[N1bNXuDb]

. DOES THE FACT THAT AL ZARKOWI -- WHO MOTHER****ING MASTERMINDED 9/11.-- IS ONE OF THE INMATES BOTHER YOUR WHITE ASSES? I GIVE YOU THIS HYPOTHETICAL----- A US SOLDIER SEES A AFGHAN PECKER INSURGENT PLACING BOMBS ON THE ROADSIDE AND DETAINS HIM AND HIS CAMEL MOOSE. WHERE DOES HE GO NOW!? THE US FOR TRIAL? WHO HAS JURIDICTION NO ONE SO HE GETS RELEAESD TO CONTINUE PLOTTING

OH MY GOD The sheer amount of douche bag naivete is starting to make my tonsils hurt. Can anyone get me a soda, I think I am about to go to a sushi place and finally hit on the geisha there or whatever you call their waiters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETN1p.../failblog.org/

[haudraufwienix]

Camel moose? I'd pay to see one of those.

[tutkarussia]

Sure he was, but he couldn't get a clear shot

[Riprincattiva]

I'm gutted that your link wasn't of a hot geisha or whatever you call their waiters.

Hang on - has waiter/waitress gone the same way as actor/actress, where actresses now refer to themselves as actors, or does Wiglaf think servile Japanese men are the way to go?

[WaysletlyLene]

The terrorists have won.

[ffdfriendforurr]

Florida? That way the Miami cuban expatriates can continue the tradition...

[VXHLrsO1]

Europeans, per usual, are pleased to whine about Gitmo but when time comes to actually DO ANYTHING its the same old song and dance.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0123/p05s01-woeu.html


Closing Guantánamo: Will Europeans take detainees?
Europeans, who have long pushed to close the controversial facility, are hesitant to take some of its inmates.
By Robert Marquand | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the January 23, 2009 edition


Paris - On no single issue has Europe been more in disagreement with America than the Guantánamo detention center. The camp was a focus of anti-US protest here, synonymous with the image of a bullying world power using torture to obtain confessions from terror suspects.

The European Union collectively called for closing "Gitmo." Now, Barack Obama, who is deeply admired in Europe, has ordered Gitmo trials to be halted, and signed an executive order Thursday to close Guantánamo within a year.

It sounds like Europe's dream scenario. Yet European states are not rushing to take detainees, a step considered essential to closing the camps.

Rather, on the eve of a Jan. 26 meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels that takes up the question, there's more temporizing than unity – and a possibility that some states that say they will take inmates considered wrongly detained may hide behind bureaucratic moves to tie such help to a collective EU agreement. Such agreement may be difficult.

In France, and also in Germany, where Chancellor Angela Merkel was first in Europe to call for closing Guantánamo – foreign and interior ministers are now making conflicting statements over a willingness to play host.

"We know of interest from Finland, Ireland, Germany, Portugal, Britain, and Sweden," says Lotte Leicht, director of EU affairs at Human Rights Watch in Brussels. "But some of these states are also hinting that help should be spread among all states in a collective decision.

"The Europeans said for years they would assist inmates if only the Bush administration would decisively close Guantánamo," she continues. "Now we have a new reality with a new president. So to say the EU can only help if we do it together may be a bad excuse not to, rather than a real effort."

European nations are mainly looking at the 60 of the 245 detainees who have been scrutinized and cleared for release – but cannot go home to China, Algeria, Uzbekistan, Russia, Syria, Libya, and other states, due to fears of reprisal.

Albania took five Chinese Uighers in 2006. Some human rights groups have called for the Obama administration to take the remaining 15 Uighers as a show of good faith.

Portugal and non-EU member Switzerland this fall suggested they would take inmates unconditionally; some diplomats see statements this week by Spanish President José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero as an affirmative sign.

The Netherlands has given a definite "No," and Austria, Denmark, and Poland have sounded negative in press reports.

European diplomats say it is early days, that the Obama White House has made no formal requests for relocation, and that many nations are waiting for a fuller reading of what the Obama team will bring to transatlantic relations.

As one American diplomat in Europe put it: "They all said no before, and now they want to say yes, but there are domestic and legal hurdles to surmount."

European expert Charles Kupchan, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, says that, "It would be an important gesture of goodwill and would get the transatlantic relationship off on the right foot … to have help with the prisoners. It would mark a clear break with the Bush years, when Europe was unwilling to help."

But in an EU that is often characterized as divisive and dissembling on hard national problems, and that could not agree this freezing winter on how to collectively deal with gas shut-offs in the Russia-Ukraine dispute, the Obama team may have to be patient.

The administration wants help in its efforts on Afghanistan, but this week, military officials in Germany, France, Britain, and Italy suggested that, at least for now, they would not be sending more troops there.

On Guantánamo, there was a chorus of support from within the relevant quarters in the EU bureaucracy – both before and after Jan. 20. EU Commissioner for Justice Jacques Barrot said this week that Obama's move to close down the detention center was "a chance for a new partnership between Europe and the US." Thomas Hammarberg, the commissioner for human rights at the Council of Europe, on Jan. 19 called for the EU to offer asylum to those who can't return home.

But these voices vie with statements and popular sentiments that the problem is one America caused and thus should deal with. "America created Guantánamo. It has to come up with the solution," as Austria's interior minister, Maria Fekter, stated this week.

Germany's foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, has repeatedly called for help with Guantánamo in an election year in which he is Chancellor Merkel's main competitor. But this week, Wolfgang Schauble, the interior minister and a member of Merkel's party, sounded a different note, saying that the republic should only take persons of German nationality, of which there are none. "The United States holds responsibility for the people who have spent years in Guantánamo," he said.

Jennifer Daksal at Human Rights Watch in Washington counters that while the US is primarily responsible, "There now a recognition that Guantánamo is everybody's problem. It is part of the terrorist recruiting narrative. For years, the Europeans have indicated they would help, but Bush never put forward a plan. Now, Barack Obama is ready to do this."

[c2siOlIk]

Europeans, per usual, are pleased to whine about Gitmo but when time comes to actually DO ANYTHING its the same old song and dance.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0123/p05s01-woeu.html

Yeah, we need more whining about evil Euros from Americans instead

[janeloveslifenow]

I think we will win the war on terror in oh, about five hundred years.

WASHINGTON – A Saudi militant who was released from Guantanamo Bay after six years of confinement is now a top figure in the Yemeni branch of al-Qaida, a U.S. counterterrorism official confirmed Friday.

Said Ali al-Shihri was released in 2007 to the Saudi government for rehabilitation. He re-emerged this week, identified by a militant-leaning Web site as a top deputy in "al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula," a Yemeni offshoot of the terror group headed by Osama bin Laden.

The Yemeni branch has been implicated in several attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Yemen's capital Sana.

Al-Shihri is one of a small number of deputies in the group, the U.S. counter-terror official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss sensitive intelligence.

The militant Web site, which referred to al-Shihri under his terror nom de guerre, "Abu Sayyaf al-Shihri," also revealed his Guantanamo prisoner number, 372.

The announcement from the militant site came the same day that President Barack Obama signed an executive order directing the closure of the jail at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, within a year.

A key question facing Obama's new administration is what to do with the 245 prisoners still confined at Guantanamo. That means finding new detention facilities for hard-core prisoners while trying to determine which detainees are harmless enough to release.

At least 18 former Guantanamo detainees have "returned to the fight" and another 43 are suspected of resuming terrorist activities, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said on Jan. 13. He declined to provide the identity of the former detainees or what their terrorist activities were.

It is unclear whether al-Shihri's name would be a new addition to that list of 61.

The Internet site, an online magazine published by al-Qaida affiliates, announced that al-Shihri is the group's second-in-command in Yemen. "He managed to leave the land of the two shrines (Saudi Arabia) and join his brothers in al-Qaida," the statement said.

Included in the site's material was a message to Yemen's populace from al-Qaida figure Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's top deputy.

According to Pentagon documents, al-Shihri was stopped at a Pakistani border crossing in December 2001 with injuries from an airstrike and recuperated at a hospital in Quetta for a month and a half. Within days of leaving the hospital, he became one of the first detainees sent to Guantanamo.

Al-Shihri allegedly traveled to Afghanistan two weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, provided money to other fighters and trained in urban warfare at a camp north of Kabul, according to a summary of the evidence against him from U.S. military review panels at Guantanamo Bay.

An alleged travel coordinator for al-Qaida, he was also accused of meeting extremists in Mashad, Iran, and briefing them on how to enter Afghanistan, according to the Defense Department documents.

Al-Shihri, however, said he traveled to Iran to buy carpets for his store in Riyadh. He said he felt bin Laden had no business representing Islam, denied any links to terrorism, and expressed interest in rejoining his family in Saudi Arabia.

Yemen is rapidly re-emerging as a terrorist battleground and potential base of operations for al-Qaida and is a main concern for U.S. counterterrorism officials. Al-Qaida in Yemen conducted an "unprecedented number of attacks" in 2008 and is likely to be a launching pad for attacks against Saudi Arabia, outgoing CIA Director Michael Hayden said in November.

The most recent attack, in September, killed 16 people. It followed a March mortar attack, and two attacks against Yemen's presidential compound in late April.

The impoverished country on the southern tip of the Arabian peninsula has a weak central government and a powerful tribal system. That leaves large lawless areas open for terrorist training and operations.

Yemen was also the site of the 2000 USS Cole bombing that killed 17 American sailors. Seventeen suspects in the attack were arrested; ten of them escaped Yemen's jails in 2003. One of the primary suspects in the attack, Jamal al-Badawi, escaped jail in 2004. He was taken back into custody last fall under pressure from the U.S. government.

___

Associated Press writer Maggie Michael contributed to this report from Cairo. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/...anamo_al_qaida

[SkeniaInhilla]

I wouldn't be surprised if we've created a few terrorists in Gitmo.

I'm equally sure many of those held are indeed our enemies, and have been from the outset.

But the proper thing is to try them in a court of law. What, you think that a US jury is likely to go easy on a suspected Islamist terrorist?

This "OMG, we can't take them out of limbo!" stuff is silly. As for which state... how out CA? Is Alcatraz still available?

-Arrian

Amen, brother man. Try them or send them home. In the end I expect virtually all of the nations will end up accepting their own citizens back.

[Agedprepdoock]

I wouldn't be surprised if we've created a few terrorists in Gitmo.

I'm equally sure many of those held are indeed our enemies, and have been from the outset.

But the proper thing is to try them in a court of law. What, you think that a US jury is likely to go easy on a suspected Islamist terrorist?

This "OMG, we can't take them out of limbo!" stuff is silly. As for which state... how out CA? Is Alcatraz still available?

-Arrian

It is extremely naive to believe that the scum held in Guantanamo are entitled to a trial. In no other american war have enemy combatants been accorded such a right. Personally, I'd like to know what "crime" would they be charged with?

As for a jury letting them go, let me point out that every day in this country violent criminals go free as a result of technicalities. Just how well 'mirandized' do you think these scum were? Can you not imagine the antics that trial lawyers will engage in if/when this occurs.

If y'all want to give them a trial, I say fine. Send em back to where they actually broke the law, Afghanistan. Last I recall, their punishment was a whole lot more severe than ours.

[Arrocousa]

... noone asked yoiu to open Gitmo in the first place... and while it would be cavalier of Europe to take some of them on board - why? Are we to blame that you elected Bush? As far as I am aware UK wanted all of it's own citizens back where all bar one have already been returned, and I am pretty certain everyone you will feel safe handing over their own citizens back - will take them.

In any case I am sure that an appropriate solution for the "terrorists" will be found... but a good way to turn a pro-Obama and pro-US thread into anti-European

You dont seem to aware that the home countries of many of these individuals dont want em back. Since Europe has whined about our 'maltreatment' of these scum perhaps europe should 'DO SOMETHING' rather than just flap its multilingual gums.

[InvertPrete]

I'm actually curious. Given the fact that most of these people were never on US soil or anywhere else where US civilian law normally extends, what portion of the penal code could be applied to them if they were brought to trial in US courts? Generally they are only held as long as they are deemed to have intelligence value, yes?

[Olphander]

If they are obviously "scum" they should be convicted.

Of what?

[arcalmanard]

It's amusing to watch the 'tards fret about having one of these guys on US soil, as if they're going to break out of solitary in Ft. Leavenworth, hitch a ride to Kansas City, and then set off a dirty bomb.

I doubt the NIMBY contingent shares your optimism.

[Ruiceara]

They still owe us for the free housing and food!

Actually that reminds me of the April 2001 Hainan Spy Plane incident where a US spy plane was taken by the Chinese. Various intriguing legal arguments went into the ether during that time.

US: "If you would only be more transparent, we wouldn't need to spy on you. It's your own fault we were spying!"

PRC: "You owe us hangar and housing fees for the soldiers we detained. It comes to $1 million USD."

US: "The cockpit of the plane is part of US sovereign territory, as it's a flag-bearing US vessel. If you step inside that cockpit we're going to write a strongly worded complaint about it."

PRC: "The death of the one pilot in that crash is directly attributable to the head of the executive branch, and we are entertaining pressing murder charges against George Bush."


etc.

[DownloadMan]

Gah? What color is the sky in this strange world that you live in?

What's the point of not putting a bullet in thier brainpan if they have no intelligence value? Any response to the rest of that post though?

[Qynvtlur]

I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Some gitmo detainees have been in there for 6 years or more. Do you think any of them still have any intelligence value whatsoever?

I dunno. I'm not in any position to judge. Are you?

[WUlcN1Rz]

I like OFITG's avatar. The animated blinking eye is funny for some odd reason. And he's had it for years so it's even better.

[uphokyhuP]

But the proper thing is to try them in a court of law. What, you think that a US jury is likely to go easy on a suspected Islamist terrorist?

I think one concern was that our rules for discovery would endanger sources of intelligence. The government could just claim some sort of national security privilege to protect them, but then it's not really a fair trial.

These sorts of things are never as simple as you might think.