You know GOPers, when the gov't closed Alcatraz I believe that we movexd the prisoners to other facilities. Not sure though, might want to check on that. (Rated)

Not sure why I am among the first to make a comment, but this is just more of the same from the party trying to re-brand itself with the same damn messages. It is a positively, ridiculously, shamelessly overplay on fear. Speaking of branding, my suggestion to the GOP - get the the nearest kink-shop and find yourself some new toys to play with! Walking off, shaking my head, don't get it, just don't get it.

If those people are not imprisoned very specifically in that one facility in Cuba then the terrorists have won.

What better way to celebrate one's second day in office than to announce the closing of Gitmo? Worry about the "how" later. As Obama clearly has no plan (or clue generally), it's up to everyone else, it seems, to deal with that thorny problem.

There's been no shortage of trying, the lunatic left extreme being to release them into the United States with a generous stipend to make sure that the little dears never again have to face the face of poverty, which clearly drove them to their dastardly deeds in the first place.

But before the impression we've elected a president who is clearly over his head becomes overwhelming, I'm going to bail the guy out (bailing out is, after all, all the rage), with my Cuba Libra Solution.

Just open the gates. Give them a copy of whatever scripture they want and bid them bon voyage.

Some releasees will find their way to Havana where, Sean Penn tells us, life is good. Others will paddle their way to Miami and take their chances with choppy waters. Talk about baling. In any event, our hands will be clean. We've seen the error of our ways and granted the inmates their freedom.

No justice for the victims of 9/11, no closure for their families, no measurable improvements in security for the rest of us. But oh! the rich vein of resources that were exposed that day: fear, rage, a lingering sadness, an infuriating sense of national impotence. Even the hole in the ground hasn't healed. If things had been otherwise, would terror have retained its value as a marketing tool? Would we see that parade of snarling mug shots and wonder, Can Leavenworth hold these guys? I don't think so. I'd think we'd see them as criminal suspects instead of supervillains. And we might be seen ourselves in a less paranoid light.

A look into the events of 9/11 may lead one to conclude that the Arabs/Muslims probably did not attack us. Here is just one compelling question:
Why did the WTC buildings pancake down in 10 seconds - the speed of an object falling through the air? How can that happen, when the floors below were supposedly intact?

Who really brought down the towers? No one seems to want to find out. The official story has too many holes.

Now that is really scary!

Isn't that an old Leni Riefenstahl sound track?

"Lawrence B. Wilkerson served as chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, one of the senior Bush Administration officials that pushed the run-up to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Last week he published a blog entry claiming that among the more than 700 people who had been detained at Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba that only “two dozen or so of the detainees who might well be hardcore terrorists.”

ad hoc intelligence philosophy that was developed to justify keeping many of these people, called the mosaic philosophy. Simply stated, this philosophy held that it did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance (this general philosophy, in an even cruder form, prevailed in Iraq as well, helping to produce the nightmare at Abu Ghraib)…. The detainees' innocence was inconsequential. After all, they were ignorant peasants for the most part and mostly Muslim to boot."

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/914

What do some people think they know that Colonel Wilkerson, Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Powell don't know?

Oooh, scary propaganda!

Actually, I thought the soundtrack had elements of Basil Poledouris. That, or the song my concert band played last week. Except not as good.

At any rate, it's yet another pitiful attempt for the GOP to continue to try to frighten the uninformed.

Furthermore, Brig, Gen. Janis Karpinski, commander of 17 prisons, including Abu Ghraib, which at one time held as many as 6,000 detainees said:

". . . generally 90 percent of the security detainees being held at Abu Ghraib were just innocent, had no information at all."

http://dir.salon.com/story/books/int/2005/11/10/karpinski/index.html

Man, americans seem to really love their "reality TV shows.

Reality, not so much!

P.J. O'Rourke quote: Isn't that an old Leni Riefenstahl sound track?

I busted out laughing at that comment. (Even lefties can have a sense of humor, apparently) Don't be dissin' Leni, P.J.

Triumph of the Will, baby, Triumph of the Will.

I'll have to agree with the other comments that the GOP needs to get some new propagandists on the payroll. I'm available.

Furthermore, Brig, Gen. Janis Karpinski, commander of 17 prisons, including Abu Ghraib, which at one time held as many as 6,000 detainees said:

". . . generally 90 percent of the security detainees being held at Abu Ghraib were just innocent, had no information at all."

Yes, let's look to Janis for authority. The one who was totally sleeping on the switch. And how about the equation of innocent and no information? Obviously someone should tell Janis that you can be guilty as hell and still be clueless, as is she.

This is a really well-crafted ad... of the quality of movie trailers. It prompted me to actually go the website listed at the end and read the legislation that is proposed.

It also makes me more consciously appreciative of the efforts of the FBI, CIA, and military to capture these men.

Fear is a tactic, is it? Old news?

Is that what the hordes fleeing from the recent buzzing of downtown Manhattan by an incompetent administration were thinking a few days ago? "Oh, there goes the GOP again; it's hijacked Obama's airplane in an effort to scare us."

Actually, in its galactic stupidity, the Obama administration may have done the country a service by reminding a forgetful public of what savagry can accomplish when unleased on our shores.

Steve and Gordon, there are almost 7 billion people in the world. And we are to believe that only the ones that are in Guantánamo are the ones we must fear? You may be comforted by that, and I won't attempt to say you're wrong for that, but please respect the notion that some of us fear the .. well, even with those guys imprisoned it's still “almost 7 billion” out there who might be a problem... and might be more of a problem if they can say we're a bunch of lawless hypocrites who talk a good story but aren't afraid to do our worst. Places where we torture people we've never placed on trial are the perfect fodder for them to rally people in opposition to us, and that is something to fear if we were going to have a healthy fear of something. Moreover, insisting on trials for these men should result in convictions unless the government really isn't sure they did anything, in which case why are they torturing them?

You simply have to wonder if the GOP thinks a 4 year Presidential campaign is going to win the White House. Personally I think by 2012 people are going to be so tired of the endless "fear and smear" ads are going to turn against the Republican candidate.

It is pretty desperate, I agree. I don't think it really needs a response, but if I were to give one I'd say two things:

First, an alternative to Jon Stewart's "Terrorists are not supervillains" remark: The U.S. has the largest population of prisoners, by raw count and per capita, in the world. Some of them are pretty bad people. Americans have been safe from Charles Manson, for example, for forty years. We know how to keep people in jail.

Second, on the question, "How does closing Guantanamo Bay make us safer?" A better question is this: "Does closing Guantanamo Bay make us less safe?" Because, really, a lot of decisions don't have implications for safety one way or another. It's not as if terrorists are being released into society. They're just going to prison in a different location.

Are Republicans afraid we'll catch cooties from terrorists if they touch American soil?

The only hope now for the Gop. base is the "Right Wing Deprogrammer".

So, gord o, now that you've dismissed Maj. Gen. Karpinski remarks, have you anything cogent to offer about Wilkerson's?:

"Lawrence B. Wilkerson served as chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, one of the senior Bush Administration officials that pushed the run-up to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Last week he published a blog entry claiming that among the more than 700 people who had been detained at Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba that only “two dozen or so of the detainees who might well be hardcore terrorists.”

Nope, you got it all wrong. The GOP is a superior marketing machine. They have some of the best marketing minds in the world working for them. It started with Nixon and then Reagan's dream team. They are testing and setting benchmarks. They have 3 years and they will plan well. Also, the ad give comfort to the far right base which has been somewhat shaky since McCain received the nomination.

How do you think they have retained the white house 28 of the last 40 years? Luck.

I saw this and am disgusted at what Republicans will stoop down to. They seem to forget that 911 happened on THEIR watch and yet are trying to make it a Democrat policy issue. I just hope Americans can see through all of their "bullshit."

As a 9/11 widow and former head of a families' organization that protested such exploitive imagery, I am deeply offended. On the other hand, as someone who's been on the planet awhile and has seen quite a bit, I'm not in the least surprised. However, one caveat: if it's laughed off the air, well and good. If it "works"; that is, if it makes people afraid, watch out. Incursions into not one but two countries were predicated around the death of my husband (and, for a time, supported) and no one seemed to care whether it was appropriate or not...

Freedom of speech is a fantastic thing. Freedom of thought is a scary thing.

Fear is an effective strategy that has been used on both sides of the aisle to rally support.
Whether its crime, gun laws, global warming, gay marriage, affirmative action or tax increases, we have often been guilty of voting our fears and not our hopes. Barack Obama may be one of the few glaring exceptions in the last few decades, as many Americans cast their lot with “Hope”. Then again, how many voters were concerned about allowing a continuation the fiscal and foreign policies of the previous eight years?

It’s doubtful the right will let go of a successful strategy, simply because it did not work one time. The wing nuts are continuously adding fuel (disinformation, distortion & divisiveness) to the fire, and fear is their most potent weapon.

Do you do things that work - or things that don't ? Do you follow the law - presumably crafted by legislators elected in the usual way - or not ?
Gitmo is and was illegal. End Full stop.
The treatment given those kept there never came close to protocol and international standards. End Full Stop.
Torture is not a method of interrogation. It is a way to generate false confessions. End Full Stop.

What's to discuss ? The only problem is that the law of the land clearly states that the death penalty is applicable to all those who participated - and that's not going to happen.
Congress consented. Whatever else I think of that - they did. Nor were Gitmo and al Ghraib unique : just an open acknowledgement of behavior which the U.S. prosecuted Nazis for. No quid pro quo here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Servicemembers'_Protection_Act

The sad fact is that records were never properly kept of who the detainees were, what they may or may not have done....there was a total lack of what we call "Due Process".
Right on this board today is a post outlining the lack of action. Not too surprising. There are so many guilty parties Gitmo itself wouldn't be large enough to keep them if it should be emptied first.

So has anyone bothered to thank Cuba yet??? Hmmm???

John,

The sad fact is the whole thing was done in the grey areas so even if Obama decided to prosecute or appoint a special investigation, nothing will come of it.

They got around the "due process" by not having them on US soil. They were not prisoners, they were enemy combatants from war so different rules apply. These are not stupid people they are well connected Washington insiders with a full army of lawyers.

The only thing that would be gained would be nothing. The best Obama can do is close the loopholes, but someone will create new ones and new grey areas. There is no perfect system. Plus, the democrats don't want to press the issue to much because as more comes to light they had full knowledge of what was going on and did nothing and even in some cases approved the actions of the CIA.

Plus this is a constant, regardless of who is in power the government does not turn on itself or will willingly admit fault. If push comes to shove they will close ranks.