Posted on 12/26/2010 10:05:27 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Gibbs: indefinite detention of terrorists regrettable
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Sunday that it was unfortunate that some terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay need to be held indefinitely without trial.
"Some would be tried in federal courts, as we've seen done in the past. Some would be tried in military commissions, likely spending the rest of their lives in a maximum security prison that nobody, including terrorists, have ever escaped from. Some, regrettably, will have to be indefinitely detained," Gibbs said on CNN's "State of the Union" as he described Obama's beleaguered plan for closing Guantanamo.
The press secretary quickly sought to clarify his comments by adding, "I say 'regrettably' not because it's a bad thing for--necessarily for them in terms of the fact that they're very dangerous people and we have to make sure that even if we can't prosecute them, we're not putting them back out on the battlefield."
With Obama now almost a year overdue on his promise to close Guantanamo, Gibbs offered no prediction that the president's plan would come to fruition anytime soon. "It's certainly not going to close in the next month," Gibbs said. "I think it's going to be a while."
Gibbs's comments came following an exchange in which CNN's Candy Crowley suggested that the president had the authority to close Guantanamo but had not. Gibbs replied by noting that legislation passed by Congress bars bringing Guantanamo prisoners to the U.S. "There are prohibitions, legislatively, on the transfer," he noted.
Gibbs did not note that all the restrictions were signed into law by Obama, albeit as part of broader legislation. Another measure further limiting Obama's power to move prisoners out of Guantanamo was passed by Congress last week and is awaiting his signature or veto.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Where is the liberal outrage?!!
At the behest of a host of companies — from Kraft Food and Pepsi to some of the nation’s largest banks — a little-known office of the Treasury Department has granted nearly 10,000 licenses for deals involving countries that have been cast into economic purgatory, beyond the reach of American business.
Most of the licenses were approved under a decade-old law mandating that agricultural and medical humanitarian aid be exempted from sanctions. But the law, pushed by the farm lobby and other industry groups, was written so broadly that allowable humanitarian aid has included cigarettes, Wrigley’s gum, Louisiana hot sauce, weight-loss remedies, body-building supplements and sports rehabilitation equipment sold to the institute that trains Iran’s Olympic athletes.
Hundreds of other licenses were approved because they passed a litmus test: They were deemed to serve American foreign policy goals. And many clearly do, among them deals to provide famine relief in North Korea or to improve Internet connections — and nurture democracy — in Iran. But the examination also found cases in which the foreign-policy benefits were considerably less clear.
In one instance, an American company was permitted to bid on a pipeline job that would have helped Iran sell natural gas to Europe, even though the United States opposes such projects. Several other American businesses were permitted to deal with foreign companies believed to be involved in terrorism or weapons proliferation. In one such case, involving equipment bought by a medical waste disposal plant in Hawaii, the government was preparing to deny the license until an influential politician intervened.
In an interview, the Obama administration’s point man on sanctions, Stuart A. Levey, said that focusing on the exceptions “misses the forest for the trees.” Indeed, the exceptions represent only a small counterweight to the overall force of America’s trade sanctions, which are among the toughest in the world. Now they are particularly focused on Iran, where on top of a broad embargo that prohibits most trade, the United States and its allies this year adopted a new round of sanctions that have effectively shut Iran off from much of the international financial system.
“No one can doubt that we are serious about this,” Mr. Levey said.
But as the administration tries to press Iran even harder to abandon its nuclear program — officials this week announced several new sanctions measures — some diplomats and foreign affairs experts worry that by allowing the sale of even small-ticket items with no military application, the United States muddies its moral and diplomatic authority.
“It’s not a bad thing to grant exceptions if it represents a conscious policy decision to give countries an incentive,” said Stuart Eizenstat, who oversaw sanctions policy for the Clinton administration when the humanitarian-aid law was passed. “But when you create loopholes like this that you can drive a Mack truck through, you are giving countries something for nothing, and they just laugh in their teeth. I think there have been abuses.”
What’s more, in countries like Iran where elements of the government have assumed control over large portions of the economy, it is increasingly difficult to separate exceptions that help the people from those that enrich the state. Indeed, records show that the United States has approved the sale of luxury food items to chain stores owned by blacklisted banks, despite requirements that potential purchasers be scrutinized for just such connections.
Enforcement of America’s sanctions rests with Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which can make exceptions with guidance from the State Department. The Treasury office resisted disclosing information about the licenses, but after The Times filed a federal Freedom of Information lawsuit, the government agreed to turn over a list of companies granted exceptions and, in a little more than 100 cases, underlying files explaining the nature and details of the deals. The process took three years, and the government heavily redacted many documents, saying they contained trade secrets and personal information. Still, the files offer a snapshot — albeit a piecemeal one — of a system that at times appears out of sync with its own licensing policies and America’s goals abroad.
In some cases, licensing rules failed to keep pace with changing diplomatic circumstances. For instance, American companies were able to import cheap blouses and raw material for steel from North Korea because restrictions loosened when that government promised to renounce its nuclear weapons program and were not recalibrated after the agreement fell apart.
Regrettable, yet necessary.
This is what happens when you cater to left-wing nuts and let them take over your party. Obama and his people know (and probably knew during the campaign) that much of what they promised the Cindy Sheehan types would never be enacted.
Quinn's first law; Liberalism ALWAYS generates the exact opposite of it's stated intent.
They are devoid of character; hence will never admit defeat.
Bush was right; again.
Don’t take prisoners and you won’t have a Guantanmino detention center.
The Obama administration should be put on trial at the Hague. Such a blatant violation of human rights.
The lib outrage will be front and center day 2 of the next administration.
The fundamental principal of liberalism is hypocrisy.
We are very resilient to still be surviving as a nation.
The Obama administration should be put on trial at the Hague. Such a blatant violation of human rights.
9 posted on Sunday, December 26, 2010 12:25:18 PM by Brilliant
No BO and his co-conspirators should be put on trial in State Courts throughout the US for the crimes committed by the BO regime in the US.
Contact your congressman, senators, County Sheriff, DA, State Legislators, Governor, and County Grand Jury Foreman and demand that they indict, prosecute, convict and imprison BO and all his local co-conspirators for TSA Sexual Assaults, Voter Fraud, Identity Theft, Illegal Foreign Campaign Contributions, Poisoning of the Gulf of Mexico, Embezzlement of Government funds etc.
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-to-start-and-lead-citizens-grand.html
http://dewdropwarriors.blogspot.com/2009_05_01_archive.html
Being laundered through Joe Scarbourough and directed at Bush.
Should be “The corrupt members of the current regime in the White House that should be serving in the Gitmo country club are not, and that is truly regrettable.”
But someday....! Perhaps there will be justice in the next conservative administration!
Its not regretable. Its called serving a life sentence.
Should be “The corrupt members of the current regime in the White House that should be serving in the Gitmo country club are not, and that is truly regrettable.”
16 posted on Sunday, December 26, 2010 12:55:45 PM by pillut48
Why in the world to these incompetent, effing, WH liberals insist upon apologizing for doing the right thing? Stupid ***ers.
Regrettable only because they have been executed.
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.