Terrorism researchers say Republican security concerns are unfounded.
Posted on 02/17/2009 9:13:35 AM PST by Zakeet
Party members in Congress introduce legislation seeking to prevent inmates from being held near their electorates
Republicans in at least six states are seeking to block the White House from transferring Guantánamo Bay detainees to their districts, in what critics call an effort to stymie Barack Obama's efforts to close the prison.
Congressional Republicans have introduced bills that would bar the government from moving any of the 250 inmates to some of the most prominent military and civilian detention centres in the US, including a "supermax" high-security federal prison in Florence, Colorado, which holds at least 16 convicted international terrorists, and a South Carolina naval brig that holds the only enemy combatant jailed in America.
Obama, who signed an executive order during his first week as president to shut the six-year-old facility, has yet to release plans for the suspected terrorists who remain there. Critics say the pre-emptive legislation and media campaigns from Republicans – and at least one Democrat – are intended to defend George Bush's legacy against those who claim the prison has damaged America's standing in the world and has become a recruiting symbol for terrorists.
Last week, 20 Texas Republicans sent a letter to Obama urging him not to send Guantánamo detainees to their state. Sam Brownback, the Kansas senator, aims to keep detainees out of a military prison there, and an Arizona Republican has filed legislation that would prevent detainees from being shipped to federal civilian or military prisons.
Guantánamo critics say the Republican opposition is based on flawed assumptions about the capacity of the US criminal justice system to securely handle the suspected terrorists, and is a proxy for broad opposition to the Guantánamo closure.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Terrorism researchers say Republican security concerns are unfounded.
“Guantánamo critics say the Republican opposition is based on flawed assumptions about the capacity of the US criminal justice system to securely handle the suspected terrorists, and is a proxy for broad opposition to the Guantánamo closure.”
Simple. Use some of those Infrastructure stimulus funds to build prisons in Connecticut, Pennsy, New Jersey, New York, Mass, and Maine.
I am sure Senator Collins and Snowe would welcome them with open arms.
This story gives me the chills. Michigan’s idiot governor is expected to release thousands of prisoners because of the costs and we’ve already got prisons sitting empty. The state’s budget was the first in the country to hit the toilet; here’s a prime opportunity for that nitwit to approach the feds. She’ll spin it as “investments” by the feds in MI if they’d pay to house terrorists here.
I think the American people should vote to say where the terrorist go..I pick San Francisco give them to Nancy..Or maybe Harry he lives in the desert so that would be the perfect place for them they are use to the heat,,
I call our governor “The Depressionator”. I really need to open up photoshop and come up with something to illustrate it with.
Perhaps the Lincoln Bedroom?
Since Millstone seems to love them so much.
It's the big target painted on the facility that takes them. It's the radicals who will try to “free” the inmates that has me somewhat leery of taking them. If a bombing or some such would hit a maximum security prison — say the one in Colorado, who else would escape? THOSE are the questions for which we should get answers before proceeding, but like everything else in government these days, we'll proceed before knowing what the ultimate cost is. It may be higher than US citizens are willing to pay.
Because they don't want them either.
If “having morals” is “obstructionism” then baby, I’m an obstructionist!
Good for them. Didn’t Murtha offer to take them?
What was that movie that came out years ago, it was sort of a half-comedy yet with serious undertones? The Feds were going to relocate a bunch of refugees into Idaho, and the governour of the state calls up the Guard to prevent it, and ends up being joined by North Dakota and Montana?
Good idea! You wanted ‘em, you take ‘em.
Murtha offered to take them but there are strings attached. Like the fact that his district doesn’t have maximum security prisons to hold them in. In other words, “Give me billions to build a prison and I’ll take em.”
Moving the terrorists to prisons on the mainland would only prove that the Democrat desire to close Gitmo doesn’t stem from a serious belief that the terrorists held there are being mistreated, but only proves that Barry wants to close it for symbolism only.
It won’t be long before the libtards who want them here figure out that they were better of at Gitmo. About that time they’ll move on to wanting them in halfway houses.
Paul Begala said recently that those who didn’t support the stimulus shouldn’t accept stimulus funds for their state.
Where is he now, saying those who oppose closing Gitmo should refuse to accept any prisoners?
Where is he now, saying those who approve should invite the government to send the prisoners to their home states?
(crickets)
I’d like to make an offer to the 0bama Administration.
Please send the detainees to Texas. There are a number of us civilians who will be happy to watch them for you.
I’ll take the first watch. Whoever is relieving me for the second watch, bring a book. There won’t be much for you to do.
Saw terrorist work up close and personal at Khobar Towers. Wouldn’t mind a little payback.
Your screen name cause me to think of this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.