• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Which of These Terrorists Will Obama Release Near You?

    According to the Pentagon only about 60 of the 250 detainees at Guantanamo could be released relatively safely, and that only 80 of the rest could face trial by “military commissions.” The New York Times reported this week that President-elect Barack Obama appears “to have rejected a proposal to seek a new law authorizing indefinite detention inside the United States.” National Journal‘s Stuart Taylor the connects some dots:

    This seems to imply that Obama will either continue to rely on Bush’s legal arguments for continued detention without charges — arguments that many Obama supporters have assailed — or yield to the demands of left-leaning human-rights groups that he release any and all Guantanamo detainees who cannot be criminally prosecuted.

    If seeking a new detention law has been ruled out … Obama would have only two options for dealing with the 100 or so apparently-dangerous-but-perhaps-not-prosecutable detainees.

    The first option would be to continue Bush’s military detention of these men as “enemy combatants,” presumably in the mainland United States. … The second option would be to release or transfer to other countries all of those who cannot be prosecuted. That group could include men such as these:

    Abd al Rahman al Zahri, who the government claims had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and who declared at a military hearing: “I’m not one of [Osama bin Laden's] men and not one of his individuals. I am one of his sons. I will kill myself for him and will also give my family and all of my money to him…. With the help of God, we will stand mujahedeen and terrorists against Americans.”

    Mohammed al Qahtani, who, the public evidence strongly suggests, was sent by Al Qaeda from London to Orlando, Fla., to be the 20th hijacker in the 9/11 suicide attacks. He was turned back by an alert immigration agent at the Orlando airport on August 4, 2001, while Mohamed Atta was waiting to meet him. Qahtani has become a cause celebre among human-rights groups because he was subjected in 2002 to what many call torture. Susan Crawford, the senior official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo detainees to trial, dismissed all charges against him last May. She recently told The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward that she would not allow any new charges to go forward because “we tortured Qahtani.” But she added: “He’s a very dangerous man. What do you do with him now if you don’t charge him and try him? I would be hesitant to say, ‘Let him go.’ ” The left-leaning Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents Qahtani, has said that he “should be sent back to Saudi Arabia’s highly successful custodial rehabilitation program.”

    Mohammad Ahmed Abdullah Saleh al Hanashi, who is probably more typical of the apparently-dangerous-but-perhaps-not-prosecutable group. He was Taliban cannon fodder. He admitted during a military hearing, “I was with the Taliban” and said he fought on the front lines against the Northern Alliance. Men such as him may be unlikely recruits for terrorist attacks against the U.S. but might well, if released, rejoin Taliban attacks on U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    15 Responses to Which of These Terrorists Will Obama Release Near You?

    1. DANIEL mohavevalley says:

      Maybe the senate could house them or san francisco

    2. Spiritof76, New Hamp says:

      Please house them in New York at NY Times building. It is just Al Jazeera west and they will feel at home there. Some of them should be sent to Hyannis and others to San Francisco. Kennedy compound will take care of the oppressed and San Francisco has the sanctuary laws defying the nation's laws.

    3. Ryan, Orlando Fl. says:

      An American tragedy worthy of Shakespeare.I still hear his supporters claim that he kept us safe! What was 911?, a mulligan? Bush had been in office almost a year! And those same supporters are claiming that president elect Obama, is somehow responsible for the recession his incoming administration is about to inherit! I can hardly contain my laughter at such absurdity.Undoubtedly Mr.Bush will go down in history as the worst leader of a western power since Adolph Hitler!

    4. Michael Haltman says:

      Just wrote a piece in my blog, The Political and Financial Markets Commentator (http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com) on the new AG and his opinion of what constitutes torture and how these opinions will tie the hands of intellegence.

      In our country humiliation is torture, while for our enemies gauging out a prisoners eyes or cutting off their hands is not.

      That seems like a problem to me.

      Mike Haltman

    5. Michael Garrison, At says:

      Prior to 911 American interests were attacked in every year since the bombing of our Marine barracks in Berut. In the almost eight years Since 911 we have not been attacked. President Bush commtted himself to the protection of the American people. His record will stand.

      .

    6. Ireland says:

      I suggest that any member of the current liberals Democrats or any Republican who signs this Bill into law and allows the detainees released should be forced to invite one to stay a few days at their home. We’ll see how accommodating Ms. Feinstein or President Obama is to any Gitmo prisoner, when they’ll be drinking their coffee and sitting in their lay-z-boy.

    7. David, Virginia Beac says:

      In response to Ryan, Orlando FL on Jan 16;

      President Bush has kept us safe since the 9/11 attacks by taking the fight into their territory. 9/11 was not a mulligan. Need I remind you of the World Trade Center bombing that occured on Clinton's watch? What about the USS Cole bombing?

      The recession that Obama will inherit will be a challenge for the new president. Spending our way out of it with bail-outs for all doesn't seem sound to me. I can however contain my laughter, because these are times of grave concern for the future of America.

      History will undoubtedly record George W. Bush as a great President and defender of freedom.

    8. H D, Virginia says:

      By intervening at Gitmo, President Obama will, in fact, prevent the mastermind of 911 from being prosecuted for that terrible attack on America. The terrorist will instead be tried for a lesser crime in New York having to do the the 1993 World Trade bombing. Why?, because the Obama team has decided that waterboarding voids the terrorist's confession. Must be the Chicago Way.

    9. Morgan, TN. says:

      Ryan, Orlando FL.

      Comparing Bush to Hitler is something that needs containing more than your giddy high school laughter. Grow up dummy. Please explain how releasing terrorists is safer than taking the fight to the enemy? Don't bother, I'm sure it would require more research than watching a movie.

    10. Ronn W says:

      Im not the biggest Bush fan, but he did help keep the country safer. I strongly disagreed with going into Iraq when we did. We needed to focus more, and longer on Afganistan. As for Obama… We are in big trouble people. This is not racist(for those african americans that can't seem to quit playing that card) I dont care what the guys race was. I just wanted someone that was fit for the job. Neither canidate was fit. This was the poorest of choices in presidential canidates the U.S. has ever had. Obama had a way of talking for 30 minutes straight without ever saying anything! So far, almost all he has done is confirmed that things are bad and getting worse. He has admitted to plans for making power costs higher till we can become more "green" (im so sick of all the green talk, I could puke) If anymore coal industries are built he will "bankrupt them"..HIS words, not mine. The bush administration was just so hated, that no matter who ran on the democratic card..they WOULD win. As Ive said before…Obama didnt win the election..the republicans LOST it. Americans are so easily influenced. Its so sad. America voted for a guy, and could not give ONE good reason why, besides…Change. Change? Change what? Good change? Bad change? What kinda change? No one knew. But they voted for him anyway. 2 years before he ran for president, he openly said he wasnt qualified to run on the national ticket. He didnt have enough experience. Suddenly, in just a mere 2 years..he's ready? No, he's not. And he's proving that very quickly. I just pray that all the Clinton administration people he hired talk some sense into him before we find ourselves in another Great Depression. I hope Im wrong… I really do. But until he proves me wrong, I feel that we are in for a "change" that america isnt prepared for.

    11. Leslie Ohio says:

      Ronn W.. Kudos! You said it completely right and I praise you for your speech. Hope everyone that voted for Obama likes the "change" he's giving you. Cause he never said it was a good change.

    12. J. Jolene Atkins says:

      I didn't vote for him. I didn't like the change he was threatening (promising)when he was running; and I surely do not like it now. I do not want to live as the Europeans; I do not want to live in a Socialist state; nor a Communist State. Neither do I want Universal Health Care. I do not mind health care somehow being delivered to those who are really and truly unable to pay for it; but I don't want the health care I pay for messed up. Neither do I think it is right for people making $80,000 to have health care given to their children at taxpayer expense. My husband and I raised two children, paid for their insurance and their medical care on much smaller salaries (closer to minimum wage for a few years- then middle class wage). We didn't ask for welfare health care. I do believe people making $80,000 annually should be able to manage their own familiy's health care. Government needs to be smaller – not bigger; and it needs to get out of our private lives inasmuch as possible. Give us America and our freedoms back! Keep us Safe from terrorists! That shouldn't be asking too much!

      J. Atkins – Dallas, TX

    13. Ronn W says:

      Thanks Leslie… It's really quite depressing. I go to the malls and see Obama tshirts, hats, cups, flags, charms, car tags..etc etc.. And I wonder if these people that are so enthused about his presidency are enthused for the right reasons. So i asked a few of the people selling the merchandise if they voted for him. Of course they said yes. I then asked them, what was it that made them decide to cast their vote for him… Here are the answers!!… #1-"I thought it was time to have an african american leader" #2-"America needed change" #3- "I beleived amercia was ready for a black president"… WHAT??? This is the best answers you could give?! Oh and one guy even said, "cause Bush sucked"(i still have no idea what that had to do with electing Obama, but he helped prove my point) No one could name a specific reason worth electing a president. Even a couple of my closest friends voted for him. But they cant tell me why, except for saying how much they hated bush and then the whole "change" speech. Come on people! WHY DID YOU VOTE FOR HIM? I am completely open to hear any good specific reasons.

    14. Robert Dye / Grand I says:

      What about execution? Anyone thought of that? They are obviously terrorist and if they were not they will be when they get back home with an even greater vengeance against Americans. I say execute them and put it live on pay per view and donate all proceeds to the widows and victims of 911.

    15. Bill s ,fl says:

      These Islamic Terrorists are part of an invading army bent on killing Americans.They are now housed in Gitmo and that's where they should stay until Obama orders them to face a firing squad.Remember 9-11,the horrible death of USA civilians being burnt to death and leaping out of windows rather than being slowly fried like a hamburger on the grill and massive destruction of Twin Towers and the Pentagon.Those people suffered a horrible torturous death and the liberals in this country worry about the treatment of these low life Islamic Terrorists.Keep them in GITMO and have them eat pork three times a day.Water-boarding is not torture as compared to being forced to jump from 80 to 100 stories up or not jumping and being grilled like a hamburger in a matter of seconds.That's torture!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×