Gitmo, Gitmo, Gitmo

Gitmo, Gitmo, Gitmo. OK, fine. Civil, civil, civil this is not! Suddenly I am being bombarded with Gitmo rhetoric (e-mails). And it is just that, rhetoric. (Don’t get it twisted). Pro or con to Gitmo existing you have to understand what is going on and the consequences behind closing it (or keeping it open). The reason Gitmo exists is solely due to the fact we are fighting a civilized war against an uncivilized adversary. Rather than kill them (like we probably should given what they are trying to do and have done to our troops) we keep them and interrogate them. And yes, that is seemingly controversial but pales in comparison to a video taped decapitation of an American contractor or journalist.

Where I will concede in the whole Gitmo controversy is here and only here. It fails to work ONLY when detainees are released. 61 detainees (that we know of) have gone back to commit further acts of terror. The outcome of such releases you see as you drive by your local Veteran’s Memorial Cemetery. Once placed there (in Gitmo), they should remain there - indefinitely. (That's my concession and I'm sticking to it).

So what happens to these released detainees? Obviously, they just don’t send them straight home. They go to Saudi Arabia where they are religiously re-socialized. They enter a program that re-teaches Islam to redefine martyrdom as they currently understand it. A nice program at a nice facility, liken it to Islam 101 at a local college campus (literally). From prison to a college campus - I am not joking. They say what they need to say and are released to family. They are not monitored, they are not prohibited from contacting fellow martyrs, they go home to mom and dad. Mom and dad are "asked" to contact the center or authorities if they notice behavior that may lead to further acts of terror. They get paid $700 a month after leaving the program and are encouraged to get married (which they are given $20,000 for). So basically they are getting paid to be released which only provides incentive to give the lip service required to get out of the program. You add Taqiyya (dissimilation) to that and there is no reason as to why such a program would or could work. (Not following that, read here).

From a more liberal perspective we seek to give these detainees more rights than they deserve. It is not as much about protecting the civil rights of these individuals as it is protecting the nation and our troops. OUR CIVIL RIGHTS do not apply to armed people at war with us; their civil rights do. And their civil rights (under the holy word they are fighting for) dictate that they die for their cause; not to get a speedy and fair trail or have their rights read to them. We are applying our standards to those our standards do not apply. These are not American citizens that held up a convenience store. Once people begin to understand that they will understand what the problem is (and is not).

The next step is; who remains at Gitmo. The worst of the worst. If releasing the "not so bad" is failing, turning over the remaining detainees will fail on a greater scale. This is not rocket science by any stretch of the imagination.

So what is the problem? Pre-election rhetoric is the problem. The administration is more concerned about keeping its word on this issue than it is keeping the nation’s best interests at heart. This is not an enemy in which we can simply disengage and walk away from. Leaving them to be, and imagining this has all been a bad dream will have catastrophic results. They have to be stopped. Cheney said it best; "The United States needs to not so much be loved as it needs to be respected. Sometimes that requires us to take actions that generate controversy." This new kinder, gentler ideology is going to end badly. Believe it or not, being the bad guy from time to time has good results if your intentions are right. "The road to hell was paved with good intentions" and that is road we are now on.

But then again, if we have become so soft that we are too "kind" to spank our children with their best interests at heart; so then I suppose it is far too great of an expectation that we as a people spank an enemy with our nation’s best interest at heart!

Having said that, I have read each e-mail you guys have sent me on this. And with the understanding and respect to the fact that everyone has their opinion - every one of your opinions are wrong! Love hurts, but denial costs. We say we love our nation but we want to forgo the pain of protecting it. The only question remaining; is how much will this denial cost us in the long run?

-T

Wake up and toughen up people.