127 Comments - MrJM - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:36 am: When will the Republican party learn that soiling one’s diaper at the mention of imprisoning and trying terrorists in America is not a sign of strong, confident leadership. – MrJM http://twitter.com/misterjayem - Clyde Frazier - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:45 am: Rich and editorial writers are the ones woefully ill-informed and not well read. Al Qaeda lives to commit symbolic mass murder and by making Illinois the home of the infamous Gitmo prisoners, Obama has made Illinois a bigger target. All the bluster and phony indignation on the left won’t change that fact. To those who doubt this I suggest they go to nearest public library and do some serious reading on jihadism and al-Qaeda. - George - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:48 am: Plus, Rich, if there really were 2,000 al-Qaida followers and family members voluntarily traveling to a federal supermax prison to declare their association with a known terrorist… Wouldn’t that be, umm, helpful? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:48 am: So, Clyde, you’re afraid. We’ve established that. Now, show us some evidence. - Served - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:51 am: Clyde: Any reading recommendations? Or any facts to back your claims up? Other than “they’ll attack us”, (which has been true at least since the first time they attacked us) there has been no reasonable criticism of the transfer. - MrJM - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:52 am: Clyde, They are criminals — mass murderers but criminals — not super-villains. Americans are more than up to the task before us. – MrJM http://twitter.com/misterjayem - OneMan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:54 am: Funny until Durbin mentioned it, I had not heard anything about it being a DoD prison. So the BoP would not be running it but the Dod? I could have sworn I heard that it was a BoP team that did the inspection yesterday. So is it the military who guards prisoners at DoD jails or is it civilians? If it is the military that puts a big cramp in the job creation. - The Doc - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:54 am: ==if there really were 2,000 al-Qaida followers and family members voluntarily traveling to a federal supermax prison to declare their association with a known terrorist== Wrong, George. Visitation would be strictly limited to counsel. Understand that this facility wouldn’t operate like your garden variety pen. It would be under the direction of the DoD. - George - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:54 am: I hear these prisoners can fly and walk through walls. And that the only reason they stayed in camp X-Ray in Guantanamo (chain link fences) was because they decided to. - John Ruberry - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:58 am: There’s a great place, a quite secure one, for these terrorists: Gitmo. It has a state of the aret health care facilities–does Thomson? If an inmate becomes quite ill, he’ll have to be transfered to a hospital–a security risk. The assassasin of Meir Kahane, a Jewish activisit, El Sayyid Nosair, was held at Attica. The NYC landmark plotters schemed to rescue him–using a truck bomb. Look it up. Would it have succeeded? Probably not, but we are not dealing with rational people. - Phineas J. Whoopee - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 9:59 am: Boy that Kirk is way off based thinking these al-Qaida types of Islamic terrorists might be capable of attaching in Illinois because we are imprisoning their hero’s. (sarcasm) I’m not sure whether Kirk is right or wrong but I am sure glad someone is bringing it up. By the way Rich, what do you mean by “show us some evidence.” There is enough evidence of al-Quaida’s terrorist activities to fill a library. I must have missed your point. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:01 am: ===There is enough evidence of al-Quaida’s terrorist activities to fill a library.=== Then point to some evidence that they have the current capability to attack a remote prison in Northwest Illinois. Do you think they’re supermen or something? - Thomas Westgard - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:01 am: The Illinois GOP has really made a misstep here that’s going to hurt in a number of ways. Kirk dove headfirst down this path, so now he has to somehow justify it. Trouble is, he’s just flat wrong and people aren’t going to buy it. Saying America can’t make a safe prison just sounds unpatriotic and cowardly. Combining that with an appeal to Palin supporters and what you have is a disorganized clusterf*** of a Senatorial campaign, going nowhere. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:02 am: ===The NYC landmark plotters schemed to rescue him–using a truck bomb. Look it up.=== And they didn’t do it. - dupage dan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:02 am: There is a difference of opinion regarding how these people are to be defined. MrJM describes them as mass murdering criminals - to be tried in a civil criminal court. The other description is that they are combatants. Bin Laden declared war on the US back in 1993 with the first attack on the WTC. This may not be a war in the conventional sense but it is clear our enemy believes we have been at war since that time. Since the prisoners are not “lawful” combatants as described in the Geneva Conventions, they are subject to a military tribunal as such. This is why some believe that moving them to this civil prison is a mistake. - John Ruberry - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:03 am: And they didn’t do it. Because they got arrested first. Sheesh. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:04 am: Other than the the int’l community and liberals not liking it, there is nothing wrong with gitmo.had obama not issued an executive order in his second day, or so, in office, closing gitmo, I doubt that people would have been clamoring for him to honor that campaign promise. so to avoid his further embarassment and discomfort, quinn and durbin are giving him an out. The real problem is and was that the detained enemy combatants are/were being held indefinitely with no trial in sight. This is where the Bush administration went wrong. the Obama administration would have been better to just get the trials started and finished ASAP rather than prematurely/hastily ordering Gitmo closed and yielding to nonsensical int’l and liberal pressure. Now, if the obama administration plans to try enemy combatants within the next two-three years and bring resolution to their status. okay, fine. now, where is that part of the discussion? dems? obama? newspaper editorial boards? exactly what is the plan for these detainees, once they come to Thomson? after they are tried and there is nothing to warrant their continued detention in some cases, then what happens to them? is the u.s. on the hook for paying there expenses to go back from where they came? does the u.s. grant them amnesty to stay in the u.s. as a way of saying “sorry we goofed”? If you guys want thomson to be the next newest federal prison, okay. fine. because there have not been any terrorist attacks like 9/11 since 9/11 if you guys want to think that all is well, and terrorism is no longer a concern, then okay. fine. “Kirk’s scare talk might do him wonders with the GOP base, but it won’t convince a single terrorist that this nation has a backbone.” Do terrorists care that the nation has a backbone? given that terrorists are willing to knowingly blow themselves up in the commission of a terrorist attack, probably not. Does anyone really think terrorists are afraid of the U.S.? I have to stop here because this what got Bill Maher into trouble and cost him his show on ABC. 9/11 never happened, okay? everything is just fine– no need to worry. gee gosh golly this is the united states and we haven’t had a terrorist attack since 9/11 so we’re okay. whatever. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:04 am: From Wikipedia… Since October 7, 2001, when the current war in Afghanistan began, 775 detainees have been brought to Guantánamo. Of these, approximately 420 have been released without charge. As of January 2009, approximately 245 detainees remain. Three have been convicted of various charges: * David Hicks was found guilty under retrospective legislation introduced in 2006 of providing material support to terrorists in 2001.[13][14] * Salim Hamdan accepted a position on bin Laden’s personal staff only as a chauffeur.[15] * Ali al-Bahlul made a video celebrating the attack on the USS Cole (DDG-67). Of those still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest. - George - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:05 am: Plus, as someone has mentioned, didn’t Mark Kirk vote for the Defense Department Reauthorization Act? Which included funding to transfer these prisoners to the U.S.? So was he for it before he was against it? - Clyde Frazier - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:05 am: I’d start with The Looming Tower and anything by Walid Phares. Look at target lists that have been found. All symbols. Obama and Quinn just moved Illinois targets up the list. - cassandra - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:05 am: I’ve said before-I’m not worried about security but I do wonder where the thousands of local jobs figures (2000? 3000?) figures are coming from. Isn’t it possible that the DOD and/or Fed Prison agency will bring in their own staff instead of hiring locally. Presumably the entry bar and background check requirements for those guarding suspected international terrorists are very high–much higher than, say, for state corrections officers. And are we assuming that Thomson (pop 600) will suddenly blossom into a haven of shops and trendy restaurants for employees at the jail. I doubt it. I think Pat Quinn will say anything, promise anything to get elected. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:06 am: Both sides have been fearmongering this thing. For the past year, it had been politically expedient to claim that Gitmo was causing more terrorists to sign up. For the past year, it has been politically used to claim that the US was making itself unsafe by holding and trying Gitmo detainees in Guantanamo Bay, which the last I knew, has been an American base for over a century. When liberals attacked Bush over Gitmo, the Administration investigated placing the detainees in other countries - but the other countries weren’t interested in helping, just criticizing. When liberals attacked Bush over Gitmo, the international Red Cross/Crescent investigated and found no problems. Gitmo had been repeatedly investigated by third party, even blatantly liberal biased organizations - who in each case, found nothing wrong. But it became a political playing card, and Obama used it without thinking about where the detainees were supposed to go. Now he is stuck. We have the President on record supporting military tribunal trials for the detainees before he played the Gitmo political card. We have bipartisan support for a legal framework based on legal precedent for fair trials for the detainees. This entire debate occured years ago, and there were few complaints at that time. At least until it became a political game. The fearmongering has been rampant for over a year. The liberals are now claiming that the detainees didn’t get real trials, years after they previously agreed to the methods put into place. They are now claiming that the detainees in Gitmo are a source of terrorist recruitments and a source of international embarrassment. The fearmongering has been on both sides. It is incredible to read that the former fearmongers are now fingerpointing at the questions raised by their political opponents. It is incredible that Kirk is being accused of being cowardly, when Mark Kirk is the only candidate that has actual battle experience against these people! I can’t believe how confident political opponents have become accusing a US veteran of this war, as being spineless? Oh shut up - this entire Gitmo issue is a political nightmare when it needn’t be. The problems were debated and solved years ago. We are being played as idiots by people disinterested in our public safety. These fearmongers are only concerned about their political power plays. Jobs? What a poor excuse to implement a poorly thought out ad-hoc political decision. What few jobs there will be is offset by the negative images of the Illinois Gitmo. You people supporting this are nuts! - Phineas J. Whoopee - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:06 am: You don’t have to be Superman to blow yourself up and take some folks with you. I’m not sure whether this is good for Illinois or not, however, I am sure that Kirk should not be ridiculed for making his argument. It is a valid point and should be discussed before any decision is made. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:07 am: To their credit, not all GOPers here on the blog and around the country are drinking the Kool-Aid. Many are embarrassed by the portrayal of an America too scared to deal with these fanatics. Whoever put out the talking points (Rove? Ailes?) has probably got the curtains drawn today. For years, it’s been a right-wing staple that Democrats were too weak to be trusted with the terror issue. Now, you’ve got leading GOPers telling the world that we’re too weak or scared to put people in super-max prisons or on trial. Strange, but true, and ultimately a cynical, and very stupid, tactic. You can have rational discussions on the appropriateness of civilian rather than military courts. But there’s no question that putting Sheik Whats-His-Name on trial in Foley Square in lower Manhattan is a giant extended middle finger to terrorists everywhere. It says our system and values are superior and unshakeable. And we ain’t scared. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:08 am: ===however, I am sure that Kirk should not be ridiculed for making his argument.=== When his argument is riddled with falsehoods then he should be ridiculed. - Served - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:08 am: The point is that there is no evidence of an increased threat of attack because of the prison. There are already terrorists in prisons around the country. It hasn’t happened. There are limitless “motivations” for attacks, but the truth is that Al Qaeda is illogical, and they’ll try to attack things no matter what. Terrorist targets have been everything from government buildings to landmarks to hotels. We haven’t stopped building or going to those. Almost every single post about the threat this prison will create includes a made up scenario that could happen today, without the prison in use. - Louis Howe - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:09 am: Seems to me that the word “Wimp” applies to the current GOP rant about “Gitmo Terrorists” locked up in Illinois. Where’s their patriotic zeal and flag waving honor. Didn’t they tell us “Don’t Worry” about spending $2 Trillion invading Iraq….it will all be worth it the end. Well, we are entering the end game phase and the strategy isn’t so clear. America housed thousands of Nazi “enemy combatants” in Illinois (Camp Ellis,ect) during WWII. I doubt that the “Greatest Generation” cowered and felt threatened. Actually, the GOP legacy prior to WWII was isolationist, so perhaps the current GOP crop of politicos are returning to their natural skittishness about international conflicts. It’s time to ManUp!!! - John Ruberry - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:10 am: In a bloggers conf call I took part in May, Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) revealed–”there are people on the internet and on the airwaves” planning rescue missions at Gitmo. Thomson is more accessible than Cuba. I don’t think that a plot like this would succeed, but again, we are not dealing with level-headed peopl.e. - Will Done - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:13 am: Rich wants evidence that al-Qaeda wants to kill as many Americans as possible? Is this a joke? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:14 am: ===Rich wants evidence that al-Qaeda wants to kill as many Americans as possible? Is this a joke? === What I asked, moron, is whether there is any evidence to back up the claims made by Kirk and others. Bite me. - Served - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:15 am: I guess I’ll add an example: Timothy McVeigh. A terrorist. I’m sure there was a batch of cray cray out there somewhere that would have liked to make a point with his incarceration. Should he have not been incarcerated domestically because of a perceived threat? I just don’t understand the NIMBY hysteria that’s going on. You don’t think the FBI, CIA, and NSA will be monitoring for attacks on the security facility housing the former Gitmo population? Really? They’re not just going to plop them in Illinois and ignore it. - Thomas Westgard - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:15 am: “Both sides have been fearmongering this thing.” Ah, the good old “you did it first” schoolyard retort. First, who did it first doesn’t solve the problem of where the prisoners should go. Second, Republicans have set themselves up as the party of brave, brainless flagwavers, so it’s that same GOP base that will be offended by fearmongering against American prison guards. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:18 am: George, you forgot that we can still stop them with kryptonite. Perhaps Illinois should build a few more prisons and lease them out to other states to generate desperately needed revenue. Then instead of the “Land of Lincoln” we can become the Land of Prisons. Add a few iron bars to the State Flag! (Snark fully intended) Have we sunk so low as a state? Will our new legacy be “we are so desperate for money we will do anything?” Rod’s wife ate bugs for money. We all laughed. But isn’t this just another way of eating bugs for money? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:18 am: ===But isn’t this just another way of eating bugs for money? === I agree. And I’d eat bugs for a few billion dollars, which is what I think we ought to get for this prison move. - just sayin' - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:20 am: Yet another self-generated disaster by the Illinois GOP. Few GOP officials here have ever worn the uniform. Now they say they won’t even lend a hand in the war on terror by allowing some terror suspects to be housed in a supermax within our borders (even though it’s already happened in other cases). This is typical of the selfish incompetence of the GOP officials from Illinois. If anything involves any leadership or even an iota of risk, let someone else do it. These wimps care more about what the terrorists think than keeping our country safe. I’m sure guys like Tom Cross, Andy McKenna and Pat Brady view all the men and women serving in the military as chumps. Well guys, that’s not how voters feel. - Mary, Sterling - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:20 am: Suleiman Abu Gheith said, so nicely: “We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4 million Americans - 2 million of them children - and to exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the [Americans’] chemical and biological weapons.” “America knows only the language of force. This is the only way to stop it and make it take its hands off the Muslims and their affairs. America does not know the language of dialogue!! Or the language of peaceful coexistence!! America is kept at bay by blood alone…” - Secret Square - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:22 am: Louis, you’re right about Illinois having housed Nazi POWs during WWII and no one “cowered or felt threatened.” But they still took precautions. There were regular air raid drills and air raid wardens appointed in almost every town of any size (from what I understand, talking to my parents and grandparents). So they didn’t dismiss the possibility that an attack could happen to them. Still, I do agree that Kirk and the GOP are blowing the risk a bit out of proportion. - Right Winger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:25 am: I still don’t see why they need to be moved from Gitmo in the first place. - OneMan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:25 am: ==Few GOP officials here have ever worn the uniform. Now they say they won’t even lend a hand in the war on terror by allowing some terror suspects to be housed in a supermax within our borders (even though it’s already happened in other cases).== Looking forward to your list of Democrats who have served… Last time I checked Kirk still does. Can you say that about any of the Democratic statewides? Did any of them ever server? Alexi? Quinn? Try selling your chicken-hawk BS someplace else, please. It old, tired and at least in Illinois, generally BS. So Rich if we don’t get ‘a few billion’ out of this should we still do it? I suspect they will not pay much more than replacement cost for the facility. Otherwise Senators from a whole host of states will scream bloody murder. - One of the 35 - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:26 am: At the risk of being overly pragmatic, since Illinois is in financial shambles, we can’t afford to fully staff a prison we built 6 years ago,doesn’t it make financial sense to sell the thing and raise some funds? - Big Policy Nerd - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:26 am: This is knee jerk reactionary fearmongering from the GOP led by their commander in chief- Captain Kirk…News Flash: According to the AP there are already 35 convicted terrorists doing time in Illinois prisons. I am sorry to disappoint Captain Kirk, but that hasn’t led to any terrorist attacks on Illinois soil. Further, the prison would be leased to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, which would then lease a section to the Department of Defense to house the transfers form Gitmo. So all the GOP candidates for Governor and Captain Kirk don’t think our men and women in uniform can adequately prevent terrorists escaping form jail. Way to support the troops. Why do they not support the troops? If this area is reeling in unemployment and the community supports the transfer, let’s give people jobs and lock them up the terrorists to rot in the safest facility in the world. The rest of us will go on with our daily lives while the right wing lives in fear. - Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:30 am: Gotti served his time in Marion and it’s not like the southern Illinois Italians rose up, stormed the gates and freed the boss. Why was there no GOP outrage when Marion’s mayor went on Fox News a few months ago and said, “send ‘em here.” Oh yeah, because McKenna and Kirk hadn’t yet announced their campaigns. Strange how their degree of concern seems to fluctuate with their personal political planning. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:31 am: ===Strange how their degree of concern seems to fluctuate with their personal political planning. === I think this became much bigger news when the governor and the White House got involved. A mayor making announcement is just that. An actual official move in that direction is something else entirely. - Louis Howe - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:33 am: Secret Square and others…I suggest you Google “Camp Ellis, Illinois” and read about the precautions taken in housing more than 5,000 mostly German prisoners. Fulton County farmers were given 30 days to move off the 17,000 acres, and believe me, the Table Grove prison facilities were nothing like the maximum security prison at Thompson. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:34 am: rich, weren’t you concerned the other day about illinois looking desperate? now you’re okay with it? it’s a sad price to pay for jobs. for a few dollars more, let’s sell off Illinois’ portion of lake michigan? what will we conceive of next? this decision has been reached out of desperation. the governor is desperate for cash. thomson is desperate for jobs. obama is desperate to deliver on a campaign promise. irrespective of mark kirk, the IL/National GOP, shouldn’t we be concerned about the quality of this decision and its ramifications. Can’t we all agree that doing things out of desperation, absent sufficient review/consideration/discussion, probably isn’t in our long term interest? - SangamoGOP - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:37 am: When the GOP talks about jobs, balanced budgets, and lower taxes they tend to win elections. When they forget this mantra and go off half-cocked about this kind of stuff, they end up looking like fools and giving the jobs issue to the Dems. If the Gitmo terrorists are going to come to the mainland, then they can and should go to the remote NW corner of IL where the economy could use the fed payroll dollars. Do these guys want to kill Americans and all non-Muslims? It sure seems like it. Do gang-bangers want to sell drugs and kill anyone who might impact that trade including prosecutors and judges? Yes. Are there gang-bangers in every prison in IL or as McMurphy is want to say, in our ‘neighborhoods’? Yes. - lake county democrat - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:37 am: I agree about the fear mongering, but that said Americans are going to have to spine-up because one day there will indeed be Northern Ireland/Israel type terrorism attacks (bombs in trash cans, suicide bombers on busses) and I wonder what the political reaction is going to be to the first of these — say if it were in Rockford or Chicago shortly after the transfer or a trial of a former gitmo detainee were here. - Anon - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:37 am: Rich, I think your analysis is spot on here. However, with regards to the price we get for the prison, isnt our bargaining position predicated on competition? It would seem that if the federal government needed something that only Illinois had, we could really hold it over the barrel and get a really good price. however, if Thompson is one of several, wouldnt that lead to a bidding war? Maybe the governor’s asking price is based on the competative market of other prisons that suit the deferal govt’s needs? Do we know the answer to the question of how many other prisons are in the running? - Willie Stark - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:38 am: This is what the modern Republican Party leadership has become: anti-rational fearmongerers. It’s about time the media starts to confront that reality and stop pretending that they are the loyal opposition offering a reasonable counterpoint. They’ve mutated into something else entirely. It extends to a lot more than just Thomson prison. Look at how many do not believe evolution to be a sound theory, or that global climate change is being caused by human activity. Or that Pres. Obama is going to take their guns - when he hasn’t done or said anything of the sort and pretty clearly has no intention of doing so. That is what is truly frightening - not whether or not the good ‘ol USA is able to keep a few hundred terror suspects from bustin’ out of prison or their buddies from bustin’ in. How does the GOP leadership manage to hold the simultaneious beliefs that we are the greatest nation ever and that we aren’t up to keeping those bad guys secure on our soil? I’m sick of their “America can’t do it” attitude. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:38 am: ===”there are people on the internet and on the airwaves” planning rescue missions at Gitmo.=== Thanks John. We may never have known about that fact if you hadn’t been on that bloggers’ call. Stay vigilant my friend. We need you on that wall. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:38 am: ===now you’re okay with it?=== Did you see where I said that? I want the state to get more money. If we’re gonna look desperate, let’s at least get paid. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:40 am: Back in 2006 - we all agreed on how to handle this. Obama agreed. We put them in Gitmo and allow visits by any international organizations with an axe to grind to prove any injustices. We all agreed that the judicial process would be fair military tribunals based on previous US law. We all agreed. What happened? Politics! In 2006 the Democrats wanted to regain Congress and the White House. They flip flopped on it. They started fearmongering that Gitmo and Bush made the US unsafe. We all agreed it wasn’t - but the Democrats decided to flip on this. Obama then flipped. This entire discussion is based on political expediency, not facts. This entire discussion is based on the fact that we have one party disinterested in keeping their word. The fearmongering started when it became politically expedient to do so. That happened during the Congressional Elections of 2006. “Gitmo is used as a recruitment for more terrorists!” “Gitmo is making us unsafe!” “Gitmo is causing the US to lose face across the world!” “Gitmo is a house of torture!” “Gitmo is a symbol of American arrogance!” On and on! But now that we have a veteran of this war questioning the politically opportunistic Barack Obama’s ad-hoc political policy of putting convicted terrorists in Illinois - the veteran is being accused of being a coward? Who is fearmongering whom here? And take a look at the other fearmongering tactics being used - right here: “Kirk is showing terrorists that the US is afraid of them” “If we do not let the terrorists into the US, (they are currently residing on a US base, which is technically the US), we will be seen as weak.” Ridiculous! - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:41 am: The M.O. of a an [Al Quaida] terrorist is very different from that of U.S. mafioso. the latter doesn’t like to bring unnecessary heat/attention to itself for the sake of keeping its lucrative criminal enterprises intact. the former’s only intention is to kill and harm, and it is done in ways to achieve optimal results and get attention. the issue is not terrorists breaking out of prison. the issue IS stopping/eradicating the motivation for terrorism in the first place. - Just Wonderin.... - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:42 am: “Then point to some evidence that they have the current capability to attack a remote prison in Northwest Illinois. Do you think they’re supermen or something?” Um, I am going to go out on a limb and just guess that it is probably easier to attack Thomson, IL than say a secure US military installation protected on one side by the ocean and on the other by a minefield and then there are of course about 10,000 sailors and Marines. Significantly more protection than can be reasonably assumed to be put in place in the continental US. If this is run by the DOD as a DOD installation then that is a little different, it will give them much more flexibility to handle the situation. I also agree that there is something funny about the officials who have absolutely no national security/military experience throwing in their 2 cents. I mean, Bill Brady’s national security knowledge is about as in depth as remembering his own Brinks Home Security code. - Brennan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:43 am: =You don’t think the FBI, CIA, and NSA will be monitoring for attacks on the security facility housing the former Gitmo population?= You mean like they were Nidal Malik Hasan? I think Kirk’s reaction is a little over the top, but it is not born out of ignorance and fear as Rich frames it. Most of the Gitmo detainees do not have backers trying to free them. The detainees aren’t spiritual leaders. KSM is an operative. Ramzi Bin Al Shib is an operative. These are guys that are supposed to go down with the sinking ship. They’re not guys you try to rescue. They’re not a source of inspiration for any followers. Ramzi Yousef has been locked up in the Supermax facility for almost a decade now. Again, an operative that provides little to no spiritual inspiration to try and spring him. =I still don’t see why they need to be moved from Gitmo in the first place.= They shouldn’t move. But we have President Hope and Change that makes decisions first and constructs the policy later. Hey, the new boss sounds a lot like the old boss. - OneMan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:44 am: So Rich, Do we do it if we just get replacement cost of Thompson? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:45 am: ===it is not born out of ignorance and fear as Rich frames it.=== Actually, the newspapers framed it that way. Also, since Kirk spouted untruths, it is ignorance. And since he has no actual facts to back himself up, it looks to me and a whole lot of others like partisan fear-mongering. - Plutocrat03 - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:45 am: To date there is an incomplete picture of what is being proposed at Thomson. It almost seems that its being made up as we go along. The Gov was on the radio last night talking about a full federal prison being run there. That is not reflected in what is in the press today. There is a whole list of questions that need answers starting from how the State will replace the lost capacity, how the money will be used all the way to what the feds will do with the property. The application of doctrinaire approaches will do little other than spend capital we do not have on solutions that will not work. What is best is to get the facts and make a decision. Naivete and fear mongering have no place when dealing with the public’s money or safety. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:46 am: ===Do we do it if we just get replacement cost of Thompson?=== In my opinion, no. We should get more for this. Lots more. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:46 am: ===The Gov was on the radio last night talking about a full federal prison being run there. That is not reflected in what is in the press today.=== Yes it is. - Bill - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:49 am: Typical of repubs. Talk loudly and tough but carry a little stick - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:50 am: rich wants taxes raised ASAP and thomson made into a federal prison so that the state can get money. Go it. Thanks! @ Anon - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:37 am according to an AP story published yesterday afternoon, Governor Quinn et al. (perhaps) “misspoke” or “misled” when they suggested that a prison in Colorado is being considered as well. - shore - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:54 am: When democrats run ads against congressman kirk saying that because he took a 1,000 dollar contribution from a pro-life congressman he will take your Glenbrook North attending daughters right to choose away, you don’t read newspaper endorsements critiquing them. Taking a position that doesn’t square with newspapers is not wrong. We don’t hear mayor daley hit for attacking law abiding gun owners or any of the other junk that we generally hear from chicago democrat politicians rebuked in editorials. In fact most columnists at the sun-times generally treat the word conservative in their columns like its a plague. These newspapers are holding kirk to a different standard because he is a republican. Overall it’s a net gain for Kirk. The newspapers will still endorse him because he is a far superior candidate to his opponents-he will mop up in edboard debates with his knowledge of issues, and he will have reassured conservatives-with hits like the one he took from rachel maddow last night, that he is good to go. - OneMan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:58 am: ==Typical of repubs. Talk loudly and tough but carry a little stick == So using that logic, we should just put them in county jails or perhaps open happy jails since there is obviously no risk what so ever…. Come on folks, yes there may be overstating of the risks but this isn’t like putting some outfit bagman in your jail. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:58 am: =You don’t think the FBI, CIA, and NSA will be monitoring for attacks on the security facility housing the former Gitmo population?= Yeah kinda like how federal agencies have been so vigilant and effective in keeping the 12 million or so illegal immigrants out of the country, or the billions of dollars in illegal drugs that flood into the U.S. yearly etc out. Bottom line, we can’t even secure our nation’s borders. But, we can at least try to mitigate our risks of terrorist attack, can’t we? shouldn’t we? - Bill - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:59 am: ==most columnists at the sun-times generally treat the word conservative in their columns like its a plague.== That is becuase it is. At least they get some things right. - Skirmisher - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:59 am: The irresponsible fear-mongering response by Illinois Republicans on this Thomson prison issue is another example of why I now routinely toss letters from the Republican Party into the trash without opening them. Are there no responsible grown-ups in Illinois politics??? - downstate hick - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:02 am: The Price of Thomson. We are not going to get a huge premium for the prison, but we should get double our costs, and assurances if the feds decide to close it in the next decade the State gets it back at no cost. - Gunslinger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:02 am: I welcome the increased scrutiny brought on by Kirk and others because the speed at which this potential transaction appears to be taking place concerns me. When government moves too fast, it often makes mistakes. From a public safety and economic standpoint, I don’t want mistakes right now. I want effective outcomes. I believe the supermax prison in Thomson can handle these terrorists, but I don’t fully discount the negative impact of bringing terrorists to Illinois because, like it or not, their presence will motivate others to attempt criminal acts. Springfield recently had someone attempt to ignite what he thought was a large quantity of explosives contained in a van to kill the people in the Paul Findley Federal Building. This guy thought he was working with an al-Qaida operative. Additionally, the selling of the Thomson prison is the selling off of a state asset, although at present, an under utilized one. This should be of concern to everyone because our current leadership focuses on problem delaying, quick fixes instead of solutions that result in long term financial health. Illinois needs to absolutely maximize its take on the sale, including ensuring the local jobs are there has advertised and the one-time monetary boon is put to WISE use. - Served - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:02 am: “Yeah kinda like how federal agencies have been so vigilant and effective in keeping the 12 million or so illegal immigrants out of the country, or the billions of dollars in illegal drugs that flood into the U.S. yearly etc out.” This is so full of straw, it’s going on a stroll with Dorothy. We’re talking about a confined area, WCW, not an expansive border. - Plutocrat03 - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:04 am: Sorry Rich, what is in the press today is an incomplete proposal. To pursue this boondoggle, we should start with the usual RFP process and let the bidders come out of the woodwork. Let the proposals see the light of day and let the public voice their thoughts. This is much like Daley’s bulldozing of Meigs at night. Do the deed and hunker down until the complaints stop. Where is the confidence in the system? - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:08 am: “This is so full of straw, it’s going on a stroll with Dorothy. We’re talking about a confined area, WCW, not an expansive border. ” Don’t take what I wrote out of context and then try to argue against it…now which logical fallacy did you just commit? My point was about the capacities of various National Security agencies and their abilities/performance heretofore. - Served - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:15 am: WCW: You mean like the FBI’s recent string of competent interception of various terrorist plots, including one in central Illinois? Looks like they’re performing pretty well in this area. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:19 am: Rich, maybe someone already asked the question, but I’m just catching up. I don’t know whether it matters, but does anyone know what happens to a prisoner when he’s released? For example, if Al-Marri were released from Gitmo v. a prison here in the US, where would he go? - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:22 am: Served, that is understood. As I stated yesterday…have terrorist attacks been thwarted since 9/11, yes. that’s what the bush administration said. But, Condolezza Rice et al. were always cautious and realistic to throw out the caveat that the threat of terrorism will continue to exist in the United States. we don’t know for certain that the terrorist attacks that have been thwarted are not just trial baloons on the part of terrorist leading up to something much bigger, more devasting and harder for u.s. national security to detect beforehand. - Phineas J. Whoopee - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:24 am: As I have previously stated, I think the security ramifications need to be analyzed but having an already built, state of the art, maximum security prison sitting empty and an established need to move high risk prisoners from a disgraced facility seems to be an easy decision. Another words, worth the risk. Illinois needs jobs, America needs to bail on Gitmo and terrorists need confinement. What else do you do? Spend hundreds of millions to build the same facility somewhere else. Maybe this was meant to be. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:24 am: - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:19 am: I’ve asked those questions yesterday and today and no one has provided an answer. with you and more people asking, hopefully someone can/will answer finally. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:29 am: I think Yglesias makes a point that’s been mostly ignored but deserves debate… ===In political terms, the right likes the war idea because it involves taking terrorism more “seriously.” But in doing so, you partake of way too much of the terrorists’ narrative about themselves. It’s their conceit, after all, that blowing up a bomb in a train station and killing a few hundred random commuters is an act of war. And war is a socially sanctioned form of activity, generally held to be a legally and morally acceptable framework in which to kill people. What we want to say, however, is that this sporadic commuter-killing isn’t a kind of war, it’s an act of murder. To be sure, not an ordinary murder—a mass murder—but nonetheless murder. […] After all, do we really want to send the message to the world that a self-starting spree killer like Nidal Malik Hasan is actually engaged in some kind of act of holy war? It seems to me that we don’t. A lot of people in the world are interested in glory, and willing to take serious risks with their lives for its sake. Insofar as possible, we want to drain anti-American violence of the aura of glory. And that means by-and-large treating its perpetrators like criminals.=== - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:31 am: oh and Served… part of the U.S. national security community’s problem is that there are not enough people who can do the counter intelligence work that is needed to help future thwart terrorist attacks. the recent indcident at Ft. Hood suggests that we may never be up to snuf when it comes to having the ability to send counter intelligence agents abroad who are Muslim and can speak the language. our national security isn’t where fully where it needs to be, and may never be. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:32 am: I agree with the above. Terrorists can “declare war” all they want. But they’re criminals. Don’t give them the satisfaction of being warriors or soldiers. They haven’t earned it. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:34 am: Rich, if that’s the case then as the panelists on Chicago Tonight suggested last night, the U.S. is going to have to define whether or not these detainees are enemy combatants or simply “criminals”. But to have them sit around for almost a decade without a trial, is also the problem here. First, define them. Second, try them and let’s move on. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:35 am: –the recent indcident at Ft. Hood suggests that we may never be up to snuf when it comes to having the ability to send counter intelligence agents abroad who are Muslim and can speak the language.– What in the world are you talking about here? The shooter was a natural-born U.S. citizen, doctor, officer in the Army. By the way, there is not a “Muslim” language. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:37 am: WCW, I’ve been asking questions and making statements re: the psychology of terrorism on ALL the blogs since the end of last week and still haven’t gotten answers. The only responses I’ve been getting are 1) jobs, 2) “playing politics” to attack our Administration, and 3) not having confidence in IDOC. As a matter of fact, one of my posts here that raised points others are raising today, didn’t even make it. Maybe it was the statement I made at the end. - state employee - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:38 am: pssst….did you all forget that the ceilings in the cell houses fell down shortly after the prison took on it’s first inmates? Thompson is not max security when you have a skylight in your cell. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:40 am: Anonymous, the question has already been addressed here. There is no way that the prisoners will be released into the neighborhood. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:42 am: Word, There is legitimate concern that he was a working for something other than the U.S. national security interests. Was he a terrorist operative? I don’t know, but according to some there is indication that he might have been. I’m not going to any further than that because I don’t people to jump up and start crying about it. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:44 am: I’m not sure I fully agree with your 11:32, word. While I don’t want to give them the satisfaction of being called soldiers based on our definition, calling them “criminals” won’t cut it either because before you know it, someone’s going to be talking about “rehabilitation”. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:47 am: Rich, the question has not been addressed by the Quinn or Obama administrations. after they are tried and it is determined that they no longer need to be held, they are no longer a prisoner, so what becomes of them at that point? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:49 am: If they’re not a citizen they’d be deported. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:50 am: WCW’s right. I’ve been reading press releases and articles since this started last week, and no one seems to be adressing the point. Does someone have a reference? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:54 am: Anon, if they’re not gonna be released here it’s of little to no interest to this blog. We have enough on our plate as it is right now. Stick to Illinois as much as possible please. - Third Generation Chicago Native - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 11:57 am: There have been no terrorist attacks on Gitamimo, or Cuba. So…why would they want to attack their own people….or an airport where family and friends of prisoners would be? There are a lot of GOP constituents in the area of the Thompson Prison that are wanting this, they want the jobs, they feel the area and prison can handle the prisoners. They want the economic growth that comes with more jobs being created. This is just hurting the GOP by digging in their heels on this, this makes it look like a war against the Democrats just for the sake of it, and they don’t appear to be looking at the actual rational issues, but taking this as an all out war against the Democrats for the sake of battling with the Democrats. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:03 pm: –calling them “criminals” won’t cut it either because before you know it, someone’s going to be talking about “rehabilitation”. – Strawman. No one’s talking rehab for convicted criminals in SuperMax now. - Deep South - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:03 pm: The GOP, reacting to the loud and rabid among them, are running hard to the right for this election. The Thomson prison issue is like manna from heaven for them. But, in Illinois anyway, this may well turn out to be a losing strategy. Was is Nixon who said right hard to the right in the primary and come to the center for the general? Well, that was a long, long time ago. It probably won’t work this time around. - JonShibleyFan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:05 pm: “When liberals attacked Bush over Gitmo, the international Red Cross/Crescent investigated and found no problems.” That is, quite simply, not true. Though they’d reported *improved* conditions in 2006, they published a report in 2007 alleging torture, even at the hands of medical personnel. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:23 pm: Maybe it’s because I lived in a city (Munich) where two bombs went off while I was there. Nobody panicked, the opposition parties didn’t eventually go all hyper. My college campus (on an Army base) was also hit with several bomb threats. Or maybe it’s because I’ve been to war zones where bombs were going off and people were shooting very close to me. Or that I have a wife who survived three wars. Either way, while this Gitmo/Thomson thing does make me uncomfortable, I still don’t understand the abject fear out there. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:39 pm: === Strawman. No one’s talking rehab for convicted criminals in SuperMax now. === Sorry, but I thought the word “rehabilitation” popped up at least once or twice during the Tamms discussion. Am I wrong? - Anon - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:41 pm: The real question–not yet debated here–is why even have these low-lifes here on US soil in the first place? The reason they were out of country in GITMO was because of the legal theory that if they are not in the US then the US Constitution does not apply. These are war criminals, not domestic criminals and in my opinion these people do not have the right to have the Constitution apply to them. Keep them off US soil. Why on earth would the President want to bring them to the US. That is the real question. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:42 pm: And, I thought that someone was stating that keeping prisoners in Tamms in 23 hours of solitary confinement was “torture”. And that Quinn called for an investigation. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:48 pm: ===The real question–not yet debated here=== That question was debated during the ‘08 presidential campaign. It’s not really at all pertinent to this blog. ===legal theory that if they are not in the US then the US Constitution does not apply=== see Rasul v. Bush and Boumediene v. Bush. - Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:49 pm: If we are truly frightened of the terrorists and jihadis and their threats against our country, the presence of absence of a prison to house a few in northern Illinois is the least of our concerns. Their anger derives primarily the presence of our military in their countries. Why aren’t Kirk and the rest demanding the withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan and the Middle-East? If they are concerned about a terrorist bullseye on Chicago, why not ask Obama to move out of the city? If they are concerned about the health and safety of the citizens of northern Illinois, why not support a public health care system that is open and affordable to all. If you live in Thompson, Illinois, will you be more at risk from a terrorist breakout or dying from cancer that you cannot afford to have treated? Please. - dupage dan - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:55 pm: Just because we don’t have a country or countries in recognizable uniforms doing battle against a similarly clad fow doesn’t mean its not a war. The fact that we have a lone assasin murdering people doesn’t alter the idea that we are at war. Since the USA arguably has the most sophisticated means to do battle and our opponents do not, leaves the opponents with a need to develop means to confront us in less conventional ways. To ignore or minimize this is, I think, foolhardy. Trying to dismiss them as so many gnats buzzing around our heads to be swatted away with a rolled up magazine is dangerous. David slew Goliath. To compare AlQueda and their cohorts with the various Marxist groups bombing in Europe (assuming that is when you were in Europe, Rich) is simply not the same thing. The Bader Meinhof gang was a small group of people. Al Queda is much more massive and should not be considered a criminal organization. More to the point - I agree with those who say Gitmo is the place for these people. No prison is free of problems. The John Howard Association would tell us that. Those housed there could very well rue the day they are moved to a supermax prison. I would be completely against mixing in US criminals with this group. Recruitment goals with these people would be made easier if we did that. Don’t fix what ain’t broke. Thomson prison should be fully functioning as a state facility. Politics prevented that from happening. I wonder why? - jobs? - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:58 pm: Would these even be jobs for civilians or ordinary citizens? doubtful, wouldnt this have to be a military type prison (like gitmo) with military officers as the gaurds, etc.? probably wouldnt bring a lot of employment to the “locals”. so not sure how well that aurgument works. - Third Generation Chicago Native - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 12:59 pm: The article Rich posted ===Illinois town prefers detainees over unemployment=== That is really a good article pointing out the actual people who would be most affected by this, and they are for the Gitanimo detainees taking up residence at the Thomson prison. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:03 pm: ===have to be a military type prison=== A small portion would be, yes. The rest would be a federal prison. And the guards/employees would all live nearby. - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:08 pm: @Du Page Dan I recall the news reports of the bombing at the german disco, in ‘86 i think, frequented by U.S. service personnel was carried out by muslim arabs. I don’t reall hearing about any german bombings involving marxist groups back then. @ word, thanks you are right, and I had intended to list the arabic and farsi languages in that sentence. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:14 pm: I believe AP released something yesterday re: qualifications for the new jobs and contesting the number of new jobs that were to be created. Sounded as if they might have to recruit from outside the area. Either way, I don’t think that many would argue that opening the prison would not help the local economy. However, isn’t closing Guantanamo Bay and transferring the prisoners here a separate issue? - Right Winger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:14 pm: So, essentially, many of you are proposing a bailout by the federal government to the state of Illinois in exchange for moving Gitmo to NW Illinois? Some of you (Rich included) are saying that the Fed should pay us “much more than replacement costs”? Why? So we can rob Peter to pay Paul? - Served - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:15 pm: WCW, it is irrational to expect that the country will never be attacked again, because there’s no such thing as a flawless operation. RE: The actual prevention of attacks. The guy in Central Illinois thought he was in a van full of explosives when they arrested him. He would have likely gotten the real thing and followed through if the FBI hadn’t intervened. Does that pass your threshold? For these people to say that this prison will result in terrorists interrupting our childrens’ kickball games, or that we’ll instantly become target #1 and all die is silly. “I’m afraid” and hysterically screaming “We’re all gonna die!” is not an argument that counts, because FACTS disprove it. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:24 pm: –@ word, thanks you are right, and I had intended to list the arabic and farsi languages in that sentence.– If your intent was to list all the languages the world’s Muslims speak as a first language, you would have to list a lot more than that. You could start with English. Could we not go down the road of automatically linking Muslim with terrorist? There are about 1.6 billion of them. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:27 pm: ===So we can rob Peter to pay Paul? === Yes. - art - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:39 pm: It could be argued that the president is making the Thomson decision in his capacity as Commander in Chief (CIC), and if that, Rep. Kirk, by nature of his still serving in the USNR, needs to shut the bleep up or resign his commission if he feels the need to publicly disagree with the CIC’s decision. You never really take the uniform off if you’re still under contract with the military, even if you’re a reservist. Fwiw. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:49 pm: Good thing you used the phrase “could be argued” and the word “if”…art. - Cindy Lou - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 1:55 pm: Surprisingly even to myself, once Congress sorts it out, I find I am not as anti about this as maybe I thought I would be. It scares the heck out of me, but so does crime and violence surrounding me at any given unexpected moment as I go through daily activities when I venture out of my backyard, I face risks of some variety. I remember well the planes circling around my area after Sept 11th 2001. I remember learning of the guy who had been living here in the community and now resides at the prison in Marion. I have no real choice but to trust in those who bring the prisoners here and guard them that they will kept me and others as safe/secure as possible. If the prisoners are coming to USA soil, why not here? Why Anywhere,USA, but not Illinois? I would think putting/keeping these prisoners all together in one place would allow the focus all out on the best secure measures available concentrated in one area. Whether it is Illinois or Montana or yet a different state. - shore - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 2:02 pm: Perhaps it would be a good idea for the tribune to do a myth/fact and break down the positions of the administration, congressman kirk, quinn, durbin, and detail what is at stake in a grid format so that we could concentrate the debate. Otherwise we seem to have a panic where the words al qaeda, Illinois, guantanamo, white house put together in a campaign season breed a lot of talk and not much fact. - Just Wonderin.... - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 2:43 pm: Art, it could also be argued that there has been no decision made so you’re point is moot. - art - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 2:51 pm: Just sayin’. The previous administration effectively bludgeoned as treasonous anyone who dared criticized W when he did anything in his role as CIC. - Ghost - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 2:53 pm: I still think the cirtical debate here is why we are selling a brand new prison when we have crumbling 100 yr old prisons we need to either close, or reduce the inmate population at and do repairs. We have a brand new bought and pai for prison; we have outdated prisons that need condemend. Thje math here is simple, we need the prison more then a measley 120 mil single payment. Cost benefit is to keep the new prison. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 3:01 pm: Ghost, adding to your questions, why would the Federal Government spend $120 million plus who knows how much more to move them out of Gitmo? Why not leave them there, process the last of them, then close Gitmo? Or is that being too fiscally responsible? - colt 45 - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 3:43 pm: i’m wondering where the trials for the guantanamo inmates would be held if they’re moved? maybe i just missed that part. seems to me that the administration is shutting down gitmo simply for the sake of closing it down. what happens when the thomson prison become “thit-mo” or “guantanamo north”? if the issue to the adminstration is improving our image in the world and getting the detainees tried, then do it and be done with it. justice is justice and moving the prisoners to thomson seems like an unnecessary expense. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 3:46 pm: Kirk on the House floor, asking some good questions and discussing claims re: number of jobs to be created and $$ Illinois will get for the terrorists. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyQIB27MRGg - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 3:57 pm: Anonymous, there is at least one more unfactual statement in that video. Sheesh. Don’t these guys have enough material to work with without resorting to making things up? - Say WHAT? - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 4:09 pm: Would Illinois moratorium on the death penalty have any affect on the outcome of the trials of the GITMO detainees if they come here to Illinois? - Montrose - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 4:14 pm: +Would Illinois moratorium on the death penalty have any affect on the outcome of the trials of the GITMO detainees if they come here to Illinois?+ No. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 4:15 pm: OK, I missed something, Rich. Which statement is not accurate? - Lynn S - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:40 pm: - Will County Woman - Tuesday, Nov 17, 09 @ 10:04 am: Other than the the int’l community and liberals not liking it, there is nothing wrong with gitmo.had obama not issued an executive order in his second day, or so, in office, closing gitmo, I doubt that people would have been clamoring for him to honor that campaign promise. There’s plenty wrong with Gitmo, WCW, but I’m not sure Rich will allow us to get into all that here. Frankly, if we are going to detain people as “terrorists”, then we need to be man (or woman) enough to do it within our own borders. And there are lots of us clamoring for Gitmo to close, the sooner the better. Obama campaigned on it, he needs to do it. - Former Dem - Wednesday, Nov 18, 09 @ 7:31 am: The tiresome meme that these detainees are “criminals” is ludicrous. Does the U.S. military use drones to destroy neighborhoods where criminals live? Does it target criminals for death with snipers? Does it consider the death of women and children as collateral damage when going after criminals? These detainees are prisoners of war - not mere criminals. Does that mean that Quinn’s proposal is bad policy? Not necessarily. But the liberal rant about affording constitutional rights to these individuals is grossly illogical - and dangerous. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.