+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Obama Backpedals on the Uighurs we pikirler

  1. #1
    Unregistered Guest

    Default Obama Backpedals on the Uighurs we pikirler

    Obama Backpedals on the Uighurs
    by Charles D. Stimson



    There’s an old saying among trial lawyers: “When you go into the woods and find a turtle high up on a tree stump, you know he didn’t get there by himself.” In other words, sometimes there is no innocent explanation for why someone is where they were when they were caught.

    That maxim certainly applies to the 17 Chinese Uighurs caught fleeing Afghanistan after 9/11, who are now detainees in Guantanamo Bay.

    The Uighurs (pronounced “wee-gers”) are a Turkic Muslim minority group from western China. They really dislike the government of China -- so much that, shortly before Sept. 11, 2001, they sought the best training they could find on modern terrorist TTPs (tactics, training and procedures). For terrorists and wannabes, the top choice for terrorist training prior to 9/11 was Afghanistan. So that’s where they went -- specifically, the training camps in Tora Bora.

    Those camps were run by the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), which (no surprise) the U.S. State Department has designated as a terrorist organization.

    After 9/11, the Uighurs fled to Pakistan. Some were captured by Pakistani or coalition forces, and some of those were handed over to the United States, which transferred them to Guantanamo. Except for five who we transferred to Albania in 2006, they’ve been held there ever since.

    During the Bush administration, left-wing activists and politicians pushed for the Uighurs’ release, often arguing that the enemy of our enemy (our ally China) is our friend.

    So what?

    Mercenaries who sought out the Harvard of terrorist training camps are dangerous, whatever their target on any particular day.

    It seems the Obama administration got this point, but not until after floating a series of trial balloons this spring hinting that some Uighurs might be released into the United States.

    First, Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters that “the possibility exists” that some Uighurs would be coming to the United States.

    Then in late March, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair shed more light on the administration’s plan: “If we are to release them in the United States, you can’t just sort of, as you said, put them on the street there, but we need some sort of assistance to them to start a new life.”

    That balloon crashed quickly. Both Republicans and Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, told the administration to forget about it. So, left with no political cover, the administration finally did the right thing.

    Last Friday night, the Department of Justice filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court stating that the Uighurs have no legal basis to be released into the United States.

    Let that sink in. That’s the same position the Bush administration was defending for years.

    According to the Obama administration’s new playbook, the Uighurs “have already obtained relief” because they have been cleared to leave Gitmo. And there is a big difference between being cleared for release to a suitable country and actually being released into the United States.

    The Uighurs don’t want to go back to China because they fear persecution. And the United States won’t send any detainee to any country where, it is more likely than not, they’ll be tortured. Thus, the standoff.

    The Obama administration has finally recognized that the Uighurs are not only trained terrorists, but also illegal aliens with respect to United States. The DOJ brief explains that the “power to exclude aliens is ‘inherent in sovereignty,’ and that the power to decide which aliens may enter the United States … rests exclusively in the political branches.”

    This means that keeping the Uighurs in Gitmo, rather then setting them loose in the U.S. is, as the administration concludes, “constitutionally valid.” Of course, they’re right. But it sure took them a long time to come to that conclusion.

    And where is the outrage that greeted the Bush administration’s identical position? Where are the editorials in The Washington Post and The New York Times decrying the Obama administration’s “abandonment” of the rule of law? Keith Olbermann and other liberals have been suspiciously silent on this issue.

    But don’t hold your breath. This is, after all, the Obama administration.

    The Uighurs’ case is not a tough one to resolve. If sovereignty means anything, it means that the elected government, not unelected judges, gets to decide who is eligible to enter the country. The Uighurs are not Americans, have no ties to the United States, own no property here, and have no known relations in the country. They lack green cards or any other legal status that entitles them to set foot on U.S. soil.

    That would be enough for the U.S. to turn back any other alien at the border. So why not aliens who are terrorists, too?

    Charles �Cully� D. Stimson is a Senior Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation (www.heritage.org). He served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs from 2006-2007.

    Reader Comments: (87)

    Here are a few of the comments submitted by our readers. Click to view all
    Please remember the opinions expressed by our readers are in no way those of Human Events, nor are they condoned by us, and we reserve the right to remove abusive posts. Report Abusive Post
    Hmmm. "Wee-gers"?

    Sounds kinda like "wiggers" -- you know, whites who like to pretend they're as bad as certain African-Americans.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 03:21 AMJames A. Nollet, Milkowice, POLAND
    Report Abusive Post
    Obama keeps proving why liberals are useless for national protection. This is just another flip-flop. I am sure the press will be pointing this out to us (yeah, right).

    The entire media piled on Bush and Cheney for years, and now Obama has 'another' Bush/Cheney policy in his quiver. I swear, the only difference between Obama and Bush is the flag pin.

    I want to congratulate all of the liberals who post here. I am sure your hero is being applauded by you for this newest Bushism. Surely you all support Obama's use of Bush Data mining, eavesdropping, tribunals, and this latest 'come to Bush.'

    Jun 04, 2009 @ 03:35 AMLance Morrison, CA
    Report Abusive Post

    The same libs who have been posting in favor of cracking the skulls of 7th,8th, and 9th month babies are the same ones who will be decrying the 3 people we water boarded.


    Jun 04, 2009 @ 03:47 AMLance Morrison, CA
    Report Abusive Post

    Newt Gingrich/Rush apologizes for calling Sotomayor a Racist

    Jun 04, 2009 @ 04:26 AMLance Morrison, CA
    Report Abusive Post
    "..After 9/11, the Uighurs fled to Pakistan. Some were captured by Pakistani forces and some of those were handed over to the United States.."

    You failed to add: ==>


    Innocent people are going to be victims. Lets face it who does not need $5000 in Pakistan

    Dear Mr. Stimson
    You r

    Jun 04, 2009 @ 04:40 AMThomas Moses, Ohio
    Report Abusive Post
    Last night on Fox News, Vice President Cheney admitted that the Bush administration deliberately decided to pass the buck on GM and let President Obama deal with the problem. Cheney admitted that he thought the “right outcome was going to be bankruptcy,” but that President Bush didn’t want to “be the one who pulled the plug.” Instead, the Bush administration put together a costly auto bailout to stem the tide until President Obama took office:

    CHENEY: Well, I thought that, eventually, the right outcome was going to be bankruptcy. … And the president decided that he did not want to be the one who pulled the plug just before he left office.



    Jun 04, 2009 @ 05:00 AMLance Morrison, CA
    Report Abusive Post

    Former Republican senator Rick Santorum last week went on Greta’s show and chastised the Bush administration, saying that officials “blew it” for punting the problems onto Obama:

    SANTORUM: President Bush blew it. You know, he went out and convinced the Congress to give him a bunch of money to save the financial sector and then decided to take a little piece of that and give it to General Motors and Chrysler. Why? He punted. He basically said, I don’t want this failure to be on my watch. I want to let Obama deal with it. And we all knew at the time that letting Obama deal with it means the government’s going to come in and run the show, and that’s exactly what’s happened.

    Very Amazing!!!


    Jun 04, 2009 @ 05:16 AMLance Morrison, CA
    Report Abusive Post
    The Uighurs are an oppressed minority in China. Often shot dead in the street repeatedly over the past several decades by jack-booted People's Liberation Army thugs. Of course they sought training and support where they could get it. The Uighurs at Guantanamo may indeed be bad actors, but we shouldn't jump to that conclusion without more data.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 06:19 AMJoe M., Hong Kong
    Report Abusive Post
    What a disappointment Obama is. I am listening to his speech now and it is all words and no substance. He is just justifying American and Israeli terror with a mixture of crocodile tears and cotempt for their millions of victims.

    He can mention the Holy Quran as much as he likes, but it cuts no ice if he continues to send arms to the Zionists to continue tp oppress the Palestinian people.

    So he hopes it will be business as usual for the bankrupt predator!

    He gives his speech in Cairo where his undemocratic stooge Mubarrak is kept in power by American guns and against the will of the Egyptian people.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 06:46 AMZeinab, Netherlands
    Report Abusive Post
    This is a tough one.

    Are these Uighurs Muslim fundamentalist terrorists (bad) or just enemies of Beijing (good)? Worse, are they both?
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 06:49 AMBuck, Landfill, NJ
    Report Abusive Post

    The same libs who have been posting in favor of cracking the skulls of 7th,8th, and 9th month babies are the same ones who will be decrying the 3 people we water boarded.


    Lance Morrison


    Lance will think he has a cute new extremist right-wing talking point and will blog multiple conservative boards with this same message.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 06:56 AMIgnacio Izquierdo, Nogales, Mex/az
    Report Abusive Post
    "The DOJ brief explains that the 'power to exclude aliens is ‘inherent in sovereignty,'..."

    I had no idea there was anybody anywhere in this government--bureaucrat, politician or judge--who could or would string those particular words together any more.

    That's heavy duty thought there: "power to exclude aliens!!!!!!" "inherent in sovereignty!!" Wow.

    Do we dare dream these concepts apply also to illegals coming in on foot or by auto across the border or by plane into JFK?...probably not. Just for a moment there....in my dreams....

    Oh well. At least for the time being, we know there is someone in the bowels of the DOJ referencing the national sovereignty of the United States of America.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:13 AMMeryl,
    Report Abusive Post
    The case of the the kidnapped Chinese bought for money. It is like all the other crimes of the criminally insane US of AIPAC. I suppose Obama has been unable to resist the AIPAC representatives of the Killer state.

    Obama mentions in his speech both Iran and Israel. He hinted at Iran's non-existent violence but said nothing about Irael's actual violence. He did mention the unbreakable bond of 40 years between the US of AIPAC and Israel.

    He ought to have stayed home as he lost all credibilty in the eyes of all honest people in the Islamic world. He is just a black George Bush.

    It looks like the arrogant and nasty Hillary Clinton won the election after all!
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:21 AMZeinab, Netherlands
    Report Abusive Post
    Say it ain't so!

    The magic negro capitulated on another Bush Anti-terrorism policy?!

    And I thought we were going to get Bush 11 with McCain?

    The only thing we can trust this guy with is his promise to take the wealth from those that have it and give it to those that do not.

    Of course liar= liberal.

    Par for the course.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:24 AMBaldy, SD
    Report Abusive Post

    See! We have been telling you all along that the mulatto is a fraud.

    You need to listen to us more.

    We are alot smarter than you sound.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:29 AMBaldy, SD
    Report Abusive Post
    It is interesting to see a program after Obama's speech how big American corporations are now prefering to receive Euros rather than dollars. 7% drop of the dollar in one week. The Wall street analysts say that it is just the beginning.

    The optimists feel it is a sign of a more globalised economy and the pessimists say it is "bye bye America".
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:31 AMZeinab, Netherlands
    Report Abusive Post
    Awesome picture of eliet athlete Obama on a racing bike!

    What a contrast from Bush who kept falling off his tricycle.

    fitting metaphor for their legacies aint it ?

    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:35 AM'08AMA, Jakarta
    Report Abusive Post

    Lance will think he has a cute new extremist right-wing talking point and will blog multiple conservative boards with this same message.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 06:56 AMIgnacio Izquierdo, Nogales, Mex/az

    Easy on 'em Iggy, there's only a handful of them left.
    The last straglers have to wear mulitple heats you know.

    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:38 AM'08AMA, Jakarta
    Report Abusive Post
    hats not heats.

    there's no heat left in their cold bodies.
    Jun 04, 2009 @ 07:40 AM'08AMA, Jakarta
    Report Abusive Post
    Obama having a cabinet where only Zionists are allowed and having just received his orders from his boss, the moronic killer called Bibi, then I suppose he has to have business as usual or try and borrow the money to have business as usual.

    No bankers like being bullied by rogue insolvent clients.

  2. #2
    Unregistered Guest

    Default Me, the Extremist

    According to your site, I an 'extemist right wing' guy. I am contemplating why that would be. Then I got it--I am exteme because I don't agree with you. My beliefs apparently make me extreme (what an easy word off the lips to discount and marginalize someone). Let's see:

    I spoke about late term abortion, as in mom is in her 9th month and gets an abortion for reasons other than her health or some severe issue with the baby. An example would be a mom carrying a baby until near birth and then deciding she doesn't want stretch marks. That child may have a little more importance. Does this extremist think she should be prevented? No. The law is on her side. I would support changing the law.

    Oh, I am an extremist because I supported going into Iraq after Saddam refused inspectors, shot at our planes, etc for 9 years. I suppose you all wouldpreferthe old Iraq. I am sure it wouldn't be extreme to shove every free woman back to the stone age.There are women in Congress in Iraq today--in Congress!

    By the way, as far as your group goes, I see no point in holding peoplewho poseno threat or intent. If they do--another story. As far as rendition, the same 'extreme' stand goes for me--follow the law. I want no human to ever suffer persecution through rendition.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts