Gitmo Survey.What Cities Would You Want To Send The Terrorists To?,Places "Worse Than Hell".

[RandallFlagg]

Just put them in a supermax facility until such time as they can be tried and fried (or sent back to whatever hellhole they came from).

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

they are prisoners of war. They have declared war on us in their own warped minded way. They are not criminals. They are not murderers from a war standard. They are prisoners of war and until they have admitted defeat and cease all hostile actions against us and our allies, they remain prisoners of war.

It's funny, I just saw a news piece on the television. Prisoners there have access to a 20,000 book library, 5,000 movies and 300 channels on TV.

Why the HELL would they want to leave?

not to mention a brand new soccer field....and, of course, they are the darlings of the left. You know...."those poor souls being forced to live in GITMO"

Indeed. Using enemy combatants as pawns. The left will stop at nothing.

 

[Jarhead]

So, Barry contends that GITMO is a "recruiting" tool for the terrorists. OK, so be it. So, we close GITMO and bring the rag heads to, say, Florence CO to the Supermax.

Can somebody explain to me how the HELL that would be any different than leaving them where they are now!?!?!

It's cheaper,

a government that spent a half a billion dollars on a website is concerned about spending 80 million dollars a year to keep prisoners of war in check and not give them the defendant benefits of the US criminal justice system?
Really?

 

[RandallFlagg]

So, Barry contends that GITMO is a "recruiting" tool for the terrorists. OK, so be it. So, we close GITMO and bring the rag heads to, say, Florence CO to the Supermax.

Can somebody explain to me how the HELL that would be any different than leaving them where they are now!?!?!

It's cheaper,

a government that spent a half a billion dollars on a website is concerned about spending 80 million dollars a year to keep prisoners of war in check and not give them the defendant benefits of the US criminal justice system?
Really?

The left will parrot whatever they hear on MSNBC. It's what they do.

I have no doubt whatsoever that there is no savings to be had over shipping this scum to the supermax in CO. But the left will throw ANYTHING out there in their feeble attempt to support their "messiah".

 

[Jarhead]

what seems to be forgotten here is that once they enter the US and are incarcerated, they are entitled, by law, to a speedy trial and their fate is determined by a jury of their peers.
Now...here you go....
"Your honor, my client is part of a group of individuals that are at war with the United States. Whereas the United States refuses to declare it as an actual war, my client and his group have. If, in fact, ny client is guilty of murder during an act of war, then every single American Soldier that has killed an enemy combatant during ALL US wars is guilty of murder."
Every single prisoner will be released unless they can find them guilty of war crimes. But they cant because the US has not officially declared war on them.

It is a no win situation.

 

[OldLady]

How much are any of you willing to have your taxes raised to pay for this?

Let me help you. NONE of you.

Your header is by the ACLU. All credibility lost, sonny.

Just because you don't like their point of view doesn't make the facts less real, Randall. Look at their sources. Unless you're one of those tinfoil hat guys, you've got to admit this is what it costs. An existing supermax in Colorado would be scads cheaper. I don't know why they would want to build a separate, new prison for them. Unless they'd get killed in the general population. But the supermax my son works at has a nice big solitary unit. Save tax payer money on these scum bags!

 

[RandallFlagg]

what seems to be forgotten here is that once they enter the US and are incarcerated, they are entitled, by law, to a speedy trial and their fate is determined by a jury of their peers.
Now...here you go....
"Your honor, my client is part of a group of individuals that are at war with the United States. Whereas the United States refuses to declare it as an actual war, my client and his group have. If, in fact, ny client is guilty of murder during an act of war, then every single American Soldier that has killed an enemy combatant during ALL US wars is guilty of murder."
Every single prisoner will be released unless they can find them guilty of war crimes. But they cant because the US has not officially declared war on them.

It is a no win situation.

Isn't that what Barry has been about from day one? I mean, seriously. Barry has shown his love for Iran already. Is there any question left about this guys' loyalty?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue would be my first choice,

 

[OldLady]

The Gitmo Dilemma is back in the news this week, and Obama really thinks he can just cut them loose somewhere in the USA. Yah, what's he gonna do? Get his phone and pen again.
But what if you had the power to send them free? Where would you send them? Doesn't have to be just one city, you can spread them around, 10 here, 12 there, 15 over here, etc.
Can we start with Washington DC and Detroit?
You can also choose cities around the globe.

Just put them in a supermax facility until such time as they can be tried and fried (or sent back to whatever hellhole they came from).

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

 

[Jarhead]

what seems to be forgotten here is that once they enter the US and are incarcerated, they are entitled, by law, to a speedy trial and their fate is determined by a jury of their peers.
Now...here you go....
"Your honor, my client is part of a group of individuals that are at war with the United States. Whereas the United States refuses to declare it as an actual war, my client and his group have. If, in fact, ny client is guilty of murder during an act of war, then every single American Soldier that has killed an enemy combatant during ALL US wars is guilty of murder."
Every single prisoner will be released unless they can find them guilty of war crimes. But they cant because the US has not officially declared war on them.

It is a no win situation.

Isn't that what Barry has been about from day one? I mean, seriously. Barry has shown his love for Iran already. Is there any question left about this guys' loyalty?

that has been the argument since day one. People think the right is all about calling it 'Islamic radicalism" for prejudicial reasons. No! It is because we can not declare war on them if we don't define them. And since they don't have actual "borders" we must define them as a people. If we just refer to them as "terrorists" and declare war on terrorists, then if a radical right asshole blows up an abortion center, he can claim it was an act of war.....

So since we can not define them, we can not declare war on them and if we don't declare war on them then we can not prosecute them for war crimes. and if we cant prosecute them for war crimes, our laws will allow them to go free because they declared war on us and are therefore not murderers. They are combatants.

Obama is well aware of this. So is every single person in congress.

 

[Jarhead]

The Gitmo Dilemma is back in the news this week, and Obama really thinks he can just cut them loose somewhere in the USA. Yah, what's he gonna do? Get his phone and pen again.
But what if you had the power to send them free? Where would you send them? Doesn't have to be just one city, you can spread them around, 10 here, 12 there, 15 over here, etc.
Can we start with Washington DC and Detroit?
You can also choose cities around the globe.

Just put them in a supermax facility until such time as they can be tried and fried (or sent back to whatever hellhole they came from).

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

wrong. We cant prosecute them because they are war combatants. A war combatant can not be prosecuted for murder.
Know your stuff.

 

[RandallFlagg]

How much are any of you willing to have your taxes raised to pay for this?

Let me help you. NONE of you.

Your header is by the ACLU. All credibility lost, sonny.

Just because you don't like their point of view doesn't make the facts less real, Randall. Look at their sources. Unless you're one of those tinfoil hat guys, you've got to admit this is what it costs. An existing supermax in Colorado would be scads cheaper. I don't know why they would want to build a separate, new prison for them. Unless they'd get killed in the general population. But the supermax my son works at has a nice big solitary unit. Save tax payer money on these scum bags!

So now you limp-wrists are "concerned" about tax payers money? Jesus Christ! I'll alert the media!!

Darlin - check this FACT out, will you? The post at Guantanamo costs the United States of America $4,000 per year (in perpetuity) to keep it there. That place belongs to the US.

The troops are ALREADY stationed there. It is a LARGE American military installation. Not JUST a prison. There nearly 15,000 personnel (and their dependents) there at any one time. So, we send correction personnel there on a routine basis. That is their duty station. Just like if they were stationed in Oklahoma or Germany. They would still be doing their job.

Now - where is the savings by relocating a prison?

 

[Jarhead]

How much are any of you willing to have your taxes raised to pay for this?

Let me help you. NONE of you.

Your header is by the ACLU. All credibility lost, sonny.

Just because you don't like their point of view doesn't make the facts less real, Randall. Look at their sources. Unless you're one of those tinfoil hat guys, you've got to admit this is what it costs. An existing supermax in Colorado would be scads cheaper. I don't know why they would want to build a separate, new prison for them. Unless they'd get killed in the general population. But the supermax my son works at has a nice big solitary unit. Save tax payer money on these scum bags!

So now you limp-wrists are "concerned" about tax payers money? Jesus Christ! I'll alert the media!!

Darlin - check this FACT out, will you? The post at Guantanamo costs the United States of America $4,000 per year (in perpetuity) to keep it there. That place belongs to the US.

The troops are ALREADY stationed there. It is a LARGE American military installation. Not JUST a prison. There nearly 15,000 personnel (and their dependents) there at any one time. So, we send correction personnel there on a routine basis. That is their duty station. Just like if they were stationed in Oklahoma or Germany. They would still be doing their job.

Now - where is the savings by relocating a prison?

there must be savings. Obama said so. Just yesterday!

 

[RandallFlagg]

The Gitmo Dilemma is back in the news this week, and Obama really thinks he can just cut them loose somewhere in the USA. Yah, what's he gonna do? Get his phone and pen again.
But what if you had the power to send them free? Where would you send them? Doesn't have to be just one city, you can spread them around, 10 here, 12 there, 15 over here, etc.
Can we start with Washington DC and Detroit?
You can also choose cities around the globe.

Just put them in a supermax facility until such time as they can be tried and fried (or sent back to whatever hellhole they came from).

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

wrong. We cant prosecute them because they are war combatants. A war combatant can not be prosecuted for murder.
Know your stuff.

Apparently, you DON'T watch the news, do you? There was never a declaration of war (per our Constitution) so, if they step ONE FOOT on United States soil, they are entitled to due process.

Now please, tell me you didn't know that and better yet, tell me that you did NOT know that your boy, Barry, has been after this from day one...

 

[RandallFlagg]

How much are any of you willing to have your taxes raised to pay for this?

Let me help you. NONE of you.

Your header is by the ACLU. All credibility lost, sonny.

Just because you don't like their point of view doesn't make the facts less real, Randall. Look at their sources. Unless you're one of those tinfoil hat guys, you've got to admit this is what it costs. An existing supermax in Colorado would be scads cheaper. I don't know why they would want to build a separate, new prison for them. Unless they'd get killed in the general population. But the supermax my son works at has a nice big solitary unit. Save tax payer money on these scum bags!

So now you limp-wrists are "concerned" about tax payers money? Jesus Christ! I'll alert the media!!

Darlin - check this FACT out, will you? The post at Guantanamo costs the United States of America $4,000 per year (in perpetuity) to keep it there. That place belongs to the US.

The troops are ALREADY stationed there. It is a LARGE American military installation. Not JUST a prison. There nearly 15,000 personnel (and their dependents) there at any one time. So, we send correction personnel there on a routine basis. That is their duty station. Just like if they were stationed in Oklahoma or Germany. They would still be doing their job.

Now - where is the savings by relocating a prison?

there must be savings. Obama said so. Just yesterday!

Yeah, and I believe everything that Barry says...

 

[Jarhead]

Just put them in a supermax facility until such time as they can be tried and fried (or sent back to whatever hellhole they came from).

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

wrong. We cant prosecute them because they are war combatants. A war combatant can not be prosecuted for murder.
Know your stuff.

Apparently, you DON'T watch the news, do you? There was never a declaration of war (per our Constitution) so, if they step ONE FOOT on United States soil, they are entitled to due process.

Now please, tell me you didn't know that and better yet, tell me that you did NOT know that your boy, Barry, has been after this from day one...

huh?

 

[Jarhead]

Just put them in a supermax facility until such time as they can be tried and fried (or sent back to whatever hellhole they came from).

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

wrong. We cant prosecute them because they are war combatants. A war combatant can not be prosecuted for murder.
Know your stuff.

Apparently, you DON'T watch the news, do you? There was never a declaration of war (per our Constitution) so, if they step ONE FOOT on United States soil, they are entitled to due process.

Now please, tell me you didn't know that and better yet, tell me that you did NOT know that your boy, Barry, has been after this from day one...

did you not read my post before you criticized my intelligence?

 

[RandallFlagg]

The problem, of course, is they can't be tried – the consequence of Bush's incompetence and stupidity.

While the idiot Bush was indiscriminately detaining terrorist suspects, he failed to gather evidence of their alleged guilt, or determine if indeed they were terrorists at all.

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

wrong. We cant prosecute them because they are war combatants. A war combatant can not be prosecuted for murder.
Know your stuff.

Apparently, you DON'T watch the news, do you? There was never a declaration of war (per our Constitution) so, if they step ONE FOOT on United States soil, they are entitled to due process.

Now please, tell me you didn't know that and better yet, tell me that you did NOT know that your boy, Barry, has been after this from day one...

did you not read my post before you criticized my intelligence?

Re-read. I wasn't quoting your post.

 

[Jarhead]

Then they should be repatriated to wherever they came from. If they couldn't even be charged under the very relaxed standards of a military tribunal, WTF are we holding them for?

Exactly.

wrong. We cant prosecute them because they are war combatants. A war combatant can not be prosecuted for murder.
Know your stuff.

Apparently, you DON'T watch the news, do you? There was never a declaration of war (per our Constitution) so, if they step ONE FOOT on United States soil, they are entitled to due process.

Now please, tell me you didn't know that and better yet, tell me that you did NOT know that your boy, Barry, has been after this from day one...

did you not read my post before you criticized my intelligence?

Re-read. I wasn't quoting your post.

actually, if you look at it, it was quoting my post....maybe an error...

 

[OldLady]

So which of you to believe? Jarhead says we can't prosecute them and we therefore have to let them go if we move them onto US soil?
Randall says if the prison closed, the military base built around it would remain open and therefore save us no money. I question that, since I saw a spot on the news a few weeks ago talking about some of the (very elderly) Cubans living on base who would be out and homeless if GITMO closed. Sounds more like a total closing, Burger King and all.

 

[Jarhead]

exactly where do the two of us contradict each other? I don't see what oine thing has to do with another.
But what I DO know is that once you take a prisoner of war onto US soil, they become a prisoner with the US laws protecting them. They will be offered a fair trial in front of a jury of their peers and all they will need to do is say they were military combatants during a time of war. Unless they can be found guilty of war crimes, a federal US court will not be able to prosecute them for murder for they did not murder in the legal sense. They killed during a war just as many US soldiers do.
That is why we have prisoner of war camps NOT on US soil. There is a reason for it. That is ALSO why military tribunals do not put them on trial. They are not guilty of anything from a military standpoint. We keep them in prison so they can not go back to the fight. It is that simple.
Remmebr, just because we did not declare war on them does NOT mean they did not declare war on us...and since they did, they have the US laws on their side. They must be kept off US soil. The DoJ, All of congress and the executive branch are well aware of this.