The President orders top terrorist suspects to Gitmo from CIA ‘secret prisons’

Posted by: ST on September 6, 2006 at 4:11 pm

Michelle’s got blanket coverage of the press conference the President held today.

Mario Loyola at NRO thinks the President’s announcement is a big win for him, and huge loss for Dems:

The President just pulled one of the best maneuvers of his entire presidency. By transferring most major Al Qaeda terrorists to Guantanamo, and simultaneously sending Congress a bill to rescue the Military Commissions from the Supreme Court’s ruling Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the President spectacularly ambushed the Democrats on terrain they fondly thought their own. Now Democrats who oppose (and who have vociferously opposed) the Military Commissions will in effect be opposing the prosecution of the terrorists who planned and launched the attacks of September 11 for war crimes.

And if that were not enough, the President also frontally attacked the Hamdan ruling’s potentially chilling effect on CIA extraordinary interrogation techniques, by arguing that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions is too vague, and asking Congress to define clearly the criminal law limiting the scope of permissible interrogation.

Taken as a whole, the President’s maneuver today turned the political tables completely around. He stole the terms of debate from the Democrats, and rewrote them, all in a single speech.

Tammy Bruce is calling Bush’s announcement “outrageous.” What do you think?

RSS feed for comments on this post.

8 Responses to “The President orders top terrorist suspects to Gitmo from CIA ‘secret prisons’”


  1. Well, I for one am a little disappointed. I do not believe that the terrorists should be given GCIII protection. I do not believe that it applies in this war. I have no real problem with the CIA having secret prisons off American soil. However, unless I missed a voicemail, I was not consulted on the issue.

  2. Baklava says:

    I am so proud of the president’s actions. It was brilliant.

    The liberals can only froth at the mouth more. And they look crazier everyday. Liberalism is a mental diseases is what I’ve been saying. They can only go forward with more and more accusations not based on facts but their own “feelings”. Is that a way to debate?

  3. Drewsmom says:

    Bush does everything he does to mess with the dems minds, he lies awake nights and thinks these things up and I love it.:d

  4. benning says:

    Lock them up, toss in a Koran, and leave them to their own devices. Let them out when they are old, gray, and feeble.

  5. forest hunter says:

    benning: You left out *don’t feed them*. They can eat the book to get all the sustenance they’ll ever need.

  6. TomW says:

    ST, I tend to agree with Belmont on this one. Below is the money excerpt. (By the way, it’s nice to drop in and be in touch with you again.) Best Wishes~

    From The Belmont Club (

    “This should have been done from the first and it should have been done while the ashes of the WTC were still smoldering. Nevertheless better late than never….No politician likes to take responsibility for exposing the public to danger by treating terrorists with kid gloves yet no one likes to admit that the Geneva convention is inadequate for dealing with global terrorist threat. Now the dilemma can no longer be avoided. And since Hamdan decided the question cannot be left to the President alone, it is now before the nation in the shape of a request to Congress…Andrew Sullivan is already unhappy.

    ” ‘This is the Rove gambit: make this election a choice between legalizing torture or enabling the murderers of 9/11 to escape justice. The timing is deliberate; the exploitation of 9/11 gob-smacking; the cynicism fathomless. There is only one response: call them on it and vote for their opponents in November. And pray that in the meantime, John McCain won’t lose his nerve or his integrity.’

    “The cup Sullivan wants to pass away is exactly the cup politicians were happy to see low level operatives to drink from out of sight. But it is inaccurate to call this a ‘choice between legalizing torture or enabling the murderers of 9/11 to escape justice.’ It’s a choice between specifying what kinds of interrogation are allowable under our system of values and letting the murderers of 9/11 escape justice. … Have Geneva and give up a lot of safety; or modify Geneva to some degree and get some, but not complete safety. No more punts.”

  7. Can’t disagree with that, Tom!

  8. sanity says:

    Bush has to follow with what the supreme court has injected itself (1st time in history it has intefered with a president like this, on this issue) and try and get Congress to mandate military tribunals in doing so will make what the supreme court has dictated moot.

    I think this is a calculated move on Bush’s administration part, in making these well known-to-be-terrorist and masterminds of some of the most horrific bombings, fall under the same genieva convention rulings – he is making it an issue to either deal with these people as a police matter (which will make those who support that look rediculous) or in a military tribunal.

    I think this is more to make a case for military tribunals than really allowing these monsters any kind of protections under the geneva conventions.