FoxPolitics.net - Appleton, WI News - What's really going on in the Fox Cities

FoxPolitics.net Blogs

FoxPolitics News

Local/State Govt Links

Salaries

• Appleton School District, 2007-08
• City of Appleton
• Town of Grand Chute
• City of Menasha
• City of Neenah

Candidates

City of Appleton

• Elected Officials
• Salary Watch
• Directory
• Mtg. Agendas/Minutes

Advisory Board

Blogroll

Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America

Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

5/26/2009
Burri: President Obama - if you don't like Gitmo, change it.

"…instead of serving as a tool to counter terrorism, Guantanamo became a symbol that helped Al Qaeda recruit terrorists to its cause. Indeed, the existence of Guantanamo likely created more terrorists around the world than it ever detained…It is a rallying cry for our enemies. ... By any measure, the cost of keeping it open far exceed the complications involved in closing it."
- President Barack Obama, May 21, 2009

"Gitmo, Gitmo, Gitmo. Say that name to a real die-hard liberal: it’s like raking fingernails across a chalkboard in an airplane full of screaming children on a 22-hour flight in pants a couple sizes too tight."
- TrogloPundit, May 8, 2009

I'm willing to bet that, a year from now, detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, will still be operating, and never mind President Obama's orders to the contrary. He'll change his mind, or circumstances will change it for him.

To do otherwise would be stupid. Closing Gitmo won't solve any problems. It will only transfer them, and create a few more.

Why would we close it? Not because there's a better option available. Our allies find Gitmo to be a convenient excuse to bash the U.S., but won't take the detainees themselves. Moving the detainees into the U.S. is both dangerous and politically impossible: thus the 90-6 vote against funding the shutdown.

The only reason we're even talking about this – the only reason – is that Gitmo has become a symbol of American malfeasance.

Click over to Wikipedia for the long list of allegations involving Gitmo guards and detainees. Abuse, torture, neglect, disrespect, degradation. Many of them are very likely false, but even so – even if every single allegation was obviously, demonstrably fraudulent – the fact of the allegations alone is enough to give Gitmo a bad name.

One wonders why we don't just change the name, then. If we're looking for a symbolic fix, that would be it. And it would cost less.

But no, our symbolic directive is to close Gitmo, and move those prisoners elsewhere. Someplace where they won't be subjected to abuse and degradation or, at least, where the public relations efforts aimed at undermining America's defenses won't follow, won't hit home, won't create another "recruitment tool" for Al Queda.

And where, pray tell, would that be?

Nowhere. No matter where they go, the same allegations can – and will – be made. The next place will simply become another "symbol that helped Al Qaeda recruit terrorists to its cause."

And then what? Close another one? Move them again?

Wisconsin's Supermax prison became a lightning rod for "human rights" criticism, too, because they took the phrase "maximum security" seriously there. Maybe those criticisms were valid, maybe not. The point is: in the swirling ether of news and opinion, it doesn't matter. Some will believe, others will suspect, still others will use the allegations to score political points.

That was true of Supermax. It's true of Gitmo. It will eventually become true of my basement detention facility, where I plan to house up to eight current Gitmo detainees in only slightly less lavishness than they have now, and at a relatively low cost to the taxpayers.

No matter where we put them, that place will become the new "symbol."

The point being: if the prisoners are being mistreated, it isn’t the fault of the place.

President Obama: you are in charge now. If you don’t like Gitmo, change it. Enact new policies. Enforce them. Invite Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International and the U.N. to make sure they're being followed.

Gitmo is just a place. If its reputation can be damaged, it can also be fixed.

Lance Burri is a contributor to the Badger Blog Alliance and The TrogloPundit.

COMMENTS

Wounded Knee is just a place, Little Big Horn is just a place, Ground Zero is just a place, Normandy is just a place. Place and name matter. Gitmo is a place word that has meaning and context that cannot just be made to go away. It is symbolic of a time when we abandoned standards of conduct long held sacred. It won't just go away with a mere change in policy or practice. It is forever associated with America's loss of the moral high ground.

billie (Tue May 26 08:24:10 2009)

Yes, and we still remember those places for the bad things that happened there. So closing Gitmo won't remove the stigma. Terrorists will still be able to use it. So we might as well do the practical thing, continue using it, and try to change its reputation, even if we fail.

Lance (Tue May 26 09:11:28 2009)

Aren't we confusing Gitmo with Abu Ghraib ?
There is a big difference here, so lets keep the record straight.
I think the media combines them all the time.

OK , no ones wants torture, thats a given.
We are a nation of laws, so what constitutes torture ?
The Geneva Convention defines conduct, so should we use it as our guide ?
That same "law" if you will, says persons appreheneded in battle without uniforms can be shot.
Maybe we wouldn't have a problem, if we executed them .
Does that mean I want to execute them ? NO
I am just saying there are lots of laws and rules, and we have here a detesting of certain conduct, without rule enlightenment or use. Just "feel good" attitudes.
This does not work in rule of law systems, as ours is .
These same "feel good" people were no where to be seen or heard from during the beheadings...why not ?
Where was their threat of criminal prosecution during that reign of terror ? I heard none !
Where was the hollywood movies detesting this form of torture (and it was!)

Did you notice the change in the very same voices. They were the ones who wanted to " ban land mines". Do you remember Princess Diane and the crusade she led with members of Hollywood, wanting to ban all Land mines, yet---after 9-11---
Not one peep out of them (Diane excused) against the car bombs and the suicide vests that kill our GI's !
A car bomb or a land mine perform the same function, and get the same result

So now we want to put these killers in a prison in Wisconsin or elseware, for what ? so they can teach other inmates their form of Radical Islam ?
Once in a prison, they are free to run internet scams, have visitors , and get legal representation.
I say if we do that, why not give them the keys to the prison as well.
I mean if you believe that they will just sit and rot, you have a very limited and complete misunderstanding of our prison system.. Cable TV anyone ?

Rich (Tue May 26 12:28:18 2009)

Yes, I am cynical...so I will say I think he wants to "seed" Muslim terrorists into more prisons so they can convert their fellow-prisoners, and thus gain more potential terrorists.

I recall his inauguration address, where he kept saying (at least 3 times if i recall correctly) "to those listening overseas, it's coming" My daughter said to me, "I don't like the sound of that; what does he mean by 'it'? And WHO are the ones listening overseas?" Couple that with the FACT that many overseas Muslims (yes I saw the footage) were haunting their internet bars, and pumping out emails, etc. in support of BO...

emily matthews (Tue May 26 16:14:53 2009)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend