Skip to comments.Losing their heads over Gitmo (Ann Coulter)
Posted on 06/15/2005 4:58:33 PM PDT by perfect stranger
I guess Bush should have backed Katherine Harris, after all. Sen. Mel Martinez, the Senate candidate Bush backed instead of Harris, has become the first Republican to call for shutting down Guantanamo. Martinez hasn't said where the 500 or so suspected al-Qaida operatives currently at Gitmo should be transferred to, but I understand the Neverland Ranch might soon be available.
Maybe Sen. Arlen Specter the liberal Republican Bush backed instead of conservative Pat Toomey, which still didn't help Bush in Pennsylvania will step forward to defend the Bush administration. That Karl Rove is a genius.
Martinez explained his nonsensical call for the closing of Guantanamo by asking: "Is it serving all the purposes you thought it would serve when initially you began it, or can this be done some other way a little better?"
There are Arabs locked up at Guantanamo, no? Admittedly, not enough. (And not under what any frequent flier would describe as "harsh conditions.") Still and all, Arabs are locked up there. That is what we call a "purpose."
By becoming a focus of evil for human-rights groups, Martinez suggested, Guantanamo has become a recruiting tool for al-Qaida: "It's become an icon for bad stories," Martinez said, "and at some point you wonder the cost-benefit ratio." (I've been wondering the same thing about Mel Martinez.)
This is preposterous. NBC's "The West Wing" is an icon for bad stories; Gitmo is a place where we keep an eye on evil, dangerous people who want to kill us.
Martinez was borrowing a point from Sen. Joe Biden which is always a dangerous gambit because you never know who said it originally. The "Biden" version was: "I think more Americans are in jeopardy as a consequence of the perception that exists worldwide with its existence than if there were no Gitmo."
So if people around the world believe that if they try to kill Americans they might go to a bad, scary place called Guantanamo, that will make them more likely to kill Americans? How about doing a cost-benefit ratio on that analysis?
Let's also pause to ponder the image of the middle-of-the-road, "centrist" jihadist who could be "recruited" to jihad by reports about abuse at Guantanamo. You know the kind of guy who just watches al-Jazeera for the sports and hits the "mute" button whenever they start in about the Jews again, already.
Liberals want us to believe such a person exists and that he is perusing newspaper articles about Guantanamo trying to decide whether to finish his coffee and head off to work or to place a backpack filled with dynamite near a preschool.
Note to liberals: That doesn't happen.
What happens is this: There are thousands of Muslim extremists literally dying to slaughter Americans, and only three proven ways to stop them: (1) Kill them (the recommended method), (2) capture them and keep them locked up, or (3) convince them that their cause is lost. Guantanamo is useless for No. 1, but really pulls ahead on No. 2 and No. 3 (i.e., a "purpose").
Let's just hope aspiring jihadists are not reading past the headlines and discovering that what Amnesty International means by "the gulag of our time" is: No Twinkie rewards for detainees!
That's not a joke. As described in infuriating detail by Heather MacDonald in the Winter, 2005, City Journal, interrogators at Guantanamo are not allowed to:
yell at the detainees, except in extreme circumstances and only after alerting Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and never in the ears;
serve the detainees cold meals, except in extreme circumstances;
poke the detainees in the chest or engage in "light pushing" without careful monitoring and approval from the commander of the U.S. Southern Central Command in Miami;
reward detainees (for example, for not throwing feces at the guards that day) with a Twinkie or a McDonald's Filet-O-Fish sandwich in the absence of express approval from the secretary of defense. (I suppose it goes without saying, "supersizing" their order is strictly forbidden under any circumstances.)
Without careful monitoring, interrogators aren't even allowed to subject the detainees to temperature changes, unpleasant odors or sleep cycle disruptions. But on the bright side, they are allowed to play Christina Aguilera music and feed the savages the same food our soldiers eat rather than their usual orange-glazed chicken. That isn't sarcasm; these are the rules.
No cold meals, sleep deprivation or uncomfortable positions? Obviously, what we need to do is get the U.S. Army to serve drinks on commercial airlines and get the airlines to start supervising the detainees in Guantanamo.
American soldiers make do with C-rations. Dinner on an America West flight from New York to Las Vegas consists of one small bag of peanuts. Meanwhile, one recent menu for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo consisted of orange-glazed chicken, fresh fruit crepe, steamed peas and mushrooms, and rice pilaf. Sounds like the sort of thing you'd get at Windows on the World if it still existed.
I got a fever - for Ann Coulter!
Man, is she good!
Bump for Ann! I swear, have a number of the people in the country descended into madness? A United States Senator, speaking on the floor of the Senate, compares our security personnel to Soviet sociopaths and Nazis and murderous Communists in Asia. I would like to spit in the face of Dick Durbin!
good point. If it was carried to the same level for Christian U.S. servicemen the ACLU would be slapping lawsuits on anything in uniform that moved.
"This is what we get for taking prisoners. The obvious solution hardly bears mentioning."
During the VN adventure (screwed up by our lovable Congress), when Americans went out and encountered enemy troops, they might kill two and bring back 98 captured. The ROK Marines, when they encountered 100 VN brought back two captured. The Dims are like that, the Pubbies should be like that.
I agree, the closing line says it all. You could put that on
a bumper sticker.
Pray for W and Our Troops
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Ann doesn't understand. If we show them how our criminal justice system works, for example, let them free because not enough terrorists on their jury(like that texas case): they will love us and sign up for social security .
My idea: if GITMO saves one child it is worth it!
I'm all for shutting down Gitmo. Outfit the scummy bastards with tracking devices in microchips inplanted in their hearts and let them off at the Baghdad bus station. Give them a one-day headstart and then let the games begin.
This thread needs more cowbell!
Hey, Mel! Here's to your defeat in your next campaign cycle!
PETA will object I'm sure to sacrificing chickens in pursuit of the illegal war on terrorism.
Oh, those kind of drumsticks... never mind. :)
LOL. Unbelievably stupid statement by Mel, that's for sure. Methinks he regrets making it...
That's what I was getting at!
Someone had to do it.
Martinez was just on Hannity and said he was taken out of context.
He will be on the Senate floor in 30 minutes ragging on Turban Durbin. If they show it on CSPAN hopefully somebody will put up a live thread.
Thanks. The "out of context" excuse is so old, however, Mel thus far has impressed me and I will trust him over the presstitutes--at least this time...
"Meanwhile, one recent menu for suspected terrorists at Guantanamo consisted of orange-glazed chicken, fresh fruit crepe, steamed peas and mushrooms, and rice pilaf. Sounds like the sort of thing you'd get at Windows on the World if it still existed."
That one's going, going, gone! It's over the fence, over the bleachers, over the roof! And it was still going up when it left the park!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.