Obama Dangles Money Saving Carrot By Closing Gitmo

When President Obama recently announced his plan to close Gitmo, he said it would save between $65 and $85 million a year.  This from a guy who, when leaving office next year, will have almost doubled our national debt to nearly $20 trillion dollars, and who will leave the next President 1/2 trillion dollars a year in continuing debt.  So much debt, that for the the first time in our history, Moody's had to downgrade our nation's credit worthiness. So, saving a mere $85 million is laughable. 

Saving any money by closing Gitmo is most likely a fallacy.  Obama has a long history of getting things wrong whenever he and money are involved.  Remember how ObamaCare was going to save the average American family $2500 a year for their health insurance?  Still waiting on that one while premiums have nearly doubled that amount. Or, the stimulus plan that was supposed to keep unemployment under 8% and take it down to 5% by early 2013.  Instead, it went to 10% and didn't hit 5% until late last year.  This resulted in more than 1/2 trillion dollars being spent in extended unemployment benefits.  Or, how about all those green energy projects where $2.2 billion was wasted by his Energy Department on failing startup companies.  In fact, one solar project at Ivanpah was so badly designed that it now needs another $540 billion dollars for a bailout after Obama had already given that project a $1.6 billion loan.   These dollars aren't even in the $2.2 billion previously mentioned because that tally was done before the Ivanpah project was finished in 2014.

Yes, Barack Obama is a real money saving machine.  The reality is that saving $85 million is comparable to swatting a gnat on an elephant's behind.

References:

Obama gives Congress plan to close Guantanamo Bay prison: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-gitmo-20160223-story.html

History of the United States public debt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay [and Deficit] Summary: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

Obama Promised Healthcare Premiums Would Fall $2,500: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-25/obama-promised-healthcare-premiums-would-fall-2500-family-they-have-climbed-4865

Unemployment benefits cost: $520 billion: http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/29/news/economy/unemployment-benefits-cost/

Obama clean energy loans leave taxpayers in $2.2 billion hole:  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/27/obama-backed-green-energy-failures-leave-taxpayers/?page=all

A renewable energy company touted publicly by President Barack Obama which lists Google as an investor is requesting a $539 million federal grant to help pay off part of a $1.6 billion federal loan it received to build a solar plant in the Mojave desert: http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/09/google-owned-solar-company-requests-540-million-bailout-to-help-pay-1-6-billion-loan/

Closing Gitmo Won't End It As a Recruiting Tool

Come hell or high water, Barack Obama is dead set on closing Gitmo before he leaves office, and it doesn't matter how many of the remaining worst of the worst he releases into the world.  In doing so, the President will erroneously believe he has shutdown a main recruiting tool for the terrorists.  However, he would, as usual, be wrong.

When Gitmo closes, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the Taliban, and all the other terrorist groups will see this as a win for them and a defeat for the United States.  They will relish that fact because they know that this "defeat" can be used as a "real" recruiting tool. Mark my words.

References:

January 2016: Obama vows to 'keep working to shut down' Gitmo | TheHill:  http://thehill.com/policy/defense/265688-obama-calls-for-closing-guantanamo-amid-releases

January 2016: http://www.redstate.com/2016/01/13/president-obama-releasing-hardcore-terrorists-deadly-ploy-close-gitmo/President Obama Releasing 10 More “Hardcore” Terrorists:

Obama: ISIS using Gitmo to rationalize 'demented, sick' violence: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/260724-obama-guantanamo-an-enormous-recruitment-tool-for-isis

Terrorists from Gitmo: Not in My Backyard!

There's that old saying: "One rotten apple will spoil the whole barrel".  So, what happens when you have a whole bunch of rotten apples.

Apparently, in a last ditch effort to fulfill President Obama's long overdue promise to close Guantanamo Bay, the Pentagon is now engaged in a desperate attempt to find one or more U.S. prisons that could "securely" hold the remaining 127 "worst-of-the-worst" prisoners that no country will take.

But, here's the problem, and why Gitmo should not be closed.

We already have a radicalization problem in our U.S. prisons.  Segments of the population are becoming gang members and joining groups like the Aryan Nation.  More importantly, inmates are being converted to radical Islam at an astonishing rate.  In the U.S., Muslims make up less than one percent of the population at 2.4 million.  Yet, in prison, the number has reached 15%; mostly through conversion.

Do we really want to accelerate this process by adding 127 fully radicalized terrorists to our existing prison population?  This gives home-grown terrorism a whole new meaning.

References:

"One rotten apple spoils the whole barrel”: http://journal.frontiersin.org/researchtopic/2319/one-rotten-apple-spoils-the-whole-barrel-the-plant-hormone-ethylene-the-small-molecule-and-its-compl

Pentagon is on the hunt in U.S. for Guantanamo replacement: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-defense-guantanamo-20150818-story.html

Prisons are breeding grounds for jihadists: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/12/prisons_are_breeding_grounds_for_jihadists.html

Obama's Dangerous Game Of Trying To Close Gitmo

It's no deep secret that the President has wanted to close the terrorist interment facility at Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) since 2009.

Now, 6 years after taking office, he is still saddled with 127 prisoners; having just released 5 more on New Year's Eve at a time when no one was really paying attention.  Those 5 just released were supposedly determined to be of a medium threat.  But, if so, why has it taken more than a decade to find a home for them and the remaining 127?

The truth is, that all the easy-to-transfer inmates had all been moved before Obama took office.  Even so, about 19% of those who left that facility under Bush rejoined the battlefields against the U.S., Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Today, Gitmo houses the worst-of-the-worst, and this is why Obama has had so much difficulty finding countries that will take them. Consider, as an example, the Bergdahl deal.  Those 5 prisoners, who were traded for a possible U.S.deserter, were all extremely high level Taliban commanders and, my guess, is that their return-to-battle rate will be a lot higher than any of those released in the past.  This is the problem with trying to close Gitmo.  We are now faced with freeing some of the worst terrorist bad guys that we had captured.  It would be similar to our prison system dumping every "FBI's Most Wanted" inmates onto the street and expecting them not to return to their former lives of crime.

The statistics prove this out.  Of the 532 detainees released by Bush, the recidivism rate was only 19%.  Today, with Obama having released 88 prisoners since 2009, the rate has gone up to 29% and climbing higher by the day.  In effect, President Obama is hell-bent on freeing the kind of people that could do this country the greatest harm, and that's a very dangerous game to play merely to make good on a 2008 campaign promise. 

References:

US releases 5 more Guantanamo Bay prisoners, sends them to Kazakhstan: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/31/us-releases-5-more-guantanamo-bay-prisoners-sends-them-to-kazakhstan/

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl exchanged for top 5 Taliban commanders: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2014/05/sgt_bowe_bergdahl_ex.php

Under President George W. Bush's tenure, 532 detainees were released from the detention facility.  88 Guantanamo detainees were released by Obama. "The recidivism rate is nearly 29 percent and has been climbing steadily...": https://news.vice.com/article/new-us-intelligence-report-a-former-gitmo-detainee-recently-returned-to-the-fight

Is Gitmo Really a Recruiting Tool for Terrorists?

With the highly suspect swap of five high-ranking Taliban leaders in exchange for one deserting U.S. sergeant, many are now speculating that this "Let's Make A Deal" tactic is the pathway that President Obama will take to fulfill his 2009 State of the Union commitment to close Guantanamo Bay (aka Gitmo).  With him, as usual, arguing that Gitmo is the main tool for recruiting terrorists.

But, to my knowledge, no one has ever challenged the President's "main tool" argument.  Basically, it was another Obama statement that seems to have no bearing in fact.  As far as I can tell, Obama's stance on Gitmo comes from a 2008 paper released by a Washington-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).  Their conclusion was that Gitmo should be closed because of human rights violations; not necessarily because its seen as a recruiting tool.  However, in arguing its closing  they also said this in their report:

Symbols of alienation such as Guantanamo have served as a recruitment tool for individuals and groups who seek to harm the United States, increasing -- not decreasing danger. Researchers at West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center found scores of references by top Al Qaeda leaders referencing Guantanamo (some in the same breath that they mention Chechnya) going back to 2002 and as recently as January 2008.

But, when you go to the referenced West Point research paper, there are no "statistics" being presented that would justify the word "scores" being used in the CSIS report. There is only an opinion by the author, Sherifa Zuhur, that Gitmo contributes to recruiting because it is contrary to our rules of law and imprisonment as noted by this quote from that very opinion piece:

"...the United States has projected a strong message to the world about living under a “rule of law,” where the principle of being innocent until proven guilty and the human rights afforded by the Western systems of democracy should be defended. Some damage to American claims of justice and rule of law is irreparable, even if Guantanamo is closed, which would be desirable."

Again, the closure is desirable from a human rights perspective and not because it is a recruiting tool

What hurts Mr. Obama's claim and the above mentioned opinion piece is the fact that, in two separate studies, which looked at published Al Qaeda propaganda communiques, Guantanamo Bay is seldom referred to when compared to other words of recruitment like "Israel."  Thus, clearly indicating that Gitmo is not a primary focus.

What the President doesn't seem to understand is that his use of drones in the last five years is probably more of a recruiting tool than Gitmo.  All to often, in attempting to kill one or "just of few" terrorists, there are many innocent civilians lost by collateral damage.  It is also viewed as cowardly because there is no way for Al Qaeda or the Taliban to fight back against an unmanned drone.    And, our use of drones doesn't just anger the terrorists but, it also angers the rest of the world as shown by this recent global Pew poll:

Obama's claims of terrorist recruiting are simply fallacious; and are only being used because he thinks that is what Americans want to hear as the primary reason for closing the prison.  His real intention is to once again satisfy his left-wing base who sees Gitmo as another one of Bush's "doings" and a violation of human rights.  I would contend that killing terrorists from afar, with unmanned drones, without combat, and any potential trial is a bigger human rights issue; especially when you look at the results of that Pew poll.


References:

Closing Guantanamo: From Bumper Sticker to Blueprint: A report of the CSIS Human Rights and Security Initiative and the Working Group on Guantanamo and Detention Policy:  http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/080905_mendelson_guantanamo_web.pdf

West Point: Sherifa Zuhur: PRECISION IN THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR: INCITING MUSLIMS THROUGH THE WAR OF IDEA: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub843.pdf

Gitmo Is Not a Recruiting Tool for Terrorists: https://www.google.com/search?q=Gitmo+Is+Not+a+Recruiting+Tool+for+Terrorists&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

Note: The link above is being presented as a Google search because direct access to this article will be denied unless you already have a Wall Street Journal subscription.

How Drones Create More Terrorists: Militants take advantage of fearful communities to draw new recruits: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/how-drones-create-more-terrorists/278743/

Obama’s Use of Drones Gives Al Qaeda the Edge in Iraq: More broadly, though, the growth of al-Qaeda is due to the Obama administration’s single-minded focus on drone warfare and counterterrorism: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/01/19/Obama-s-Use-Drones-Iraq-Gives-Al-Qaeda-Edge

More broadly, though, the growth of al-Qaeda is due to the Obama administration’s single-minded focus on drone warfare and counterterrorism. - See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/01/19/Obama-s-Use-Drones-Iraq-Gives-Al-Qaeda-Edge#sthash.GqaDLnEE.dpuf

More broadly, though, the growth of al-Qaeda is due to the Obama administration’s single-minded focus on drone warfare and counterterrorism. - See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/01/19/Obama-s-Use-Drones-Iraq-Gives-Al-Qaeda-Edge#sthash.GqaDLnEE.dpuf

PewResearch: Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted: Drone Strikes Widely Opposed: http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/

Obama Signals Trouble With His Base

Over the past two weeks, Obama has made it publicly clear that he knows he's in trouble with his political base of once-fellow Democrats.

On September 12, in an obvious attempt to win back lost Hispanic votes, he announced that his Administration will no longer deport any illegal aliens unless they have committed a felony; probably saving 300,000 from deportation. Then, there was the jobs bill to provide funding to keep unionized state government workers on the job and to provide "union" infrastructure jobs with billions in project spending. On Monday, there was his rose garden speech. In that "punish the rich" diatribe, he served up as much red meat to the left as he possibly could by playing the typical Democrat's class warfare card. Following that, his Attorney General, Eric Holder, announced in a press interview in Brussels, that Obama will seek to close Guantanamo Bay by the November elections of next year. Then, too, his U.N. speech of today was truly aimed at closing the wounds that he had opened with the Jewish community over Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. Lastly, within his U.N. Arab/Israeli speech, he oddly brought up the topic of Gay/Lesbian rights.

From all of the above, it is obvious that Obama is all out for Obama in 2012 and, could care less if his policies are good or bad for the country as a whole. With so much "base building" politics in just two short weeks, it appears the President is in panic mode and that he will do whatever it takes to "buy" his way back into winning next year's election. Now, who's putting politics before country?

So Easily We Forget

Since Obama came to office, there has been much discussion about the detainees at Guantanamo Bay and their rights. From the left's viewpoint, these people are being totally deprived of their rights for criminal justice. But, what about our rights. Because of the events of 9/11, each and everyone of us is unable to live as freely as we did before that date. You know this to be true every time you or I try to board an an airplane. Just look at the fear that was created in New York City, nearly eight years after 9/11, when Air Force One, flanked by two F-16's, flew over the Statue Of Liberty for an Obama Administration authorized photo op.

Al Qaeda existed long before Guantanamo Bay and it will exist long after it is closed. The concept that Guantanamo is a reason that would-be terrorists are joining up with Al Qaeda is like saying that someone joined the Army because they liked those tan jump boots. I would think that the reasons for hooking up with Al Qaeda are quite a bit deeper than that prison in Cuba housing a handful of people. In his speech on National Security, Obama made the statement that Guantanamo Bay was probably responsible for recruiting more terrorists than it was created to house. That may sound good in a speech but it is only his opinion with no real facts to support it and he knows it. It is not provable. It is no more provable than his pledge to save or create 2 to 2.5 million jobs with the passage of his Stimulus Package. At its peak, Guantanamo only held 780 detainees. Today, it is estimated that there is something between .7 and 1.1 billion Muslims in the world. It is also estimated that as much of 7% of that number, about 91 million, are radicalized. If true, an extra 800 or more terrorists being created by Guantanamo is absolutely an insignificant number. Anyway, no self respecting terrorist would ever want to wind up in a prison facility like Guantanamo and be deprived of sacrificing themselves in some extremely violent act. Certainly, if Guantanamo is the only reason people become terrorists, we should see a mass exodus from Al Qaeda as soon as Gitmo is closed. But, my guess is that won't happen. Anyway, how do we know Guantanamo was the reason that anyone joined Al Qaeda? Did Rasmussen or Gallup call up 1500 Al Qaeda terrorists one night and take a poll and ask that question? The left loves to use this "recruiting" argument for closing Gitmo because they like to point back to the story about a Koran being flushed down the toilet as part of the Guantanamo interrogation of terrorists. However, the left seems to ignore the fact that this story was proven false (See Full Story). But those on the left, as many of them always do, love to proliferate a lie for political gain.

Somehow, with Obama now in office, the Democrats are attempting to erase the history and anxiety after 9/11. They seem to want to ignore the reasons behind everything that was done in the short time following 9/11. The people of this country and our Congress demanded that the Bush Administration make us safe from another attack. Gitmo and harsh interrogation resulted out of those demands and out of that fear. Let's not forget that most of these detainees weren't on some kind of Sandals or Beaches vacation; laying out in the sun in their monokinis while sucking down pina coladas. Rather, they came their from other countries to join in the Jihad; to kill Americans and their allies; and, to die to reap the rewards of Allah. These people are so distasteful to their own citizens that their own home countries won't take them so that we can close Gitmo. To this date, the oh-so-smart Obama has been only able to convince two countries to take two of these detainees.

I hear other Democrats and Obama's Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, say that Guantanamo presents a bad image to the rest of the world. If it has a bad image, that's because our left-wing press in "this country" spent the last 5 years demonizing Gitmo as a way to destroy George Bush and his Administration. Papers like the New York Times and the Washington Post and magazines like Time and Newsweek (owned by the Washington Post) spared no ink in trashing Gitmo as a means to get Democrats back in office. As mentioned previously, the left-wing Newsweek caused international riots and deaths as a result of their false story about a Koran being flushed down a toilet. All throughout the Bush Administration, the left-wing, Fifth Estate worked feverishly to undermine our National Security so that they could dethrone Bush and the Republicans and install their own, left-wing, ideology.

But, so easily do the national media and the Democrats forget. If we ever get attacked again, there will be all these people on the left who will once again squirm out of the fact that it was their policies -- their softness on national security --- that put us at more risk for that attack than any harboring of less than 800 prisoners at Guantanamo ever did. This is exactly what happened because of the emasculation of this nation's security; starting with the Democrat's Church commission and ending with the softness of the Clinton Administration to take out Bin Laden before the 9/11 events unfolded.

Lastly, the national media seemed not to connect the dots on the 4 terrorists that were caught this week before they were able to blow up synagogues and take down a military jet with a stinger missile. These people were Americans that converted to Islam and were radicalized while in prison. Radical Islam is like a virus and it strikes those who harbor ills against this country; like the majority of inmates in our prisons that operate outside of normal society. If we do close Gitmo and move those detainees into U.S. prisons, it isn't their escape we need worry about. It is the radicalization of the disenchanted in those prisons that should concern us. That's the real risk that the mainstream media and the Democrats are too ignorant to understand. Furthermore, it is highly possible that some activist liberal judge or judges will ultimately rule to release these people and, because their home countries won't take them back, they will wind up on our own city streets. What then? To say that won't happen is pure idiocy. All you have to do is look at the number of harden criminals, pedophiles, and rapists that liberal judges have sent back onto our streets with very disastrous results.

Obama's Speech On National Security

I just couldn't let this one pass by waiting to comment on it this weekend.

In another one of his "I'll make it all better with another one my patented B.S. speeches," Obama decided to give a near-impromptu speech on national security that everybody knew was an attempt to try and stomp on Cheney's speech that was already scheduled and that was to be given at that very time on the very same topic. But, Cheney smartly held his speech so that he could precisely counter everything that Obama was expected to say. Obama felt that he had to give this speech because, in the public forum, he was losing ground on the issue of national security to Cheney. Yesterday, Democrats and Republicans, alike, handed Obama a stunning defeat by not funding the closure of Guantanamo Bay. With Obama's national security policies looking pretty tarnished, Obama's only remaining tactic was to give a speech that would basically say that the previous Administration had made security decisions that were done in "haste" and without "forethought" and that had made this country less safe.

My only comment to that statement are these few examples of Obama missteps.

Obama, without any logic or forethought, was prepared to release interrogation photos that everybody in the world, except Obama, knew would result in a backlash that could jeopardize the lives and the safety of our soldiers, our diplomats, and our citizens around the world. Days before the release, he finally put some thought into his previous decision and decided to backtrack and not release those photos. Thank God he figured it out before his prior hasty decision became a disaster.

While on the campaign trail last year, Obama said he would abandon military tribunals to bring Guantanamo detainees to justice. After three months in office and, finally, with some actual and intelligent thought, he decided to proceed with the policy of the Bush Administration to try those detainees with military tribunals. Once again, it appears that Obama's mouth was running faster than his brain!

Two days after being in office, he declared that he would close Guantanamo Bay (a.k.a. Gitmo ) in one year. Now, a third of the way into that promise, he and his people are still clueless as to the "how" of closing that facility. That's why the United States Senate, yesterday, with a vote of 90 to 6, voted "no" to any funding without seeing a plan. If asking for money without a plan isn't haste and a lack of forethought then, I don't know what is. How much do you want to bet, that a year from now, Guantanamo will still be open and Obama will be giving another one of his speeches to make it "seem" like it was a good thing that we, not he, didn't close Gitmo?

To me, this blog survives because everything Obama does has been done, in my opinion, without any forethought. Haste? Well, you be the judge? He's only been in office for four months and he has made major decisions that may absolutely kill the economic and national security future of this country. Is that forethought? For this guy to criticize the Bush Administration for its haste and a lack of forethought is just laughable. Before Obama can claim that we are any more secure with his policies, he will have to back that statement up with time; not just four months of saying that it's so. For the last 7 years, we have been safe under the policies of Bush. Let's see how safe we are in the next three and three-quarters years that are still remaining in this guy's term in office!

The Unintended Consequences of the Guantanamo Decision

There is a law in physics that says that every action has a opposite and equal reaction. This is also true in politics. And, the apparently political Supreme Court's decision about the Guantanamo Bay detainees will have it's equal reaction; mostly negative.

My guess is the the battle field capture of opposing forces by our own military will cease rather than play games with some Federal judge to obtain approval for detainment. The enemy will either be shot dead without any risky attempt to capture them alive or, if they do surrender, they will be immediately handed over to interrogators of some other country. In either case, the comfy quarters and the rules of interrogation by United States forces will be forfeited. There will be no 3-square meals, prayer time, clean cells, exercise periods, and fresh clothing; as was the case in Guantanamo Bay.

This is what those dancing-in-the-streets liberals have doomed all enemy combatants to as a result of this extremely "bad" Supreme Court decision; a decision based more on hating Bush than good law. The consequences of that decision are both far reaching and, as is the case with almost all Supreme Court decision, irreversible. Mark my words!