Uighurs Riot in China

There are riots in China's northwestern Xinjiang region today with 140 reported killed and over 800 injured, reports the Wall Street Journal. "Witnesses said the conflicts pitted security forces against demonstrators, and members of the region's Turkic-speaking Uighur ethnic group against members of the country's Han Chinese majority. Many among the predominantly Muslim Uighurs have chafed at Chinese government rule."

Good thing those Uighurs aren't terrorists or violent.

"Uighur activists said hundreds of Uighurs, many of them students, had gathered Sunday to protest racial discrimination and call for government action against the perpetrators of an attack last month on Uighur migrant workers at a toy factory in southern China."

The story goes on to report that "Demonstrators clashed with the police, witnesses said, and rioters smashed shops and attacked buses. 'Most were young Uighurs. They were smashing everything on the street,' said one Han Chinese man who works as a driver. Another Han Chinese man, who owns a shop in the city's central bazaar, said he saw Uighurs 'with big knives stabbing people' on the street. "

I'm sure these guys are NOTHING like the Gitmo Uighurs who are innocent people who pose no danger whatsoever regardless of the fact that they were trained in terrorist tactics in Tora Bora.

No worries. Peace out.

Premier Brown Still Has Problems in Bermuda

Bermuda continues to deal with the Uighur issue today. Yesterday there were protests and demands for Premier Ewart Brown's resignation.

Today, the Governor of Bermuda, Sir Richard Gozney said "that Premier Ewart Brown’s direct negotiations with the US to bring the Muslims to the Island — a process Sir Richard described as an 'exchange of notes' — breached section 62 of the Bermuda Constitution. Because it breaches the Constitution, this exchange of notes which was negotiated and sent on June 10, was in our view, invalid. In other words, the Bermuda Government’s action to solicit the arrival of the four Uighurs was unacceptable. I talked to the Bermuda Government yesterday, June 16, and suggested to them that they should now consider carefully their next steps.”

The protest seems to be not so much about the Uighurs themselves, but about Brown's violation of the constitution. The only complaint about the Uighurs so far that I can find is the issue of citizenship. The Royal Gazette quoted one protester yesterday who said "it is ridiculous to give people long-term status before they have arrived — some people have been waiting 20 years."

Today's editorial in the Bermuda Royal Gazette outlines the problem:

On Friday afternoon, Premier Dr. Ewart Brown told the House of Assembly that Police Commissioner George Jackson had carried out a security assessment on the four Uighurs brought to Bermuda from Guantánamo Bay a day earlier.

Mr. Jackson, he said, had concluded that "there is absolutely no security risk". Yesterday, Mr. Jackson and Governor Sir Richard Gozney said that Dr. Brown's statement was untrue and misleading.

Mr. Jackson, who only learned of the arrival of the Uighurs on Thursday (presumably along with the rest of Bermuda or just before) in fact told Sir Richard and Public Safety Minister Sen. David Burch on Friday that the men were "a high risk".

And yet Dr. Brown told the House of Assembly that afternoon that Mr Jackson said the men posed "absolutely no risk".

Last night, Dr. Brown's spokesman said that the Premier was briefed by Sen. Burch on the Police Commissioner's preliminary assessment and that the Premier's comment in the House was consistent with the content of the Minister's briefing.

As of 8 p.m. last night, Sen. Burch had not responded to requests for clarification, but no doubt will do so today.

So, according to the Premier, Sen. Burch either received different information from Mr. Jackson than Mr. Jackson now says he delivered, misinterpreted what Mr. Jackson told him, or Sen. Burch outright lied to the Premier, which seems unlikely.

----------------------------

What is unquestioned is that Premier Brown misled the House of Assembly, even if he did so unknowingly.

Under the Westminster system, the one thing that you cannot do is lie to your colleagues. Parliamentary privilege means that you can accuse people of all sorts of heinous acts. But you are expected to tell the truth.

If lying in Parliament was acceptable, then the whole foundation of parliamentary democracy would collapse. If Cabinet Ministers and MPs regularly lied about their actions, laws and policies, then those very actions, laws and decisions would be meaningless.

That's why Parliaments are so strict on this point. Erskine May's 'Parliamentary Procedure' has this to say: "It is of paramount importance that ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity."

If Dr. Brown unknowingly misled the House then he needs to correct himself, and quickly.

The Royal Gazette isn't the only paper speaking out against Brown. The Bermuda Sun also has a piece laying out the complain against Brown:

Whether it is liked or not, the Bermuda Constitutional Order, 1968 [BCO 1968] is Bermuda's Constitution. As such, it defines where power resides, and in whose hands those powers reside. Under BCO 1968, power and responsibilities are clearly set out.

In originating and then arriving at a final arrangement with a foreign power without properly involving the U.K. authorities - as is required by BCO 1968, the Premier acted beyond and outside his constitutional authority. He acted outside the law. In principle and in detail, this action is the same as that of any other person acting beyond and outside the law - the Court Street gunman, for example.

The people in Bermuda seem ready for the most part to welcome and support the Uighurs. But, is Team Obama doing anything to straighten out this diplomatic mess they've created in Bermuda and the UK? Are they even "deeply troubled" by it? Or would that be "meddling"? Meanwhile, the Uighurs are living on your taxpayer dime in a guesthouse overlooking the ocean and enjoying the amenities of Bermuda. Sort of like Gitmo, but not.

Bermuda Isn't Feeling the Love for the Uighurs or for Premier Brown

All is not well in Bermuda. Despite the warm, fuzzy photographs of the Gitmo Uighurs swimming in the ocean, eating butter pecan ice cream cones, and strolling along the streets, not everyone is happy they are there.

The Royal Gazette of Bermuda reports that there was a large (by Bermuda standards!) protest today to demand Premier Ewart Brown's resignation. Dr. Brown is the official who allowed the transfer of the Uighurs from Gitmo to Bermuda without consulting anyone else.



Commissioner of Police George Jackson learned on the morning of their arrival that the Uighurs were coming and it was only then that he was able to conduct a security assessment on them.

"According to Mr. Jackson, he received a folder with 'unclassified information”'on the Uighurs on Friday, afterwhich a 'preliminary threat assessment' on the men was run by Police. Based on the limited information available, the overall threat assessment was deemed to be ‘high’, he said. 'This was conveyed to the Governor and Minister Burch on Friday afternoon. Simultaneously, contact was made with our security agency partners and a more comprehensive threat assessment was commenced.'"

The protesters said they are not criticizing the Uighurs so much as the way the transfer was done. They are angry at Dr. Brown for not consulting anyone else and are demanding his resignation. They are rightly concerned about tourism, also.

Meanwhile, the media is portraying the Uighurs as cuddly little misunderstood castoffs, showing them eating ice cream and swimming in the ocean. And they look mighty healthy in these photos I'm seeing, by the way, for someone coming out of "hell."

For a refresher course on these cuddly, ice cream eating, ocean swimming Uighurs, refer back to Thomas Joscelyn who has done extensive reporting on them:

First, the Uighur detainees are alleged, for good reasons, to be members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM). The ETIM is a designated terrorist organization affiliated with al Qaeda.

There is sound evidence that the Uighur detainees are affiliated with the ETIM. For example, most of the detainees have made admissions during their tribunals and hearings at Guantanamo that tie them to the group. The ETIM is a jihadist organization and not part of some noble anti-China resistance. So, even if you have sympathy for the Chinese government’s opposition (as I do), including other Uighur organizations, the Uighur detainees at Guantanamo are not part of any legitimate, anti-Chinese government organization that deserves our support. The ETIM is an ideological cousin of al Qaeda that seeks to establish a radical Islamist state throughout South and Central Asia.

Second, many of the Uighur detainees have freely admitted during their tribunals and hearings at Guantanamo that they were trained by two known terrorists: Hasan Mahsum and Abdul Haq.

Mahsum was killed in Waziristan in 2003. Haq is still active. Neither Mahsum nor Haq can be considered legitimate freedom fighters. Open source accounts, as well as the testimony of knowledgeable experts, indicate that both Haq and Mahsum had ties to senior al Qaeda terrorists, including Osama bin Laden and Abu Zubaydah. Mahsum operated in the Mullah Omar’s Kabul for years and received the Taliban’s support repeatedly.

Third, the Uighur detainees’ training took place at a camp in Tora Bora, Afghanistan -– a known stronghold for al Qaeda and the Taliban.

There is no dispute over the fact that the Uighur detainees were at Tora Bora both before and after 9/11. You will recall that Tora Bora became the fallback zone for retreating jihadist forces after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan. Most, if not all, of the Uighur detainees fled Tora Bora for Pakistan, where they were picked up. Some have tried to argue that there is no proof that the Taliban and/or al Qaeda sponsored the Tora Bora camp. But this is sheer nonsense. It is difficult to believe that the ETIM could have operated inside the heart of Taliban country without at least the acquiescence of senior Taliban and al Qaeda members. And there is evidence that the Tora Bora camp was sponsored by them.

Fourth, the Uighur detainees’ training makes them a potential threat not just to the Chinese government/military forces.

Meanwhile, the Bermudans are protesting. Reuters reported that "Tuesday's protest was aimed not so much at the Uighurs as at Brown for his failure to consult the island's people or governor and his perceived snub of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, whom the governor represents. Bermuda, a banking center and tourist destination, is Britain's oldest colony and one of the world's wealthiest places."

This might have been avoided had the Obama White House done their job and covered all the bases. Unless, as I said before, and like the pattern seems to indicate with other issues, they are being intentionally deceptive.

The Surreal Presidency and the Bermuda Triangle

This whole detainee transfer business this week has been just surreal to me. In fact, lots of things have felt that way since November, but this one just has me, well, I was going to say speechless but that's not true because I've written about it a lot. I guess I'm just incredulous.

Go back to the campaign when Obama first promised to close Guantanamo. He said this in May 2007:

"We need to bring to a close this sad chapter in American history, and begin a chapter that passes the might of our military to the freedom of our diplomacy and the power of our alliances. And while we are at it, we can close down Guantanamo and we can restore habeas corpus and we can lead with our ideas and our values."

In June 2007 he said:

"While we're at it," he said, "we're going to close Guantanamo. And we're going to restore habeas corpus. ... We're going to lead by example _ by not just word but by deed. That's our vision for the future."

Okay so January 22 he signs the Executive Order that closes Gitmo. The Order says it is "consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice."

The Executive Order also says:

"In view of the significant concerns raised by these detentions, both within the United States and internationally, prompt and appropriate disposition of the individuals currently detained at Guantánamo and closure of the facilities in which they are detained would further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice. Merely closing the facilities without promptly determining the appropriate disposition of the individuals detained would not adequately serve those interests. To the extent practicable, the prompt and appropriate disposition of the individuals detained at Guantánamo should precede the closure of the detention facilities at Guantánamo."

Stop there for a minute. There's no plan as to what we're going to do with these enemy combatants; there never was. What he's saying here is that there are "concerns" about these detentions both here and abroad and that closure of Gitmo will "further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States..."

How's that working out for you today, Mr. Obama?

So far over 100 countries have refused to take these enemy combatants off your hands, specifically the Uighurs.

How do we solve that problem? We pay Palau $200 million to take 13 of them and we dump four off in Bermuda. Oh, but there's a problem there, too. Our United States government LIED to Britain about that. We purposely deceived them for their own good. A senior U.S. official "told the BBC that Washington was attempting to shield the UK from Chinese anger." China considers the Uighurs terrorists and would like to have them back. We were just trying to help the UK by lying to them.

With friends like that, you don't need enemies. I've discussed ad nauseum why the Uighurs are terrorists as has Thomas Joselyn at The Weekly Standard, among others. I'm not going back into that in this post. It's not even a negotiable topic. They are trained terrorists. Period.

The point here is that Obama has lied not just to the UK, but to the American people. The White House put out the story that this was a nice, happy deal. The premier of Bermuda put out a nice statement about what good friends we all are. When the flaming bag of poo hit the fan, Ed Morrissey rightly points out that "the White House tried to spin it by claiming they thought Bermuda’s premier had included the UK in their end of the discussions. "

First of all, the White House should have handled that and not farmed it out to Bermuda. That's pure incompetence, unless of course, we weren't planning on telling the UK in the first place.

If we are going to "lead with our ideas and our values" as Campaign Obama stated, is this what we can expect for the duration of his reign? Lies? Deception? Is that what our values are, now? If he's lying to the UK don't you think he's lying to us, too? Let's talk about the health care lie - or not. We'll save that one for another post. But he's lying to you.

Do not throw that argument at me that Bush lied. It's tired. It's been done. And resolved. And it detracts from this particular issue. Bush wasn't perfect and nobody says he was. But he kept us safe. And a lie from Bush does not excuse one from Obama.

The biggest thing I had against Candidate Obama was his stance on national security and while he has retained many of the policies of the Bush administration, I believe that his position on Gitmo and terrorist release is a poor one. He's turning it all back into a law enforcement problem (Mirandizing enemy combatants on the battlefield for crying out loud!) which is exactly, undeniably what led us to 9/11. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this is a bad plan. It didn't work before and Americans died. Why is Obama choosing to take us down this path again?

This is where I get that surreal feeling. I will have people tell me that I need "to support our president!" and "let him do his job!" "It's wonderful that he gave these men their freedom!" Refer to the paragraph about terrorists. Rephrase that sentence to "It's wonderful that he gave these terrorists their freedom!" and see how surreal that is.

All politicians lie, of course. But this one goes further because it alienates our ally Britain. Talk about making us look poorly in the eyes of the world - he thought Gitmo did, but what will other countries think about being lied to? This Bermuda Triangle puts the UK in China's crosshairs because they want the Uighurs.

Meanwhile, we're shipping the rest of the Uighurs, along with a lot of cash, to Palau. We're turning murderers over to the Saudis. And we've brought one to Manhatten, who incidentally could theoretically get a "not guilty" verdict and walk free.

It seems to me that the new Gitmo plan is unlock the doors. Alienate our allies. Suck up to terrorist dictators and ignore their actions that promise to endanger the world.

Do you feel safer now?

Uighurs Back to Gitmo?

Oops. The British government is not happy to have the Uighurs in Bermuda. Bermuda is Britain's oldest remaining dependency and the U.K. still has final say over foreign policy and security.

The Times Online reports that "the Government of Bermuda failed to consult with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on the decision to take in the Uighurs – whose return is demanded by Beijing – and it could now be forced to send them back to Cuba or risk a grave diplomatic crisis."

"We've underlined to the Bermuda Government that they should have consulted with the United Kingdom as to whether this falls within their competence or is a security issue, for which the Bermuda Government do not have delegated responsibility," an FCO spokesman said. We have made clear to the Bermuda Government the need for a security assessment, which we are now helping them to carry out, and we will decide on further steps as appropriate."

Didn't anyone check this out first?

Update: The Weekly Standard weighs in:

"The bottom line is: The Obama administration negotiated the transfer of four Uighur detainees to Bermuda without first gaining approval from the British government. I suppose there are some in Bermuda's government that don't see this as necessarily a bad thing. There are some who want independence from the Brits. But you would expect that the Obama administration would at least seek to assuage British concerns first, instead of provoking British "fury."

Is this how diplomacy is done in Obama’s supposedly new-found “multilateral” age?

We eagerly await objections from the left concerning Obama's cowboy-like unilateralism."

Of course this complicates things for Britain, too, because now they have China clamoring to reclaim the Uighurs and now those 4 Uighurs are technically in custody of the U.K. I'm betting they won't be writing BHO a thank you note for that one.

Bermuda 4, Palau 13

The Uighur transfer to Palau continues to develop. According to the AP this morning, four have already been resettled in Bermuda.

As for the other 13, they are headed to Palau. According to Palau's president, "Toribiong said the Uighur detainees from China's arid west would start their new lives in a halfway house to see how they acclimatize to his tropical archipelago west of the Philippines."

Does he realize that they haven't been in China in quite some time and they they've acclimatized to tropical Cuba pretty well?

This is the part where it all gets murky: "How long the men stay depends on whether they can find a better place to go, Toribiong said.

'"So we'll accept them and the details of the arrangements will be worked out, and they will be here until we can find out where they should be permanently located,' he said."

Based on this statement, they could stay in Palau for two days or two years or two decades. Whatever they want to do. If they decide to go back to Afghanistan, there's nothing stopping them.

Update: Bermuda issues a statement, part of which says:

"The United States Government will bear the cost surrounding this relocation and the Government of Bermuda will facilitate documentation, residence and employment."

Uighurs Pack Their Bags for Tropical Paradise of Palau

As reported yesterday, the Uighurs are indeed going to Palau. At a cost of $200 million. What a deal. At least they'll still be in the tropical climate they've become accustomed to at Club Gitmo.

Seriously, all kidding aside, what surprised me today was the information that the Obama administration had contacted 100 governments to take the Uighurs, all of which refused. One hundred! That doesn't say much for this administrations diplomatic efforts. Nobody wants these terrorists. Kirsten Powers was on Fox this morning trying to make the case that the Uighurs aren't terrorists because they've never been convicted of anything; she said they are welcome in her neighborhood anytime.

Thomas Joscelyn at Weekly Standard has been covering these guys extensively and he wrote today, as a reminder, that "all 17 Uighur detainees are either members or associates of the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement (also known as the Turkestan Islamic Party), a U.S. and UN-designated al Qaeda affiliate. Most of the Uighur detainees have admitted they were trained at ETIM/TIP training camps. And at least eight of them have admitted that Abdul Haq, a member of al Qaeda’s elite Shura council, ran the training camps where they learned to wage jihad."

We may not have caught them with a stick of dynamite in one hand and a match in the other, but it's pretty darn close.

What I've not yet been able to determine is the conditions for this deal. The New York Times says that Palau is going to "temporarily resettle" them (for $200 million), but how long is temporary and under what conditions? Do we get a refund if they only stay a week? Will they be free or confined? They'll be reviewed "periodically" whatever that means, but how closely will they be monitored?

Now the question remains as to what to do with the 100 or so Yeminis that are there. If the Uighurs are "not terrorists" and are the best of the lot, what about the Yeminis? How much will it cost us to get rid of them?

Michael Goldfarb posted this Survivor reminder this morning; sign me up!

Tribal Council, Anyone?

From NRO's The Corner:

"The Associated Press has learned the Obama administration is in talks with the remote South Pacific island nation of Palau (PA’-lau) to resettle some or all of 17 Chinese Muslims now held at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. . . The officials spoke on condition of anonymity due to the delicacy of the negotiations. They said the U.S. is prepared to give Palau up to $200 million in aid to accept the Uighurs. Palau is an independent nation about 500 miles east of the Philippines that has close ties with the U.S."

$200 million? Good grief. Let's just auction them off on eBay.

How much will it cost to send Jeff Probst with them?

(Update: More at Hot Air.)

Uighurs Compare U.S. to "Hetler"?

Fox New toured Gitmo Monday afternoon and saw the Uighurs. The Uighurs, using their art pads (paid for by the U.S. government) wrote messages to the reporters:

"America is Double Hetler (sic Hitler) in unjustice (sic injustice)"

Follow the link. There's more.

Sounds like they can't wait to come live here.

Uighurs NOT Coming to America?

Obama's plans to close Gitmo got a new kink Friday night. As reported by NRO's The Corner, the Obama Justice Department is now arguing that the Chinese Uighurs have no right to be released into the United States. Read the whole thing (go on, it's not long.)

As the Weekly Standard points out, "that this has the potential to put a major kink in the Obama administration's Gitmo diplomacy. European nations are clamoring for the U.S. to accept some of the Uighur detainees in return for accepting some themselves. Now, the Obama administration has conceded that the Uighurs have no right to be released in the United States."

The fact remains that to accept them into the United States violates immigration laws because of their terrorist ties.

This should enrage the left as they had been expecting, thanks to Eric Holder, that the Uighurs would soon be coming to America. Is the Obama administration feeling the push back from the right on this issue? Why the reversal? With Obama, you must always ask WHY?

(More at Memeorandum.)

Harry Reid Flips on Guantanamo

Harry Reid has changed his position on Guantanamo; a week ago he declared none of the prisoners should come to America. Today, Supermax is just fine.

Via Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic, consider this excerpt from an interview between Harry Reid and Jon Ralston regarding the closure of Gitmo.

"Reid, who has been criticized for his contradictory positions on Guantanamo Bay, said some prisoners will be put in maximum security prisons on U.S. soil, emphasizing the safety of those facilities:

"'A maximum security prison in the United States, there has never been a single escape.'"

"JR: 'You think eventually the plan is going to be to put them in maximum security prisons here in this country, correct?'

"'I think some. Keep in mind, Jon, there's so many different issues. There's no question that a number of these people who are there are not guilty of anything. The Uighurs, these are a group of Muslim Chinese who are guilty of nothing. They were arrested, put in there. They are there. They are doing nothing. We're going to have to find someplace to put them. We can't send them back to China. Should they go into a maximum security prison? Probably not.'"

This is the same Harry Reid who on May 19, on said this:

REID: If people are -- if terrorists are released in the United States, part of what we don’t want is them be put in prisons in the United States. We don’t want them around the United States.

and then this:

REID: I’m saying that the United States Senate, Democrats and Republicans, do not want terrorists to be released in the United States. That’s very clear.

QUESTION: No one’s talking about releasing them. We’re talking about putting them in prison somewhere in the United States.

REID: Can’t put them in prison unless you release them.

QUESTION: Sir, are you going to clarify that a little bit? I mean (OFF-MIKE).

REID: I can’t -- I can’t -- I can’t make it any more clear than the statement I have given to you. We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States. I think the majority -- I speak for the majority of the Senate.

So what has changed in seven days? Seven days ago he didn't want the Guantanamo terrorists anywhere near the United States, much less released into the United States. Now he has totally reversed that and says that they'll be just fine in a Supermax, thanks. It even appears that he's softening on the release issue as well for some of them, specifically the Uighurs.

In the Ralston interview, Reid makes it sound as if the Uighurs were simply rounded up at random and stuck in Gitmo. Never mind that they, by their own words, were training in a Tora Bora al Qaeda camp. Never mind that they had desires to wreak havoc in China.

Thomas Joscelyn cites four reasons why it is dangerous to assume the Uighurs are not dangerous. The reasons are listed below but go here to read his explanation.

"First, the Uighur detainees are alleged, for good reasons, to be members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM). The ETIM is a designated terrorist organization affiliated with al Qaeda."

"Second, many of the Uighur detainees have freely admitted during their tribunals and hearings at Guantanamo that they were trained by two known terrorists: Hasan Mahsum and Abdul Haq."

"Third, the Uighur detainees’ training took place at a camp in Tora Bora, Afghanistan -– a known stronghold for al Qaeda and the Taliban."

"Fourth, the Uighur detainees’ training makes them a potential threat not just to the Chinese government/military forces."

So as I see it, Reid is faulty on two counts here - his reasoning that the Uighurs have done nothing wrong is quite dangerous, but his total reversal on the Guantanamo issue is also troubling. One statement in particular bothers me - Reid now seems to be comfortable with the Supermax idea because "there has never been a single escape."

What is bothersome about this statement is the naivete of the idea that escape is the only problem with bringing terrorists here (Uighur or otherwise). Andy McCarthy outlined the other problems at The Corner on NRO. We know that terrorists can recruit, plan, and execute attacks from within prison walls. This has been documented. See the McCarthy article for the specific citations.

In addition, just because they can't escape doesn't mean the prisons won't be targeted by terrorist organizations to get them out. One specific example McCarthy cites is this: "So, for example, when the WTC was bombed in 1993, the other top project on the cell's agenda was breaking Nosair out of Attica. When the WTC bombers were arrested, their co-conspirators plotted several atrocities (a conspiracy to murder Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak on a trip to New York and a plot to bomb New York City landmarks) which, in part, were designed (as they discussed in recorded conversations) to induce American authorities to release the prisoners. "

Also, consider this information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act regarding attacks on prison guards at Gitmo. Those guards are trained military professionals - not civilians. I don't mean to imply that Supermax prison guards aren't trained or professional, but dealing with prisoners of this sort is a whole different experience. How will your average civilian prison guard fare against terrorists who can turn the most common thing, like an iguana tail, into a weapon?

There is this incident from the above referenced report: "Nicolucci said one of the most serious incidents occurred this May, too recent to be recorded in the Pentagon's released reports. A prisoner staged an apparent suicide attempt while his inmates slicked the floors with human waste, seeking to overpower guards when they slipped, he said. 'We provide fans in order to keep them cool,"Nicolucci recalled."And they were using the basket, or the grate of the fan as a shield, the blades as machetes, the pole as a battering ram.'"

Harry Reid seems to conclude that escape is the only real problem with keeping the terrorists in prisons inside America but that tells me he hasn't done his homework. Or he's just clueless, which is also a possibility.

McCarthy raises the concern that eventually, once in our Supermax prisons, these people would have to be released: "I note that in 2001, the Supreme Court (in Zadvydas v. Davis) concocted a due process right for even deportable/excludable aliens to be released on bail, in the U.S., if the government fails to deport them within a statutorily prescribed period. Eventually, Gitmo detainees brought to the U.S. would get the benefit of this ruling — bet on it."

So again, I ask, has Team Obama thought this thing through? Clearly they have no plan. And clearly Harry Reid changes his mind fairly often. So isn't this an issue that should be better considered by the administration? Or is a campaign promise more important than national security? Just askin'.

Related:
Uighur Release Coming Soon
The Chinese Uighurs
Obama's Speech on National Security
Richard Clarke on the Gitmo Video

HuffPo Does P.R. for Uighurs

I am in total accordance with Jammie Wearing Fool on this one: what kind of goofy PR is HuffPo doing for the Chinese Uighurs in Gitmo?

"Chinese Muslims known as Uighurs, detained for more than six years and counting at the American prison at Guantanamo Bay, are firing back at Newt Gingrich, who has accused them of terrorist ties and says that releasing them into the United States would endanger the country.

"The seventeen Uighurs told their translator, Rushan Abbas, how they felt when they heard Gingrich's remarks. Abbas has been working with them in Guantanamo since 2002, initially contracted by the Department of Defense. The Uighurs' rejoinder to Gingrich is the first quasi-interview with detainees still imprisoned in Guantanamo."

The Uighurs undoubtedly do not want to be released to China because they would certainly be tortured or executed as terrorists. They certainly see the benefits of being released onto American soil so image rehabilitation through the media is their best shot. Now, all of a sudden, we're supposed to believe they are not terrorists at all but just misunderstood choirboys picked up by bounty hunters for no good reason.

In a recent column, Newt Gingrich claimed that" '[b]y their own admission, Uighurs being held at Guantanamo Bay are members of or associated with the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an al Qaeda-affiliated group designated as a terrorist organization under U.S law.

"No, they have never admitted that, says Abbas, adding that the Uighurs call the claim 'baseless, factless slander against them.' Abbas returned from Guantanamo Monday. She now works with the Uighurs' defense attorneys, but said that her comments to the Huffington Post were not intended as advocacy on their behalf.

"The Uighurs call relatives in the United States and Europe often, she says, so stay up on the news. They were surprised to hear the accusation from the former Speaker of the House.

"Why does he hate us so much and say those kinds of things? He doesn't know us. He should talk to our attorneys if he's curious about our background," Abbas relates. "How could he speak in such major media with nothing based in fact? They were very disappointed how Newt Gingrich was linking them to ETIM which they never even heard of the name ETIM until they came to Guantanamo Bay."

Factless slander? As I've posted before, Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu made many trips to Gitmo in the course of researching and writing his book, Inside Gitmo. His research included interviews with prison officials and review of legal documents, among other sources.

Cucullu writes, "Just to be clear, these men are not choirboys who strayed on the path home from church services. They were captured in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, in which they were by their own admission undergoing training so that they could return to China to be terrorists supporting an independent uighur Islamic nation" (140).

But now, according to HuffPo, this is all a fallacy. They never admitted this.

Just what exactly does the media think goes on in an al Qaeda training camp? What exactly does the media think these people are training for? To be cashiers at Wal Mart? They train people to be terrorists in al Qaeda training camps.

This idiotic assertion was also made in the case of John Walker Lindh who put himself in an al Qaeda training camp but then wants to claim the victim role and pretend like he was just there to study religion or some such nonsense.

Based on the HuffPo article, and on Cucullu's book, the Uighurs actually have it pretty good at Gitmo, relatively speaking. Not as good as a free ride in the United States, but better than they had it in Afghanistan. They have big screen TV, a personal diet plan, better medical care than some American citizens, an ocean view and "they call relatives in the United States and Europe often."

But they do have that nasty Newt Gingrich picking on them. "Why does he hate us so much?" they asked. Maybe because most Americans have a low tolerance for terrorists. We don't need to give them an engraved invitation, an escort into the country, and wait for them to attack us to know that they are terrorists.

Meanwhile, HuffPo is handling their PR.

Terrorists Aren't Dangerous

Today Eric Holder said this to the House Judiciary Committee on what to do with the 241 prisoners in Gitmo:

"We are not going to do anything that will endanger the American people," Holder said. "If there were a sufficient basis to conclude they pose a danger to the United States, we would not release them."

Wonder what the BHO administration considers "sufficient basis"? Apparently training in a Tora Bora al Qaeda terrorist camp doesn't qualify. What does it take to be considered dangerous by Team Obama?

Oh wait. I remember, now.

A Terrorist is a Terrorist

Andy McCarthy at NRO's The Corner quotes a letter from Rep. Frank Wolfe (R.-Va.) to Attorney General Holder regarding the Uighurs and their imminent release into the United States:

"I have grave concerns that you are playing fast and loose with the definition of “terrorist” and may be misleading the American people regarding its plans to release the Uyghur detainees into the U.S. Let me be very clear – the Uyghurs held at Guantanamo Bay are trained terrorists and members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), a designated terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda, as designated by both the U.S. government and the United Nations (U.N.). Whether their intended victims were Chinese or Americans, a trained terrorist is a terrorist."

Here's my virtual high-five to Rep. Wolfe!

Related:
Uighur Release Coming Soon
The Chinese Uighurs
Catch and Release Terrorist Program

Update: Welcome Green Room readers! (Thanks Pundette!)

Catch and Release Terrorist Program

Do you still feel safe in America? I don't. Consider this from The Weekly Standard:

Most, if not all, of the Uighur detainees were trained at a camp in Tora Bora, Afghanistan, prior to the September 11 attacks. According to documents released by the Department of Defense, several of the Uighurs admitted that a terrorist named Abdul Haq ran the Tora Bora camp. Both the United States and the United Nations designated Abdul Haq an al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist last month.

While the DOD’s unclassified files provide many details about the Uighur detainees and their ties to known terrorists, other documents in the U.S. government’s possession likely include more.

In a letter to President Obama last week, [Rep. Frank A.] Wolf said that information he received “indicates that the Uighurs may be more dangerous than the public has been led to believe.” Wolf did not specify what information he had received, but asked that President Obama “declassify all intelligence regarding their capture, detention, and your administration’s assessment of the threat they may pose to Americans.”

I'm beginning to understand why gun sales in the US are skyrocketing. People are losing faith that their country will protect them and they might have to protect themselves. I think that if a Tora Bora trained terrorist is released in my neighborhood, I'm pretty likely to find a way to protect myself.

Uighur Release Coming Soon

I don't even know what to say on this anymore. We're one step closer to adopting seven Chinese Uighur terrorists from Gitmo into the United States. It alternately depresses and enrages me.

Via Hot Air, and according to the LATimes, "There are 17 Uighurs ... at Guantanamo. A U.S. official familiar with the discussions over their release said that as many as seven could be resettled in the U.S., possibly in two or more small groups. Officials have not said where in the United States they might live. But many Uighur immigrants from China live in Washington's Virginia suburbs, and advocates have urged that the detainees be resettled near people who speak their language and are familiar with their customs."

Remember, these guys were picked up in Afghanistan and had trained at the Tora Bora al Qaeda training camps. They were undergoing terrorist training, by their own admission, so they could return to China and fight for an independent Uighur Islamic nation there.

These guys are such volatile characters that they smashed their big screen television at Gitmo when they saw a woman with bare arms at a soccer game:

"But the TV privileges underscored potential difficulties to come, according to one current and one former U.S. official. Not long after being granted access to TV, some of the Uighurs were watching a soccer game. When a woman with bare arms was shown on the screen, one of the group grabbed the television and threw it to the ground, according to the officials."

Are these the kind of neighbors you want?

And pardon me for asking the obvious, but why in the world are we going to import terrorists into the country? There is no case to be made that they are not terrorists. If you're picked in in an al Qaeda training camp, it's a safe assumption that you are a terrorist. "Where's your sign?"

And when you admit you were training to return to your home country in order to overthrow the government in order to replace it with another faction, you're probably a terrorist.

And what happens to them when we get them here? Will they be monitored? Given a financial settlement? Health care? How long will they stay? Will they learn the language? Get jobs? Become productive citizens? Have civil rights that we'll later be accused somehow of violating?

Taken in combination with the events of the past week with the release of the OLC memos, and the impending release of 44 prisoner abuse photos, we're getting a pretty clear picture of a much weaker national security situation than was the case on November 3. It's not a pretty picture and it's damn depressing, really.


Related Posts:
Overruling Urbina - One for the Good Guys
The Chinese Uighurs

(Photo credit: Erik de Castro/Reuters/Corbis)

The Chinese Uighurs

National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair said this week that some Gitmo detainees may very well be released into the United States; not only that, they would have to be provided with assistance and training to start their new life. As one might expect, this created a firestorm of criticism in the press.

The group most likely to be released here would be the Chinese Uighurs who were cleared for release quite some time back but have no place to go. The United States is concerned that they would be tortured or killed if returned to China. The Uighur population in China is primarily from the northwest region but there are smaller communites throughout China.

I went back to my friend Gordon Cucullu who wrote Inside Gitmo and took another look at the Uighurs. He writes:

"To the security-minded Chinese government officials, the Uighur community has a darker side. Within the Uighur community are extremist groups who are radical Islamist fundamentalists dedicated to using terrorism to achieve their goals of independence."

Well, now that's reassuring. Isn't it? No? Cucullu continues:

The Uighurs "were captured in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, in which they were by their own admission undergoing training so that they could return to China to be terrorists supporting an independent Uighur Islamic nation."

The camps where they were captured were in the notorious Tora Bora region.

Thomas Joscelyn at The Weekly Standard has done some excellent reporting on the Uighurs. He writes:

"First, the Uighur detainees are alleged, for good reasons, to be members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM). The ETIM is a designated terrorist organization affiliated with al Qaeda.

There is sound evidence that the Uighur detainees are affiliated with the ETIM. For example, most of the detainees have made admissions during their tribunals and hearings at Guantanamo that tie them to the group. The ETIM is a jihadist organization and not part of some noble anti-China resistance. So, even if you have sympathy for the Chinese government’s opposition (as I do), including other Uighur organizations, the Uighur detainees at Guantanamo are not part of any legitimate, anti-Chinese government organization that deserves our support. The ETIM is an ideological cousin of al Qaeda that seeks to establish a radical Islamist state throughout South and Central Asia."

"The ETIM has openly targeted and threatened civilians, as it did last year during the Chinese Olympics. In a publicly-released video, an ETIM member stood in front of al Qaeda’s black flag as he threatened anyone who attended the Olympics. The ETIM has also executed terrorist bombings against civilian targets inside China. ETIM trainees have fought alongside Taliban forces in Afghanistan on a number of occasions. They have also been used to buttress other al Qaeda-allied jihadist forces throughout Central Asia, including in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan."

Why on earth would we choose to import terrorists? And why are we so concerned with what happens to them in the first place? I say send 'em back to China and let China worry about them.

The idea of bringing them to the United States is crazy enough on its own without the additional insult of using taxpayer dollars to fund their new life. Welfare. The euphemistic "assistance."

The Obama administration is more concerned with keeping an ill-conceived campaign promise than with the security of the American people. Are they so naive that they think this move will raise us up in the eyes of the international community and erase the "blight" of Guantanamo? Iran could care less if we bring these guys over here and give them "assistance." They'll continue to hold Roxana Saberi without charge in a Tehran prison. They won't be impressed with our magnimity.

Where will we settle these guys? Will they have to register in the same way sex offenders do? Not likely. Will they settle in "sanctuary cities"? Will we keep track of them? I guess we'll have to so we can keep sending them those welfare checks.

The Uighurs are still committed to their cause and there is little reason, according to Cucullu, that they won't continue to fight from within the United States.

Bone-headed idea.