See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America
2. Michelle Malkin » 80 anti-Gitmo protesters arrested at Supreme Court
3. Michelle Malkin » Supreme Court opens up Gitmo lawsuit floodgates; Scalia: “The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today. I dissent.”
4. Michelle Malkin » Game Boys at Gitmo
5. Liberals: On Second Thought, Guantánamo Rocks! « Jane Q. Republican
6. Bush y Obama, cerrar Guantánamo, y la dificultad de hacerlo « Sarah Palin en Español

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #192366
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:12 am, PBoilermaker said:

   Sadly, not at all surprising. In fact, it was expected.

2. #192370
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:23 am, 30 pcs of silver said:

   May God bless all of her efforts. They are noble. They are necessary.

   I’ll tune in at 10:00.

   When I think of how vulnerable we really are – the more I am convinced that a Democrat must not win the presidency in 2008.

   Hunter 08′

3. #192377
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:30 am, nbarry said:

   Isn’t Kuwait a staunch ally? Don’t we have large military bases on its soil? Didn’t we liberate them from Saddam? What the hell is going on?

4. #192379
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:33 am, 30 pcs of silver said:

   Can you say Pakistan? They are an ally too. However, they do a really good job of forgetting about that as well.

   Israel hasn’t let us down.

5. #192380
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:34 am, cpodug said:

   nbarry said:

   Loyalty is not really a recognized virtue any more, especially in Arab countries. And if you can get a handout from “The Great Satan,” you are not obliged morally, or in any other way to repay it. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

6. #192382
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:35 am, uhangtight said:

   she is amazing. may she be protected and blessed, after this.

   amazing woman. her brother would be proud of her efforts to keep his memory alive and the light on the tactics of our enemies.

   “The Constitution is not a suicide pact,” Justice Robert Jackson in 1949.

7. #192391
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:43 am, Sergeant Tim said:

   For a full appreciation of Debra’s testimony, see Gitmo’s Guerrilla Lawyers.

   Also, her full prepared testimony will be on our web site later today.

8. #192394
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:47 am, Sergeant Tim said:

   Wrong link in comment #7.

   Here is the correct one.

9. #192400
   On December 11th, 2007 at 9:55 am, lgm said:

   Three points.

   One: Readers of this blog might think it ironic that MM calls someone else’s group an echo chamber.

   Two:
   

   Congress owes it to them and to the American people to consider the full consequences of granting this level of extraordinary relief to the kind of people who detonate IEDs,…

   The point of a trial is to determine guilt. It isn’t enough to say “he’s the kind of person who does it.”, you need to show that he actually did it. If the evidence against these people were that strong, we wouldn’t be in this situation.

   Three:
   

   Tom Wilner, … said that his firm received money from the families of the 12 Kuwaiti detainees…

   So we’re supposed to think badly of lawyers who accept fees from the families of people they represent? If my kid were “detained” with no legal rights, you bet I would pay lobbyists and lawyers.

10. #192401
    On December 11th, 2007 at 9:57 am, 30 pcs of silver said:

    Thanks Sergeant Tim.

    I’ve added this website to my favorites.

    I find it mind-boggling that these jihadists can find anyone in the US to represent them. How soon people forget about 9/11 and the current war our troops are fighting.

    I shake my head in amazement.

11. #192402
    On December 11th, 2007 at 9:58 am, Mister P said:

    Bush senior should have NEVER free Kuwait from Saddam in the 90s.

12. #192404
    On December 11th, 2007 at 9:59 am, Brian72 said:

    This lady has been solid as a rock ever since 9-11-01, fighting the political correctness assault on our nation’s self defense.

    If Cindy Sheehan is the “Peace Mom”, Debra Burlingame is the “Defense Mom”. She is very sharp, has real investigative chops from an attorney background, and knows where to poke holes in the lib’s arguments. Whenever she has an op-ed published, or an interview I always pay close attention.

    Way to go Debra, give Congress some common sense!

13. #192415
    On December 11th, 2007 at 10:14 am, ramdoug2002 said:

    Is it possible for you to post a detailed listing of which politicians, by dollar amount , received lobbying money from the specific law firms being funded by foreign nationals on the Gitmo issue ?

14. #192428
    On December 11th, 2007 at 10:21 am, Romeo13 said:

    On December 11th, 2007 at 9:55 am, lgm said:

    Two points… or maybe three…

    1. The Geneva convention does NOT require hearings for prisoners of war, unless they are also accused of somthing else. They can be held indefinatly as prisoners.

    In Fact, as these were Un Uniformed combatants, the Geneva convention allows us to just SHOOT THEM, as sabotuers.

    2. To give every military POW a full hearing with full AMERICAN civil rights would be impossible. The battlefeild does NOT have forensic scientists, and does NOT have time to take testimony… let alone bringing together everyone needed to cross examine. This would absolutly destroy the militarys ability to function as a military.

    3. It must be very good for you, that there are those of us out here who will do the distastfull duty of protecting you. I have killed in defense of this country… I have killed so you have the right to dissent… If you continue to use your freedoms to stop those who wish to defend you, you soon will not have those freedoms…

15. #192432
    On December 11th, 2007 at 10:25 am, Brian72 said:

    Here we go again.

    Let me state this clearly:

    The Constitution of the United States is not a shield for ALIEN ENEMY COMBATANTS.

    The aforementioned ALIEN ENEMY COMBATANTS have dedicated themselves to depriving you and your fellow citizens of the United States the rights granted you by the creator, enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

    If you are not a citizen of the United States, or a legal resident of the United States, why do you claim rights under the Constitution of the United States, the founding document of your sworn enemy?

    When an American citizen commits a felony, that citizen’s right to bear arms and right to vote are forfeited, in the interests of justice and public safety. Why should ALIEN ENEMY COMBATANTS receive rights from that which they have sworn to destroy under command of a FOREIGN HOSTILE POWER?

    ALIENS who align themselves with a FOREIGN HOSTILE POWER whose mission is clearly to DESTROY or DAMAGE the United States have no standing in civilian courts of the United States. That is the jurisdiction of the MILITARY JUSTICE system.

    Civilian courts are for civilians. Military Courts are for COMBATANTS.

    What is so difficult to accept about this?

    This ain’t Judge friggin’ Judy!!!

    THIS IS WAR!!!

16. #192440
    On December 11th, 2007 at 10:31 am, Brian72 said:

    …..and what he said.

    On December 11th, 2007 at 10:21 am, Romeo13 said:

    By the way, thanks for doing whatever it is you did for this country. Some of us don’t want to sue you in the International Criminal Court for doing your sworn duty, to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

17. #192497
    On December 11th, 2007 at 11:05 am, Mark Jaquith said:

    Don’t really care who pays them, as long as they aren’t doing anything illegal, like leaking evidence that’s under seal.

    1. These detainees are frequently called “terrorists” by people on the right — their guilt is assumed.
    2. If they’re guilty, then the friends who would defend them probably know about it, and could be sympathizers with their cause.
    3. If such people are blocked from funding their defense, it’s possible they will not be able to mount a defense at all.
    4. Why not just cut the charade and execute them all without a trial?

18. #192551
    On December 11th, 2007 at 11:37 am, meatpieandtatters said:

    The Fundamentally Un-American Civil Liberties Union.

19. #192568
    On December 11th, 2007 at 11:43 am, Boomer said:

    On December 11th, 2007 at 9:23 am, 30 pcs of silver said:
    When I think of how vulnerable we really are – the more I am convinced that a Democrat must not win the presidency in 2008.

    Hunter 08′

    I’m with you 30 pcs our national survival depends on getting a hard core conservative to turn this country around. Hunter is my choice too, but the MSM is doing their best to sell the RINOs as conservatives.

    Really bothers me these folks are allowed to undermine our democracy in the courts. The more I see the more I believe Thomas Jefferson was right about fearing the judiciary in losing our freedoms.

20. #192623
    On December 11th, 2007 at 12:08 pm, Sergeant Tim said:

    The full text of Debra Burlingame’s prepared remarks is not posted at 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America:

    If Guantanamo closes, won’t guerrilla lawyers just follow for love and money?

    By the way, lgm, all these law firms claim this is pro bono “charity” work. HaHaHa! Charity work is what most of their PR spin says the terrorist were doing when they got caught.

21. #192875
    On December 11th, 2007 at 2:13 pm, WarTip said:

    I believe it goes to the heart of the practical debate, not over the issue of whether a reasonable interpretation of the Constitution does or does not give enemy combatants full access to our federal courts, but whether, in fact, it should. John Adams wrote in 1776 that “we are a nation of laws, not men,” but I would ask, who writes the laws and to what end?

    What did Ben Franklin say about allowing (lawyers) people of title to make the law?

    Wow! Brian72 actually covered my talking points pretty well.

    Unfortunately what is not being discussed is the amount of money being funneled to politicians by way of lobbying and other special interest groups. Until we take away their financial incentive they will continue to betray we the people.

    It never ceases to amaze me how many politicians who actually seem to have a pair willfully allow themselves to be fully emasculated when the almighty dollars are at risk!

    Won’t anyone bring into question foreign governments financing the political parties and ignoring we the people?

22. #192912
    On December 11th, 2007 at 2:56 pm, deepdiver said:

    We, The People, have lost control of the country. The democrats are fully vested and invested in the failure of America and individual Americans. They can’t win if there is not a crisis, if people are not having difficulty, if our military is successful in it’s missions. Happy, healthy, productive, wealthy Americans are their bane. By the same token, the MSM is invested in the same failures as they are overwhelming on the democrat side.

    Within all this is the issue of non-uniformed combatants who are part of organizations which have stated their desire to kill Americans and destroy this nation. And we have plenty of democrats, even on this forum, not only unwilling to condemn them, but proposing using tax dollars seized from native citizens to do so. That’s like giving a rapist $600 for a new gun and ammunition, the key to your house, the security codes, and a list of times your wife is going to be home alone. Friggin’ genius!

    We will try one more time: They are un-uniformed combatants – by all modern rules of warfare (including the Geneva Conventions) they get treated as spies, not POWs. Along with that we have the right to execute them by firing squad any time. We can shoot them. No trial required. No habeas corpus needed. No tribunal even need be considered.

    I cannot for the life of me figure out why the democrats want to give illegal immigrants, terrorists, and un-uniformed combatants the same, or in the case of illegals, more, rights than American citizens. They would give all who wish to destroy us the simplest means to do so. *bangs head on desk in frustration*

23. #192973
    On December 11th, 2007 at 3:50 pm, zorro said:

    From Debra Burlingame:

    To be fair, Shearman & Sterling isn’t the only law firm cashing in. Arnold & Porter, another D.C. firm, also reported $380,000 in lobbying fees on behalf of the “International Counsel Bureau”—which is nothing more than a P.O. Box in Safat, Kuwait—and “the Kuwaiti Detainees Committee.” Their FARA registration indicates that they “contacted members of Congress, congressional staffers, and media representatives, in an effort to obtain due process for the Kuwaiti detainees in U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay.” These lobbying efforts appear to be having a tremendous effect.

    Our prisoners at Gitmo were not picked up going to Sunday school. They are enemy combatants captured by our valiant soldiers, sailors, Marines and “others”. The law firms stated above appear to be willing to take money from our enemies for the sole purpose of weakening our Republic. In my opinion, they dishonor our Country.

    Should we treat these enemy combatants as if they are citizens? Heck no. Never. Holding these devils at Gitmo indefinitely is not inhumane and does not make us as bad as them. In fact it is more than they deserve. Just a reminder to our liberal friends, the enemies we are fighting do not keep prisoners long, just long enough to behead on video.

24. #193068
    On December 11th, 2007 at 5:19 pm, lgm said:

    zorro (#23) writes:

    Our prisoners at Gitmo were not picked up going to Sunday school. They are enemy combatants captured by our valiant soldiers, sailors, Marines and “others”.

    We do not know this. In fact, it seems that a fair number of them were detained by locals and turned over to US forces for rewards. There seems to be little evidence against many of them.

25. #193098
    On December 11th, 2007 at 5:47 pm, deepdiver said:

    Yep, I agree. Let’s let them all go, buy them a condo in Pompano Beach and give them a Federal Firearms License (FFL) since they are such law-abiding good guys we just screwed over for our own selfish reasons. It’s the least we can do.

    Actually, let’s have an adopt a terrorist program. Liberals can sign up to have Gitmo prisoners stay at their houses with their families for 6 months at a time. I’m sure that the kindness the liberals would show them would easily turn them around and make them love Americans and quit trying to kill us. Then again, they may kill you and your wife and your children in your sleep because you picked up a Koran without washing your hands and putting on a pair of gloves first, but hey, at that point they will be legal residents so at least they will then be entitled to due process so the liberal will have died for a good cause.

    Foxes in the hen house because the sheep on guard were busy throwing rocks at the penned up sheep dog.

26. #193192
    On December 11th, 2007 at 7:32 pm, secondsight said:

    Why the hell can’t politicians have the clarity of thought of Debra Burlingham?

27. #193334
    On December 11th, 2007 at 11:55 pm, Sergeant Tim said:

    lgm: You wrote in comment #24 above:

    We do not know this. In fact, it seems that a fair number of them were detained by locals and turned over to US forces for rewards. There seems to be little evidence against many of them.

    Do you believe all the enemy’s paid PR firm’s propaganda? Tell us (as you seem to have researched this), of the 300+ detainees still in Gitmo, how many would you say were just foreign (to the country they were in) “charity” workers local authorities picked up and turned over to the US?

    BTW, do you happen to know the classified evidence presented to the CRST boards or are you speculating having only heard the talking points from the likes of Mark Denbreaux?

    My point is not to say you are knowingly espousing the enemy’s PR firms’ spin yet you are, like the rest of us outside of the arena, at a disadvantage. If we are to win this war, we need to have some faith in those on our side in the arena. We don’t and should not know the classified information that proves the detainees are a threat if released for if we did, the enemy will know it as well. And that is the same reason why bringing terrorists into the federal courts or providing them habeas corpus review, regardless of their locale, is reckless and dangerous.

28. #193361
    On December 12th, 2007 at 12:47 am, PBoilermaker said:

    Romeo13 said: “The battlefeild does NOT have forensic scientists”

    I agree with all of your other points, but we actually do practice forensics on the battlefield.

29. #349244
    On June 13th, 2008 at 2:41 am, expat said:

    lgm,

    How lame can you get? The innocents were turned over by their own countrymen? For rewards? lgm, these cretins are not from the countries where they were picked up for the most part. In addition, we have tried to turn some of the 300 remaining detainees back to their country of origin. But you want to know a secret? Their countries will not take them!!!!!!!!!! Figure it out and pass it on to your fruitcake friends. These are bad people and they want to kill you. I know this from first hand meetings with them. Even as we gave them medical treatment and tried to save their lives they still wanted to kill us. I think you should have all 300 over as your house guests. What do you say to that?

30. #349373
    On June 13th, 2008 at 10:18 am, Politicalguano said:

    Who can now argue that these 5 judges are not a grave threat to our freedom and our lives? Who can argue that they have not violated their oaths of office?
    This Court lost all moral authority long ago. It began a lengthy series of actions to strip the police of respect and authority, released murderers and rapists on minor technicalities, has released tens of thousands of convicted felons because prisons were not comfortable enough, and has with this last decision, made clear their intent to place the lives of every American in utmost peril and to inform the President, the Congress, and the People of our Nation, that from now on it is they who rule this land and that the rules of law and our Constitutional protections will not stand between us and their perverted lust for power.
    I call upon our Congress to impeach these 5 traitors immediately. I call upon the President to refuse to enforce the Court’s Ruling and to Pardon all those whom this Court has placed at risk of legal jeopardy by declaring these terrorists detention as unlawful. The President must denounce and expose these 5 judges and explain clearly the risks that our soldiers and citizens alike will face, including: (1) crippling lawsuits – the proceeds of which will flow to our enemies; (2) criminal prosecution of soldiers and police officers for – kidnapping, attempted murder – ” yes your honor these American soldiers shot me for no reason, etc, then they locked me up in Cuba”.
    How are our soldiers to defend themselves against Quislings like John Murtha and Nancy Pelosi when these politicians have already decided the soldiers guilty despite proof of not just of their innocence but of heroism and honor?
    This Court has decided that only Non-Americans have absolute rights and Americans have none.
    Our Military High Command must resign in protest and our other military leaders must let it be known they too will not stand for this ruling which places the lives of each soldier at peril on the battlefield and in the US courts.
    The People of this Nation are in great peril and must unite and let our Government know this court decision must not be allowed to stand and those who made it must be removed from office.