Congressman Proposes Bill: No Gitmo Detainee May Set Foot on U.S. Soil
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
By Michael W. Chapman, Managing Editor
Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) (Courtesy of Rep. Shadegg's Web site)
(CNSNews.com) – Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) has introduced a bill that would prevent any of the detainees in the soon-to-be-closed Guantanamo Bay prison from being allowed into the United States. Back on Jan. 22, President Barack Obama issued an executive order mandating the closure of the prison, known as Gitmo, within 12 months. Gitmo holds nearly 250 enemy combatants from the war on terrorism.
With the question in mind of where those prisoners will go, Rep. Shadegg introduced HR 1238, which would prevent anyone being held at Gitmo from setting foot on U.S. soil.
“No American family should ever have to worry about their own government placing a terrorist in their community,” Shadegg said in a statement about the bill. “I have introduced legislation that would make this impossible – ensuring that the Islamic extremists at Guantanamo are not given the chance to enter our country and complete their unfinished mission of shedding American blood.”
Among the near-250 prisoners at Gitmo are Abd al-Rahm al-Nashiri, who was implicated in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole Naval ship, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the reported mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. According to the Department of Defense, some 61 former Gitmo prisoners who were released have returned to terrorism.
Abdullah Massoud was a Taliban terrorist captured and sent to Gitmo shortly after 9/11. There, he received medical treatment, including a prosthetic leg, and legal assistance. He was eventually released and he returned to the battlefield. As The New York Times Magazine reported in October 2006:
“Massoud was captured fighting the Americans and the Northern Alliance and spent two years there [at Gitmo], claiming to be a simple Afghan Talib. Upon his release, he made it home to Waziristan and resumed his war against the U.S. With his long hair, his prosthetic limb and impassioned speeches, he quickly became a charismatic inspiration to Waziristan’s youth.”
On Jan. 22, Obama said that Gitmo would close “no later than one year from now.” The president also ordered a special task force to review the conditions at Gitmo. Many critics of the Bush administration had claimed that prisoners were being tortured and otherwise treated inhumanely at the prison.
In its 81-page report, released Feb. 23, the task force concluded: “After considerable deliberation and a comprehensive review, it is our judgment that the conditions of confinement in Guantanamo are in conformity with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.”
In his March 3 statement, Rep. Shadegg said: “Our brave soldiers sacrificed valiantly to keep these terrorist killers away from their loved ones and ours. Now we may bring them here ourselves? That is one risk we should never take.”
HR 1238 is currently being circulated among lawmakers in the House, where it will garner co-sponsors. From there it will be debated in the House Judiciary Committee. If it makes it out of the committee, it could then go to the House floor for a vote.
Good idea. Note that it is looking for cosponsors now.Send a letter to your hired hand.
First of all, the bill is just not needed. 1) There is no way that any terrorist where there is evidence that they are in fact such a person will be allowed out of a prison and into the community.
2) Secondly, those where no evidence exists that they are in fact a terrorist, will be sent to a foreign country...not to your neighborhood.
3)The bill is actually an attempt to keep the detention center in Gitmo open and operating and nothing more than that.
1) The above post quite clearly refutes your position when it states Upon his release, he made it home to Waziristan and resumed his war against the U.S. With his long hair, his prosthetic limb and impassioned speeches, he quickly became a charismatic inspiration to Waziristan’s youth.
2) Evidence..... since they were detained because they are enemy combatants or terrorists, keep them detained until we can determine where their allegiance lies.
3) I'm okay with this, but they were detained for a reason and I for one do not want Gitmo closed.
__________________ A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that. Shane
Nemo me impune lacesset
We recall the case of the Shoshone war band which showed up complete with one 30-30 rifle per man the week after Pearl Harbor, and simply wanted to have the enemy pointed out to them. "We hear there's a war going on and we want to go fight it." Jeff Cooper
Hmmm...guess I should have said released into your community. Last I heard, Waziristan was no place near my community. The rhetoric of the first post clearly is intended to imply that the detainees at Gitmo would be coming to a neighborhood near you. Pure fear tactics and nothing less than fear tactics.
As for them going home and right into "terrorist" activities there...not too sympathetic. I have been to the middle east and for the most part have little respect for their BS and the people who put up with it.
Closing down Gitmo is a good idea in my mind or if not that, at least providing a level of judicial system that every person on US soil is afforded.
Never, in any modern war, was being an enemy combatant a reason to call someone a criminal. At worst, they were held as POW's until the war was at an end. The Bush idiocy of calling each and every person that engaged in combat with our combat troops "terrorists" is not tolerable! Terrorists target innocent CIVILIANS not combat troops.
If another nation were to invade the US, I would bet that you would be out there with weapon in hand in defense of the nation with or without a uniform. Under the Bush definition, you would be an illegal combatant and a terrorist.
Quite a bit of the "evidence" used to justify the round up of many of these detainees proved to be less than worthless. That didn't stop them from rounding them up and shoving them into a prison though. Gee, you would you feel being treated just exactly the same way? Might you have a bit of hatred toward those who treated you so badly? Might you want to get some revenge when you got released? Or would you just simply be grateful that they let you go without killing you?
I got no love at all for the vast majority of middle eastern crap and am very happy to allow them to all kill each other off but, we of the United States do have standards that we must apply to all if we have any interest in actually promoting the idea of freedom. Otherwise, we are no better than they are.
The Bush idiocy of calling each and every person that engaged in combat with our combat troops "terrorists" is not tolerable! Terrorists target innocent CIVILIANS not combat troops.
Ah but you see terrorism against innocent civilians IS a generally used and accepted tactic of the organizations whom these people serve. I personally see no good reason why the detention center in Gitmo should be closed. Having said that, I would not fear them being detained in a highly secure facility in a remote location on U.S. soil.