Opinion Forum

Mo Gitmo

January 8th, 2010

With the promise of increasing attacks on America, terrorist or otherwise, the question of how we deal with these people continues to beg for an answer. In times past people who committed acts of war against us were considered our enemies and treated as such. For reasons unexplained, the present Administration has chosen to treat our enemies with kindness and respect no matter what our grievances against them might be.

The latest terrorist to bask in the kindness of this Administration is the wannabe Detroit/Copenhagen bomber. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was, according to all indications, going to try to destroy almost 300 lives when the bomb he was wearing blew the Northwest Airlines plane apart. What a Christmas message that would have been. God or fate, depending on your beliefs, prevented this madman from accomplishing his goal.

Abdulmutallab, like his fellow killers at the Guantanamo prison, is being give full American constitutional protection. Our Justice Department has already started treating this latest bomber as if he were a citizen. I wonder why Obama continues to run interference on behalf of these enemies of the American people.

Charles Krauthammer treated the subject very well in his column in today’s Washington Post. Krauthammer’s sentiments pretty much echo my own. What type of message are we sending those who would do us grievous harm? If nothing else, it is that the punishment will not likely equal the crime.

Articles written by Larry Ennis
Tags: Constitution, Guantanamo, terrorism, terrorist
Categories: News, Politics | Comments (4) | Home

4 Responses to “Mo Gitmo”

Tom | January 8th, 2010 at 3:44 pm

Starting from the top:

“the present Administration has chosen to treat our enemies with kindness and respect” — No, they’re trying a small number of them in federal court instead of by military commissions. Agree or disagree, that’s not “kindness and respect” by any standard and it doesn’t apply to all.

“bask in the kindness of this Administration” — No, they’re prisoners at Guantanamo or in other federal facilities. The treatment their receiving is essentially the same as under the Bush Administration.

“Abdulmutallab, like his fellow killers” — No, he’s not a killer, as far as anyone knows. He tried to kill people, and for that he may spend his life in prison.

“full American constitutional protection” — No, prisoners at Guantanamo are not receiving full constitutional protection. You can look that one up for yourself.

“I wonder why Obama continues to run interference on behalf of these enemies of the American people.” — Geez, there it is, the nutso conspiracy theory posed as an innocent question. Well, hmmm, it must be because he’s a crypto-Muslim socialist determined to destroy America, right?

“Krauthammer’s sentiments pretty much echo my own.” — No, they don’t. He’s critical of the Administration for prosecuting Abdulmutallab in federal court and questions the rationale for closing Guantanamo. But he also noted that the Bush Administration did the same thing and says that Obama made good decisions to impose extra security for travellers from certain countries and stopped returning detainees to Yemen. He’s opposed to some things Obama is doing, but his views are reasoned, supported by analysis, and based on fact.

larry | January 9th, 2010 at 5:55 am

Tom
As you said, starting from the top.
1. Call it what you may. The treatment of these soldiers of Allah by our government is a slap in the face of every American that has suffered at the hands of these people.
2. During the Bush Administration not one terrorist was offered the full power of the American Justice System to defend them against the people they have sworn to destroy.
3. Trying to separate the would be Detroit bomber from his fellow terrorist by “splitting hairs” is an out right attempt to run interference for our soft on terror President. Had the Detroit bomber succeeded he would have murdered 285 people.
3. AG Eric Holder is preparing to try at least 3 Gitmo detainee’s in New York City. These three will enjoy the full benefit of our legal system thanks to the Obama administration.
4. Your asinine comments in this paragraph don’t deserve a reply.
5. Krauthammer questioned the “Mirandizing” of the terrorist and the fact that they were not going to be treated as combatants but as citizens instead.
Call it what ever suits your political leanings. Obama is soft on terrorism when it comes time to punish them.

Tom | January 9th, 2010 at 6:50 am

1. They’re in prison, Larry, and some have been there for many years. What more do you want done to them? Can you say?

2. During the Bush Administration, terrorists were, in fact, tried in federal courts. Here’s just one source, providing information that’s available all over the place:

Many of Holder’s [and Obama’s] critics appear to have forgotten that the Bush administration used civilian courts to put away dozens of terrorists, including “shoe bomber” Richard Reid; al-Qaeda agent Jose Padilla; “American Taliban” John Walker Lindh; the Lackawanna Six; and Zacarias Moussaoui, who was prosecuted for the same conspiracy for which Mohammed is likely to be charged. Many of these terrorists are locked in a supermax prison in Colorado, never to be seen again.

3. Abdulmutallab isn’t a killer because he failed to carry out his plot. That’s simply a fact, and they’re useful things.

3. (4) The actual number Holder decided to try in New York is five. They’ll be treated the same way as terrorists tried in federal court under the Bush Administration. And I happen to agree with you that it’s a bad idea.

4. (5) Larry, if you don’t want absurd implications to be drawn from a sentence loaded with absurd implications, then don’t write it.

5. (6) I agree that Krauthammer’s column was good. However, he didn’t fall off the cliff of common sense and logic necessary to make wholly unsupported assumptions about the President.