Krauthammer and Barnes call for ‘indefinite detention’ law for suspected terrorists.
Krauthammer and Barnes call for ‘indefinite detention’ law for suspected terrorists.
Last night on Fox News, war hawks Charles Krauthammer and Fred Barnes expressed outrage at President-elect Obama’s pledge to close the Guantanamo Bay prison for suspected terrorists. As an alternative, Krauthammer called on Democrats to pass an “indefinite detention” law; Barnes wholeheartedly agreed:
KRAUTHAMMER: We’re going to have to have a law which is going to allow indefinite detention, and it is going to be Democrats who will actually have to craft it. I think that’s poetic justice. [...]
BARNES: Guantanamo will be hard. You have to pass new laws. As Charles says, you have to pass a permanent detention law in the case of some of these guys.
However the two did not agree on the rationalization for such a law. Barnes said Gitmo detainees are “almost” treated better there than in any other prison in the world, while Krauthammer argued that the U.S. interned Germans and Japanese indefinitely during WWII and the same should apply now. Watch it:
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
can we start with Krauthammer who terrorizes me weekly in the op/ed pages of the local newspaper with the dirty bombs he calls “journalism”?
December 9th, 2008 at 3:41 pmLet’s say we do a trial run starting with these two bozos.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:48 pmKrauthammer and Barnes are stupid right-wing idiots who want to turn back our human rights some eight-hundred years, to the time before the Magna Carta was signed in England in 1215… The are vile beyond belief, but they are Bush Republicans, and so it is par for the course for them…
December 9th, 2008 at 3:48 pmKrauthammer & Barnes-two boneheads proving if you give them enough rope…
December 9th, 2008 at 3:50 pmFacism in the name of ‘protecting’ the United States is still facism
December 9th, 2008 at 3:53 pmThese two would feel perfectly at home in 1930s Germany.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:56 pmNo people can indefinitly imprison suspects without a trial and pretend to being a law abiding citizenry. Either they are POWs or there MUST be a judicial showing of wrongdoing or no imprisonment. The very concept of saying well we think you MIGHT be a bad guy so we are just going to lock you up and never let you go WITHOUT every actually SHOWING you are a bad guy is incomprehensible and should be to anyone with the pretense of decency. Krauthammer and Barnes of course leaving such pretense behind many moons ago.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:57 pmwhat i’d like to know is what exactly is it going to take for these bozos to get the message that americans have rebuked them and their ideology? a couple of them tried and hung for treason?
December 9th, 2008 at 3:59 pmKrauthammer and Barnes call for ‘indefinite detention’ law
– - Call it what it is; tyranny.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:59 pmUmm…
December 9th, 2008 at 4:00 pmHAHAHAHAHA…..NOT THAT THEY WEREN’T BEFORE…..BUT FOKKK SNOOZE IS REALLY TRYING TO BRING ON STAGE THE BIGGEST CONSPIRATORIAL IDIOTS AND BLOODTHIRSTY FASCISTS TO DATE
THE RIGHT WING IS MELTING DOWN……BETTER STAND BACK…..THESE VAMPIRES NEVER EXPLODE/IMPLODE WITHOUT A BIG MESS
December 9th, 2008 at 4:00 pmStill riding that old terrorist fear bandwagon? Barnes and Hammer are so yesterday. No ones listening anymore.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:08 pmThank God we will have a President with a brain and one who looks out for the American People and the Military. If we were to have a law to keep people in jail forever without charges this would be picked up by other countries and it would happen to Americans and US soldiers. With so many Americans traveling overseas what would the US do if men/woman/children were kidnapped, transported, tortured, raped and even killed while being held without charges forever? What goes around comes around.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:10 pmOr…we could create and/or turn them over to an international body like say the International Human Rights Court or maybe create an International Terrorism Court that has the authority to try and incarcerate terrorists.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pmWTF is wrong with these people? When did they go just batshit crazy and start seeing boogymen under their beds every night? We cannot, cannot hold people indefinitely. It’s not only against our laws, but I’m pretty sure it’s against International law as well.
Sheesh, WTF is wrong with these people?
December 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pmLet’s see, we could detain the entire bush administration as terrorists. Put them all in Gitmo and leave them there for an indefinite period of time, say the next 50 years.
But then, this would indicate that closing Gitmo would have to be put on hold. Hmmmmmm.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:14 pmThe internment camps during WWII are one of America’s greatest shames. It is thus no surprise that these small minded bigots advocate bringing them back.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:14 pmBarnes is indeed a cretinous moron.
But he approves of Obama’s cabinet choices so far. He’s fukcing orgasmic about ‘em.
As for the Karuthammer, you gotta figger it’s his fate to be confined to that chair. I suspect his bitterness stems from the sores on his ass. Not that I can spare a single scintilla of pity…
December 9th, 2008 at 4:17 pm‘Poetic Justice’, eh?
I think he’s saying the we’re going to have to do what they’ve wanted to do all along – and that gives them joy.
They give ‘morally bankrupt’ a whole new meaning.
I’d bet thier conception of ‘poetry’ was just as suspect as their conception of ‘justice’.
Krauthammer, Barnes, and the rest of Fox are a stain and a blight.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:17 pmRight, we should continue to pick up even more Middle East people off the streets to put them in Guantanamo and torture them until they confess that they had a hand in the “demolition” of the World Trade Center. Godda keep this hoax “war on terror” fired up!
December 9th, 2008 at 4:20 pmI see Faux News still upholds its right for a permanent leave of rational thought and taking the lowest road(s) whenever possible.
The Gitmo of the sick and depraved minds will always exist in the Faux-iverse.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:21 pmTell ya what: let’s declare all the wingnuts to be “terrorist suspects” and detain *them* indefinitely.
Yeah. Works for me.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:21 pmYou’ve heard of dumb & dumber…meet
Dumbest & Dumber Yet…
December 9th, 2008 at 4:26 pmIgnoranceIsNotBliss says;
WTF is wrong with these people?
A. It’s called Republicanism(aka: Fascism).
December 9th, 2008 at 4:27 pm“Krauthammer argued that the U.S. interned Germans and Japanese indefinitely during WWII and the same should apply now.”
December 9th, 2008 at 4:32 pmAnd many of those interned were citizens of the USA – being stripped of all rights and any property they owned…
Charlie is an evil, vile person to even think, let alone speak such a thing.
#3 . . . I agree, we can’t know if it will effective, so the two clown brothers and a few former buschco crooks should join them for an indefinite stay. Probably best to have the location be in an overseas country as well.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:33 pmBarnes and Count Krautula are easy targets for you all, true.
But I was on a thread a week or two ago when I asked repeatedly, just what is Obama going to do with the 250 detainees at Gitmo? No one ever answered.
Give all of them a civillian trial? Impossible for a wide variety of reasons. Obama would have to either grotesquely compromise national security by allowing them to call witnesses who could never testify or just simply release them because of the way they were captured (out of uniform, on the battlefield, no evidence gathered)or treated since.
Send them all home? Equally impossible. The Chinese suspects and many others would be summarily executed, or the Yemenis (I understand around half are Yemeni) would be convicted and then released like the Cole bombers were. Obama is too tough a politician to give his challenger in 2012 that kind of ammo.
So, loathe him all you like and wish for him to be imprisoned, gloat over him being bound to a wheel chair if you must, but I actually think Krauthamer is right on this one.
When have Reid and Pelosi ever failed to let you guys down?
December 9th, 2008 at 4:33 pmtreated “ALMOST BETTER” than any jail in the world ?
What does that mean ???????????
And I haven’t even gotten to debunking their image of free swimming lessons, music blaring, etc. as being consistent with a civilized detention.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:35 pmI’m still trying to figure out how it’s “poetic justice” that the Democrats have to try to clean up the Republicans’ mess. Talk about sore losers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSGLzStgujM
December 9th, 2008 at 4:37 pmKelt: Just EXACTLY WHY are you afraid of letting the detainees have a TRULY fair trial instead of a Kangaroo court?
Are you afraid that some/most of them might actually be innocent and set free?
December 9th, 2008 at 4:38 pmIndefinite detention is something we already have. It’s called a “life sentence without parole,” and it follows a jury trial in this country.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:38 pmPerry; PLEASE stop those links about going bonkers. once, or twice is ok, BUT YOU ARE WEARING IT OUT!
Thank you for your attention.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:40 pmIf the people being held in GTMO are guilty of a crime, then let them have their trial and let’s move on. At the very least, allow each and every one of them to challenge their own detention in court.
Our court system is designed to punish people for what they actually did, not what they might have done if they weren’t picked up and thrown in prison forever.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:45 pmUncle Ho Says:
Kelt: Just EXACTLY WHY are you afraid of letting the detainees have a TRULY fair trial instead of a Kangaroo court?
Are you afraid that some/most of them might actually be innocent and set free?
No – if they are innocent, they should go free, obviously. Neither one of us has any way in this world of ascertaining their guilt or innocence at this point.
But – military tribunals are an established precedent in the history of Anglo-American jurisprudence. And for the reasons I cited in my post, a regular civillian trial for these guys is simply not practical.
WHY are YOU assuming that a military tribunal cannot be fair?
And BTW, all you trying to collude the shameful detention of American citizens of Japanese descent during WWII and the detaining of Japanese and German POWs should just quit it. You are either ignorant or dishonest if you persist.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:57 pmCourts martial are the established precedent in the history of Anglo-American juriprudence – the current military tribunals were thought up last year, and do not contain the rules of justice common to the Anglo-American history of jurisprudence. I suspect that you know this and are being deliberately dishonest.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:01 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
Wears Diapers at Night Says:
You are either ignorant or dishonest if you persist.
Should we start calling you the ‘pot’ or the ‘kettle’?
Congrats, Matt! That is two accurate copy-paste jobs of my comments in a row! Amazing how a little Ree-Ding can make you look so smart. Well, relatively speaking, anyway.
Sadly, til you have something of substance to say instead of the ad hominem garbage and puerille name calling, you will be stuck in the basket with Fred, rhf and McMetal. Maybe joe cantwell, too.
*
good luck
*
December 9th, 2008 at 5:10 pmGee, these guys sound like Saddam supports, with all this talk about, confined forever?
December 9th, 2008 at 5:11 pmThe wingnuts are out in full force today.
Keltoi at Night Says:
Yes I DID answer you and no Krauthammer is NOT right. There is NO WAY we can continue to even pretend we are a decent people bound by law if we just say we will only USE the law if it is convienient. I dont even want to HEAR that doing the right thing isnt convienient so we should just eschew all standards of decency and forget the law. Either they are POWS or they are criminals but they can NEVER be treated as criminals without a showing IN COURT that they ARE guilty of criminal behaviour. You still seem to be turning the burden of proof around and are ASSUMING they are all guilty even though we PAID A BOUNTY to the warlords whom we KNOW are not credible to turn them over to us. IF we are keeping innocent people in custody then WE are doing something WRONG. What justification can there possibly be to keep someone incarcerated indefinitly IN CASE they might be bad people? YES if we want to keep them they get trials. It isnt that hard to keep secret testimony secret. That CAN be done. We can set up a special court in say Miami to handle these cases and get professional jurors who spend the next three years hearing the cases. As long as all the aspects of a fair trial are included. Then we can find a few countries that will take them IF they are not found guilty. Do you remember the Uigers? We kept them for four years even though our own Pentagon admitted very early that they were NOT considered combatants of any kind nor to be dangerous and were just swept up being in the wrong place at the wrong time. This is not an acceptable practice. I said this last time you made this specious, rediculous and frankly fascist claim.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:21 pmKeltoi at Night Says:
These military tribunals have NOT been fair that was shown. No SECRET evidence that the accused cannot hear that is NOT a fair trial. The very idea that we should eschew the rule of law and decency because it is too much trouble is flat out disgusting. You have no comittment to fairness and the rule of law. In this country the law is supposed to be king. We either believe in the fairness of the legal process or we dont. Saying there are 250 of them and being fair is too much trouble is flat out fascist.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:26 pmdickdata42 Says:
Courts martial are the established precedent in the history of Anglo-American juriprudence – the current military tribunals were thought up last year, and do not contain the rules of justice common to the Anglo-American history of jurisprudence. I suspect that you know this and are being deliberately dishonest.
No. Imprecise, yes, but deliberately dishonest, no.
If you look at the semantics of “Court Martial” (court of war) and “military tribunal”, there is no substantial difference. The current military tribunals that were “thought up” were voted on and approved by the Democratic Congress, BTW.
And that is what I am saying, along with Krauthamer – the Dems are going to write a law very similar to what he has described. I am not saying it is good, but I don’t see any good options because the Bush Admin punted the issue for so long that there are no good options left. Like Iraq, there was no plan for what to do with these guys once they were taken. Court cases forced Bush to cobble together something, but 7 years later it is still very murky.
You may want Obama to give them all civillian trials, but he isn’t going to. Gentelman’s wager. The only alternative is something like Count Charles suggestion. It will happen.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:28 pmEugene….Congress will write laws to retroactively cover all you said in your posts. I think that is what Krauthamer was saying. “Indefinite” and “Eternal” are not the same.
Maybe I am wrong. But I don’t think so. We will see.
All the same, I respect your passion for fairness in this very unfair world.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:33 pmKeltoi at Night Says:
I can no longer support military tribunals, which originally I didnt have a problem with. There needs to be a jury and I dont care if the military conducts the trial as long as ALL aspects of a fair trial are part of the equation.
December 9th, 2008 at 6:08 pmThe right hates court oversight.
WHy not just get rid of Marbury vs. Madison and be done with it…
December 9th, 2008 at 8:13 pmGuess it all depends on who’s calling the shots.
For I’d say these Neocon-nutt-huggers are on the short list, so lock THEM up post-haste.
December 9th, 2008 at 11:01 pm.
Dear Mr. KRAUTHAMMER and Mr. BARNES,
Life in prison would be good enough, NO?
But then again, to obtain such a sentence, one first must be charged and tried in a court of law. This IS America still, and America operates under the Rule of Law. And now that there is a Leadership change, as with all democracies, it is the (R)epublicans that will end up eating crow on this.
Dear sirs,
Please explain the redeeming quality to NOT pursuing justice through a court of law? If these men are guilty, as you assert they are, then why not give them a fair trial?
Subversion of the Rule of Law, the (R)epublican way.
What…?
… We don’t need to follow no stinkin’ law?
And these clowns still debate the legitimacy of the low reputation America has…
Q U E S T I O N:
What kind of government refuses to follow the Rule of Law?
Is this what KRAUTHAMMER and BARNES argue for?
.
December 10th, 2008 at 1:38 amPoetic justice would be this guy falling face first down an uncovered man hole, mouth wide open!
December 10th, 2008 at 7:51 amKeltoi:
All leaders face difficult circumstances, and it is by their actions and decisions that they are judged.
You bet that Obama will not want to take action in this matter because it is “a difficult situation”.
You bet that Obama is no better, or even worse than Bush, and will enact a law that takes us even further away from being a nation with a foundation of morals and justice.
You bet that Obama will put his partizan political aspirations (say re-election in 4 years) at the forefront of his decisions from day one.
You bet that every one in Gitmo is guilty, or guilty enough to be held forever in Gitmo conditions (while you claim to have no REAL knowledge of guilt or innocence — and true words applied to all of us — you still speak in such language that supports the enactment of an indefinete detention law without judicial process. Therefore, you assume guilt for the detainees).
You also assume that a military tribunal is exactly the same as a trial by jury. If you REALLY need to be shown how vastly the two differ, and which one has a skewed precedent to begin with, and which one is more influenced in a certain way, I will, but I must presume from the general content of your posts that you have some intelligence and so you already know the differences, and are just dishonestly presenting this false position.
Now, I don’t know what Obama will do (you, however, seem to have a functioning crystal ball or magick mirror), but I suspect that, if available past information is accurate, he will take action in this matter and that action will not be the one you see in your ink-filled gazing bowl (or do you prefer sheep entrails? Goat liver? Tea leaves? Tea bags?… well, whatever).
December 10th, 2008 at 8:39 amI hope you are wrong about Obama CC. I agree about military tribunals. Everyone should read or at least see the movie based on the Trial by Kafka. It really shows the horror of a judiciary that is rigged.
December 10th, 2008 at 10:06 amNice of them to volunteer to go to jail for their crimes of war propaganda and terrorism against a sovereign nation. When is the sentencing?
December 10th, 2008 at 11:43 amI hereby officially suspect Krauthammer and Barnes of being terrorists.
December 10th, 2008 at 11:50 am