|
cannon_fodder
|
 |
« on: January 26, 2009, 10:59:23 am » |
|
According to a Tulsa World article over the weekemd, here, Oklahoma congressional delegation has vowed to fight any potential transfer of war-on-terror (what's the new word we are supposed to use for it?) to Fort Sill Oklahoma. Putting aside the debate on if Guantanamo Bay should be closed as a terrorist prison camp, because it IS going to be closed, the question is what do we do with them? Oklahoma's answer is Not In My Back Yard. We have fought hard to get military installations. OKC fought to retain the Federal Prisoner Transfer Center. We waive flags and brag about our patriotism. Why not let them be housed in Oklahoma? The security concerns are clearly not factual. No one ever escaped from Gitmo and no attacks on the facility. In fact, one would be willing to guess that there would be a good deal MORE security at Ft. Sill. Not too mention more personnel, construction, more media, more attorneys visiting... more money in Oklahoma's economy. My take: this is just whining about not wanting to close down Gitmo. It is going to happen, so why not just put up and offer to help to do whatever we can in our patriotic zeal to help our nations war effort? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
- - - - - - - - -
I crush grooves.
|
|
|
|
grahambino
Guest
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2009, 11:19:29 am » |
|
How dare they question the judgment of the military? Do they somehow think that our military is incapable of keeping these guys locked up on American soil?
Talk about a slap in the face to those brave men and women working to keep these guys locked up to insinuate that Ft. Sill is incapable of housing these guys.
For a state so in love with private prisons and accepting dangerous felons from all over the west, this is absolutely ludicrous and maddening.
They're just playing obstructionist politics and trying to sound tough.
I'm curious, was Oklahoma's delegation against detaining German prisoners of war in Oklahoma during WWII?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
guido911
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2009, 12:37:59 pm » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
According to a Tulsa World article over the weekemd, here, Oklahoma congressional delegation has vowed to fight any potential transfer of war-on-terror (what's the new word we are supposed to use for it?) to Fort Sill Oklahoma.
The War on Terror is now "challenges". The Gitmo detainees are now challengers. Your "take" may be correct. I say let Sheriff Joe take them in (oh wait, Joe makes his inmates wear pink underwear--that would be inhumane and/or violate the Geveva Convention or something). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.
|
|
|
|
Gaspar
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2009, 12:46:51 pm » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
According to a Tulsa World article over the weekemd, here, Oklahoma congressional delegation has vowed to fight any potential transfer of war-on-terror (what's the new word we are supposed to use for it?) to Fort Sill Oklahoma.
Putting aside the debate on if Guantanamo Bay should be closed as a terrorist prison camp, because it IS going to be closed, the question is what do we do with them?
Oklahoma's answer is Not In My Back Yard.
We have fought hard to get military installations.
OKC fought to retain the Federal Prisoner Transfer Center.
We waive flags and brag about our patriotism.
Why not let them be housed in Oklahoma?
The security concerns are clearly not factual. No one ever escaped from Gitmo and no attacks on the facility. In fact, one would be willing to guess that there would be a good deal MORE security at Ft. Sill. Not too mention more personnel, construction, more media, more attorneys visiting... more money in Oklahoma's economy.
My take: this is just whining about not wanting to close down Gitmo. It is going to happen, so why not just put up and offer to help to do whatever we can in our patriotic zeal to help our nations war effort?
Why don't we take it a step further. Why not build a special facility right here in Tulsa for Terror (or challenges) detainees. We could become the nation's specialists. Imagine the jobs, and money that would bring our state and town. The huge influx of lawyers, and reporters would buy up the nearly 6,000 unsold homes and lots in the area, and Tulsa would establish a special place in history. Why not? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
When attacked by a mob of clowns, always go for the juggler.
|
|
|
|
godboko71
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2009, 01:26:33 pm » |
|
Truthfully I see no problem using our Fort/Forts (if they build more) but I am odd I guess. Seems to me if our service people can keep them locked up in other countries they can do it in our backyard to.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Thank you,
Robert Town
|
|
|
|
we vs us
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2009, 01:38:16 pm » |
|
Par for the course, really, for the OK delegation, who seem singularly willing to ride the national brakes in service of their own delusions of grandeur (I'm looking at you, Coburn).
The NIMBYism doesn't make much sense unless it's to be a thumb in the eye of the Administration. The prisoners aren't a danger to pretty much anybody. (At most, they're a danger to themselves, if the number of hunger strikes and attempted suicides which seem to be endemic down there at Guantanamo are any clue.)
In other words, I agree with you CF.
Guido, do you have some video of that whole "challenges" bit? Not that I don't believe you, but I've been googling around for that cite and can't seem to find any mention whatsoever of the Obama Admin changing the GWOT nomenclature.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
patric
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2009, 01:46:45 pm » |
|
There are not, and have not been plans to ship Gitmo prisoners to Oklahoma.
Only discussions, and speculation.
Is this correct?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Tulsa will lay off police and firemen before we will cut back on unnecessarily wasteful streetlights." -- March 18, 2009 TulsaNow Forum
|
|
|
|
cannon_fodder
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2009, 02:50:53 pm » |
|
You are correct patric. Oklahoma was listed along with Levenworth, Kansas, a facility in Tennessee and "other military installations" as possible locations. But our delegation felt the need to jump in and say NOT IN MY BACKYARD!
Gaspar -
I am not advocating for Oklahoma as a military or international prison state. Please provide an objective instead of sarcastic analysis of your position if you feel it would somehow be detrimental to Oklahoma. It seems to me we are pro military, war on challengers (is that right? I'm so confused), and the general notion of doing something for our country. But all of a suddenly this is off limits. When I don't really see a negative in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
- - - - - - - - -
I crush grooves.
|
|
|
|
rwarn17588
Guest
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2009, 06:48:26 pm » |
|
Who cares where these prisoners are housed?
The mastermind from the first World Trade Center attacks has been cooling his heels for the past 15 years at the supermax prison in Colorado.
Nothing has happened there, and it's not as if residents there are b*tching about him being there.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dbacks fan
Guest
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2009, 08:42:04 am » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
According to a Tulsa World article over the weekemd, here, Oklahoma congressional delegation has vowed to fight any potential transfer of war-on-terror (what's the new word we are supposed to use for it?) to Fort Sill Oklahoma.
The War on Terror is now "challenges". The Gitmo detainees are now challengers.
Your "take" may be correct. I say let Sheriff Joe take them in (oh wait, Joe makes his inmates wear pink underwear--that would be inhumane and/or violate the Geveva Convention or something).
Joe is probably looking into it right now just to get himself some more media exposure. He is in the news here at least once a week. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tim huntzinger
Guest
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2009, 10:01:16 am » |
|
I am all for bringing them in. In fact we ought to encourage this if not for any other reason but to put the 'close Gitmo' voices in their places. Clearly we need a Constitutional Amendment to resolve the issue and I am disappointed that this has not already been done.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dbacks fan
Guest
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2009, 12:45:57 pm » |
|
Well no discussions of Gitmo detainees here yet, but the media w**** Sheriff Joe just can't go a week with out being in the media. Maybe next week he will say "Bring 'em here, I've worked for the Fed's, DEA, and I'm Americas toughest Sheriff, and if you don't believe me watch my show on Fox Reallity TV." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
patric
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 03, 2009, 12:18:40 pm » |
|
"If the option is they are there for life or you kill them or send them to Tulsa, Oklahoma, I'd say put them there for life,'' Inhofe said. "
Senator fruitloops thinks the detainees are coming to Tulsa?
Were going to have to build more parking spaces now...
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 03, 2009, 10:52:40 pm by patric »
|
Logged
|
"Tulsa will lay off police and firemen before we will cut back on unnecessarily wasteful streetlights." -- March 18, 2009 TulsaNow Forum
|
|
|
|
Townsend
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 03, 2009, 01:36:11 pm » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by patric
"If the option is they are there for life or you kill them or send them to Tulsa, Oklahoma, I'd say put them there for life,'' Inhofe said. "
Senator fruitloops thinks the detainees are coming to Tulsa?
Were going to have to build more paring spaces now...
Finally, a market for my kapsa and fatir. Stay out of my business Senator fruitloops. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
guido911
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 03, 2009, 02:16:16 pm » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Who cares where these prisoners are housed?
I do dammit. Bringing hundreds of terrorists onto American soil could encourage terrorist attacks near those facilities. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.
|
|
|
|
