78°
forecast

Legislation aims to shut state's door to Gitmo inmates

Posted to: Military

WASHINGTON

The Obama administration risks adding to the danger of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil and promoting alliances between international terrorists and criminal gangs if it transfers suspected enemy combatants to facilities inside the United States, three of Virginia's Republican congressmen warned Monday.

Reps. Randy Forbes of Chesapeake, Eric Cantor of Henrico County and Frank Wolf of Fairfax County said they want Congress to pre-empt any effort to move prisoners now at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to facilities in Virginia.

The lawmakers conceded that they're unaware of any plan for such a move but argued that President Barack Obama has opened the door to transfers by announcing his intention to close the Guantanamo prison. The administration says it's still deciding what to do with about 250 suspected terrorists now at Guantanamo.

"We don't think they should be anywhere in the U.S." and particularly not in Virginia, Forbes said. Lawmakers from at least nine other states also have filed legislation to keep Guantanamo detainees out of their states.

Forbes and his colleagues complained that Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder decided to close Guantanamo before Holder visited the prison last month to assess conditions there.

Holder returned from the visit saying he was satisfied that prisoners are being treated humanely. The Guantanamo prison has been the target of attacks by human rights activists who contend that some prisoners there have been tortured. The Bush administration has acknowledged that some prisoners were subjected to waterboarding, an interrogation technique that simulates drowning.

The current administration's director of national intelligence, retired Adm. Dennis Blair, told Congress last month that publicity about Guantanamo has made the camp a foreign policy and security liability. U.S. allies are reluctant to participate in counterterrorism policies because of the camp's image, he testified.

Forbes, Cantor and Wolf said two military-run prisons - the Navy brig in Norfolk and the Marine Corps brig at the Quantico Marine Base - have been identified as potential places to house inmates from Guantanamo. The two brigs were among a series of military facilities pinpointed by House Armed Services Committee staffers last year as places where space is available; neither the committee nor the administration has suggested they be used.

Cantor argued that both Virginia sites are relatively close to nuclear power plants that could be targets for terrorist attack. Wolf said placing the Guantanamo detainees anywhere in the United States could facilitate alliances between international terrorists and violent gangs that already recruit new members inside the prisons.

Darrell Legg, a former case management coordinator for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, said it's unlikely any inmates transferred from Guantanamo would be allowed to interact with domestic prisoners.

"Whatever setting they're placed in, it's likely to be 23-hour lockdown," said Legg, who now works on prisoner classification issues for Federal Prison Consultants, a Florida-based company.

Dale Eisman, (703) 913-9872, dale.eisman@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

a word about "common sense"

"Sailorcurt on Wed, 03/04/2009 at 8:45 pm.
...says that someone has "common sense"...now that's a condemnation of the first order."

I'm a firm believer in "common sense" some people have it and others don't even know what it means. If people would view issues in our government as well as world issues with "common snese" and let that dictate a workable solution we would all be better off.

So I take it...

you're out in the field Fletcher?

propoganda and you

You'll dance to anything. That's sad, not funny.

"BTW: The tribunals have already released several prisoners that were subsequently killed or re-captured in battle."

Military Tribunals

"but tried they should be, against some just and fair code and in the public sphere."

So are you saying here that the military tribunals are not a "just and fair code" or that they simply aren't public enough for you?

BTW: The tribunals have already released several prisoners that were subsequently killed or re-captured in battle.

Now you're confused

Let me explain: I don't find the topic funny, I find you funny. There's a difference.

You're right, I didn't respond to your "answer", I was distracted by laughing so hard at your "baby eating" comment (I'm still getting chuckles out of it, thank you).

This issue is not a matter for "consensus". When Sgt York virtually single-handedly captured 132 German enemy combatants, should the public have demanded "consensus" to agree that they were, in fact, enemy combatants? At trial it would have been 132 swearing that they were just innocent bystanders caught up in the clutches of the evil American Military-Industrial complex against 8 accusing them of being combatants.

As a military vet myself, I tend to take the word of the Soldiers in the field. If they capture someone they say was shooting at them, or placing an IED, etc...then they are enemy combatants. Period.

No public consensus needed.

I'm glad you find the topic

I'm glad you find the topic funny but a bit mystified that you zeroed in on what you call my hyperbole while you are blind to what I pointed out as the hysterics of the fear and smear mongers (your ilk?). The way you've jumped from point to point is a simple, effective and thoroughly nonsensical tactic called deflection. It is general employed by people who lack the the ability to argue on their point on reasonable grounds. Your latest post is again a deflection away from the question you raised in the prior post and the answer I provided. I can only conclude that you don't have a serious point of view on the discussion and that I would have been better off ignoring you or else, taking your low road, mocking you for your ignorance. I'd laugh at you too, but I don't find broad humor all that funny, a bit sad perhaps but not funny.

Gertz Point...

...says that someone has "common sense"...now that's a condemnation of the first order.

Fletcher, sorry I was unclear; I was mocking you.

I always get a kick out of people who don't see the irony in their having to resort to melodramatic hyperbole in order to conjure up sufficient outrage.

But don't worry, I'm not laughing at you.

I'm laughing about you.

OK...you got me...I'm laughing at you a little bit too.

fletcherpratt has common sense in this matter

and clearly understands what the American way is all about. For some of you the hate and venim is to the extreme, and actually a very scary way of thinking.
"williamw92608 on Tue, 03/03/2009 at 9:29 am.
He is the most liberal president that this country has ever seen and it is only going to get worse!"
William, with less than 45 days in office you have already condemed President Obama, and clearly state, "it is only going to get worse". I feel sorry for such a negative attitude, a lack of understand that the world is watching us, and we need to act like the America we are. Please understand "liberal" is not a four letter word, but "Bush" is.

Sailor curt, close enough to baby eating terrorist for you?

I can't tell whether you are being snarky, over fastidious, or haven't read the posts below. Here are some choice bits of hysteria that inspired my mocking phrase: baby killers:"(you know, the ones who would slit your child's throat while you watched just because you don't believe in their god)" dehumanization: "Is the lunatic in the White House SERIOUSLY considering this a viable alternative to treating these "people" the way they should be treated?" AND "Of course there are other states that should probably on the "host" list. Vermont, Massachusetts, New York and a few others that think the terrorist don't exist." cue Ominous music: "There is no sense in bringing that kind of possible danger to the states,unless of course he is the Antichrist. Which I am hoping he isn't." AND "These guys are the bad in this world as far as we are concerned. They HATE us." AND "It is your fault that this imposter of a president has decided to close Gitmo and bring these terrorists into our country."

Good Point

"Calling them all baby eating terrorists is a gambit for the simple minded."

Excellent point.

So why is it that you're the only one calling them that?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: Military rss feed   



Toolbox


 

special features