Murtha takes aim at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo.
By on Jan 9th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Murtha takes aim at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo.
“Now that he is back in power, [Rep. John] Murtha (D-PA) wants to make sure Abu Ghraib prison is shut down, and he is sending his staff to inspect conditions at Guantanamo in Cuba.” Referring to the upcoming military supplemental legislation, Murtha said, “I will try to shut it [Abu Ghraib] down in this bill.” President Bush “vowed in a May 2004 speech to build ‘a modern, maximum security prison’ and then destroy Abu Ghraib prison — with the Iraq government’s approval.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
That’ll be one huge signing statement Bush’ll be forced to pen after that bill passes. I’m sure it’ll say something like:
“This legislation to shut down Gitmo is interpreted to mean that it shall stay open….”
January 9th, 2007 at 1:54 pm#1 Punchy
Plus the Dems will be quite vocal about any signing statement Bush make from here. At least, I hope they do it, because it would be the best way to blast any remaining credibility Bush has …
January 9th, 2007 at 1:58 pmMurtha needs to call for Bush and Cheney to resign or the Congress must impeach both of them! Americans want prison terms for them!
January 9th, 2007 at 2:01 pmDon’t shut down the cells at Gitmo!
January 9th, 2007 at 2:05 pmWhat better place to put the Bushco?
They can argue all night
Over who has the might
To to tell the rest of the Repugs where to go.
#4 Clyde
My thoughts exactly.
I believe Abu Gharib should remain open as well, so the Iraqi’s can “waterboard” Dead-Eye Dick and the rest of the Bushco, or walk’em on leashes with cigarettes dangling from the corners of their mouths ala Lindy whatever her name was.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:16 pmWhere is MA gonna get dates?
January 9th, 2007 at 2:26 pmGood job, Mr. Murtha! Make the President and other members of Congress go on record to say if they are for naked butt pyramids or against naked butt pyramids. Next stop, Gitmo, and its policy of peeing on the Koran!!
January 9th, 2007 at 2:33 pmWhat a bunch of a$$holes. You say you don’t like what is happening there. You say it is torture and you don’t approve of torture. Then you butt munches call for the torture of others.
Stupid hypocritical statements. No wonder no one takes you moon-bats seriously.
ROTFL
January 9th, 2007 at 2:47 pmBy the way. Abu Ghraib is owned and run by the Iraqies. We are not in there anymore. But the people in Abu Ghraib with wish the Americans were in control again.
As for the GITMO country club. Why does this a-hole want to weaken our country. What is it with you libs.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:50 pmHappy Guy > go to GITMO and live with the prisoners there, since you think the place is a country club resort!
January 9th, 2007 at 2:54 pmMy question is;
Will Murtha tell the Iraqis that THEY have to close Abu Ghraib? We can pull our people out of there (I think we already did, maybe not), but can we dictate that the Iraqis do to?
January 9th, 2007 at 2:57 pm#9 Happy Guy
The existence of Gitmo weakens our country. What has gone on there is, at the very least, immoral and at the very worst illegal. A high percentage of those who are sent to Gitmo have no ties to terrorism or enemies of our country whatsoever. The rest of the world is disgusted with the lack of process and transparency and disgusted with our treatment of detainees. Countries that have historically been our allies are distancing themselves from us, thus lessening our ability to enact effective foreign policy, thus weakening our standing in the world.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:59 pm“#8 and #9″
They were being what we call “facetious”. Please look it up. Also we don’t want to have Bush and Co tortured. We just want them in prison (preferably in the Haque serving life sentences for war crimes) where they deserve to go.
As to Gitmo, we Libs aren’t opposed to having military bases, we just don’t like to have prisons around the globe completely outside of the judicial system, where we torture people. Closing the prison at Gitmo wouldn’t weaken our country. Allowing torture to be exercised by Americans, does.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:06 pm#12 AshenShard –
Who is on the UN council on Human Rights?
Answer: Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Pakistan and China.
And you think GITMO is embarrassing? The UN weakens us to the world. The fact that we put up with any crap from this pack of criminals shows us as weak.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:16 pmMurtha? Murtha who? Oh, that has-been who the Dems rejected for the #2 position in the House in lieu of Steney Hoyer?
January 9th, 2007 at 3:17 pmThe fact that we put up with any crap from this pack of criminals shows us as weak.
Comment by Happy Guy
Im with you. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Negroponte et al. are all criminals…
January 9th, 2007 at 3:20 pm#12 Happy Guy
We claim to be better than them, and therefore should act better than them. Last I checked this administration was quite friendly with saudi Arabia, Russia and Pakistan, while effectively ignoring China. Before we critisize anyone for their poor human rights record, we must improve our own and once again become a shining example of equality, humanity, and democracy rather than just a bully.
Our seat in the UN is likely the only reason we haven’t had sanctions slapped on us. So it therefore does not weaken us, but strengthens us when much of the rest of the world is against us.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:22 pm#13 PaganAmerican – #5 asked to (“waterboard†Dead-Eye Dick). I think that was asking to torture.
Military prisons are necessary for enemy combatants. They are not Americans and they are not criminals who should get lawyers. They do not have constitutional rights no matter what the ACLU tries to say. Yes, they should be afforded certain human rights but that is the gray area constantly under discussion.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:23 pmoops, #17 should be directed to #14
January 9th, 2007 at 3:25 pm#18 Happy Guy
They should be given due process at the very least. Not only would it be a shining example for the rest of the world to follow, but it would quickly weed out those who are totally innocent thus improving our image around the world, making more room for those who should actually be there, and cutting the costs of imprisoning someone who shouldn’t be in prison.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:27 pm#16 – Juan C, Ha ha, Kofi and him family of raiders. Sex for food scandals with starving children. Do you really want to hash up that one again?
January 9th, 2007 at 3:28 pmMore blah, blah talking. Lets see some action.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:28 pmWhat I don’t understand about Happy-Guy is how he could so completely hate the US.
I mean:
He hates the concept of a nation of laws rather then men.
He hates the concept of a nation without torture.
He hates the concept of the bill of rights, especially rights like fair trials (Going back to before America even existed) free speech, privacy, freedom of religion (Or lack thereof) etc…
He hates the various treaties the US spearheaded or at least played a major part in, which have made the world a better place (NPT, Geneva, Helsinki, etc…)
He hates the seperation of Church and State.
He even hates that whole bit about America being ruled by the people, for the people (He considers that concept communism)
You see, when I look at what the US is supposed to be, warts and all, it seems to me that it is basically meant to be something very good. I just cannot understand how a guy like Happy-Guy can hate it so much.
Please, someone, clue me in here.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:41 pmwait are you saying…
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Negroponte et al. traded food for sex with little children? Wow. Just, wow. I must have missed that one (Chalk it up to conservative media) but, heck its a good thing the Democrats are in charge now isn’t it?
January 9th, 2007 at 3:44 pmMurtha? Murtha who? Oh, that has-been who the Dems rejected for the #2 position in the House in lieu of Steney Hoyer? Comment by Jason M. Hendler
And what were the names of the former House majority leader and his #2? Weren’t they Republicans? Aren’t they the real has-beens now? Actually, I think they are the “never-weres”.
Come on, Jason, you can do better than this.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:45 pmI COULD NOT have put it any better! What a NOVEL idea! Worthy of recognition in CONGRESS!
I for one would welcome THAT legislation. The thought of seeing Barbara and Lynn crying their eyes out would be pure poetic justice for all of the mothers who have only solace from a flag draped coffin!
January 9th, 2007 at 3:45 pm#22, gobble gobble….i thought only turkeys do that….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owIkvWXIbJg
January 9th, 2007 at 3:47 pmMurtha? Murtha who? Oh, that has-been who the Dems rejected for the #2 position in the House in lieu of Steney Hoyer?
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Hastert? Hastert who? Oh that has-been who the American people rejected for the #1 position in the House in lieu of Nancy Pelosi?
We can play this game all day.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:48 pmBruce Gorton
Don’t try to understand “Happy Feet” too much. To fully comprehend, you would probably have to descend to a most unpleasant place in the twilight zone where time, space, and logic are so warped that one could end up with reality vertigo.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:49 pmYes Bruce, there is a scandle. You can ignore it all you want but UN food earmarked for starving families where not given the food until the families allowed the UN soldiers to have sex with their children.
You can ignore it and make Bush cracks all you want but then I will forget discussions and go back to trolling.
ROTFL
see
ROTFL
January 9th, 2007 at 3:49 pmGot some evidence on that one Happy Guy?
January 9th, 2007 at 3:51 pmHappy Guy
Okay, just to be clear on this: The Republicans, listed by Juan C had all gotten together, and talked some UN peacekeepers into letting them in on what was basically a pedophile ring in the third world, where they exchanged food for sex.
That said, I still don’t see what any of your posts have to do with the abuses of human rights in Gitmo, or whether Murtha is right or not in his stance on Gitmo.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:57 pmYou mean like the one you made about the dems wanting to take the day off for football when it was really the GrOPes?
No wonder no one takes the GrOPers seriously.
Besides that, if you read about my name, you would know that it leads to the star of Bethlehem and not the moon.
Happy Guy you I believe in Jesus, dont you?
Genesis 1:16-18
God made two great lights-the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. (NIV)
The lesser light they speak of is most likely the moon.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:09 pmSilly Happy Guy.
You can ignore it and make Bush cracks all you want but then I will forget discussions and go back to trolling.
Your not very good at either one, might I suggest you study your bible, Moonbat. Bwahahahaha!
January 9th, 2007 at 4:14 pmGod set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth,
Whomever wrote that was narcissistic to say the least, to imply the stars were put there by God to light this one little planet. Moronic.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:15 pmThe moon is only 500 years old, and was not there when the Bible was written. /sarcasm.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:15 pmI was just pointing out the hypocrisy of Happy Guys moonbat statement.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:19 pmThe reference to moonbat got me wondering. Anyone know what happened to “Moonbat Patrol”. Happy Guy sounds a bit like him.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:26 pmI was just pointing out the hypocrisy of Happy Guys moonbat statement.
Comment by Zep Tepi
I know you are not the writer of that stuff, you just quoted it. Its cool.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:30 pmThere is no pleasure to be taken in debating with the likes of Happy Guy because it is manly to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man. The trolls should remember that old adage I just coined: Never make vast proclamations with a half-vast brain.
January 9th, 2007 at 4:46 pm#41 My bad. It should be “unmanly.”
January 9th, 2007 at 4:47 pm#4 CtR
January 9th, 2007 at 4:51 pmWhat better place to put the Bushco?
Just the thought of that makes me smile. Exiling Bush&Co to Gitmo would be the only reason to keep that place open.
“Some people tell me it’s shut down already but nobody’s verified that.”
What? Did I read that right? I find Murtha’s statement quite troubling. I would naturally assume spending billions of dollars in the war effort would yield knowledge about the current status of Abu Ghraib. Surely, out of billions of dollars a $5.00 phone call could be allocated to verify the prison’s current status. How many intelligence officers would it take to verify this? One? Two? I would think one simple phone call would do the trick.
Apparently the top brass in command doesn’t know what’s going on. With the amount of money we’re spending, they SHOULD know what’s going on.
I suppose the Abu Ghraib chapter of this war book is one chapter this administration would like to delete. NO DOUBT THIS MENTALLY-CHALLENGED ADMINISTRATION WOULD LIKE TO DELETE EVERY CHAPTER IN THIS WAR BOOK.
As far as I am concerned, the Abu Ghraib chapter changed peoples’ perception of this war. We were supposed to be the “good” guys but we weren’t. The “integrity” Bush was trying to push went down a rat hole. Just like the billions of dollars we are spending is going down a rat hole.
When a few, or more than a few, Bush administration officials are in jail, I hope we can verify that the prison is open for business. Don’t worry officials! We, the American taxpayers, will make sure the prison is open. PRISONS!!!!!
John
January 9th, 2007 at 8:36 pm“Some people tell me it’s shut down already but nobody’s verified that.â€
Translation:
I’m going to grand stand here. I am goingto raise an issue that I am not even sure is an issue. I am going to close a prison that I do not even know is open. Look at me, LOOK AT ME !!!!!! Ain’t I great!
Mutha = moron
January 10th, 2007 at 10:19 amI agree that Hastert and Frist ARE has-beens – electing individuals who will “reach across the aisle” to a minority party that had no intention of reaching back was the Reps greatest mistake. Not defending effective leaders like Tom DeLay and Trent Lott against bogus charges caused Reps to lose momentum on their agenda, as well as deal with political crises as they occurred.
January 10th, 2007 at 10:34 amI agree that Hastert and Frist ARE has-beens – electing individuals who will “reach across the aisle†to a minority party that had no intention of reaching back was the Reps greatest mistake.
Blather by Jason M.H.
So Porker Hastert and Cat-killer Frist tried to reach across the aisle, eh? What aisle? Hastert even tried to lock out fellow Repubs who disagreed with him, saying he would only accept “the majority of the majority” opinion. He also removed the very conservative but honest Joel Hefley as Chairman of the House Ethics Committee for doing his job and reprimanding Tom Delay for dubious ethics. Meanwhile, Frist wanted to do away with the Senate tradition of the filibuster.
January 11th, 2007 at 1:18 amAnd, BTW, Stanford is not an Ivy League university.