...it appears to me that it is deceptive to the reader, giving them the impression that the quote is status quo.. when in fact it is coming from a right-wing idealogue..

-- Stephen Peter

This reader considers a Senator, any U.S. senator, to be a "Washington official". Even the grotesque Joe Lieberman is a "Washington official". There is not any doubt about the fact that US Senators are "Washington officials". Speaking to or down to an audience who is not aware of that fact is generally not what goes on around here.

If we don't like the fact that we have to offer this particular group of men political asylum by the terms of our own laws, next time maybe we should think twice about seizing people and flying them to US administered territory for detention.

-- BrianScheetz

A point I brought up in my post. Yet I'm not sure political asylum would apply to these detainees. Let's not forget the Obama administration was not responsible for seizing them either. Yet he is being blamed by Glenn and his followers for the situation her inherited.

Glenn:"Is Sen. Shelby not a Washington official?"

SP:" He is.. and thank you for the response."

Perhaps America is different country and they do things differently there. But in our nation elected persons are not known as officials. Officials are non political and un elected career Civil Service staff who facilitate the policies of the elected members. For further information I would refer you to "Yes Minister." Jim Hacker was the hapless minister. Sir Humphrey was the official.

I signed a letter that the ACLU had emailed to me (I can't find a copy of the letter, but I think it was related to the ACLU's accountability for torture movement). The ACLU then forwarded it to my Senator, Mel Martinez. Here is the senator's response:

Below is a response to the recent comments I received from you:

Dear XXXXXX:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the release of Guantanamo detainees in the Unites States. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to take this opportunity to respond to your concerns.

The Global War on Terror is a multi-pronged effort that includes the gathering of intelligence from suspected terrorists to avoid future terrorist attacks on the American people. As part of this intelligence gathering effort, a detention facility was created in January 2002 at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Station located in eastern Cuba. Our country has been presented with many unprecedented and difficult choices concerning the debate surrounding the decision to close Guantanamo Bay, and in particular, what to do with the detainees.

While I believe that detainees must be treated humanely, I do not agree with the Supreme Court's decision that these individuals should be granted the same rights as American citizens. The strength of America depends on the preservation of our values. Terrorists who are detained in this war, simply cannot and should not be afforded the same rights and process that our citizens enjoy. Whether detainees should be relocated in the United States or outside is a critical question that this Administration has yet to answer.

We are still in the midst of a Global War on Terror against an enemy bent on attacking Americans wherever and whenever it can. There is no question this war is unprecedented. There is no question we face unique and difficult choices. But one thing is very clear – we should never allow alleged enemy combatants to enter or be released in the U.S. No court, civilian or military should ever be asked to decide whether a foreign terrorist trainee is “safe-enough” to be brought into the U.S. or released onto our streets. The American people deserve from us greater protection of their personal and national security.

I understand your concerns regarding the release of these prisoners and I will work with my Senate colleagues and the Administration to ensure that those determined not to be a threat are returned to their homeland, and the remaining detainees receive justice. My highest priority as your Senator continues to be the protection of our families from terrorism. Rest assured that I will keep your concerns in mind should this issue be considered by the full Senate.

Again, thank you very much for sharing your opinions with me. If you have any additional questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. In addition, for more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at http://martinez.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Mel Martinez

United States Senator

I am thankful that he isn't seeking re-election in 2010.

Did anybody else get an email about H1N1 from John O. Brennan? Just trying to find out whether I got it due to being technically Medical Reserve Corps (now part of Homeland Security) or not.

Yet he is being blamed by Glenn and his followers for the situation her inherited.

-- bernbart

What does it mean when to you when you say, "followers"? Since you frequently mention how you enjoy sitting down for a reading of the New York Times does that mean that we should or could assume that you consider yourself to be a "follower" of some of the NYTime's columnists? My take is that you just like to read the NYTimes for some of the reasons that you've stated in the past. But if you'd like to call yourself a follower that is your right, of course. And it is your right to call people who read Greenwald "followers", but that does not make your impossible insight correct, or even sensible. Really, to me, it seems like your way of putting out a passive aggressive insult.

I got the email, too. I thought I had unsubscribed to White House propaganda a long time ago...

I deleted it.

Glenn, you do such yeoman's work that it's impossible to overstate the value of it. And that is really a sad thing to say; why shouldn't this be the standard instead of the exception? That's pathetic in and of itself.

A few things:

Wakil calmly stroked his beard as he described rough treatment at Bagram and Guantanamo, though he prefers to refer to his treatment by his American captors as "disputes."

This man is more human than our Glorious Leaders could ever dream of being (and a lot more forgiving than I am). Imagine, being able to maintain a modicum of sanity after such an experience, while people like Mark Kleiman (with whom I was unfamiliar until today) make statements like this

There is a class of people to whom the label "preventive detention" properly applies; people (who could be U.S. citizens or not) who have the intention to be terrorists but who aren't members of any terrorist group with which we're currently in armed conflict.

And it doesn't even occur to him, apparently, that he's engaged in Orwellian Thought Crime.

And I really detest articles like the Bumiller one you linked to:

The conclusion could strengthen the arguments of critics who have warned against the transfer or release of any more detainees as part of President Obama’s plan to shut down the prison by January.

She couldn't take the time (nor could her editors insist she take the time) to verify any of this? And much further down, near the end of the article (when most people have probably stopped reading anyway, the intentional nugget if disinformation already in place), we see

The Pentagon has provided no way of authenticating its 45 unnamed recidivists, and only a few of the 29 people identified by name can be independently verified as having engaged in terrorism since their release. Many of the 29 are simply described as associating with terrorists or training with terrorists, with almost no other details provided.

Shit.