Welfare for Freed Gitmo Detainees?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Lightningdog, Mar 27, 2009.

  1. Coming to a neighborhood near you.

    Welfare for Freed Gitmo Detainees?

    Here, from the Associated Press, is a partial account of DNI Dennis Blair’s first press conference today (emphasis mine):

    During his news conference, Blair also said the Obama administration is still wrestling with what to do with the remaining 240 detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, which the president has ordered closed.

    Some of the detainees, deemed non-threatening, may be released into the United States as free men, Blair confirmed.

    That would happen when they can't be returned to their home countries, because the governments either won't take them or the U.S. fears they will be abused or tortured. That is the case with 17 Uighurs (WEE'-gurz), Chinese Muslim separatists who were cleared for release from the jail long ago. The U.S. can't find a country willing to take them, and it will not turn them over to China.

    Blair said the former prisoners would have [to] get some sort of assistance to start their new lives in the United States.

    “We can't put them out on the street,” he said.

    Four short questions/comments:

    (1) Does this mean that the Obama administration is planning on giving some freed Guantanamo detainees a stipend? It sure appears that way. So, not only is the Obama administration planning on freeing some detainees on U.S. soil, it is also going to pay them to live here. Amazing. Who would have thought that we would see the day when detainees who were once labeled enemy combatants would be receiving welfare?

    (2) The Uighur detainees are cited, over and over again, as the types of detainees who can be safely released into the U.S. This conclusion has been reached through a combination of specious reasoning and ignorance.

    None of the 17 Uighurs are master terrorists on par with the likes of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. They were mostly new recruits at the time of their capture. However, as I have argued before, they are all affiliated with and/or members of a designated terrorist organization, received training at a training camp in the al Qaeda/Taliban stronghold of Tora Bora, and have admitted that they were trained by two known terrorists. And, on top of that, the group that trained them threatened to attack the Olympic Games in China last year.

    Even if you don’t think that we should lock them up and throw away the key, do we really want to pay them to live on U.S. soil?

    (3) The AP says the United States can’t find a country to take the Uighurs, other than China, which may treat them harshly. But that really remains to be seen. Ireland, for example, has apparently offered to take some Guantanamo detainees. Other European nations have been somewhat more reticent.

    (4) Is the Obama administration considering paying other Guantanamo detainees to live in the U.S. as well?

    Posted by Thomas Joscelyn on March 26, 2009 05:38 PM | Permalink

  2. If they weren't considered dangerous, why were they at gitmo in the first place? Clearly there were good reasons to think they were dangerous. They were being trained in terrorist camps. They weren't there on vacation.

    I find it interesting that the Obama administration places the welfare of terrorists over the American people. This is the only conclusion to draw. They see that these people may be subjected to repression, so rather than run that risk, they expose the American people to them.