Obama vindicates Bush
OBAMA’S GITMO IN AFGHANISTAN TO CONTINUE, AND EXPAND OPERATIONS *
THE TRACK RECORD AND COMMON SENSE INFORMS THOUGHTFUL PEOPLE of the danger of bringing Islamic radicals and terrorists to American prisons.
They have a TENDENCY TO MULTIPLY like cockroaches.
News Item: NY Post 5.22.09
“They were like a million other petty criminals — until they embraced radical Islam behind bars, launching a terrifying march to a planned mass murder that ended only when authorities sabotaged their sinister plot.”
Tell Mr. Obama, and Pelosi and Feinstein to continue housing these animals in Cuba, and in Afghanistan. Did you know Mr. Obama has a prison in Afghanistan just like Gitmo, filled with terrorists who are not covered by the Geneva Conventions, according to Mr. Obama’s AG, Mr. Holder?
The only difference is Obama imprisons three times as many— about 670 detainees — indefinitely in Afghanistan, and he has no intention of closing that facility or releasing those murderers.
Is the Afghanistan prison a recruiting tool for terrorists Mr. Obama?
Hypocrisy? Oh yes, and much more…READ HERE from a radical Left publication:
* Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed “Obama’s Guantanamo.”
PS: President Clinton initiated rendition through the CIA in the 90s because he didn’t want to step up and interrogate terrorists himself. So he sent them to Egypt. If you know anything about Egyptian ‘interrogation,’ you know it’s real torture, the kind of treatment many do not survive. Even if the Egyptians got useful intelligence, which is questionable, the U.S. could never be fully confident the Egyptians would fully disclose it.
Had Mr. Clinton had the balls to interrogate terrorists, would we have obtained intelligence allowing the prevention of 9/11? Pure speculation of course, but an interesting question nonetheless.
OBAMA IN BUSH CLOTHING by Charles Krauthammer
If hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue, then the flip-flops on previously denounced anti-terror measures are the homage that Barack Obama pays to George Bush. Within 125 days, Obama has adopted with only minor modifications huge swaths of the entire, allegedly lawless Bush program.
Krauthammer hammers the point home:
Observers of all political stripes are stunned by how much of the Bush national security agenda is being adopted by this new Democratic government. Victor Davis Hanson (National Review) offers a partial list: “The Patriot Act, wiretaps, e-mail intercepts, military tribunals, Predator drone attacks, Iraq (i.e., slowing the withdrawal), Afghanistan (i.e., the surge) — and now Guantanamo.”
Jack Goldsmith (The New Republic) adds: rendition — turning over terrorists seized abroad to foreign countries; state secrets — claiming them in court to quash legal proceedings on rendition and other erstwhile barbarisms; and the denial of habeas corpus — to detainees in Afghanistan’s Bagram prison, indistinguishable logically and morally from Guantanamo.
What does it all mean? Democratic hypocrisy and demagoguery? Sure, but in Washington, opportunism and cynicism are hardly news.