Obama plans military detention of terror suspects – just not at Gitmo

Posted by: ST on February 20, 2009 at 8:51 am

Jacob Sullum is outraged, but I think it’s safe to say that we won’t see near the outcry we did over Bush and Gitmo from most of The Usual Suspects, including the Euro-elites abroad as well as Euro-elite wannabes here in the US. Why? Rusty Shackleford explains:

Bush-Hitler: Holding terrorists indefinitely without charge in Gitmo.

Hope-Change: Holding terrorists indefinitely without charge somewhere else.

Yep.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m glad that the Obama administration apparently understands on some level the need to indefinitely hold suspected terrorists, but at the same time, it makes the apology-fest he had with Al Arabiya all the more outrageous, considering the fact that some of the very GWOT policies he indirectly criticized Bush for during that interview – and demagogued the administration over during the course of the campaign – he plans to do himself.

(Via James Joyner)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 Responses to “Obama plans military detention of terror suspects – just not at Gitmo”

Comments

  1. Neo says:

    They need to select a site knowing in advance that it will be labeled a “torture site”

    May I suggest a back lot at Disneyland .. saying
    confining prisoners at Disneyland is “torture”
    will have a certain level of disbelief attached.

    I fully expect the prisoners to be sent back to Afghanistan, where they can be conveniently allowed to escape. If they “chip ‘em up” (or make believe they did) with tracking devices, then let Diane Feinstein tell the NYT, they will all be executed by the Taliban in short order.

  2. Severian says:

    I don’t know man, if I hear “It’s A Small Small World” one more time I’m likely to chew my own head off.

  3. forest hunter says:

    Sev: You oughta see the *All things Disney* they go gonzo over, over here!…..or not! @-)

  4. SpideyTerry says:

    Obama? A hypocrite? Can that possibly be?

    What’s next? Is he gonna turn out to be a flip-flopper or someone lacking any substance in his rhetoric?

    Sarcasm? Me?

    ;)

  5. Neo says:

    And Obama got a report (prepared by the military) that prisoners at Gitmo are getting their Geneva Convention rights. Some critics don’t like the source.

    Better yet, after given a month to come up with a court position on rights of prisoners at Baghram, the Obama DOJ adopted the Bush position .. no rights.
    The usual suspects .. Human Rights Watch, ACLU .. were aghast.

    Obviously, the lies continue LOL

  6. Severian says:

    Sev: You oughta see the *All things Disney* they go gonzo over, over here!…..or not! @-)

    Forest, nothing would surprise me out of a society twisted enough to come up with Hello Kitty! ;)

    Of course, if they weren’t so expensive I’d have a Hello Kitty keyboard for my computer at work. :d

  7. NC Cop says:

    Well its a well known fact in the Supreme Court case Al Balldadadda v. United States that U.S. Constitutional rights only attach in a WARM weather climate.

    Guantanamo= Rights
    Afghanistan= No rights

    It makes sense, doesn’t it?

    Don’t worry, our watchdog lapdog media will be sure to pounce on Obama any minute now……any minute now……wait for it….wait for it……..#-o