Democrats: Soft on Terror

Filed under: Democrats, Guantanamo Bay — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on June 6, 2007 @ 7:30 pm CEST

And this is exactly why Americans don’t believe the Democrats will fight terrorism as actively, aggressively and effectively as they should:

A day after two military judges ruled against the Bush administration’s system for trying terrorism detainees, Democrats seized on the rulings on Tuesday as evidence that Congress should restore the right of those held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to challenge their detentions.

Senator Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who is the majority leader, said he would be willing to bring such legislation to the floor. The Senate Judiciary Committee is preparing to approve such a plan on Thursday.

Challenge their detention? Challenge their detention? What’s this? They are terrorists, not human beings! Human beings have rights, terrorists (unlawful enemy combatants) don’t.

Reid, Harry, Pelosi, Nancy… Please. Listen to me people, I watched the first Republican debate: talking like that will get you no where.

It’s all about doubling the size of Gitmo and torturing detainees.

Yes, I watched the first Republican debate and I have learned my lesson.

Gitmo should be closed asap. It is hurting America’s image tremendously and it’s quite simply wrong to treat people as if they are animals.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

5 Comments »

  1. 1 Doubting Thomas

    June 6, 2007 @ 7:34 pm CEST

    I certainly hope this post is satire. If not, my opinion of you has greatly decreased!

    If so, good job!

  2. 2 mvdg

    June 6, 2007 @ 7:37 pm CEST

    Doubting Thomas, my real opinion is:

    Gitmo should be closed asap. It is hurting America’s image tremendously and it’s quite simply wrong to treat people as if they are animals.

    I am a hawk, but not one that proposes violating human rights and torturing prisoners.

  3. 3 oldcodger

    June 6, 2007 @ 8:06 pm CEST

    They have wanted to close gitmo for over a year now. The problem is that the countries of origin do not want these people in their countries cause they know they are truly trouble for them.

    Secondly the USA does not want to try them in the open because everyone of them will lie out their ass telling everyone how evil the USA is and how they tortured them unmercilessly for 5 years.

    So the Bush admin asked for the ruling so they could try them with legal representation but without it being a public spectacle. Now you have no doubt in my mind Judges in the military that are legislating from the bench.

    Sad state of affairs. These judges must be close to retirement and cannot wait to write their books and make millions.

  4. 4 kritter

    June 6, 2007 @ 8:22 pm CEST

    MvdG- I agree and its nice to see you stand up for this principle. Some Americans unfortunately believe that if we do it its not as bad as if another country like China or Russia did it. We are supposed to stand up for human rights. Not to do so is moral relativism.

  5. 5 Fred Fry

    June 7, 2007 @ 4:59 pm CEST

    One thing to keep in mind about Gitmo is that even the UN, while demanding that it be closed, in it’s report decided that those detained there did not qualify for Geneva Convention protections. Not that any of the news media reported that. As it was you had to read the damn thing to find that nice little nugget.

    Many of those detained deserve no rights. Now that they have been caught, they are using our very system against us. We are only suckers for letting them do that.

    If you want to worry about prisoners, forget the couple hundred in Gitmo. If your really worried about people’s human rights, worry about the million plus in jail in Russia for starters.

    If General Washington were around today we would have no Gitmo. That’s because they all would have been hung as criminals.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or willfully misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid use of vulgar language as well as racial, ethnic, or religious slurs.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email.


Editorial Staff

Editor-in-Chief: Michael van der Galien
Managing Editor: Jason
Assistant Editor: Claudia



 



Listen to PoliGazette Radio on internet talk radio




 

Proud member of Moderate Blog Network, a FeedBurner Network.

Recent Comments

  • C Stanley: Cindy- funny, where I come from, hypocrisy also includes defending candidates from one party from personal...
  • basil:      Obama can call in all the woman to campaign for him but it won’t help him.  Obama had his...
  • Bob from Sarasota: This is the most inane sub piece I’ve ever seen…..photo (insert) is  not a picture of...
  • Morgan Walker: Fortunately, American Comedy is at its highest regarding McCain. HuffPost’s 236.com is going for...
  • Cindy: Rachel, They are "picking on her family" because her political points are in direct contrast to her...

Partners