociology and women’s studies and a tendency toward being a picky pants when it comes to accusations of racism, yeah, I have to admit saying he’s racially biased, or prejudiced, works better for me. I think there was a statement about him being clearly racist that got the hair on my neck up a bit even though I get that he was engaging in a form of race baiting– and I later (after I posted) saw that you did qualify the racist thing in additional comments. By most accounts, I agree, he was throwing around accusations and had I been in Crowley’s shoes there is no doubt in my mind that I would have found the situation highly irritating. Since I’m picky about accusations about racism, I may have even started parsing right there on the spot when Gates tossed out the word racist– because that wasn’t fair. Despite that, and the many things I’ve read about disorderly conduct laws and police procedure, I don’t think anything Gates did warrants him being arrested. I believe Crowley is a class act, and we’re all human and make mistakes, and he didn’t deserve the accusations that were hurled at him, but I think he made a mistake. If I had called a cop a sexist and hollered at him and so on and he’d arrested me when I standing on my front porch, or in my front yard, I’d be furious– and if I was having a particularly bad day and the cop looked at me the wrong way– in a way that reminded me of sexist cops I knew– it could happen. It likely wouldn’t, but you never know. I’ve had some run-ins with cops that make it understandable to me that someone would have preconceived notions. Okay, so then, if later, people were saying that because I’d written feminist papers in college, and defended seemingly male-bashing feminist literature and music as culturally significant, and dissed patriarchal institutions in speeches, and sex-baited the cop (?? not sure that works, lol, sounds like I’m offering something, no?) I was a sexist myself, I’d have a problem with that, too. Feminist charges, okay. Bad attitude toward cops? Okay, maybe not always, but it still ticks me off that cops tasered my grandma (the woman who was tasered was not really my grandma, but for this hypothetical, let’s say she is.) Radical? Maybe. Sexist? Despite a definition revolving around gender stereotyping that could make that argument feasible, nah.
Anyway, they’ve moved on so I will, too. Jake’s post was about Gitmo and there’s lots going on here about that, so let’s see where we’re at:)
Have a good night.

Well I certainly won’t claim that you oversimplified that time. Others may but I’m not really willing to defend Gates beyond a certain point. But even if I conceded that he’s a crazy old radical race-baiter it still doesn’t justify him getting arrested on his own front porch. That’s what makes me suspicious of Crowley though his misjudgment was probably nothing more than agitated spite.
Posted by: Skip | Aug 2, 2009 10:39:32 PM
——————————-
LOL!!
Ya, I’m on the fence wrt the arrest too. I wasn’t there, so I give the benefit of the doubt still. I did listen to the police recordings, but its really difficult to understand clearly exactly who is saying what in the middle of the tapes — although there are calls for repeating what was said as tho someone is having transmission difficulties. Crowley in the house? ALL of the transmissions sounded calm and professional, however.
Still, the arrest seems extreme to me also. What I REALLY want to see is statements from the public witnesses, and I’ve yet to see anything that way, other than a single quote from one of them who said that Gates was acting belligerent. I can think of a lot of different possibilities — some reasonable, some not. So… ???

Great conversation on Gitmo, and I confess up front I’m going to sound very emotional, and not high brow or coolly logical at all, but whatever. It’s still worth weighing in on, cuz sometimes politics is about what you feel in your heart.
I want Gitmo closed because, as the AP puts it, it’s internationally reviled, and I revile it, too. For years it’s been the worldwide focal point of protests against the U.S. for human rights violations. While the crude conditions that existed in 2002 have been vastly improved, and the protests against conditions aren’t “fair” given conditions at other prisons and the improvements made , I still can’t shake the vile images I have of it from my head. And if I can’t, how can the world community? I want Gitmo closed because it was ill-conceived from the get-go– a mistake, a gross misstep. I love America, but Gitmo is a sore– it makes me cringe deep inside– and it hurts my soul. I want to believe that America lives up to its ideals, because those ideals are what we’re fighting for, what we’re protecting, no? We can’t shake those off, or we shouldn’t. They’re what makes us so great. I want Gitmo closed because the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman said he wanted it closed, too, has wanted it closed for years, because it hurts us in the War on terror by serving as a symbol or recruiting tool for those who hate us and want to destroy us. And Petraeus agrees. “I don’t think we should be afraid to live our values,” Petraeus said several times when interviewed by Fox News. And, honestly, I want it closed because President Obama promised me he’d closed it and that was one of the reasons I voted for him. Many Americans are behind him on this despite the fact that is turning out to be much more difficult than he thought it would be.
It’s a hot mess. Absolutely. fingers crossed they can sort it out prudently.

Atlas Shrugs No one in this country would believe the lies the republicans tell if they had any intelligence at all. Hypocrisy is the word that applies to republicans who lie constantly about President Obama and his plans to improve America. Republicans in our government are the ones who instead of caring about this country care only about the rich and corporations that they work for.
Posted by: Viki | Aug 2, 2009 10:58:54 PM
———————————–
Poor Vicki, very sad.

Okay, so with a background in sociology and women’s studies and a tendency toward being a picky pants when it comes to accusations of racism, yeah, I have to admit saying he’s racially biased, or prejudiced, works better for me. …..
Posted by: Alyson | Aug 3, 2009 12:18:18 AM
————————————
Hi Alyson,
Sounds like you and I are really pretty much on the same page on this one. His accounts are pretty mild, e.g., I’ve no problem with racially biased or whatever to describe that rather than outright racist. Gotta say that the other three examples, yale app, lyrics, & institution rant, those are far more egregious than the Crowley incident.
I just get really bugged by double standards…. so to see a few folks ripping into Crowley for supposedly being racist, while ignoring that very aspect wrt Gates – and adamantly defending Gates as supposedly blameless… that was what got me going.
As I noted before, I totally agree with you that the arrest is disconcerting. I’m still withholding judgment because there may be some reasonable justification for it… BUT, as you note, Grandma or 7 year old Jr. getting tased, or a 6 yr old handcuffed for throwing a tantrum in a councilor’s office, or any number of other pretty clear abuses of police power infuriate me too.
I can see having a bad day now and then and going a smidge overboard — if its infrequent AND mild, its excusable, we’re all human. When it goes THAT far, however…. well, those types have NO business being behind a badge and need to be fired asap if not put behind bars depending on the circumstances. Its the old adage of ‘a few bad apples spoil the bunch’ on steroids – and I wish to heck that the police were FAR better at ridding themselves of those types as soon as it becomes evident that’s whats going on.

Posted by: James Danley | Aug 3, 2009 1:29:59 AM
=====================================
Thank you James, nice post.
Do you know if we’ve ever had prisoners like this to deal with before? I mean, I gather from your post the answer is probably not, and that had been my suspicion… but just wanting to be sure. For example, in Vietnam, I know much of it wound up being guerrilla warfare… did they wear uniforms? In previous wars (to this one that is), how did we handle spies caught overseas? Any idea?

Alyson… it gives me real pause to read your post regarding your feelings about Guantanamo. I’m really glad that you went ahead and posted it. You make me feel that perhaps there is more value in trying to relocate the detainees and close it than I have previously. I’m still not sure… it is a huge amount of money and there are a lot of problems that have to be resolved. But you have given me some very serious pause and believe me, your post on this issue will be on my mind for quite some time. Thank you.

I have in mind a place for the Gitmo detainees. How about right in the middle of Chicago ? How about DC ? If Obama wants so much to move them I believe he should should do it to show his ” leadership”.

The U.S. prison system already houses mass murderers, rapists, terrorists and the like. That’s why we build super max prisons. People do not escape from these prisons. The only reason Bush wanted Gitmo was so he could torture and otherwise skirt the law. Close it down and live up to the ideals of the U.S.

The clock is ticking and Obama is racing against time.
He can’t lose more credibility by missing the GITMO deadline.
One more example of arrogant grandstanding coming back to bite him.
Here’s another—”if you make less than $250K your taxes won’t go up one dime”

And Atlas Shrugs Yet Again wrote: “Do you know if we’ve ever had prisoners like this to deal with before?”
In searching the Internet, I located a book entitled, “Vietnam Studies Law at War: Vietnam 1964-1973,” by Major General George S. Prugh. NOTE: Just Google the book title to access the book online.
Chapter IV (“Prisoners of War and War Crimes”) may answer your question–specifically the end of page 62 and the beginning of page 63.

Larry . . .
“Here’s another—”if you make less than $250K your taxes won’t go up one dime”
_____________________________________
You seem to have missed it, but there were tax reductions for 95% of Americans in the Recovery and Reinvestment plan.
Do some research on it.

Danita, there is a report out today that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said that the White House could not rule out the possibility that middle class tax hikes might be necessary to lower the federal deficit. And National Economic Council Director Larry Summers said: “There is a lot that can happen over time, it is never a good idea to absolutely rule things out, no matter what.”

Mike_C . ..
The Recovery and Reinvestment plan LOWERED taxes on 95% of Americans.
Obama has done exactly what he promised.
Go smoke a cigarette.

Republican supporters conveniently forget that Bush’s administration doubled the national debt and put it on the country’s credit card. Where did he think the money would come from? Macdonalds workers?
Republican supporters also conveniently forget that the Bush administration left office with the economy in complete free-fall and blame all of that on Obama.

“People like danita conveniently that Obama’s economic policies are just like Bush’s, only with more Goldman Sachs thieves involved.”
______________________________________
The majority of the Goldman Sachs bail-out was handed out in the fall of 2008 before Obama became president.
The majority of bonuses were handed out for the year 2008, before Obama became president.

Danita….the uber-liberal…says
”
Republican supporters conveniently forget that Bush’s administration doubled the national debt and put it on the country’s credit card. Where did he think the money would come from? Macdonalds workers?”
Strange she does not ask this question of Obama’s taking that terrible, horrible situation that Bush made and putting the deficit on steriods!
Then, in her completely blindfolded way of looking at the facts…..
“Republican supporters also conveniently forget that the Bush administration left office with the economy in complete free-fall and blame all of that on Obama.”
Most all of us understand that we did not arrive here by the actions of any one person or party. (including those like Larry Summers)
Since logic & intelligent thought escape poor danita, she has to get her “bush – dig” into just about every post she places here.
With danita, as always,…She doesn’t lie….She just FORGETS the TRUTH!

The argument about Bush doubling the national debt is not ridiculous…
Posted by: danita | Aug 3, 2009 2:47:38 PM
—————————————
Mike C, right on the money.
Danita, it IS ridiculous, because you constantly defend Obama’s spending which makes anything during the Bush years look utterly puny. It IS ridiculous, because every single budget Bush proposed, the Democrats in both House and Senate screamed bloody murder about how this program and that program was being slashed drastically, children were going to starve, children were going to be illiterate, on and on. Problem is that those supposed ‘cuts’ weren’t cuts at all, they were just not as large an INCREASE as the Democrats had hoped for. The Republicans NEVER had large enough majorities to have strong control over either senate or house during those years, as a matter of fact, to my surprise, in 2001, Dems temporarily took back, shoot, now I can’t recall if it was house or senate, but one of them. Regardless, put it all together, and the budgets wound up being larger than Bush proposed virtually every year I believe. Now, I am NOT justifying it, I DO believe that the Republicans failed badly in not doing far more to control spending – even with 9/11, Katrina, Iraq and Afghanistan.
But to trumpet about Bush spending at this time, considering what Obama has done in the past 6 months is simply absurd. You’re harping on Bush and Repubs profligate spending — Obama and the Dems have taken the biggest Bush (and Dem House/Senate control last 2 years) Budgets, AND INCREASED IT BY SOMETHING LIKE 32%.
So, yes, its utterly absurd to say anything negative about Bush & Repub spending at this point in time. Unless of course you proceed at the same time to 1) note that the last 2 years of the Bush admin, the Congress, which REALLY control’s the purse strings was DEMOCRATIC party controlled, and 2) soundly condemn Obama for his spending about 10 times MORE than Bush.

Hey Mike, consider seeing today’s Q’s for O’s WH post — it could use your sort of input I’d say. :0)

“Yet another right winger who claims the Republicans really weren’t in charge.”
Accordingly it doesn’t seem to take very many Democrats to wrestle control away from them does it? Remember when almost single handed Barney Frank thwarted the entire determined Republican effort to save us from the careless excesses of Freddie and Frannie using his imposing personality alone?

And Atlas . . .
The argument about Bush doubling the national debt is not ridiculous – it is the truth. The national debt during the Bush administration basically doubled from $5 trillion to $10 trillion dollars.
Bush and the Republicans came in promising smaller government and what they gave us was a doubled national debt.
Instead of saving during good times, they vastly overspent – and when the lean times came, this is what we were left with – an major economic crisis and a doubled national debt.

Sorry, I should have said “about $13 per week.”

The argument about Bush doubling the national debt is not ridiculous – it is the truth. The national debt during the Bush administration basically doubled from $5 trillion to $10 trillion dollars.
Bush and the Republicans came in promising smaller government and what they gave us was a doubled national debt.
Instead of saving during good times, they vastly overspent – and when the lean times came, this is what we were left with – an major economic crisis and a doubled national debt.
Posted by: danita | Aug 4, 2009 4:00:41 AM
—————————-
You know, Danita, just what is your beef here? That Obama is better? That the Dems are better? That Bush & Repubs didn’t manage to keep their campaign promise on this issue? The amount of increase in public debt? Just which of these is your actual point(s)? Of course, add anything else that is your point here. Because I’m sure not getting just what it is you’re on about here.