Obama's Gitmo

Opinion Journal (WSJ) by William McGurn | Apr. 22, 2009 (Opinion)

You know we live in interesting times when Helen Thomas is going after Barack Obama. Miss Thomas was asking the White House press secretary last week why detainees at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan should not have the same right to challenge their detention in federal court that last year's Supreme Court ruling in Boumediene v. Bush gave to Guantanamo's detainees. All Mr. Gibbs could do was interrupt and correct the doyenne of the White House press corps ... Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: World, U.S., Politics, Media
Topics: Torture, U.S. Supreme Court, Media and Politics, Obama Administration
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Derek Hawkins - Apr 22, 2009 - 2:58 AM PDT
Reviewed by: Kenneth Sibbett (review), Elizabeth White-Nadler (review), Dwight Rousu (review), John Forrest (review)
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Derek Hawkins - Apr 22, 2009 - 2:58 AM PDT
Related Comments: Obama Administration (3)

Reviews

Show All Comments
Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Kenneth Sibbett
3.6
 by Kenneth Sibbett - Apr. 22, 2009

While Obama is trying to square the dilemma of how and where to keep them, at least they're not being tortured.This new torture policy is an important step in improving relations with other countries, the middle east and elsewhere.

I believe Obama is going to realize that a year is going to go by faster than he thinks. And Gitmo will still be there.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Dwight Rousu
1.9
 by Dwight Rousu - Apr. 22, 2009

The Wall Street Journal is advocating operating outside the rule of law, disappearing and torturing and imprisoning humans for life at the whim of a president.

We have seen the bushies keep innocents locked up to prevent public embarrassment about wrongful imprisonment of bounty prisoners. Power needs checks and balances.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Elizabeth White-Nadler
4.1
 by Elizabeth White-Nadler - Apr. 22, 2009

This opinion piece is well written and newsworthy. It explores the legalities of detaining possible terrorists at Bagram and compares and contrasts the ways Bagram is like, and differs from Gitmo. Very interesting and responsible reporting.

I agree with Kenneth Sibbett that specifically banning torture makes all of the difference in the world, regardless of where these detainees are held. Gitmo is more than the place where their habeas corpus rights were violated. The article could have addressed that Gitmo is forever associated with the torture that took place there in a way Bagram is not. This too affects the decisions that are made.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
John Forrest
3.0
 by John Forrest - Apr. 23, 2009
See Full Review » (5 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.2

Average
from 4 reviews (40% confidence)
Quality
3.2
Information
3.2
Insight
3.2
Style
3.2
Context
3.0
Enterprise
3.0
Expertise
2.7
Originality
3.3
Relevance
3.7
Popularity
3.1
Recommendation
3.2
Credibility
3.0
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!