Gitmo

Obama stuck with terror-stupid; including Biden saying waterboarding ‘didn’t work’

President Barack Obama has yet to make a “right decision” in the handling and prosecution of the deadliest Islamic radical terrorists captured on his and previous watches.

Obama says he has not made a final decision to move the 9/11 trial out of New York City but he indicates the trial and security costing a mere billion dollars from “his stash,” i.e. taxpayer dollars, will not be the deciding factor. Wherever it is held, Attorney General Eric Holder wants transparency. Apparently, Obama has finally found something he is willing to see C-SPAN conduct non-stop coverage of: the 9/11 trial. Do they still prefer a federal show trial? You betcha!

Meanwhile, Obama’s “intelligence” choir is singing the praises about a Bush 43 intelligence failure: Richard Reid being allowed to remain silent. They skip the verse about only the interrogations of other detainees led to Saajid Badat, his still shoe-bomb armed accomplice in England, ten months after Reid was sentenced. Nor do you hear that in response to Reid suing for his Special Administrative Measures (SAMS) to be lifted, Holder directed a filing be made that they would be allowed to expire on the same day he was touting them against Reid on the DOJ’s web site, June 9, 2009. [Editor — An emailer asked, “Is it possible the SAMS against Reid were lifted that day without his knowledge?” No. The Public Law requires the Attorney General’s approval of all SAMS actions.]

That is not the worst of it.

On November 18, 2009, Holder testified before the Senate that KSM and his co-conspirators would be held in New York City using those same SAMS and did not mention what was “coincidentally” happening in Denver. That same day, an Assistant U.S. Attorney entered Denver’s federal courthouse to tell a judge Reid’s SAMS had ended; Reid could talk to the press, was in general population, and is now communally praying 5-times a day with fellow jihadists in Supermax.

Obama got caught without a HIG-leaf when the Flight 253 bomber’s pants came down. We’ve since learned the decision-paper for creating High-Value Interrogation Groups was at the bottom of the administration’s in-boxes. Instead of ordering the aggressive interrogation of Abdulmuttalab, he was read his rights. Holder is negotiating with a terrorist, and with his lawyer present; Richard Reid is doing what Umar will not do — life.

“The HIG is up!” and running, we are now told. Yet the smart money says Eric Holder has directed they first offer those we have enough to bring to federal trial a sweetheart deal in return for their accomplices, followed by Miranda warnings, their mommies, and negotiations. No, McGruff the Crime Dog licking the faces of cooperating jihadists will not be on the table as that would be “torture.”

John Brennan told a Muslim group yesterday that a 20% recidivism rate among the Gitmo detainees Bush 43 released, “Isn’t bad.” When the choir sang harmony this morning — “Bush did it. Bush did it. Bush did it.” — they forget to chime in with Obama’s first release, Jose Padilla’s accomplice, the also dirty-bomb trained Binyam Mohamed. The two were arrested en route to opening up the gas mains beneath any suitable, fully occupied apartment building they could find in the U.S. They were to ignite an explosion that was to cause the building to collapse. It was to be like the World Trade Center towers, only without the planes.

This morning on Face the Nation Vice President Biden was asked if the administration could ever envision using enhanced interrogation techniques, specifically waterboarding as was used on KSM. Biden flatly replied, “No.” He paused and then added, “Because it didn’t work.”

Oh, no, Joe — it worked on the three of them. In fact, it worked the best when it was used the most; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gave up to interrogators “50 percent of what we know about al Qaeda” and “conducted graduate level seminars” on their methods and operations only after he was waterboarded 183 times.

President Obama is stuck with the terror-stupid.

Reporter-at-large Jane Mayer conducted a series of recent interviews of Eric Holder for a lengthy piece just published in the New Yorker magazine. Near the end, she reports this:

“Late last month, at home, in Northwest Washington, Holder addressed those who have suggested that he and Obama are too weak to take on terrorism. “This macho bravado—that’s the kind of thing that leads you into wars that should not be fought, that history is not kind to,” he said. “The quest for justice, despite what your contemporaries might think, that’s toughness. The ability to subject yourself to the kind of criticism I’m getting now, for something I think is right? That’s tough.””

Tough? Perhaps. But is criminalizing the war the smartest way to protect the American people?

New York Daily News: Keep 9/11 trial ‘the hell out’ of New York City (we say ‘not in America’)

The New York Daily News nearly matched their title ‘Keep the hell out: Obama must stop waffling and move 9/11 terror trial’ with the content of their editorial:

One of the most astonishing aspects of Obama’s struggle to find a location for perhaps the most important trial in American history is that the Justice Department got around to considering those “practical, logistical issues” only after Attorney General Eric Holder decided on New York.

Without consulting Mayor Bloomberg or Police Commissioner Ray Kelly in advance.

Without figuring the cost of security, estimated at $200 million a year, or making provision to pick up the city’s tab.

Without taking into account the extreme, long-term disruptions a trial would visit on downtown neighborhoods.

Without remembering the elemental truth that New Yorkers refuse to be played for chumps — a fact that puts Obama deep in the hole.

We’d be near full agreement with the Daily News had they not hedged by using ‘preferably’ in their closing line.

Since AG Eric Holder’s November 13, 2009 announcement, all major, national polls have shown a wide majority of Americans think that not only should the 9/11 trial not be conducted in New York City, foreign terrorists should not be afforded the Constitutional rights a federal court trial would provide them. Yes, some politicians would foolishly endanger the safety of their constituents and disrupt thousands of lives in their communities for years by inviting terror trials and detentions; they are the exception, not the rule.

Gitmo is no “black eye” on America; it is a uniquely suited, heavily defended, remote terrorist detention facility. Last year, during a meeting with 9/11 and U.S.S. Cole families, President Obama said Gitmo has been “confused with Abu Ghraib.” Our troops there are closely supervised by the DOJ and highly disciplined. The propaganda from the Left and al Qaeda would only move to the new locale if it is closed.

DOD sources have told us that had Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four fellow 9/11 conspirators been allowed to plead guilty and refused to appeal, the remaining prosecution costs for them would have been approximately $50,000. Had they not pled guilty and if they and all the other prosecutions were done by military commission at Gitmo, it would likely add tens of millions of additional dollars. Yet the total costs of prosecuting and detaining those now at Gitmo in the United States would run into the billions of dollars.

Detaining America’s enemies should never become a jobs program. Our valiant troops are already doing that tough and thankless duty for a hell of a lot less; it costs $100 million per year to operate the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Thomson Correctional Center alone will cost three times that much to purchase and twice as much to operate as a detention facility.

Last February, President Obama promised 9/11 and U.S.S. Cole families that “swift and certain justice” would be brought against those who had slaughtered our loved ones. Yet no one credible has disputed former U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White saying it will likely take three years just to prepare federal trials against the 9/11 conspirators. And last July, it was reported that military commissions for 66 detainees there were ready to proceed. Even with the revisions Congress made to military commissions, which the President signed into law this past October, they would surely get underway much sooner, at Gitmo, than by a federal trial.

We keep hearing that military commissions are untested. They’ve been around in some form since General George Washington used them during the Revolutionary War. Lincoln used them. Not including the Nurnberg trials, more than 1,100 were tried by military tribunal during and after WWII with an 89% conviction rate. The judges, lawyers on both sides, and legal assistants are well-experienced at conducting military trials.

What is really untested is successfully trying dozens of Gitmo’s terrorists in federal court, with trial and appeal judges accustomed to applying our Constitution. Why? Because there will be hundreds perhaps thousands of motions about delaying “their” speedy trial due to national security concerns, not reading them “their” rights, and not offering them “their” right to remain silent and the opportunity to speak with “their” attorneys before deciding if to speak at all. And here is news that perhaps you have read nowhere else: All those same Constitutional challenges would occur if military commissions are conducted on U.S. soil.

Non-New Yorkers are also not chumps.

With thanks for their editorial and due respect to the New York Daily News, the vast majority of those out here in fly-over country say no federal trial for those at Gitmo should ever happen inside the United States; all their trials should be by military commission, at Guantanamo Bay.