Sure closing Gitmo will make us safer. All the muslims in the world will now love us. No more recruiting for AQ. Of course we'll have to jump ship from Israel, but it's not like we haven't done that before. Iran will open negotiations about abandoning their nuke program, and ol' Kim in North Korea will begin to see the error of his ways. And the lion will dance with the unicorn under rainbow skies.

hmmm, "How Does Closing GITMO Make Us Safer?"

Okay, here's how...

You see, since Gitmo is on an island, in the middle of a Marine Corps base, these terrorists are never exposed to good old red-blooded American criminals!!

So by putting these vermin into regular prisons we increase the chance that patriotic criminals will do on the exercise yard what we should have done on the battlefield!

and THAT'S how it makes us safer!

Perhaps the detainees will now pursue regular jobs and may even serve you a happy meal at McDonalds. They are after all harmless little fuzzballs if you just give them a chance at the American dream.

There, I feel safer now.

I know, Steve. It's mind boggling.

You're asking the wrong question. It's not about making us safer--it's about saying whatever it takes, no matter how dangerous or ignorant, to win a Democrat primary.

I think P. Bunyan is correct, this is not the question opponents of Guantanamo Bay are asking.

To me, it seems as if many opponents are under the impression that all of the people there are innocent or held wrongly. Neither of those assertions are correct. Unfortunately, I truly feel that if President Obama had opened up this detention facility, there really wouldn't be these issues, the people not okay with it now, would be okay with it. It's a hold-over from the left's viciously personal hatred for former President Bush.

The opponents should be asking the question noted in the above video, rather than being blind contrarians. Personal hatred for our former president certainly does not change facts (even if they would like it to).

"It's a hold-over from the left's viciously personal hatred for former President Bush"

Exactly Heralder. That's why Obama used it to "out-left" Hillary in the primaries. Too bad it will likely come back to bite him, and all of us on the ass.

450,000 Axis troops detained on the American mainland in the latter stages of WWII. Some of those dudes were Nazis, who are like the worst dudes ever!!!

Relax. Nobody's going to force you to let some guy with a beard pitch a tent on your lawn.

To me, it seems as if many opponents are under the impression that all of the people there are innocent or held wrongly.

Gee, it seems to me as if all of the supporters are under under the impression that all of the people being tortured are guilty.

All of the people who WERE "tortured", all THREE of them, were very obviously guilty, TrueBlue. To deny that really takes Obama level audacity.

So Hyper, you'd be o.k. then if we release all of the Gitmo inmates into Canada?

450,000 Axis troops detained on the American mainland in the latter stages of WWII.

Detained. Yes. So why close down Guantanamo. They are being detained, there.

Gee, it seems to me as if all of the supporters are under under the impression that all of the people being tortured are guilty.

Actually, I AM under the impression that anyone being interrogated is guilty. I suppose the difference is having at least a minute amount of faith in people to do their jobs, rather than wasting the time and energy and resources trying to get information from someone that doesn't have any. Kind of counterproductive, and with the world watching, stupid.

Obama is not going to open the gates and just let everbody go free. As long as Gitmo remains open it will be used as a recruitment tool for terrorists. The prisoners need to be re-located to other facilities that does not have the stigma of Gitmo. In addition, Gitmo makes us impotent in pressuring other countries to respect human rights.

As long as Gitmo remains open it will be used as a recruitment tool for terrorists.

I disagree. Terrorists don't need some little detention facility for a recruitment tool, and certainly have never needed one in the past to recruit likeminded people, deploy them, and execute countless attacks on targets in many different countries all around the world.

The prisoners need to be re-located to other facilities that does not have the stigma of Gitmo.

So it's just an image makeover. So why again are we doing things to not offend terrorists and those who support them? Do not forget, a portion of the stigma Guantanamo Bay has is from the left using it as a hammer against their mortal enemy, former President Bush.

In addition, Gitmo makes us impotent in pressuring other countries to respect human rights.

First, there's nothing about the detention center that is particularly a glaring human rights issue.

Second, using your logic, I shall never criticize a movie ever again, since I've never made one myself.

Actually, I AM under the impression that anyone being interrogated is guilty. I suppose the difference is having at least a minute amount of faith in people to do their jobs, rather than wasting the time and energy and resources trying to get information from someone that doesn't have any. Kind of counterproductive, and with the world watching, stupid.

Heralder,

Does it matter to you if they are innocent or guilty? Please read this and let me know what you think.

The following passage appeared less than two months ago on the FOX New website. The statement is made by a republican, retired Army colonel, who served as chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powel.

Many detainees locked up at Guantanamo were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday.

"There are still innocent people there," Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a Republican who was chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, told The Associated Press. "Some have been there six or seven years."

Wilkerson, who first made the assertions in an Internet posting on Tuesday, told the AP he learned from briefings and by communicating with military commanders that the U.S. soon realized many Guantanamo detainees were innocent but nevertheless held them in hopes they could provide information for a "mosaic" of intelligence.

"It did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance," Wilkerson wrote in the blog. He said intelligence analysts hoped to gather "sufficient information about a village, a region, or a group of individuals, that dots could be connected and terrorists or their plots could be identified."

trueblue - "Obama is not going to open the gates and just let everbody go free."

Think so? Might I suggest you research the Chinese minority group (Uighurs) that have been held at gitmo for training at an al-queda camp in afganistan?

The admin wants to release them, "edging toward bringing some Guantanamo prisoners to the U.S., most likely to Virginia" is the terminology used.

These are the people the admin wants to place within a Chinese community in Virgina, and the local Chinese community at this point are welcoming them.

All of the people who WERE "tortured", all THREE of them, were very obviously guilty, TrueBlue. To deny that really takes Obama level audacity.

Only 3 people may have been waterboarded but there were many other "enhanced interrogation" techniques that can also be considered torture.

The reason so much emphasis has been paced on waterboarding is because the U.S. executed people who did it during WW2.

trueblue - "Does it matter to you if they are innocent or guilty? Please read this and let me know what you think."

First of all this type of story is old and what he charges has been offered almost from gitmos first opening.

Secondly, the charge is partially true. You didn't quote the portion that says gitmo at one time held close to 800 people but now holds only 240.

At this point there is no reliable evidence any of those 240 are those that were scooped up by the Pakistanis at a cost of 5k per.

You also omitted this quote: "We need to put those people in a high-security prison like the one in Colorado, forget them and throw away the key," Wilkerson said. "We can't try them because we tortured them and didn't keep an evidence trail."

So he's advocating what many believe bush has done. Lock them up with no trial and lock them up forever, just in a place other than gitmo.

And notice he implies all 240 have been "tortured" which is patent BS.

"Relax, nobodys going to force you to allow a guy with a beard to pitch a tent on your front lawn."

Im sure Obama and the ACLU would be comfortable in doing just that, or at least allowing them to visit a mosque and set up a non profit in a neighborhood near us yet away from them..

trueblue - "The reason so much emphasis has been paced on waterboarding is because the U.S. executed people who did it during WW2.

Horseshit!

They were charged and guilty of many other practices that included "waterboarding," and note the quotes.

Waterboarding as practiced by the CIA was monitored by doctors and had many other safeguards in place.

What you refer to is what was called by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East after the end of WWII as the "water cure" or "water treatment."

"The so-called 'water treatment' was commonly used. The victim was bound or otherwise secured in a prone position; and water was forced through his mouth and nostrils into his lungs and stomach until he lost consciousness. Pressure was then applied, sometimes by jumping upon his abdomen to force the water out. The usual practice was to revive the victim and successively repeat the process."

TrueBlue,

Does it matter to you if they are innocent or guilty? Please read this and let me know what you think.

The following passage appeared less than two months ago on the FOX New website. The statement is made by a republican, retired Army colonel, who served as chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powel.

To answer your question, I do very much care if people detained are innocent or guilty. I do not think they should be written off as 'collateral damage' so to speak. I do think, that if indeed they were just swept up in the net that they should be released post haste.

While it is little comfort, to obtain this 'mosaic' of intelligence from, if this is correct, common people, that it does not require interrogation.

The reason so much emphasis has been paced on waterboarding is because the U.S. executed people who did it during WW2.

This is false. You're referring to a Japanese practice referred to as 'The Water Cure'. This was among many other, abhorrently brutal techniques used against captured Allied personnel during the war, such as forced amputation, for instance.

So to state that it was for waterboarding, is false. And to state that that was the sole reason for the tribunals is also false.

Heralder... MeThinks trueblue has left the building.

I'd like to think red faced after posting such blatant, and wrong, talking points but I doubt it.

Concerned primarily about safety, huh, conservatives??? Poor, poor frightened conservatives. But if you have a problem because you're so afraid, you should take it up with Chimpy, The Moron King you're responsible for. After all, he let most of the Guantanamo detainees go free, didn't he -- how scary!!! Will you be able to sleep tonight?

Don't worry, conservatives. Al Qaeda's not going to be attacking the hicksville places where you live anyway.
depp=true
notiz=Helping Herman conserve his snark

@Heralder said: "Actually, I AM under the impression that anyone being interrogated is guilty. I suppose the difference is having at least a minute amount of faith in people to do their jobs, rather than wasting the time and energy and resources trying to get information from someone that doesn't have any. Kind of counterproductive, and with the world watching, stupid."

Wow.

It's a good thing you weren't in charge of writing the Constitution. I applaud your honesty though - I never though I'd hear anyone say outloud that the entire premise of a justice system is for the birds, as long as we have people we "trust" handing out punishments, free of any sort of checks or balances.

Again, wow.

So the answer is to move the detainees to US soil. Wow, that's just really smart .

That's the real issue of what folks need to protest and be upset about.