The Blog Formerly Known As Vote '08

Above: President Obama removes one of terrorism’s biggest recruiting tools.

Read about it here, & a discussion about whether it’s the right thing here.

Today I heard Rush Limbaugh on the radio call this move a “political” one.

To which I say: well, duh.

But not ‘political’ in the way Rush is meaning (appeasing the left).

For too long we have failed to capitalize on the United States of America’s greatest weapon: the idea behind this country & the ideals it champions.

The Guantanamo Bay prison represented a step off of the path of those ideals. It said loudly to the world, “do as we say - not as we do.” Closing the prison sends a - yes, political - message around the world that we are better than that. & that our legal system can be effective in terms of meting out justice - even against those who would call for our destruction.

Some discussion on Talk 102.3 this morning brought to mind an analogy. Styles, et al were discussing what to do with the Guantanamo prisoners - & how we can’t have them mingle with the “normal” prison population, because they wouldn’t last longer than 2 seconds. They noted that America-bombers & child rapists are subject to the prisoners’ “own form of justice.”

That’s a perfect way of looking at the mindset behind the creation of Guantanamo.

The problem with the system is that it doesn’t leave room for justice. It keeps terrorist suspects off the streets .. but because we’ve thrown them down a legal rabbit hole, one that’s in my view ultimately self-defeating, many of the legitimate terror cases will never be given true justice.

Closing Guantanamo takes away a terrorist recruitment tool, & joins the battle where it really should be fought, & ultimately will be won - not in a physical location, but rather inside the minds of everyone around the world.

& there’s nothing that says we can’t hold a suspect extra-legally. But those cases should be both temporary & reserved for the very few, ones which we have clear-cut evidence on, & not just people picked up off the battlefield, or arrested in cases of mistaken identities who have languished in Gitmo hell for years.

We as a people are far smarter than that, & it’s a breath of fresh air to have someone in charge who realizes this.

(I should also note that I have the utmost confidence we are perfectly capable of housing these prisoners on U.S. soil. The fears of “well, what if we have a prison break?” can be dispelled if you think through logically the scenario about exactly how much damage a person in handcuffs & an orange jumpsuit could really do while on the run).

We need to have faith in our country, & the multitude of legal precedents of our criminal justice system.

We should not be afraid to try these cases based on evidence & the rule of law, & the rights that our Founding Fathers believed to be inalienable - not just to American citizens, but to the entire human race.

I, for one, would rather die while upholding my great country’s ideals than give those ideals up in the name of security.

FURTHER READING:

RedState says of Rep. Jack Murtha’s offer to house the Gitmo detainees in his district:

“I’m sure the people of his district are ready to greet Khalid Sheikh Mohammed with open arms and casseroles.”

How classy. & what’s your solution, again?

Newshoggers says of Bush’s choice to go outside our legal system:

If they’d just stuck with the existing definitions, all the Gitmo detainees against whom they could build a real case under the actual rules of law, without torture and without rigging the courts, would have been tried as POW’s already. If found guilty, the death penalty would have been warranted in some cases. I would personally have had no problem with that. That it hasn’t happened is a failure of the Bush administration, no-one else. They have proven themselves incompetent to shepherd America’s national security.

& Andrew Sullivan says

“Housing detainees in the US might not be the politically safe thing to do, but it is the only ethical and lawful action. I don’t see why American prisons are incapable of handing Gitmo detainees – they house domestic terrorists already. And how housing detainees in maximum security prisons impacts the American citizens residing nearby is beyond me.

…

What do we gain by keeping detainees at Gitmo? I understand that Republicans might find some political advantage in opposing Gitmo’s closure, but don’t see a logical reason for keeping it open. Trying detainees won’t appear legitimate unless we bring them under the American system, and if we do that some very bad men will go free. But that is Bush’s failing, not Obama’s. This was inevitable the minute the Bush administration decided to authorize torture.”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.