The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Guantanamo Bay Watch

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

klg19 — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:37:46 -0000

I was just in Colorado this weekend, and in the cab from the airport I overheard news-radio discussion of the potential Colorado Supermax prison destination for some of the Gitmo prisoners. That was when I first heard the kind of nonsense that Stewart goes after in this wonderful piece.

If it's a "supermax" prison then, presumably, it's prepared to deal with anything we might send at it. Believing that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, or even Osama bin Laden himself, could somehow magically defy the bars of an American maximum security prison is to give these men more power than they deserve, and exactly as much as they want. If we can lock up Manson, and Bundy, and Dahmer, then we can certainly lock up any terrorist that comes along.

I came home to find Stewart's piece waiting for me on the DVR and shouted with appreciation. His adding Timothy McVeigh to the mix was the capper, and I was sorry I hadn't thought of that example myself.

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

Catherine — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:52:36 -0000

I was worried that Stewart would be off his game once Obama was in office. If anything, after seeing this, I think he's going to be funnier because the jokes won't be as obvious. Bush was so easy to make fun of. Besides, he's still got the media to skewer, and I suspect he'll be introducing us to a lot of the quacks representing us in congress over the next few years.

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

kid bitzer — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:00:12 -0000

just more evidence that the entire republican/fox news approach to terrorism is and has always been:

be afraid!! hide! run! under your beds!!

if terrorism means actively spreading terror among civilian populations...

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

Tessa — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:25:24 -0000

@R.oB.

I realize the NIMBY complex has been around for quite sometime, but my point is it doesn't apply logically to this particular issue. As far as I know we're not talking about building new prisons, but utilizing existing ones. So I see the NIMBY argument here more as a red herring---rather than "something for nothing think." It's a way for conservatives to block the closing of Gitmo without having to defend the unpopular position of keeping Gitmo open.

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

muzz al atesta — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:22:16 -0000

one down, who knows how many more to go...

A TEST CASE FOR OBAMA

After Guantanamo, What Next for Bagram?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,604052,00.html

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

R.oB. — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:57:41 -0000

Tessa,

NIMBY has always been with us. Every conservative wants more prisons...until one of those prisons is a mile away. It's the same ol' something for nothing think. Don't sleep.

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

Tessa — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:45:50 -0000

I've been saying for days now this whole "not in my backyard" thing is an example of an issue nobody in America is concerned about at all... until...every other talking head on t.v. starts regurgitating the sentiment over and over again until Viola! it's repeated by every other American at the proverbial kitchen table. It's a virus.

Stewart's a good antidote though. I liked him pointing out the U.S. is very good at locking people up; Number One in the world---take that China! But the brain eater guy bit gets the prize, because it really illustrates the inanity of this (fake) concern.

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

R.oB. — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:36:53 -0000

Jon Stewart is a genius. His comedy during the campaign season was stellar.

Re: Guantanamo Bay Watch

James — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:12:16 -0000

Was just thinking, if we need to find out what happened at Gitmo as a matter of national security, does the precedent "established" by Cheney et al now justifies the torture of Cheney et al to extract that information?

Could we rescind the law only after a few fried testicles?