Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Brownback leading efforts to oppose funding closing Guantanamo

May 19, 2009

Advertisement

— Sen. Sam Brownback and a growing number of his colleagues are lining up to oppose efforts by the White House to move suspected terrorism detainees to the United States.

The concern, members of Congress say, is the potential security threat to Americans if the detainees are moved from a military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the U.S.

The U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth is one of several places that has been mentioned as a potential site for prisoners, and the state’s congressional delegation has opposed the idea.

Senators will vote this week on a Pentagon request for $80 million to build any new facilities needed to transfer detainees at Guantanamo. The money is included in a supplemental Department of Defense spending bill that is expected to be debated before Congress leaves Washington for the Memorial Day weekend.

“That’s the fight this week,” said Brownback, a Kansas Republican. “I think the prospects are good to stop it.”

Republicans and Democrats are expected to offer amendments on the floor to strip the money or place restrictions on how it could be spent and require a detailed plan for transferring the detainees from the Pentagon or White House.

Sen. Pat Roberts is hosting a town hall meeting next week in Leavenworth to discuss the detainee operations. He said momentum is building against closing Guantanamo.

“It is a shortsighted and dangerous political maneuver, and judging by public sentiment in recent weeks, a majority of Americans support our efforts,” the Kansas Republican said.

Brownback visited Guantanamo on Friday, along with Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Sen. Mike Johanns of Nebraska. Brownback said in a telephone interview Monday that he is convinced President Barack Obama’s effort to move the detainees is ill-advised, given Obama’s decision to restart military tribunals for the detainees.

Brownback said it would be a waste of hundreds of millions of dollars to move detainee operations and create a new system for trying the suspects. He said the fight against terrorists isn’t going to end soon and the last thing the United States wants to do is turn detainees loose, only to see them pick up weapons against troops in Afghanistan or Iraq.

“We don’t want to face these guys in a more robust situation. They want to kill U.S. soldiers and U.S. citizens in large numbers,” Brownback said. “If you move them to the United States, that will attract more terrorists elements.”

Comments

madameX 5 years, 7 months ago

What, does he think that Al Quaida (spelled wrong, I'm sure) is going to be holding candlelight vigils outside Leavenworth if detainees are transferred there? Why is the "effort to move the detainees is ill-advised, given Obama’s decision to restart military tribunals for the detainees?" I understand not wanting to let actual terrorists go, but what is wrong with an effort to try to figure out whether or not they actually are terrorists?

63BC 5 years, 7 months ago

Both houses of the KS Legislature unanimously passed resolutions this year opposing the shifting of detainees to Leavenworth. It would be dangerous, unnecessary and injurious to Ft. Leavenworth's existing missions.

Brownback and Roberts are right, and winning---Senate Democrats just buckled and pulled the money in the face of their efforts.

That's what they've done for us lately.

LiberalDude 5 years, 7 months ago

Yes, please explain how, 63BC.

Why would it be any worse to hold the war on terror detainees at Leavenworth than the murders who are currently jailed there? I think it would be great for the State of Kansas if we took the terror detainees. It would bring millions of dollars to the state and create hundreds of jobs.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Are you guys serious?? I think this has to be the stupidest thread I have ever read on here! I dont care if its a democrat or republican issue, Im so sick of hearing about the left and the right, its ridiculous and its gets old real quick! Lets see now....why shouldnt the US house terrorists on its soil?? Gee, doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure that one out! The murderers who are up there, more than likely have nobody that wants them out, nobody who is willing to attack the US on its own soil to get them out, they probably also arent in conspiracy to kill as many US citizens as possible in one fell swoop attack! My guess is they also are not in "murder training camps" learning to kill for "religious" reasons. Yes, the US has some horrrible, hanious criminals in our system, every country does, and no doubt there are people in there who should never see the light of day. Also, no doubt there are innocent people in there. Heres the difference, those are US citizens in there, who are subject to the laws of the United States, and have constitutional rights guaranteed under that constitution. The terrorists do not! They are not citizens, they are not guarateed any "rights" by the US, and IF they escape, or are helped to escape....they are coming for YOUR backyard!!! If you are not opposed to those coming to Kansas, then I suggest you move to Leavenworth and live around them, so that all your liberal loving bleeding hearts can raise and rear them to be good upstanding people who dont want to kill us with nuclear bombs, or anthrax, or any biological or chemical weapon. Im not either republican or democrat, and this is the reason why, but common sense is common sense, and these people are more dangerous than any seriel killer ever thought of being!

uncleandyt 5 years, 7 months ago

Is Roberts still working on "Phase Two" of the Pre-War Intelligence Report? We cannot assume that every person we imprisoned is a terrorist. There must be charges. The charges must be proven. I thought we had that figured out.

rhd99 5 years, 7 months ago

We have been chastised by the rest of the country for de-emphasizing evolution. That is nothing compared to us being known as the state housing these murderous thugs who killed our fellow Americans 8 years ago. You bleeding heart liberals who want these detainees to go free, how America will be any safer when GITMO closes & these thugs come to our U.S. shores? Well.....?

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat, et al. -

I believe you forgot the word "suspected" when you were talking about all those "terrorists."

Would you have opposed housing Timothy McVeigh at Leavenworth? If not, then you must have other reasons against housing the prisoners of Gitmo in Kansas.

Something like LS04 said sounds about right. We can't have those "terrorists" (un-charged, un-tried, un-convicted) knowing what they're being held for or having access to defense and just trial. This is America, by gawd!

Flap Doodle 5 years, 7 months ago

Worth repeating: “28 March 2009 at 6:40 p.m. beobachter (Anonymous) says… …Ok, I'm done, you don't need to ban my account, I won't be back.”

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Sinver.....reread my post! I said that there are no doubt guilty as sin people and there are no doubt innocent people in prisons and in Gitmo-no doubt about it! But why is the Government insisting on bringing them to Kansas?? Maybe because Kansans are to stupid to realize they are in danger even when its right in their faces! Or maybe its because Kansas is a state that the Government doesnt care if "suspected" terrorists escape or try to attack the US, as Kansas is smack in the middle of the US. If on AMerican soil, they are subject to American law...you can't find them not guilty and then expect to ship them "back" to their countries! They will have rights! They can declare amnesty, they can ask to placed on refugee status and while they are waiting, they can help plan, plot, and carry out an even bigger attack on US soil! Why cant they go somewhere else?? Timothy Mcvee is DEAD! And so should these people be if found to be guilty! but WHO will execute? What kind of a world war could this start? And how could it possibly change our constitution if we have to give them rights?? think about it! Kansas...as stupid as they get! No wonder its a pure lovely breeding ground ripe for terrorists!! Start making the bumper stickers that say "terrorists, only Kansas can be that dumb" Because thats the message that you are going to send to the rest of the US...Its already begun!!

jaywalker 5 years, 7 months ago

I honestly don't see much of an issue with moving them to a facility in the U.S. due to 'safety issues'. I reckon some of these politicians don't want 'em in their backyard 'cuz they believe it may attract their brethren to strike nearby, but that seems a stretch too. But I've been saying from the start, why close Gitmo anyway? It's a perfect facility to detain them before, during, and after the tribunals. It's shutdown has always seemed little more than a symbolic campaign promise which never made a lotta sense other than to placate those angry at past acts. Just make certain those acts don't continue, don't 'shut down' the facility. Waste of time, waste of money.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

And furthermore....if you are SO concerned about holding innocent "suspected" terrorists, where is your concern for the Americans who are in prisons and are innocent?? Where is your compassion for them?? And this could indeed start a major world war. Lets suppose that we move those people here. And lets suppose that the Government holds some sort of trial and finds them guilty-lets say there are 5 of them. The punishment is execution. Suddenly, since these terrorists are native to Iran, Afghanistan, hell, maybe even pakistan, we dont know....then suddenly their Government is saying that if you (the US) execute those men, then we will send a nuke your way! Or they God forbid, take a plane, or 2 or 3...now the building they are aiming for isnt in NY anymore, its in Kansas! This is not a smart move! Take them somewhere else! There are a million places in the world where they can be housed until trial or whatever, dont bring them here. If they come, and that is passed, I guarantee, that in less than 3 years of the trials, you same posters will be on here crying the blues as to what is taking place in the world now, and more specifically Kansas, and mourning your family, friends, neighbors, schools, churches, communities, you watch and see. Its just not worth it!

jaywalker 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdiva,

I think you may have gone 'round the bend a touch, dear. Escapes from max security prisons are incredibly rare, and I imagine a move of these prisoners to the DB would involve building a seperate max secure housing, they won't be mixing them with American military prisoners. Leavenworth has 4 prisons within a 10 mile radius: mens's and women's state, the DB, and the big house. Moving these guys there ain't gonna make the area or the state any more dangerous. Like I said above, I don't see much sense in shutting down Gitmo anyway, but if they're found guilty in their tribunal and transferred to a U.S. facility.....so what? Doesn't make 'em U.S. citizens and they're not more likely to escape.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat-

Yes, McVeigh is dead. After he was arrested, charged, tried and convicted. The American way of justice, you know?

I see my (and that of LS04) supposition was right. You don't want them to have rights. Problem with that is that they're human beings, just like anybody else. How would you feel if the British government detained you without charge, defense or trial? What if it were your cousin, your best friend, your kid? And what if you weren't a terrorist, but just a suspected terrorist? Shucks to your rights as a human being, right?

Just like the torture debate, there is no real debate here. Morality and ethics exist outside of religious ideology or political policy.

And as far as the fear theories on what might happen if we should happen to treat these people as people and try them? Baloney. First of all, these people would not be released into the general public even if they were found not guilty. They're not American citizens and no where near the front of the line for the visa/green card/whatever to get here. We have holding cells for those waiting on deportation. As far as amnesty and refugee status, you speak as someone who has clearly never dealt with USCIS. What you fear simply will not happen.

As far as the government not caring about Kansas, well, duh. But as far as the government not giving concern to terrorist activity here, I suggest you read up on soft targets. And hey - don't we have nuclear crap all around here?

Regardless of all that, holding people without charge, defense or trial is creating a lot more terrorists than we could ever hope to house. With great power comes great responsibility. This is the mother-lovin United States of America - beacon of human rights and freedom - not an example for ourselves alone, but for the whole world. Let's remember that and the Golden Rule and some day our history will be better for it.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

And furthermore….if you are SO concerned about holding innocent “suspected” terrorists, where is your concern for the Americans who are in prisons and are innocent?? Where is your compassion for them??


Well, despite the fact that what you're saying is off-topic, I do have compassion for the innocent housed in our prisons. Thing is - they have had their day in court and also have a right to appeal. People at Gitmo do not, and that is wrong.

We hold more nuclear power than anyone who would wish to use such power against us, so the fear tactic of "What if Iran bombs us because we execute a terrorist?" just sounds like the rantings of a mad man.

Lastly, people in NY don't deserve to die any more than people in Kansas. That's a pretty nasty way to regard the rest of your fellow Americans.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 7 months ago

Jeremy Scahill: "Little Known Military Thug Squad Still Brutalizing Prisoners at Gitmo Under Obama"

Jeremy Scahill reports the Obama administration is continuing to use a notorious military police unit at Guantanamo that regularly brutalizes unarmed prisoners, including gang-beating them, breaking their bones, gouging their eyes and dousing them with chemicals.

This force, officially known as the Immediate Reaction Force, has been labeled the “Extreme Repression Force” by Guantanamo prisoners, and human rights lawyers call their actions illegal.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/19/jeremy_scahill_little_known_military_thug

KEITHMILES05 5 years, 7 months ago

It is the GOP who is playing politics with this issue. They should be ashamed of not supporting American service people and taking a stand what is right.

llama726 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat...

"I dont care if its a democrat or republican issue, Im so sick of hearing about the left and the right, its ridiculous and its gets old real quick!"

Then, in the same post:

"so that all your liberal loving bleeding hearts can raise and rear them"

Catbacker 5 years, 7 months ago

Fort Leavenworth's main mission is as a learning institution. The exchange programs at the CGSC involve officers from all of our allied countries (at some point). Holding the suspects there would cause undue strain within the educational relationships/opportunities the Army continues to develop with those from the Arab world. This is the real issue with bringing them here.

madameX 5 years, 7 months ago

"Holding the suspects there would cause undue strain within the educational relationships/opportunities the Army continues to develop with those from the Arab world."

How so?

Catbacker 5 years, 7 months ago

Because the "educational" part of the Army (Ft. Leavenworth) loses its plausible deniability if it becomes the "detaining" part of the Army (Gitmo) of which the Arab world is not so fond. Is that really that hard to understand?

madameX 5 years, 7 months ago

No, it's not that hard to understand, and I see your point about keeping the "educating" and "detaining" parts completely separate (because they do serve different purposes), but I would think that people who are being educated on a US Army base at all would be capable of understanding that detaining a few Arabs because those individuals are suspected terrorists is not the same thing as wanting to keep the entire Arab world in chains. I think the practice of keeping people locked up for years and years without even the hope of a trial has been far more damaging to our relations with the Arab world than if we made a reasonable effort to sort those who should be locked up from those who shouldn't, and if we did a better job of making sure that those who are locked up really deserve to me then it wouldn't matter so much, foreign-policy-wise, where we were holding them.

HW 5 years, 7 months ago

Jaywalker has it right. I have said that before. GITMO is the perfect location. The problem is not the location, the problem is the operators of the location. Bad things can happen to the detainees on US soil, just as they can at GITMO. Leave them there, try them, and send them to their fate per their verdict.

zzgoeb 5 years, 7 months ago

Interesting...Brownback voted for EVERYTHING Bush and his fellow war criminals did post 9/11. Also Sam continues to be "strong against crime" and vote for more laws and more prisons. So why are the Gitmo prisoners so special? Come on Sam, give us a break!

BigDog 5 years, 7 months ago

What was left out of this article is that Democrats in the US Senate (not Brownback) are the ones who removed funding for the Obama proposal for closing Gitmo ..... stating they would not fund it until there was a plan for what the Obama administration is going to do with those being held there. Hmmmm interesting concept. Not providing funding for an unknown plan.

Also, not as simple as just sending them back to their home country if they are not charged. We have prisoners now at Gitmo that we are trying to get other countries to take ... and no one is accepting them. We also have had a number who have been sent back to countries only to be captured again attacking American troops.

Lawrence seems like a good spot for them ... if you support the closing so heavily ..... just think of all the new jobs it could create.

georgiahawk 5 years, 7 months ago

I am not sure what the problem is, surely the people who started this (and I believe that we should have and should continue to go after all terrorist that are out to destroy our way of life) said to themselves, at one time, "we are going to go after these people and we are going to catch them and when we do, we are going to...??? What was their plan?

For those that think that they will go free after a trial, do you not have faith in our justice system?

For those that think that they will escape, do you not have faith in our prison system?

For those that think they will be let loose in our backyard, are you serious?

For those that were waving the flag of patriotism when we were going after these people, where is your patriotism now that you may be required to sacrifice something (and I question what the sacrifice even is)?

Katara 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says… If on AMerican soil, they are subject to American law…you can't find them not guilty and then expect to ship them “back” to their countries! They will have rights! They can declare amnesty, they can ask to placed on refugee status and while they are waiting, they can help plan, plot, and carry out an even bigger attack on US soil! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ US military bases are generally considered American soil.

Just sayin'.

Oh and you should tone down the hysterics.

Also just sayin'.

LiberalDude 5 years, 7 months ago

"Lawrence seems like a good spot for them … if you support the closing so heavily ….. just think of all the new jobs it could create."

I would have no problem having them in a jail that is in close proximity to where I live. Like many have stated, very, very few people escape from maximum security military prisons. Plus I'd be much more scared if a murder from Kansas was being held in Leavenworth and espcaped than I would of a suspected terrorist from the Middle East. The prisoner from Kansas would know their way around and blend in whereas the suspected terrorist wouldn't.

I just think these people (Republican's like Roberts and Brownback) that are trying to fearmonger by saying we don't want to move the GITMO detainees to the U.S. becuase of safety concerns are being dumb.

grammaddy 5 years, 7 months ago

The U.S. has been holding the mastermind of 9/11 in a prison in Colorado for a few years now and I haven't heard of any attacks there. Their own countries won't take them back so evidently they're not too worried about them. Why would they attack us here when they've made no attempt to attack Gitmo, where they are currently held. It is considered American soil. Let me guess..the terrorists have too much respect for the Castro brothers??? Brownback is a joke as is Roberts. The Republicans only disagree with Obama for disagreement's sake.

Mixolydian 5 years, 7 months ago

Most other recent articles on the subject of moving the detainees to the continental U.S. have headlines like:

"Democrats fail to fund detainee move to US soil."

"Reid: "We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States."

Because this headline mentions Brownback, it's Brownback bashing time and all of the blind partisan hacks come out of the woodwork.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Awesome! Nothing better to do than to dismiss fears and concerns, calling them "hysterics" and taking digs at every corner! Way to show the real truths behind the democratic party!! I totally understand your parties ethics now!!! Thank you for the enlightenment! Again, if you want Gitmo closed, and the terrorists brought to Leavenworth, then perhaps you should move there so that you can house those people in your back yards. Do I have a fear of them being on US soil? Absolutely! And if thats a bad, then I guess it is what it is.......What is the reason that other countries will not take them? Where will they go if they are released and other countries will not take them? And why is it, that there is no other place in the US, that the Government wants to put them, except for Leavenworth?? Riddle me that threaders!!

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Wow...just wow is the only thing that comes to mind right now. I remember watching these threads when BUSHCO was in office and I remember all the regulars on here crying about Bush doing this and that without a plan..blah blah blah, he went to war without a plan thats why we are in this mess..blah blah blah..and now this...taken from this mornings headlines... "Washington — President Barack Obama’s promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison suffered a blow Tuesday when his allies in the Senate said they would refuse to finance the move until the administration delivers a satisfactory plan for what to do with the detainees there."


Doesnt that say that his "allies" said they will refuse to finance until there is a plan......but certainly..lets bring them to Kansas-because the current admin knows what they are doing...right??

madameX 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat,

Read the article again. It says that Leavneworth is one of several places they are considering. Your assertion that Kansas is the only place in the US that they want to put them incorrect.

madameX 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat,

Read the article again. It says that Leavenworth is one of several places they are considering. Your assertion that Kansas is the only place in the US that they want to put them incorrect.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

You are completely right madame! I stand corrected! However, in rereading the article I did pick up another tid bit of information that concerns me greatly.....This business of spending 80 million dollars to create a new facility to house them! This, in an economy that is on shaky ground and people losing jobs, car co going under, banks going under, people being foreclosed on, the list is long and the answer seems to be nowhere in sight. 80 Million dollars would be an ill advised spending spree right now, given the current state of affairs.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Well, interesting reading I found:

"The NIMBY(Not In My Back Yard) Problem: The United States will continue holding a few dozen suspects it intends to put on trial or deems too dangerous to release. But where? A secret study conducted by the Pentagon in 2006 outlined alternative sites within the U.S., including the military facility at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and at Charleston, S.C., according to a former Pentagon official familiar with the details. But congressmen representing those and other districts with military brigs have already vowed to fight the move. "What you have is a NIMBY problem," says Charles Stimson, who served until last year as the Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Detainee Affairs. "I haven't seen one congressman raise his hand and say, 'give them to me'." Even if Capitol Hill could be persuaded to go along with the relocation, Stimson said, extensive work would have to be done on existing military brigs before Guantanamo detainees are housed there. "You can't commingle them with military detainees, so you'd have to set up a separate wing or clear out the facility," he says. The structures would have to be reinforced so they wouldn't be vulnerable to terrorist attacks. "And you would have to address secondary and tertiary [security] concerns within the town, the county and the state."


Let me repeat the last line here: You would HAVE to address secondary and tertiary (security) concerns within the TOWN, COUNTY, and STATE!

Heres the link for the entire story! http://www.newsweek.com/id/168022

Mixolydian 5 years, 7 months ago

So for the record, the vast majority of democrats in the house and senate ( 90-6 today on the Inouye Amdt. No. 1133 ) are Chickenbleeps too?

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

DPL....reread what the newsweek reported...NOBODY wants them here, nobody has volunteered to house them either.

BrianR 5 years, 7 months ago

There is a ranch in Crawford, Texas that could be used as a relocation site. I'm sure there's room.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

Oh diva....

Wrong again.

http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2009/04/23/news/state/21-hardin.txt

Not that it matters. You had your mind made up before you knew anything. Now every time you get a new piece of "news" (that everyone else is already quite aware of) you act like you've found another absolute truth, yet your original faulty position remains the same.

Research, then report. That's the way it's supposed to go.

Shane Garrett 5 years, 7 months ago

taken from the Islamic Revolution, Guards Corps, Message of Revolution. Vol. #1. 1981. "Our Revolution is a totally peculiar revolution one originating from the heart of the nation, and embodied in the call of Allaho Akbar.
"It is the Divine Will which is being, and must ever be carried out through the Revolution: "And it was our Will to favor those who were oppressed and to make them leaders of mankind, to bestow on them a noble heritage and to give them power in the land", says the Holy Qirab, (Al-qasas:75) May Allah help us all to deliver and propagate this message among the deprived of all nationalities and live our lives according to the life-giving Islamic precepts.

This is why Islam is recruiting mostly from U.S. prisions and U.S. low income areas. Anyone notice how many new Islamic centers have been built in low income area in Chicago and in Topeka, Ks.????

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

So Sin...what you are telling me is that the LJWorld is incorrectly reporting that the democrats refused to pass this due to lack of a plan???? Is this right? Because it coincides with exactly what newsweek said?? If this is the case, then we should then report this to LJWorld as Im sure they would be happy to know they have incorrectly reported the information. Is my mind made up about what?? The fact that I dont want them in Kansas?? yeah, call me crazy, but I want to feel safe and I want my family safe. Unless there is a tried and true reason you can show me where this state would benefit and never be put at risk, then yes, my mind will stay made up! I dont ever pretend to know about politics, I think its a dirty game, the democraots always blame republicans and republicans always blame the democrats, meantime, nothing gets accomplished. However, I do know what makes me feel safe and I know what makes me feel my family is safe. If Obama doesnt have a plan in place from A to Z....then you STILL think its a good idea to bring them here?????!!!!!

WhiteDog 5 years, 7 months ago

You know what always makes me feel safe? I run around like Chicken Little with my head cut off posting that the sky is falling while using lots and lots of question marks and exclamation points.

rhd99 5 years, 7 months ago

Well, yah tah tah tah, here is the news flash, sports fans, for all you Bush haters, today is not your day. News reports show that the Senate has passed by a vote of 90-6 a resolution to prohibit detainee transfers from GITMO to the U.S. Sheldon Whitehouse, Tom Harkin, Carl Levin, Patrick Leahy, Jack Reed of Rhode Island & last Dick Durbin all voted no on this measure. Pretty UnAmerican don't you think? Yeah, well phooey to these bozos, to Barack Obama & to all of you who want detainees coming to U.S. shores! Good Bye, you weakest links!

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

Good one, WhiteDog.

And diva (what an appropriate name) -

I'm not even advocating the prisoners be housed in Kansas. I'm not against it, but I'm not pushing for it either. And what a dumb question to pose. Of course no one is advocating for anything without a plan... that's stooooopid. No one has drawn up the plans to move anyone to Leavenworth, so hold your horses and wait to throw that hissy fit later, ok?

I simply engaged you in conversation to point out that you speak of those prisoners as though they are "terrorists" when if fact none have been convicted (or even tried) as such. I engaged you to point out that these are PEOPLE, not dogs in cages as you'd like to treat them in order to gain some false sense of security for yourself and your family.

I engaged you to point out that your fears are irrational. If Al Qaeda wants Kansas, having terrorist sympathizers or cohorts (if that's what they really are, not that we'll know without trying them) in maximum security at Leavenworth won't make their efforts any easier. In order for Al Qaeda to have an advantage in attacking Kansas due to terrorist suspects being at Leavenworth, you'd have to have someone on our side working for them and with them. If the prison guards were to be in cahoots with Al Qaeda, we've got bigger problems to worry about than who is in what prison where.

There is no tried and true reason that anyone could ever give you to show you how this state would benefit from having the prisoners of Gitmo. Last I checked, this move isn't about what's best for Kansas or any other state, but rather what is humane, in line with our Constitution, and best for our nation in the long run. Furthermore, there's no tried and true reason that anyone could ever give to show you how this state would be hurt by the moving of the Gitmo prisoners.

There are no absolute truths, diva.

Lastly, we aren't arguing about whether the Dems aren't ready to fund closing Gitmo without a plan. My last point was an illustration of how little you know of the things on which you speak, i.e.

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

"DPL….reread what the newsweek reported…NOBODY wants them here, nobody has volunteered to house them either."

Which is absolutely false.

And stop playing like you don't play politics. As noted much earlier:

llama726 (Anonymous) says…

ksdivakat…

“I dont care if its a democrat or republican issue, Im so sick of hearing about the left and the right, its ridiculous and its gets old real quick!”

Then, in the same post:

“so that all your liberal loving bleeding hearts can raise and rear them”

So perhaps what you mean to say is you don't play politics WELL.

Shane Garrett 5 years, 7 months ago

What most of you refuse to accept is that Al Qaeda is active and recruiting in your own back yard. It is the silent Jihad. Soon we will be bending to the will of Sharia "civil" law and banking laws. This has been developing for thirty years and perhaps longer. It may well be that prison guards could already be working for Al Qaeda. To have fore knowledge is to be fore warned.

bearded_gnome 5 years, 7 months ago

the testimony of the head of the FBI differs quite directly with what Sinv and LS04 put out as truth. he says that keeping these here on U.S. soil would endanger americans, increase risk for terrorists targeting american communities, and give the terrorists more opportunities for recruitment. who is right...gee I dunno...LS04 and Sinv far-left loons, or the head of the FBI? wow, tough choice.

one of the two was saying nobody is looking at Leavenworth for the Gitmo guests to be housed...direct boldfaced lie and just read the article above this article.
they've been considering leavenworth, a security barricks in SC, and Camp Pendleton.

good job KSDiva.

and I have to laugh, Merrill posts his usual drivvel slandering our troops. in 2006 and 2007 he posted comments calling the foreign terrorists who were blowing up our troops in Iraq "patriots." Merrill cuts-and-pastes from the best sites--NOT!

so, the defense the liberals have on this article is to call "up" "down" and to deny plain truth.

Joe Hyde 5 years, 7 months ago

"Suspected" terrorists. Yeah, right. They've been held in Gitmo for years without trail, denied legal counsel, and they've been mentally and physically abused.

The denial of due process, this abuse alone demands that they be released, sent back to their home country where maybe, someday, they can resume a normal life. If they indeed are enemy combatants then the treatment they've received at the hands of our military (and political leaders)will likely make them hate the United States forever, perhaps leading them to participate in further attacks against us.

But by keeping human beings in cages, years without trial, it is we, the people of the United States, who are committing the worst crime against our nation.

temperance 5 years, 7 months ago

"So for the record, the vast majority of democrats in the house and senate ( 90-6 today on the Inouye Amdt. No. 1133 ) are Chickenbleeps too?"

Yes.

Katara 5 years, 7 months ago

WhiteDog (Anonymous) says…

You know what always makes me feel safe? I run around like Chicken Little with my head cut off posting that the sky is falling while using lots and lots of question marks and exclamation points. ~~~~~~~~~ Me too. And just in case of a terrorist attack, I can always use one of the exclamation points to stab the terrorists if I need to defend myself.

jaywalker 5 years, 7 months ago

"this abuse alone demands that they be released," ......."will likely make them hate the United States forever, perhaps leading them to participate in further attacks against us."

Brilliant. We should definitely release them so they can attack us. Again.

TacoBob 5 years, 7 months ago

beobacther - same old screw, different twist.

Jaylee 5 years, 7 months ago

so brownback thinks obama is wrong for wanting to begin trying detainees, as well as moving US prisoners of an illegitimate war out of another country's sovereign soil to our own, inevitably claiming responsibility for our country's actions?

right......

danemary 5 years, 7 months ago

BROWNBACK OR BROWN-NOSE, VOTED FOR SEBELIUS "BECAUSE SHE IS A FELLOW KANSAN" YET PROCLAIMS HE IS PRO LIFE. THIS HYPOCRITE MUST NOT BE ELECTED AGAIN!!

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Sorry...wrong again sin.....I was not aware that the word "liberal" was solely for the democrats. I believe that there are liberal republicans, just as there are conservative democrats. So my saying to take your liberal loving bleeding heart, has nothing to do with a political party, but rather a mind set. I heard on the news this morning, Robert Mueller the head of the FBI thinks that moving these people to the US would be to dangerous as well, and Harry Reid said it aint gonna happen. So who am I to believe now? the head of the FBI who has more intelligence on this than any newspaper thread can carry, or the opinions of those who may or may not be fully informed? And before you jump me, Im not saying Im fully informed, as quite obviously I am not, however, this is an issue that I believe is important. As to my viewing those at GITMO as "animals in cages" and deserving of a fair trial and "rights" my question would be, whose rights do they have? Do they have US rights, to a fair and speedy trial with a jury of their peers? Comparing Mcveigh, or any other domestic terrorist to these people is above reproach in my book. At least Mcveigh was an American citizen, this is what gave him the "rights" to a fair trial. So the position then becomes, that the US would have to indoctrinate new laws, policies and procedures to deal with those who are being held in the first place. I also heard this morning that the President said that even if the senate didnt give up the funding, hes moving them and closing GITMO anyway. Isnt this the same mind set as it was with the Bush Admin with the war in Iraq? Not to have a comprehensive thought out plan to end the war, and now there is no comprehensive plan to house those who are being held. Interesting comparison. Finally, do I view them as dogs in cages? I dont think that I can honestly answer that question, because the truth is I just dont know. I dont think that any human should be subjected to torture and treated like an animal, however, I also cannot let my guard down when thinking about those suspected terrorists either, so the fact that they are at GITMO is ok with me. And the US houses prisoners in hundreds of prisons right here everyday, and these humans are indeed in a cage, so if its good enough for an American citizen to be "caged up like an animal" then its ok for a non-citizen to be held in one as well. Of course, this is all IMHO

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

And by the way...... "sinverguenza (Anonymous) says Good one, WhiteDog. And diva (what an appropriate name) -"


Im sorry that you both feel the need to give me these little "digs" about my screen name, and my writing style, it must be hard to be so prefect in an imperfect world, and while there are important issues on the table, some would rather be playing word games than to talk about the real issues at hand.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

gnome -

Mueller is right to be concerned. And as it was noted throughout his testimony and the AG's response, whatever path is chosen is going to chosen with the intent of insuring the safety of Americans to the best of our ability.

Thing is, there is no absolute guarantee of safety. If there were, 9/11 wouldn't have happened and we wouldn't be where we are today. Mueller wants to compare terrorist cells to prison gangs. I think that's a lofty comparison, as it's a lot easier to move dope and plot murders than it is to plan a terrorist attack, don't you think?

I take Mueller's opinion on the matter to heart. I also take notice of the fact that he's not got any suggestions for a plan of action, either.

Neither LS04 nor myself said no one was looking at Leavenworth. Perhaps you misread or are mistaking our comments with those of other posters.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

"Sorry…wrong again sin…..I was not aware that the word “liberal” was solely for the democrats."

Who's playing semantics now? You know what you meant when you said "liberal" and so does everyone else. If by backtracking you mean you'd just like to retract your statements, so be it. But don't pretend you didn't say, and mean, what you said.

"whose rights do they have? Comparing Mcveigh, or any other domestic terrorist to these people is above reproach in my book. At least Mcveigh was an American citizen..."

Case solved! You're a bigot. You feel that if someone is born outside the confines of our borders, they don't have a "right" to be treated humanely - which includes being able to face your accusers, know the charges against you and to be able to provide defense. Oh, and to not be kidnapped and tortured. Like I said, case solved. I clearly understand your worldview now and I have to say it makes me sad.

"And the US houses prisoners in hundreds of prisons right here everyday, and these humans are indeed in a cage, so if its good enough for an American citizen to be “caged up like an animal” then its ok for a non-citizen to be held in one as well."

Again, those prisoners have been arrested, charged, provided legal counsel and defense, and have a right to appeal. Comparing the conditions of an American convict to those of the people in Guantanamo is absolutely disgraceful. Americans in prison (in most cases) get three squares a day, tv, exercise equipment, phone rights, visitation rights, etc.

People at Guantanamo were taken from their families and their lives without warning, shipped to Cuba, walk around in shackles (when they aren't being waterboarded or otherwise interrogated), don't know what they're being held for, can't contact families or attorneys, and they certainly don't get to catch "The Late Show" at night.

So while I've more than got issues with our prison system, your comparison still DISGUSTS me.

"I also heard this morning that the President said that even if the senate didnt give up the funding, hes moving them and closing GITMO anyway."

President Obama is expected to give more details about his plans today. Why don't you let him talk about his plan before you accuse him of having the wrong one?

"some would rather be playing word games than to talk about the real issues at hand."

Your command of the English language is of no concern to me. But if you're going to talk in circles, prepare to have someone call you out on it. I'm not playing word games here and I've yet to skirt a single "real issue" you've thrown out there.

And yeah, it's hard being perfect. I wish you only knew.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

"Comparing Mcveigh, or any other domestic terrorist to these people is above reproach in my book. At least Mcveigh was an American citizen, this is what gave him the “rights” to a fair trial."

As an Oklahoman and an American, I have to take great offense at that view. As a young girl I watched a family friend go six feet under because of that piece of trash "American citizen."

Would you say that in the face of the families of the 168? To a mother who had to bury her child?

At least McVeigh was an American citizen? Yeah, you're right. It's totally less tragic and horrific when an American kills babies. That's heavy sarcasm in case you didn't know.

Disgusting.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

"That we treat these alien, non-uniformed combatants with more respect and care than they have a right to is our benevolence, not our duty."

Who are you to determine that a man who's had no charges brought against him, a man for which you don't even know the reasons he is being held, is getting "more respect and care" than he deserves? Seriously? Benevolence IS a moral duty.

America was formed for the benefit of "the people." And it was formed under the notion that anyone can be "the people."

Hence, stating that you only deserve rights once you hold citizenship is against the principles on which this nation was founded. Sure, you only deserve the right to vote in America once you're a citizen. But that doesn't mean you only deserve the right to be treated humanely once you're a citizen. Habeus corpus was established as a right because it's the right way to treat people, not just Americans.

If that weren't true, we wouldn't be renting Gitmo to

The people at Gitmo will never be American citizens. Under your reasoning, that means they should never be allowed rights.

America is great. Count yourself lucky to have been born here. But don't act like being treated humanely is an "American" right.

As I said earlier, ethics and morality exist outside of political policy. This is a human rights issue, not a Dem/Rep/Liberal/Conservative issue.

You would not support the idea of any other government being allowed to kidnap you, hold you without reason or charge, prevent communication with your family or attorney, and hold you indefinitely without trial.

Why support that as the standard for America? America is better than that.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Sorry sin..... "Who's playing semantics now? You know what you meant when you said “liberal” and so does everyone else. If by backtracking you mean you'd just like to retract your statements, so be it. But don't pretend you didn't say, and mean, what you said." How are YOU going to tell me what I think?? you are quite hung up on yourself I see! You are the true blue reason that people look at liberal democrats and think they are kooks! You think your perfect, its your way or no way and anyone who has an opinion that differes from yours is just wrong and stupid. Interesting. Why shouldnt I let Obama say what he is thinking before I judge him?? I suppose if he had a plan, he would have presented it to the senate and they wouldnt have shot down his plan. So either he isnt prepared or hes stupid, you make the call...... My comments about Mcveigh were intended to mean that at least he was an American citizen....those at GITMO are not! How are you going to give a non-citizen of the US the same rights you give the citizens? Who fought and died to have those rights, and you want those same people who want to kill you to have the same rights you do? That makes no sense to me...... No other country wants them, no other country will take them, that cant be disputed...right?? SO what is the US to do? Create laws to accomodate them???

WhiteDog 5 years, 7 months ago

sinverguenza (Anonymous) says…

As to my viewing those at GITMO as “animals in cages” and deserving of a fair trial and “rights” my question would be, whose rights do they have?

Finally, do I view them as dogs in cages? I dont think that I can honestly answer that question, because the truth is I just dont know.


Your repulsive view is no better than what you ascribe to the terrorists. They're human beings and have the rights given to them by virtue of being human beings. Oh, and that pesky little Geneva Convention.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

"You think your perfect, its your way or no way and anyone who has an opinion that differes from yours is just wrong and stupid. Interesting."

And what exactly do you think of my opinion? Hmmm?

You have offered positions, I've countered with legitimate, moral arguments to show you why there's a different way to look at things. You've taken what I've offered and instead of debating it, you've come up with, "You are the true blue reason that people look at liberal democrats and think they are kooks!"

Do you understand how a debate works? You're doing it wrong.

Can you dispute that we should treat people humanely, no matter where they are from? It actually seems that's what you're arguing here - that because the boys in Gitmo fell out of their mothers outside of the U.S., they don't deserve to be treated humanely. That's bigoted, it's shallow and it's wrong.

Don't like my opinion? Consult an ethics textbook and see who's on my side.

Obama is announcing his plans TODAY. So I'm guessing that before we call him unprepared or stupid, we should hear those plans. It's 10:34 in the a.m. He's got the better part of 24 hours left to go. Be patient.

"How are you going to give a non-citizen of the US the same rights you give the citizens? Who fought and died to have those rights, and you want those same people who want to kill you to have the same rights you do?"

As I explained to 75, there are human rights, and there are American rights. I propose we give every human the same human rights. Secondly, you don't have any idea whether the people detained at Gitmo want to kill you or me or anyone else.

Who fought and died? I can answer that for you. Some men fought and died, around two hundred years ago. Some British citizens, in fact. Somehow you deserve to be treated humanely because of what those men did, but other humans don't? Your worth as a human being is not determined by where your mother got knocked up and popped you out. Being an American doesn't make you special, and guess what? You didn't have anything to do with being an American in the first place. That decision was made for you, just as that decision was made for the men at Guantanamo. Don't you see why we can't just determine how we treat people based on where their mother's birthed them?

"No other country wants them, no other country will take them, that cant be disputed…right?? SO what is the US to do? Create laws to accomodate them???"

Where is your information coming from? Show me the facts on how "no other country will take them." The U.S. doesn't have to create laws to accommodate the people at Gitmo. All the U.S. has to do is stop using foreign land to circumvent the laws we already have in place.

You do understand why we're renting Gitmo in the first place, right?

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

And I'd like to point out that the quote WhiteDog cited was not from me, but from ksdivakat.

I would prefer that people not get the impression I'm a bigot as a result of misplaced attribution.

I completely and absolutely disagree with the view she presented and completely and absolutely agree with what WhiteDog said, "They're human beings and have the rights given to them by virtue of being human beings. Oh, and that pesky little Geneva Convention."

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Sin... "No other country wants them, no other country will take them, that cant be disputed…right?? SO what is the US to do? Create laws to accomodate them???”" Pay attention to what Robert Mueller said, those were his words and not mine. Furthermore, show me one post I posted where I said they should be treated inhumanly, or tortured or even mistreated?? there isnt one, because I never said that. My point all along has not changed, they are not US citizens, they do not qualify for the same constituational rights that US citizens do, and no, those who fought and died in war, did not do that for the rest of the world, they did that for the good ole US of A. Now, how will you deal with these people legally, if they come to the US? And again, if ah ah ah ah obama had a plan, why didnt he present that plan to HIS senate yesterday?? Your telling me that from yesterday to today he has suddenly come up with a comprehensive plan? ANd by the way, hes already had his little chat, so you should know, what is the plan? And oh the funniest one of all....I am a bigot!!! ROTFLMAO...that is so ridiculous that it doesnt even warrant a response from me. I think you guys have it backwards, you want to coddle the terrorist and kill the babies.....

BrianR 5 years, 7 months ago

If the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to these guys, it doesn't apply to anyone. Imprisoning someone offshore to circumvent the law is not acceptable American behavior.

WhiteDog 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says… (and lookee! I got the attribution right this time)

My point all along has not changed, they are not US citizens, they do not qualify for the same constituational rights that US citizens do,


You do realize that the Supreme Court of the United States of America disagreed with that, right?

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat says...

"My point all along has not changed, they are not US citizens, they do not qualify for the same constituational rights that US citizens do"

Geneva Convention. Article 3. Look it up. Seriously.

Check out bigotry while you're googling, too. Turns out, believing that people should be treated differently based on their national origin is BIGOTRY.

Well folks, I did my part. Hopefully she allows her children to be taught love and respect for humans, even if she refuses to learn it herself.

It's a sad world.

Flap Doodle 5 years, 7 months ago

Worth repeating. “28 March 2009 at 6:40 p.m. beobachter (Anonymous) says… …Ok, I'm done, you don't need to ban my account, I won't be back.”

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Sin...I seriously think you are either old and senile or just plain ignorant. I never said they should be treated differently, I said they are not subject to the laws of the United States guaranteed under the constitution! Where have you been for 2 days that this has been going on?? And I asked, what is Obamas plan?? hes been on TV now, what is the plan?? Saying that someone does not qualify for the same rights as US citizens is NOT a bigot! I know you would like for it to be, but that just isnt so. By the way, you may want to readdress that perfect thing, you are far from it, my far-left friend, and not that I need to, but just as an FYI, my family is extremely diverse...how about yours? If these people are brought to the US, they are NOT subject to the laws of the US, they are NOT protected by the laws of the US and they are NOT entitles to the US constitution. Big difference between US federal law, and the Geneva CO. guide lines now isnt there????

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

Like I said, I tried.

Sure hope her family members are all U.S. citizens. Mine aren't.

temperance 5 years, 7 months ago

“My point all along has not changed, they are not US citizens, they do not qualify for the same constituational [sic] rights that US citizens do”

WhiteDog beat me to the point, but it’s worth repeating. The Supreme Court’s ruling last year (Boumediene v. Bush) addressed this exact issue.

“Petitioners have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. They are not barred from seeking the writ or invoking the Suspension Clause’s protections because they have been designated as enemy combatants or because of their presence at Guantanamo.” http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-1195.ZS.html

ksdivakat is either lying or willfully ignorant.

sinverguenza 5 years, 7 months ago

I had completely forgotten about that case, temperance and WhiteDog.

Thanks for pointing it out. Although I'm making moral arguments, not legal arguments, it's good to know that the Supreme Court agrees!

Shane Garrett 5 years, 7 months ago

"Part of what we don't want is them be put in prisons in the United States," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said Tuesday, before saying he was open to changing his position. "We don't want them around the United States."

In news conferences, speeches and debates this week, lawmakers from both parties, as well as the director of the FBI, have sounded alarms about placing detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in U.S. federal prisons, where they could launch riots, hatch radical plots or somehow be released among the populace.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Ahhh now logic has joined your bandwagon! Kudos to you for recruiting and spreading your venom and vile.... To recap, Temperence siting 1 paragraph out of a 2000 page document holds no water here. Secondly, I believe I have been called,a bigot, a liar, which this one cracks me up! What am I lying about? Oh I know, I wrote the constitution and I also wrote the Supreme court ruling so I must be lying, no other explaination. At the end of the day today, your beloved democratic party shot your ah ah ah ah ah President down swiftfully and totally....Now that sends a great message. Again, Hes been on TV, hes presented the plan, what is it? Tell me the comprehensive plan so that I can research it and ponder it, and if its comprehensive, then I can change my mind. The difference between you and I is that I can admit when Im wrong, I can also disagree with people without calling them names or belittling them, somthing the left doesnt seem to be able to do. I did indeed call Sin old and senile, only after several personal attacks, so yeah, Im human, sue me! I used to think that there was such a thing as good democrats and good republicans, but with this thread there has been no positive input by any of you who stake claim as a democrat. Im so glad that I got on this thread, as I am a registered independent and now, after this, there is no way I would EVER associate myself with the democratic party, its a waste of time. And if I see a republican on another thread calling names and belittling then I will say the same to them. Its ridiculous that with all your cowardly cries to free the terrorists, rehabilitate them, bring them to America to live in the land of the free so that they are free to plan and plot and train to kill you. However, your opinions differ very much with what the Director of the FBI said. But I know, I know, you know more then the FBI and you have more intelligence, blah blah blah.....just bring em over already and allow them to go willy nelly on the US, cause you guys aint gonna be happy until that happens.

WhiteDog 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Temperence siting 1 paragraph out of a 2000 page document holds no water here.


Really? That's your whole rebuttal to the Supreme Court ruling? It's too long for you to read?

Well, OK then.

temperance 5 years, 7 months ago

"To recap, Temperence [sic] siting [sic] 1 paragraph out of a 2000 page document holds no water here."

The decision syllabus is 7 pages and the Opinion is 70 pages. Stop making things up, liar. It ruin your credibility in the same way calling people "senile" or "kooks" does. Learn to argue like an adult (and explore "spell check" while you're at it).

WhiteDog 5 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat (Anonymous) says…

Its ridiculous that with all your cowardly cries to free the terrorists, rehabilitate them, bring them to America to live in the land of the free so that they are free to plan and plot and train to kill you. However, your opinions differ very much with what the Director of the FBI said. But I know, I know, you know more then the FBI and you have more intelligence, blah blah blah…..just bring em over already and allow them to go willy nelly on the US, cause you guys aint gonna be happy until that happens.


Wait a minute here. You really think we're all saying to bring them here and set them up in a nice condo somewhere in Boca? Who's saying anything about freeing actual terrorists?

And you know, you seem to think you know more than the Supreme Court does. I think the Supreme Court trumps your FBI guy. You know, blah, blah, blah and all that.

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

Awesome!!! have a wonderful evening gentlemen!!!! LOL

Katara 5 years, 7 months ago

The spirit of nonpartisanship that ksdivakat displays is absolutely amazing.

local_support 5 years, 7 months ago

"Many Americans have had concerns about terrorists coming into our communities."

-Harry Reid earlier today

Well by that reasoning all prisons should be located on self-contained man made islands somewhere in the Pacific Ocean.

Clearly inmates are NOT members of the community. They won't be at your local church picnic or janitors at your schools. Lock them up 23 hours a day in isolation so they can't radicalize the rest of the prison population and treat them humanly. (As humanly as being in isolation can be)

THEY ARE CRIMINALS, LOCK THEM UP IN SUPER-MAX PRISONS. NOT SOME TORTURE FACILITY 90 MILES AWAY FROM OUR COAST.

Slippery slope people...Cheney's greasing it, thank god that administration is out of power.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.