Nutjob Conservatives Got it Right on Gitmo
December 28, 2008
EUROPEAN COUNTRIES MAY TAKE DETAINEES
Washington Post
May 12, 2009
GERMANY REJECTS GUANTANAMO INMATES
Agence France Presse
Conservatives Got it Right
"European Countries May Take Detainees". That’s how the hopeful December, 2008 Washington Post article described the bright promise at the dawn of the Obama administration. Liberals everywhere were elated at the prospect of genuine HOPE that things would finally CHANGE! On the eve of the inauguration of this charismatic and likable new president, liberals believed we would finally get some help and cooperation from our European allies. (Of course all the while denying the ample help and cooperation they gave during the Bush years).
After Obama’s election, giddy men in high-level government positions on the European Left were promising to help us unload the "Guantanamo Concentration Camp" (as they call the prison) of "detainees" (as they call the terrorists).
But conservatives had always said that Obama’s charisma and attractiveness were not going to make countries suddenly go against their own interests. Conservatives believed that Europe would never take a substantial number of the Gitmo prisoners.
For this belief, conservatives were ridiculed in the media as yutzes who wouldn’t know their heads from a hole in the wall. It was said that conservatives just didn’t understand how touchy the rest of the world was. We didn’t understand that their feelings could be so easily hurt that they would hold back vital help in a time of great need. We simply didn’t understand that having a pigheaded president who did what he thought was right, regardless of who agreed, was so offensive to the rest of the world that they would never again cooperate with us on anything.
We were told that if only we could elect a president who had empathy for other countries, then things could finally start to CHANGE . We had to elect a president who understood the great offenses America has committed against all the nations of the world. Someone who would even own up to and apologize for those offenses. We were told if we could elect someone like that, then things would get better. The world would begin to cooperate.
Well, we were told wrong. Not the first time either! It turns out that once again, conservatives got it right. Conservatives displayed an accurate understanding of the real world. The world has not become more cooperative – even in the face of genuine apologies and contrition on the part of our new president. Obama has personally apologized to Europe for America’s alleged arrogance and derision. Yet even in the face of that, France has decided to take just one Gitmo terrorist off our hands. Germany which originally promised to take nine, now says Nein to Nine ! They are taking none. And it’s not just the Europeans who aren’t helping – Obama, despite his charms can’t even get his own Democratic congress to help out! Congress has voted NO to funding the closing of Gitmo!
In light of the fact that Europe, and specifically Germany, have decided not to help empty Guantanamo Bay of terrorists (sorry, we should say "detainees" – "terrorists" is so demeaning), it’s instructive to look back on what was said then. Conservatives always knew that not only would Europeans not take Gitmo terrorists, neither would Americans! And that’s exactly what has happened. Germany has said no, France has said no and the US CONGRESS has said NO! And that’s NO to a charming president whom everyone loves!
Don’t we now owe George Bush an apology for saying Europe didn’t help us because he was so unlikable ? It turns out they were using his low popularity ratings as the excuse for not taking terrorists. The real reason was that they are cowards who had concerns about their own security. Fearing that they would antagonize Muslim fundamentalists in their own countries and possibly prompt terror attacks against them.Â
Here are some juicy excerpts from the Washington Post reporting that European leaders were giddy about helping the new president rid the world of this embarrassing problem. And below that is an article from Agence France Presse detailing the German No. Read this in light of hindsight. Read this knowing that France has agreed to take just one terrorists, Germany – NONE, and for all its big talk – Portugal still none. And ask yourself… who got it right? Conservatives who said Europe would provide no substantial help no matter who was president? Or Liberals who said the only reason Europe wasn’t taking them was because they hated Bush so much.
WHO GOT IT RIGHT?
December 28, 2008
Washington Post
EUROPEAN COUNTRIES MAY TAKE DETAINEES
European nations have begun intensive discussions both within and among their governments on whether to resettle detainees from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as a significant overture to the incoming Obama administration, according to senior European officials and U.S. diplomats.
The willingness to consider accepting prisoners who cannot be returned to their home countries, because of fears they may be tortured there, represents a major change in attitude on the part of European governments. Repeated requests from the Bush administration that European allies accept some Guantanamo Bay detainees received only refusals.
(THIS is what we were told – that Europe would not take them as long as Bush was president. This was what Conservatives knew would be proven to be a lie as soon as Obama took office) .
The Bush administration "produced the problem," Karsten Voigt, coordinator of German-American cooperation at the German Foreign Ministry, said in a telephone interview. "With Obama, the difference is that he tries to solve it."
(Voigt is saying that since Bush "produced the problem" Germany would not help. He then indicated that Obama was different… Obama was trying to solve the problem and therefore Germany would help. But Germany DID NOT HELP! Germany took ZERO prisoners… just as conservatives predicted they would do).
The Portuguese government pushed what had been private discussions in Europe into the open this month when Foreign Minister LuÃs Amado brought up the issue in a letter to his counterparts in other countries. "The time has come for the European Union to step forward," he wrote. "As a matter of principle and coherence, we should send a clear signal of our willingness to help the U.S. government in that regard, namely through the resettlement of detainees. As far as the Portuguese government is concerned, we will be available to participate."
(So far, despite their big talk, the Portugese government has not yet taken any prisoners).
Amado said, "I believe the new administration will have the conditions to create a new dynamic of cooperation," Amado said. He noted that when he first raised the issue of Guantanamo Bay at a meeting of E.U. foreign ministers about seven months ago, some countries resisted assisting the Bush administration.
(Remember, this article was published Dec. 23, 2008. France has agreed to take ONE prisoner, Germany NONE and still Portugal – NONE! Amado said it was because "some countries resisted assisting the Bush administration." Well now, they’re ALL resisting assisting the Obama administration)!
"I assume the new administration will have someone on a plane to Europe within minutes of Obama being sworn in," said Sarah E. Mendelson, director of the Human Rights and Security Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the author of a report on closing Guantanamo Bay.
(WISHFUL THINKING)!
Now, here’s the article from May 12, 2009 showing what ACTUALLY happened:
May 12, 2009
Agence France Presse
GERMANY REJECTS GUANTANAMO INMATES
Citing security concerns, Germany has reversed a decision to take in nine Chinese detained at Guantanamo Bay. Officials in some German federal states also made U-turns and now oppose the inmates’ resettlement , AFP reported.
The interior minister of Bavaria, Joachim Herrmann, said "no" to the move as he told German media Bild that security intelligence showed seven of the nine Uygurs – Muslims from Northwest China’s Xinjiang autonomous region – had received training from the East Turkestan Islamic Movement and had contacts with militant Islamist organizations.
"We have no interest in exposing ourselves to additional risk," Holger Hoevelmann, interior minister of Germany’s Saxony-Anhalt state, told the Frankfurter Rundschau daily newspaper.
In case you’re missing what happened here… Germany NEVER had any intention of taking Guantanamo prisoners, but while Bush was still president they could pretend and blame their decision on him. They could tell the world "we won’t take them because George Bush caused this problem and we refuse to help him out of it." When the reality all the while was they wouldn’t take them because they understood the security risk they posed.
Conservatives knew this all along and liberals didn’t. Conservatives had a much better grasp on reality here than liberals did.
We got it right because “WE” understand the way the world actually works. Those on the left(at least the truly well meanig ones)see rainbows,cotton candy clouds,and unicorns through their rose colored glasses.
rainbows, cotton candy clouds, and unicorns? If all the rain drops were lemon drops and gum drops… right Anti-lib?
Naw, you conservatives are too intelligent for us. You knew that locking up suspected terrorists on a US base in Cuba would most definitely solve all our problems. Further, what does Europe have to do with these detainees? It’s not their problem, we took them and interned them, so we should be the ones to deal with them. I don’t know what Bush or Obama are thinking on this one. Obviously Bush tried, Obama tried, so, how are you right, exactly? When did you say, because Bush failed you will fail too? I am curious about that. Obviously you don’t know how the world works, or else you wouldn’t have tried in the first place…
I have already voiced my opinion on this subject a couple times, but its always good to remind everyone. Gitmo is a disaster. We held, without trial, over 300 people, many of whom have been found to have very minimal roles in the grand scheme of things. We have held them for 7 years now. If Bush, and you conservatives with your big brains, had seen to it that these “terrorists” were legally convicted of something, anything, other than “they are terrorists, we got ‘em in Afghanistan.” And also, with all of this torture data coming to light, it seems less and less likely that their cases can be heard because you can’t forcibly obtain a testimony. Great we are in a pickle now. But you conservatives saw that coming, right? So how do we get out of it, thats what I want to know. Can you write your next article about that? What do we do with the Gitmo detainees? (Personally, again, I vote for tracking devises implanted within them and we follow them…)
Further, I pose to you all the ticking time bomb dilemma.
We have captured suspect A. We have sufficient intel to reasonably assume there is a bomb about to go off in the city causing mass casualties. He knows where the bomb is. We have three choices, Keep searching, bribe him or beat it out of him (torture). We view torture as morally wrong, and we view negotiation with terrorists as wrong (negating the middle man scenario). Which do you choose?
I want to take this line-by-line, but it would take forever! So let me just take a few!
You say what I often hear repeated by the Left like a mantra: “GITMO IS A DISASTER”. But why? I’m not seeing the disaster. I hear you guys telling us it’s one, but I’m not seeing the evidence. Where’s the evidence on that? We haven’t suffered another attack since putting them there. That would seem to indicate success!
You mock locking them up at Gitmo, yet even your beloved president Obama can’t seem to figure out what else to do with them! The Europeans (as noted in this article) promised to take a substantial number off our hands… now they’ve all gone back on those promises because guess what? They realized they didn’t want them either! So what would you do with them? And I mean what would you do with them that would actually work in the real world? The world where even DEMOCRATS VOTED NOT TO FUND THEIR RELEASE!! From my vantage point – it looks like everybody – despite all their talk – when you get right down to it – supports leaving them right where they are.
Oh and by the way, they couldn’t have been convicted of anything in our run-of-the-mill civilian courts from the start. That’s why they were sent to Guantanamo in the first place.
On your ticking time bomb dilemma – I would choose torture. But I’d accept enhanced interrogation. At least I would have until Obama revealed the big secret that we DON’T ACTUALLY HURT ANYBODY! So since that’s out – I guess we’ll have to go back to REAL torture.
Jonathan,
Likewise I would like to take this line-by-line.
I was waiting for you to make the “there hasn’t been an attack since putting them there” argument. I fear you cannot comprehend the stupidity of that argument.
Aside from Bali, London, Spain, and the many other attacks and attempts that have occurred since our illegal internment of suspected terrorists, I ask you this, why would a terrorist have to travel, plan, and execute a operation in the United States when there are US troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why go to the enemy, when the enemy is sitting on your street corner? I believe the total death count surpassed Sept 11, and if you add up civilian casualties, social instability, and other factors, how can you label this a success?
I am not saying all of this is directly related to 200 detainees, but what I am saying is that you can’t say extraditing them to Cuba and holding them indefinitely is any help either. And of course my beloved B. Hussein Obama doesn’t know what to do with them! I don’t blame him for that though. I believe we will just have to put them in prison here in the good ol’ US of A, oh, but we gotta prove they did something wrong first. Every single one of them. And then we have prove that you, the tax payer, want to pay to keep them alive. And yea, that’s the easy solution. Let them rot, we have a 100 year lease on Gitmo, and chances are they’ll be dead before that expires. But is that right? That doesn’t sound very American to me.
” Oh and by the way, they couldn’t have been convicted of anything in our run-of-the-mill civilian courts from the start. That’s why they were sent to Guantanamo in the first place.” Then what the hell are they doing in Guantanamo? If they are innocent, and couldn’t be charged, then we have gone into a country, arrested innocent people, taken them from their country, and then forgotten about them… great.
We waterboarded people, we have already determined that a) water boarding doesn’t work, and b) classified it as torture (as it was used on our own troops in Korea). Just like how we didn’t charge the Nazis for killing foreign civilians because we had fire bombed Dresden and other cities with the express intent to kill civilians, we can’t exactly say they are criminals for killing civilians when we are going around “accidentally” killing civilians in Iraq.