Obama releases 10 Gitmo-Bay detainees to Oman...?

I

Irish

Verified User
I never believed the far RW narrative that Obama is a Muslim and is sympathetic to radical Islam.

But after hearing about this, I am starting to wonder.

We already have proof that former detainees are back fighting and even leading AQ in Yemen and other places. So now he wants to release 10 more, and allow them to rejoin the fight.

Is Obama a mad man? Does he really think letting these animals out is a good idea? Is he that much of an ideolog?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-oman-in-troubling-transfer.html?intcmp=hpbt1
 
Irish said:
I never believed the far RW narrative that Obama is a Muslim and is sympathetic to radical Islam.

But after hearing about this, I am starting to wonder.

We already have proof that former detainees are back fighting and even leading AQ in Yemen and other places. So now he wants to release 10 more, and allow them to rejoin the fight.

Is Obama a mad man? Does he really think letting these animals out is a good idea? Is he that much of an ideolog?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-oman-in-troubling-transfer.html?intcmp=hpbt1
Click to expand...

Good, it needs to be closed.
 
It's a really bad idea: from Long War Journal it shows that even High Risk detainees are being sent back
( and where is Oman but abutting Yemen, which has AQAP -the "most virulent AQ affiliate).

Obama is on a Crusade (sic) that somehow Gitmo is a "recruiting tool" for AQ/IS -it's not.
IS videos rarely if ever mention Gitmo -they are proactive instead; showing reasons to come join jihad.

Obama is an idiot when it comes to foreign policy, GWOT (Global War on Terror) ;at best he is reactive, at worst he is clueless.
++
The Defense Department announced today that Fayez al Kandari, who was detained at Guantanamo since 2002, has been transferred to his home country of Kuwait.

The Pentagon cited a Sept. 8, 2015 decision by the Periodic Review Board (PRB) as justification for Kandari’s transfer. The PRB “determined that continued law of war detention of [Kandari] does not remain necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States.” Therefore, the review board recommended that Kandari be transferred and the Pentagon complied.

the board recommended “the implementation” of a “comprehensive set of security measures…including monitoring, travel restrictions, and continued information sharing.”

These “security assurances” are necessary because US officials have repeatedly warned that Kandari is a threat.

In a leaked threat assessment, dated April 15, 2008, Joint Task Force – Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) deemed Kandari a “high risk,” who is “likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests and allies.” JTF-GTMO’s analysts recommended that Kandari remain in the Defense Department’s custody, finding that he was a “committed member of al Qaeda who served as [an] advisor and confidant to” Osama bin Laden.

Kandari “has numerous connections to senior al Qaeda members and was an influential religious figure for al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan,” JTF-GTMO found. He also allegedly “provided ideological training to al Qaeda trainees” and acted as a “propagandist” on behalf of the terrorist group.

President Obama’s own interagency Guantanamo Review Task Force agreed that Kandari should not be transferred or released.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archi...guantanamo-detainee-transferred-to-kuwait.php

somehow going into a Saudi or Kuwait 'rehabilitation clinic' or 'monitoring' is supposed to mitigate.
Obama is washing his hands of Gitmo, and not caring where the debris goes.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archi...guantanamo-detainee-transferred-to-kuwait.php
The differences between the PRB’s decisions in 2014 and 2015 are striking. In 2014, the review board concluded that Kandari “almost certainly retains an extremist mindset and had close ties with high-level al Qaeda leaders in the past.”

In 2015, however, the PRB claimed that Kandari had “demonstrated a willingness to examine his religious beliefs and engaged more openly with the Board.” The PRB “noted [Kandari’s] willingness to engage with Kuwaiti officials and rehabilitation center staff members, comply with security requirements, and disassociate with negative influences since his last hearing.”
 
annata said:
It's a really bad idea: from Long War Journal it shows that even High Risk detainees are being sent back
( and where is Oman but abutting Yemen, which has AQAP -the "most virulent AQ affiliate).

Obama is on a Crusade (sic) that somehow Gitmo is a "recruiting tool" for AQ/IS -it's not.
S videos rarely if ever mention Gitmo -they are proactive showing reasons to come join jihad.

Obama is an idiot when it comes to foreign policy, GWOT (Global War on Terror) ;at best he is reactive, at worst he is clueless.

The Defense Department announced today that Fayez al Kandari, who was detained at Guantanamo since 2002, has been transferred to his home country of Kuwait.

The Pentagon cited a Sept. 8, 2015 decision by the Periodic Review Board (PRB) as justification for Kandari’s transfer. The PRB “determined that continued law of war detention of [Kandari] does not remain necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States.” Therefore, the review board recommended that Kandari be transferred and the Pentagon complied.

the board recommended “the implementation” of a “comprehensive set of security measures…including monitoring, travel restrictions, and continued information sharing.”

These “security assurances” are necessary because US officials have repeatedly warned that Kandari is a threat.

In a leaked threat assessment, dated April 15, 2008, Joint Task Force – Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) deemed Kandari a “high risk,” who is “likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests and allies.” JTF-GTMO’s analysts recommended that Kandari remain in the Defense Department’s custody, finding that he was a “committed member of al Qaeda who served as [an] advisor and confidant to” Osama bin Laden.

Kandari “has numerous connections to senior al Qaeda members and was an influential religious figure for al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan,” JTF-GTMO found. He also allegedly “provided ideological training to al Qaeda trainees” and acted as a “propagandist” on behalf of the terrorist group.

President Obama’s own interagency Guantanamo Review Task Force agreed that Kandari should not be transferred or released.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archi...guantanamo-detainee-transferred-to-kuwait.php

somehow going into a Saudi or Kuwait 'rehabilitation clinic' or 'monitoring' is supposed to mitigate.
Obama is washing his hands of Gitmo, and not caring where the debris goes.
Click to expand...

That is ridiculous, stating he doesn't care. This, again, is on the recommendation of the military, and other agencies.
 
Rana said:
That is ridiculous, stating he doesn't care. This, again, is on the recommendation of the military, and other agencies.
Click to expand...
did you read the PRB above? it states in 2014 he is "high risk".
a “committed member of al Qaeda who served as [an] advisor and confidant to” Osama bin Laden.

Now all of a sudden the PRB a recommends transfer? why is that? in 1 year?
Could it be the PRB is bowing to politics, since Obama is bent on closing Gitmo?

How is "monitoring and surveillance" -whether in Oman or Kuwait supposed to stop him?
Have you heard about other detainees going back to jihad?
Why would a high risk simply not do so?
 
annata said:
did you read the PRB above? it states in 2014 he is "high risk".
a “committed member of al Qaeda who served as [an] advisor and confidant to” Osama bin Laden.

Now all of a sudden the PRB a recommends transfer? why is that? in 1 year?
Could it be the PRB is bowing to politics, since Obama is bent on closing Gitmo?

How is "monitoring and surveillance" -whether in Oman or Kuwait supposed to stop him?
Have you heard about other detainees going back to jihad?
Why would a high risk simply not do so?
Click to expand...

We can not keep these men indefinitely unless we formally charge them with a crime. It is our law. We release dangerous men back into society all the time, if they are caught again, committing terrorism against the US they will either be killed in battle, killed by drone or captured and tried.

GITMO needs to be closed.
 
Defense Secretary Ash Carter informed Congress in December his department would transfer a wave of detainees at the beginning of 2016.

The accelerated transfers reflect a renewed effort by the president – who is likely to highlight the issue in the State of the Union address Tuesday night – to shutter the controversial prison camp. But the moves have heightened security concerns, as some of the latest detainees being shipped out were deemed medium- or high-risk prisoners.
......

White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, on “Fox News Sunday,” vowed that President Obama will close the Guantanamo Bay detainee facility before his presidency ends......

All these guys are the ‘hardcore’ type; if not, they would have been transferred earlier,” said one official familiar with the list of those being transferred Thursday.....

The Defense Department subsequently announced the transfer, and identified the detainees, late Thursday morning, saying the administration coordinated with Oman to ensure the move was conducted with “appropriate security and humane treatment measures....”

The administration is banned by law from transferring Guantanamo detainees to Yemen, given the risk in that country. Yemen is not only racked by civil war, but is the home of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. At least three previously released Guantanamo detainees have gone on to become leaders with AQAP in Yemen after leaving the camp......

This potential transfer is all the more troubling in light of the fact that Ibrahim al Qosi, who was released from Gitmo by the Obama administration in 2012, is now reportedly a leader and spokesman for AQAP,” Ayotte said......

The transfer also coincides with a recent weapons deal. The terms are classified, but the State Department a week ago approved the proposed sale of TOW 2B missiles and supporting equipment to the government of Oman – valued at about $51 million....


It is estimated that 30 percent of detainees transferred out of the prison re-engage or are suspected of re-engaging in hostile activities, according to the Department of Defense.....
++
...connect the dots....
 
Last edited:
Rana said:
We can not keep these men indefinitely unless we formally charge them with a crime. It is our law. We release dangerous men back into society all the time, if they are caught again, committing terrorism against the US they will either be killed in battle, killed by drone or captured and tried.

GITMO needs to be closed.
Click to expand...
how do you know they will be killed again or captured? some have, quite a few haven't.
About 33% are known to have gone back to jihad (sic).

It's asymmetrical war. Obama has used drones much more then Bush -that is correct - so few ever get captured anymore

But what about the high risks from before Obama was elected? Obama is using the pretext of sending them to Oman, or Kuwait or Saudi Arabia
"rehabilitation" or monitoring, that somehow that makes them not high risk.

You're the only person I've spoken to that get the idea they can be droned ( good thinking) - but that assumes quite a bit.

Congress is of course to blame for not putting them in SuperMax. But for these couple hundred, and many already released that are demonstratively high/medium risk; they should be held. Put those on trial we can of course.
 
annata said:
how do you know they will be killed again or captured? some have, quite a few haven't.
About 33% are known to have gone back to jihad (sic).

It's asymmetrical war. Obama has used drones much more then Bush -that is correct - so few ever get captured anymore

But what about the high risks from before Obama was elected? Obama is using the pretext of sending them to Oman, or Kuwait or Saudi Arabia
"rehabilitation" or monitoring, that somehow that makes them not high risk.

You're the only person I've spoken to that get the idea they can be droned ( good thinking) - but that assumes quite a bit.

Congress is of course to blame for not putting them in SuperMax. But for these couple hundred, and many already released that are demonstratively high/medium risk; they should be held. Put those on trial we can of course.
Click to expand...

If you bring them onto American soil they will have to be tried. This is the reason only a few prisoners have made it to American or Canadian prisons. We have laws and the laws must be followed, if if they are terrorists. It's what makes us different from them.
 
annata said:
how do you know they will be killed again or captured? some have, quite a few haven't.
About 33% are known to have gone back to jihad (sic).

It's asymmetrical war. Obama has used drones much more then Bush -that is correct - so few ever get captured anymore

But what about the high risks from before Obama was elected? Obama is using the pretext of sending them to Oman, or Kuwait or Saudi Arabia
"rehabilitation" or monitoring, that somehow that makes them not high risk.

You're the only person I've spoken to that get the idea they can be droned ( good thinking) - but that assumes quite a bit.

Congress is of course to blame for not putting them in SuperMax. But for these couple hundred, and many already released that are demonstratively high/medium risk; they should be held. Put those on trial we can of course.
Click to expand...
A 2009 report only lists 61 persons, that is not 30%
 
Rana said:
Good, it needs to be closed.
Click to expand...


Why don't you take 'em in....you must have a couple of empty rooms at your house....

This just proves that Obama will do anything to save face with Democrats, including putting our country at risk.....

You gotta be some special kind of fool to not know they will be back trying to kill Americans at the first chance they get.
 
Rana said:
If you bring them onto American soil they will have to be tried. This is the reason only a few prisoners have made it to American or Canadian prisons. We have laws and the laws must be followed, if if they are terrorists. It's what makes us different from them.
Click to expand...

I realize this. My personal preference would be to put them on trial - it has to be a military trial for obvious reasons.
I get this is a grey area, but simply closing down Gitmo for the stated reason "it's a recruiting tool" is a demonstrably
bad/false idea.
We just drone them now and don't concern ourselves with due process - if that is somehow "different" from terrorism
to address your point of 'nation of laws' Okey Dokey - whatever helps you feel good about it.

I look at it as war. It's a war we didn't ask for despite bin Laden's manifesto, and a Long War, but it can't be ignored.

So drone them where you can ( but no signature strikes), and for these guys..well. do anything but release them under false pretexts.
 
annata said:
I realize this. My personal preference would be to put them on trial - it has to be a military trial for obvious reasons.
I get this is a grey area, but simply closing down Gitmo for the stated reason "it's a recruiting tool" is a demonstrably
bad/false idea.
We just drone them now and don't concern ourselves with due process - if that is somehow "different" from terrorism
to address your point of 'nation of laws' Okey Dokey - whatever helps you feel good about it.

I look at it as war. It's a war we didn't ask for despite bin Laden's manifesto, and a Long War, but it can't be ignored.

So drone them where you can ( but no signature strikes), and for these guys..well. do anything but release them under false pretexts.
Click to expand...
It's unConstitutional, as well, why do you think they put it in Cuba
 
Rana said:
A 2009 report only lists 61 persons, that is not 30%
Click to expand...

that report is dated. I don't claim to have access to raw data, but with many more released since then, it would be logical
that many more of higher risk have returned to jihad. 1 in 3 is the figure I see commonly quoted.
 
annata said:
that report is dated. I don't claim to have access to raw data, but with many more released since then, it would be logical
that many more of higher risk have returned to jihad. 1 in 3 is the figure I see commonly quoted.
Click to expand...
Then you will need to dig them up, because I don't find anything more recent, thanks
 
Rana said:
It's unConstitutional, as well, why do you think they put it in Cuba
Click to expand...
I understand that.
It's how we got here in the first place -how "enemy combatant" status was conferred.

Which is why it's called Long War,or simply War on Terror. It is a war ,even if it's not against a recognized state.
Islamic State claims that status, in this case that works out fine. Treat it as such.

Or hold trials for those already captured..I'm not that concerned with the legal niceties, as much as stopping/checking
global terrorism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top