No where in the text does it lay out a plan for determining whether or not the individuals will return to terrorism, also there is nothing about requirement for rehabilitation programs upon, such as what we had under President Bush.

All that is in the executive order is a process for determining legal status of those who are confined.

Nice to know you are still lying.

Now you should probably follow Moe’s advice before he gets in a bad mood.

The better course would be to lay said terrorist/detainee face down on the tarmac and shoot him in the back of the head. Or air drop him into the Caribbean with no life jacket and let the sharks have him. And just in case you are wondering, I am absolutely serious.

Now do you remember September 11, 2001? Almost 3,000 people killed by terrorists.

Do you see why we can’t treat terrorists like regular crooks?

Now say you’re sorry to Aaron for being a rude little troll and we’ll call it all good. Next post.

As it stands now there will no longer be an evaluation of prisoners being released.

Sorry, but you’re full of it.

The executive order closing Guantanamo explicitly calls for a comprehensive evaluation of each prisoner.

(d) It is in the interests of the United States that the executive branch undertake a prompt and thorough review of the factual and legal bases for the continued detention of all individuals currently held at Guantánamo, and of whether their continued detention is in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and in the interests of justice. The unusual circumstances associated with detentions at Guantánamo require a comprehensive interagency review.

Sec. 4. Immediate Review of All Guantánamo Detentions.

(a) Scope and Timing of Review. A review of the status of each individual currently detained at Guantánamo (Review) shall commence immediately.
(b) Review Participants. The Review shall be conducted with the full cooperation and participation of the following officials:

(1) the Attorney General, who shall coordinate the Review;

(2) the Secretary of Defense;

(3) the Secretary of State;

(4) the Secretary of Homeland Security;

(5) the Director of National Intelligence;

(6) the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and

(7) other officers or full-time or permanent part-time employees of the United States, including employees with intelligence, counterterrorism, military, and legal expertise, as determined by the Attorney General, with the concurrence of the head of the department or agency concerned.

First up, Mr. Geet Wilders……..

Amsterdam Court of Appeal orders the criminal prosecution of Member of Parliament of the Dutch Second Chamber Geert Wilders

Mr. Wilders is being prosecuted for hate speech and making a movie that depicts radical Islam as just that.

The country of Jordan is about to issue an arrest warrant for Mr. Wilders.

Jordan Jumps on the Bandwagon

————————

Next on the hit parade, may I present, Ms. Susanna Winters, of The Austrian Parliament…….. Convicted of hate speech.

Austrian politician convicted of “anti-Muslim incitement”

———————–

I’ll be nice and not comment.

As far as putting the terrorists in the brig at Ft. Leavenworth, this really is not a reasonable choice. The facility on Ft. Leavenworth is for former soldiers in the U.S. Military, who have been convicted of crimes. It is not really designed to hold the type of prisoners being held at Gitmo. Furthermore, if you were to move the terrorist to “the Castle”, you would be endangering the lives of every military family member who is housed on the base. That would actually increase the risk, not relieve the risk.

The point Erick is making though is that with the closure of Gitmo and the loss of risk mitigation on individual prisoners, we will see an abundance of prisoners released who will then return to Terrorism.

Furthermore you must recognize that the Bush administration was forced to release many of the prisoners from Gitmo because of actions by the Dems in congress since 2006.

At this point I highly doubt that you are even here in good faith …especially since you knowingly lied in your first post ever on RedState.

Either way, my point still stands. Said Ali al-Shihri was released under “the Bush administration policies on terror” over a year ago, not as a result of anything Barack Obama has done. It’s absurd to hold his case up as an example of those policies’ success.

If Erick Erickson takes his argument seriously, then he would have to agree that President Bush has “blood on his hands” for any future attacks that Said Ali al-Shihri carries out.

If that’s how anyone here feels, I’d love to hear it.

Are you just making stuff up….come on, you can tell me.

Just to reiterate, this guy was released by the Bush administration. You are calling for the execution of George W. Bush. I suppose since he’s no longer in office, that’s not treason.

And this is proof that “the Bush administration policies on terror” were effective, and should not be changed.

By your logic, does George W. Bush have to wash “American blood off his hands” if this guy attacks anybody?