Graham Endorses ‘Indefinite Detention’ Of Guantanamo Detainees
Graham Endorses ‘Indefinite Detention’ Of Guantanamo Detainees
Yesterday, President Obama ordered a halt to all prosecutions of Guantanamo detainees in order to “review the military commission process.” The AP reports today that Obama is circulating a draft executive order calling for closing Guantanamo Bay within a year.
Unlike other conservatives, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has supported the goal of closing Guantanamo. However, on Fox News today, Graham whole-heartedly endorsed the “indefinite detention” of some Guantanamo detainees
GRAHAM: I do believe we can close Gitmo, but what to do with them? Repatriate some back to other countries makes sense, if you can do it safely. Some of them will be tried for war crimes. And a third group will be held indefinitely because the sensitive nature of the evidence may not subject them to the normal criminal process, but if you let them go, we’ll be letting go someone who wants to go back to the fight. … So we’ve got three lanes we’ve got to deal with: Repatriation, trials, and indefinite detention.
Watch it:
According to Graham, some detainees can’t be legally tried because of “sensitive evidence” holding them. In fact, as Ken Gude has explained, our criminal justice system is already equipped to hold full legal trials while protecting classified evidence and state secrets. Rather than a security concern, the real reason some detainees’ trials have been derailed is because the “evidence” against them was obtained through torture, and thus inadmissible.
Graham’s blunt language affirms his complete departure from his earlier, principled stance against the detention system set up by Donald Rumsfeld. In 2003, he joined Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) in writing a letter to then-Defense Secretary Rumsfeld urging him to immediately create a system “to formally treat and process the detainees as war criminals or to return them to their countries for appropriate judicial action.”
As late as last September, Graham supported at least some form of judicial process for military detainees, saying that “military commissions are the right approach to deliver justice and protect our nation in the War on Terror.” However, now Graham has apparently embraced the far-right notion that some detainees can be imprisoned forever, without legal recourse.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Perhaps Lindsey and one of his butt-buddies in the Senate should enjoy their own personal indefinite detention at Gitmo.
January 21st, 2009 at 4:48 pmThat sensitive information they have is how they’ve been tortured, isn’t it? What else could it be?
January 21st, 2009 at 4:51 pmGraham Endorses ‘Indefinite Detention’ Of Guantanamo Detainees»
– - Apparently Lindsay missed the inaugural address. Meet the new Senate, same as the old Senate, Linds.
January 21st, 2009 at 4:51 pmThinking is so hard
January 21st, 2009 at 4:54 pmEasier to just punch them
Let’s all have a beer
I guess they haven’t gotten the memo that we don’t care what they think. They really do think they are still relevant, don’t they?
January 21st, 2009 at 4:54 pmGraham might pee in his pants when he hears what President Obama did. Yes you have to love the young man with the big ears and beautiful smile while never really knowing what he’s thinking.
President Obama appointed David Iglesias as a Jag Judge for the detainees. sweet
January 21st, 2009 at 4:56 pmThe only “state secret” that needs to be protected in these cases is that there never was any evidence to hold them to begin with.
January 21st, 2009 at 4:57 pmGraham gets a woody for bondage and torture.
January 21st, 2009 at 4:57 pmThere is the possibility that “sensitive evidence” actually means, “we haven’t got jack-squat on these detainees – certainly not enough to convict them. If we go to trial with the nothing we’ve got, we’ll look like idiots.”
January 21st, 2009 at 4:57 pmummmmmm…..no one cares anymore what this closeted beard wearing repuglican homosexual wants.
THE END
January 21st, 2009 at 4:57 pmI listen to Lindsey Graham when he comes out of the closet.
Until then, he is just another hypocrite like Foley/Haggard et al.
The serve no purpose other than to find some young nubile boys to diddle with.
January 21st, 2009 at 4:59 pmI am not so sure about the torture but the bondage part…
January 21st, 2009 at 4:59 pmHe’s pretty glib about the wholesale dismissal of American and British legal tradition going all the way back to the Magna Carta, isn’t he. He must be a Republican.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:01 pmhttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/20/the-rule-of-law/
I know some of you will see Washington Times and puke but this is a good read.
RIP
January 21st, 2009 at 5:02 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul,Iraq
Oh What a Tangled Web we Weave
When first we practice to deceive.
And in this case – they left all the hard decisions to Obama to clean up the mess.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:06 pmScumbag Graham! Too bad we can’t ship HIM there! Like to see him waterboarded just for the grins and giggles. (Not really but I don’t like the guy)
January 21st, 2009 at 5:07 pmI endorse indefinite detention of Sen Graham — Another right wingnut on the loose!
January 21st, 2009 at 5:12 pmI hear there is a gated area being built in north Dallas. That sound like a good place to hold the Gitmo detainees until their status is determined.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:15 pmincluding the potentially innocent?
January 21st, 2009 at 5:17 pmThe reverse Blackstone formulation… I like to call it the Republican Blackheart formulation… ‘It is better that 10 innocent men suffer, than one guilty man go free.’
January 21st, 2009 at 5:23 pmI’ve always wondered at the logic that created this axiom: In order to protect America, we had to destroy it.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:29 pmHell, you can get the transcript from a divorce sealed. There are places, plans and clearances that permit it. This guy is supposed to be a JAG.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:30 pmI find it had to believe that any lawyer (and Graham used to be a Navy JAG) would buy into this indefinite detention bullshit.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:31 pmTP still stuck in “Shrub-mode”…
Clinton approved by Senate as top U.S.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:31 pmNo wonder I’m proud to be an American again. Frodo’s finally thrown the friggin’ ring down the volcano.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:31 pm(crossing fingers) God I hope they keep talking like this for the next four years. Please, repubs, don’t learn from your mistakes. Keep making the same tired old arguments over and over. When the next election comes around, talk all the time about gays, Mexicans, Islamo-fascists, and abortion. It worked so well for you this last time around. What amazes me is this – These idiots think they lost because they weren’t far right enough. So the same losing strategy that cost them the last election will be magnified even more so the next time around.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:34 pmEither we are committed to the rule of law or we are not. Either we HAVE values or we dont. Jettisoning EITHER because of fear or because they are inconvienient means we DONT have either a committment to the rule of law OR values. What they probably mean is that they tortured these guys and now know things about them(or think they do) that they cant use to prosecute. Tough. Actions have consequences. Time to face up to them. EITHER we can prosecute them under the law or we have to find a way to let them go. Either we can SHOW they are criminals or we cant. Just SAYING they are criminals can NEVER be the basis of indefinite detention. The very concept is antithetical to a civilized society. It is the end of the rule of law. If we can just allow a president to SAY he is guilty we dont NEED to establish it in court there IS no more justice.
I really cant say it any better than THIS from A Man for All Seasons
Father, that man’s bad.
There’s no law against that.
There is: God’s law.
Then God can arrest him.
(snip)
“And go he should if he were the devil himself until he broke the law.”
Roper says, “So now you give the devil the benefit of the law.”
And More replies, “Yes, what would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the devil?”
Roper replies, yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that.”
More responds, “Oh? And when the last law was down and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, man’s laws, not God’s, and if you cut them down, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the devil the benefit of the law for my own safety’s sake.”
or
We speak of being anchored to our principles. But if the weather turns nasty you up with an anchor and let it down where there’s less wind, and the fishing’s better.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:35 pmMapleStreet Says:
And in this case – they left all the hard decisions to Obama to clean up the mess.
But I thought Bush said he made the tough decisions! Like not ending the Iraq war responsibly and dealing with the fact he shouldn’t have started it, or determining the legal status of foreign captives through the legitimate judicial system instead of putting them in extralegal camps, or proposing modernized financial regulations that take current financial products into account, or dealing with the spiraling cost and declining quality of health care, or getting us off of dependence on foreign oil…
January 21st, 2009 at 5:35 pmanother O/T post, but someone’s gotta be looking ahead:
Obama Freezes Pay, Toughens Ethics and Lobbying Rules (Update2)
January 21st, 2009 at 5:36 pmI say keep Gitmo open. There are quite a few Republicans we could send there for being enemies of the state.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:36 pmDNFP Says:
TP still stuck in “Shrub-mode”…
Clinton approved by Senate as top U.S.
######
Did you notice the vote on that? 94-2. For all of the wingnuts’ criticisms of her, they still voted for her. How are they going to explain that one to Rush?
January 21st, 2009 at 5:37 pmTired Of Fighting Says:
January 21st, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Thanks for that link ToF. Bruce Fein is a true Conservative — a rare breed.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:37 pmSharksBreath Says:
I say keep Gitmo open. There are quite a few Republicans we could send there for being enemies of the state.
I say we give it back to Cuba. We’ve got no business holding on to that tiny scrap of land.
Of course, we could do both. Send the indicted Republicans there, and then give it to Cuba…
January 21st, 2009 at 5:37 pmChris L,
From my link:
But Cornyn and other Republicans said they still supported her nomination and it was crucial she be allowed to get to work on the foreign policy challenges awaiting the Obama administration.
“I intend to vote for her confirmation. But I also think it’s important to flesh out the concerns raised,” Cornyn said. “If we are going to restore trust between the American people and their government, we need to be sure the reality matches the rhetoric.”
At least their couching their arguments in a manner that SOUNDS ethical.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:40 pmGraham is not a lawyer, he is a republican. I mean, he may have a law degree – but he is no lawyer. He slurps at the GOP trough. He uses the Constitution to line his birdcage. Oh and BTW: Graham is not Gay!!!!! Just a homely, middle aged, pompous, neat, single, cherubic dufus.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:50 pmAwww, now, Liberace, you need to shut up now.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:57 pmLet the rule of law run it’s course. Charge and try those that can be, release those the government can’t!
Close down Gitmo ASAP!
January 21st, 2009 at 6:05 pmGraham is a 1/2 a sissy & everyone knows it. Prison & sexual deviate torture are fantasies of this chickenhawk neocon.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:12 pmThe ONLY reason the Republicans do not want the detainees to be brought to trial is because it would expose the corrupt, illegal, unconstitutional, and inhumane treatment our president ordered for these people. And because Republicans ALWAYS put loyalty to their party above loyalty to their country ( I can’t emphasize that ‘always’ enough), they will fight this every step of the way. By opposing what President Obama wants to do, and because of the reasons they are doing it, every Republican (or Democrat, for that matter) who fights this is in violation of his or her oath of office.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:13 pmole lispy graham is hoping they will keep gitmo open until his retirement at which point he will retire there. this will take care two of lispy’s fanatsies at one: being gangbanged in a prison and being the head of a harem
January 21st, 2009 at 6:25 pmI say it’s a good thing that Sen. Graham is currently in charge of both Jack and shit.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:45 pmRaptureReady Says:
They probably have key and important intelligence on these indefinite detainees.
No, they don’t.
.
RaptureReady Says:
Stop being a terrorist sympathizer. We must protect America.
You might be a terrorist. Anyone who opposes locking you up must be a “sympathizer.” Also, we must actually protect America, instead of using it as an excuse to commit evil acts.
.
RaptureReady Says:
Be a patriot, for once.
You should look up what that actually means, and then give it a try.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:47 pmGood then – the shiny little vaguely-effeminate Senator can keep them at his house.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:52 pmam i hallucinating? rectal rapture isn’t over on the prop 8 thread?
January 21st, 2009 at 6:55 pmI’m surprised Senator Law & Order for Some didn’t have a few 9/11 family members or survivors as his prop wingmen.
It never surprises me how someone who should know everything about upholding the principles of law in a democracy so casually dismisses them for rhetoric and partisan agenda setting.
Nixon would be proud of his loyalty until death!
January 21st, 2009 at 6:56 pmWhat happened, Rapture Boy?
January 21st, 2009 at 6:57 pmCouldn’t get off the ground yesterday?
Too much gold bullion in your pockets?
RaptureReady Says:
They probably have key and important intelligence on these indefinite detainees. Stop being a terrorist sympathizer. We must protect America. Be a patriot, for once.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey RupturedRetard YOU stop being an ignorant, cowardly, freedom hating, American value hating, FACIST PUNK. I think they ought to indefinitly detain moronic cowads like YOU so the adults can get on with upholding the values of this country. You can wet the bed in a prison cell just as easily as in your mommys basement
January 21st, 2009 at 6:58 pmNevar Says:
“What happened, Rapture Boy?
Couldn’t get off the ground yesterday?
Too much gold bullion in your pockets?”
be kind!
rectual rapture has had troubles with erectile dysfunction for years, he’s been consulting with elizabeth dole on the matter.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:58 pmBy the way RupturedRetard that word PATRIOT? I dont think the word means what you think it means and as always when talking about YOU I use the term THINK in its broadest possible meaning
January 21st, 2009 at 7:00 pmOnce they get released give them Bush’s and Graham’s home address.
January 21st, 2009 at 7:01 pmI agree with EugeneDebs & politicscorner,
if we have evidence then prosecute, if not,release them. You cannot imprison another human being forever for what you ‘think’ they ‘might’ do. Are we the only free nation in the world that has returned to the dark ages?
This really disgusts me and makes ashamed of my country.
January 21st, 2009 at 7:11 pmRupturedRetard says
I would rather believe the military over you because you do not have the proper clearance to access this information. Do you remember 9/11?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do YOU remember 1776 MORON? Got any evidence that the military is saying ALL those at GITMO were involved in 9/11? Why NO you are just a moron spewing the incredibly stupid talking points screechmonkey radio TOLD you to believe. Being FAR TOO IGNORANT to ever think for yourself you would act like the sheep you are, the mindless psychophant, eschewing all standards of decency and the values our country was founded on just because you are a COWARD. Because like the bedwetter you are you want to cower under your mommys bed and turn your back on our values so you can FEEL safer, not that it will make you safer but cowards like you dont care. As long as you FEEL safer. You are the very definition of a cowardly moron
January 21st, 2009 at 7:31 pmRupturedRetard spews ignorance again.
This is what I am talking about. You have a grudge with Republicans. Admit it! Also, since 9/11, did we have any terrorist attacks on our soil? If not, be thankful that we have these criminals contained. I can guarantee you that the 9/11 families would not appreciate your comment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why not? Got evidence that ALL those at Guantanamo are involved in 9/11? Not even the Pentagon thinks that. Got evidence that all those at Gitmo are criminals? If so then what is the problem with trying them and if NOT then you are un-American for trying to destroy American values. Someone SAYING they are criminals does not MAKE them criminals. I guess if I SAY you are a traitor they ought to be able to lock YOU up indefinitly. I can guarantee you are a coward and an idiot
January 21st, 2009 at 7:36 pmRaptureReady Says:
I would rather believe the military over you because you do not have the proper clearance to access this information.
100% of the times that such information has been cleared to the public, it has turned out that they didn’t have any evidence. In most cases, the military actively lied about whether there was any cause to have detained the individuals in question in the first place.
.
RaptureReady Says:
Do you remember 9/11?
Do you remember anything that’s happened since then?
This brings us back to the definition of a “Patriot.” I submit that the term is used to describe a person who is willing to assume some personal risk to uphold the founding ideals of their nation. Think Patrick Henry, the Minutemen, and the Founding Fathers. Why were they Patriots? Not because of any personal “feeling,” but more importantly because they were willing to risk their lives for the principles that have come to define America.
I would rather suffer some personal risk of being attacked by terrorists, than to support or allow the violation of those principles today. On the other hand, you would give up all of the legitimacy of your government as well as your own rights just to be kept safe from the bearded boogeymen.
That’s why I’m a patriot, and you are not.
.
RaptureReady Says:
This is what I am talking about. You have a grudge with Republicans. Admit it!
If there is a grudge, it’s a well-earned one.
.
RaptureReady Says:
Also, since 9/11, did we have any terrorist attacks on our soil?
The Bush administration has thwarted zero terrorist attempts.
.
RaptureReady Says:
If not, be thankful that we have these criminals contained.
Legitimately prove that they’re criminals. Oh wait, that would require a court of law, which is exactly what you and the Bush administration are trying to avoid. When someone actively tries to evade having their claims exposed to a legitimate body tasked with determining legal truth, I can pretty much assume that they were lying in the first place.
.
RaptureReady Says:
I can guarantee you that the 9/11 families would not appreciate your comment.
I can guarantee you that there are some who would not appreciate yours. Nor would they appreciate being used as your own poster-children and trotted out like golden idols to support your murderous ideology.
January 21st, 2009 at 9:13 pmRupturedRetard please have the decency to be embarassed by your Fascism, your stupidity and you cowardice
January 21st, 2009 at 10:18 pmI wonder what “sensitive information” is out there concerning Lindsey Graham. And Daryl, please stick to prayer, silently in private. It’s the only way to make a difference.
January 21st, 2009 at 11:30 pmI sense that a lot of Republicans and their enablers are beginning to get that tight feeling in their throat that a lot of us are finally shaking off.
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:18 am.
LOL
Sissy Graham thinks what…?
The same Sissy Graham that insisted that, “We are a Nation of Laws, not men”? That Sissy Graham?
But more so, there is one looming …
Q U E S T I O N:
Is Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) suggesting the Fourth Amendment of the USA matters not?
I’m sorry Sissy, the American people, yes, We The People, decided to call you on your teams B.S. last November and guess what…
… Your team lost.
But really,
Why not let the Democrats screw things up for a while? It gives you time to lick your wounds? Besides, what else could the Democrats screw up that your team hasn’t, already?
.
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:53 amOops, Meant, “It buys you “re-branding” time, NO?”
Noy It gives you time to lick your wounds?
But really, is there a difference?
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:56 amIf someone hasn’t posted it already (and I think TP should get in the habit of doing it), here is Senator Graham’s contact form letter:
http://lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.EmailSenatorGraham
January 22nd, 2009 at 4:04 am