Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has made the news in the past few days with his call for a Jihad on the nation of Switzerland. Gaddafi’s call was in response to a recent approval by Swiss voters of a ban on the erection of minarets.
Gaddafi, who’s full title is Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, said the following:
“Let us wage jihad against Switzerland, Zionism and foreign aggression,”
“Any Muslim in any part of the world who works with Switzerland is an apostate, is against Muhammad, God and the Koran.”
Now we believe that the Swiss minaret ban is misguided and an affront to religious liberty. But we deplore the unhinged Gaddafi’s call for holy war.
We are a little curious, however, what our Republican Congressman, Peter Roskam, thinks about Gaddafi’s actions.Voters in the 6th District may not realize that Peter Roskam is personally acquainted with Gaddafi. Roskam traveled to Libya in 2008 as part of a Congressional delegation led by Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan. Listen to Peter Roskam talk about his meeting with Gaddafi on WLS AM’s Don Wade & Roma show on April 2, 2008:
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
The same day, Roskam wen ot WIND’s Big John & Cisco Show to talk about Gaddafi and Libya again:
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
So why did Roskam go off to Libya and meet with Gaddafi and then come back and begin a tentative rehabilitation of the terrorist leader in these radio appearances?
Well, there’s the oil. They don’t call the GOP the “Gas & Oil Party” for nothing. Libya sits on huge reserves of oil and natural gas and there’s no doubt that the GOP’s clientele in the oil industry want a piece of that action.
And then there’s the campaign contributions. Yes, Gaaddafi’s Libya is a contributor to Roskam’s reelection campaign, albeit inirectly. Records made available by Congress and made accessible in the Sunlight Foundation’s Foreign Lobbying Influence Tracker show that Roskam & his staff had numerous contacts in 2008 with members of the Livingston Group, a lobbying form acting on behalf of the government of Libya, and that that firm, acting on behalf of it’s client, wrote at least 3 checks to Roskam’s re-election campaign. The livingston Group was seeking a normalization of U.S. trade relations with Libya, something that Roskam talks about as being desireable in his radio appearances. The data made available by Sunlight ends with 2008 so we have no knowledge of any ongoing relationship between Roskam and agents of the Libyan government.
Gaddafi in Libya. Uribe in Colombia. Micheletti in Honduras. Roskam sure does seem to have a thing for the world’s thugs and strongmen. We find it not a little disquieting.
Today is Ronald Reagan’s 99th birthday. We thought it might be a good thing to take a look the real Ronald Reagan, rather than the pantomime Reagan always being trotted out by conservatives. Here then is Bill Moyers excellent 1987 film on Reagan’s illegal terrorist war against the people of Nicaragua. Reagan funded his war by secret illicit arms sales to Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran, all, absurdly, in the name of fighting Communism. In doing so he violated the law and acted in direct opposition to the will of Congress, subverting the constitution and creating a shadow government. And he is held up as a hero by so-called conservatives for it. We think that conservatives have a little difficulty distinguishing right from wrong & the good guys from the bad guys.
As the administration announced this week its intention to acquire the Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois in order to house prisoners to be transferred from the U.S. Naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Peter Roskam continued his efforts to sow fear about the planned transfer. Roskam issued a brief statement on Tuesday:
“The decision to move some of the world’s worst terrorists to Illinois is an ill-advised move that ultimately will be regretted. The proponents have failed to prove how this move will make America safer. Let’s be clear: the Administration is not closing Guantanamo, they are simply moving Guantanamo to Illinois. Illinois deserves a better Christmas present than hardened terrorists. ”
He later held a press conference with the rest of the Illinois Republican delegation to object to the proposed transfer.
Roskam’s arguments against the move have been unsubstantial. He does not define how the housing of these inmates in a supermax facility will pose a threat. His stance appears to be political posturing rather than a serious concern about a security threat. It is sad that he would block the move for political gain at the expense of the people of Thomson, who favor the move and desperately need the jobs the prison will provide.
Senator Dick Durbin and Governor Quinn offered a saner perspective on Thomson yesterday:
There is reason to be disconcerted about the transfer of Guantanamo inmates to Thomson, though not for reason of a security threat as Roskam would have us believe.
No, the problem is that the Guantanamo closure, while perhaps a symbolic measure of some importance, leaves unresolved the issues associated with the use of military tribunals and of indefinite detention of prisoners without criminal charges or trial. The President and Congress must still act to correct the abuses that they inherited from the Bush Administration. They cannot simply sweep them under the carpet. That is what we should really be afraid of. The American Civil Liberties Union had the following reaction to the news about Thomson:
“Alarmingly, all indications are that the administration plans to continue its predecessor’s policy of indefinite detention without charge or trial for some detainees, with only a change of location. Such a policy is completely at odds with our democratic commitment to due process and human rights whether it’s occurring in Cuba or in Illinois. In fact, while the Obama administration inherited the Guantánamo debacle, this current move is its own affirmative adoption of those policies. It is unimaginable that the Obama administration is using the same justification as the Bush administration used to undercut centuries of legal jurisprudence and the principle of innocent until proven guilty and the right to confront one’s accusers.
“It is also greatly disturbing that the administration will continue the use of military commissions, which are no more acceptable in Illinois or any other U.S. state than in Guantánamo. Despite some improvements, the commissions still fall far short of the legal standards necessary to comply with constitutional and international standards, allowing, for example, the use of coerced and hearsay evidence that would not be allowed in federal court. The proceedings will achieve neither reliable justice nor a restoration of America’s credibility around the world.”
“The administration must also make very clear what category of detainee will be transferred to Thomson in the future and what kind of prison conditions will apply. Detainees not charged with a crime should not be subject to punitive conditions meant for sentenced prisoners who have been found guilty in a court of law, and all conditions must comply with the Geneva Conventions. “The administration will no doubt be looking to Congress for legislative buy-in for this facility, and as both branches work together, we strongly urge lawmakers to legislate responsibly and not set any policies or precedents for indefinite detention on U.S. soil, or create any violation of the Geneva Conventions.
“The Obama administration’s announcement today contradicts everything the president has said about the need for America to return to leading with its values. American values do not contemplate disregarding our Constitution and skirting the criminal justice system. After detaining hundreds of individuals without the basic due process rights that define our justice system for almost eight years, it is time to charge suspects where evidence exists and repatriate and transfer the rest to countries where they won’t be tortured.”
In recent days, the 6th District’s Republican Congressman, Peter Roskam, has been doing his best to stimulate public hysteria over the proposed transfer of prisoners currently held at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility to Illinois’ maximum-security Thomson Correctional Center. Those efforts have largely failed, with both major Chicago newspapers and most reality-based leaders denouncing Roskam’s fearmongering and supporting consideration of the plan. The public seems to have been largely unaffected by Roskam’s campaign.
Now Roskam is whining because U.S. Senate candidate and Illinois Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias reports having been briefed on the possible transfer by staff from the National Security Counsil (NSC):
“Given Mr. Giannoulias’ disclosure that he received a NSC briefing on possibly moving Guantanamo to Illinois, I urge the Obama Administration to eschew the increasingly political nature of this situation. Moving terrorists to Illinois will have tremendous security and economic implications, and now this situation has been tainted by the appearance of political favoritism given that a Democrat U.S. Senate candidate received a NSC briefing while elected Members of Congress have not. The people of Illinois will be best served by a process that forgoes the behind-closed-doors political approach and instead provides foropen and transparent consideration.”
Ha! We’re wondering when Peter Roskam is going to “eschew the increasingly political nature of this situation.” We suspect that Mr. Giannoulias received a briefing because he requested it and that Roskam, as a member of Congress, could have requested the same at any time. Instead, political opportunist that he is, Roskam smelled blood in the water when he heard about the propoosal and immediately launched into an attack against the administration without troubling himself to learn the facts. This, of course, is Roskam’s modus operandi.
Meanwhile, Roskam’s eminently sensible opponent, Democrat Ben Lowe of Wheaton, has released what I think is a terrific statement on the proposed transfer and the need we have as a nation to return to respect for our constitution and legal heritage:
Understandably, after 9/11, our nation developed a heightened fear of those who seek to commit acts of terror against our country. But somewhere during the Bush era, we also lost confidence in the ability of our judicial system to administer justice to those suspected of committing or supporting terrorism.
Instead of trusting that the foundational elements of our democracy are capable of withstanding this great challenge, we began to exchange many of our civil rights (including the writ of habeas corpus) for a greater sense of security. We stopped trusting our courts, our prisons, and the principles of due process and representation under the law, which are so vital to our democracy.
We can do better.
We can do better. We can replace Peter Roskam with a serious leader focused on problem-solving and not political theater. I think Ben Lowe is that kind of leader. Readers who long for things to change may want to wander over to Ben’s website and drop him a few bucks to help get his campaign up and running.
My brother used to have a dog, a big mutt, who’d lived only to fetch a green tennis ball. All day long that dog would carry the ball around and beg you to throw it for him. And he’d bring it back and want you to throw it again…and again…and again…all day long. The dog didn’t want to do anything else. And because he had that ball in his mouth all day, it got all wet and slobbery…pretty gross…and you didn’t really want to touch it, but the dog would insist. That was his only trick. I think the dog was kind of dim.
That dog reminds me of Peter Roskam. Peter was at it again today…his one trick…trying to scare the hell out of his constituents, and it is getting pretty old. Roskam proudly tweeted earlier today that his followers should watch him on MSNBC’s Morning Meeting where he had spoken about “Al-Quaeda possibly coming to Illinois”. Turns out he was on with Rep Bruce Braley, a Democrat from Iowa’s 1st District, which is right across the Misssissippi from Thomson, Illinois, home of the prison that is being considered to house inmates presently incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay. Here’s the video:
Roskam spouted the same tired old talking points, trying to scare you. Braley, on the other hand, demonstrated what we would expect from a Congresman: he had been out to the site and inspected it, had been briefed by federal officials, had talked it over with citizens. Why can’t we have a real Representative like Braley, firmly rooted in reality?
Braley wasn’t the only one to call Roskam on his scare tactics. Just yesterday BOTH major Chicago newspapers criticized the antics of Roskam, Mark Kirk, and the other Republican fearmongers.
…when Republicans heard that the Obama administration is looking at buying the largely vacant Thomson Correctional Facility to house some detainees now held at Guantanamo (as well as ordinary maximum security prisoners), they reacted as though Osama bin Laden had been given the keys to a missile silo…
…Give us a break. A super-maximum security prison, such as Thomson would become, is not what most of us associate with the word “neighborhood.” The critics seem to forget that no one has ever escaped from a supermax. If having a terrorist imprisoned on our soil were an invitation for his confederates to slaughter innocent Chicagoans, it would surely have happened already…
…We don’t think the residents of Illinois will buy into the panic the opponents are trying to stoke. And while the change would surely bring economic benefits and jobs to a depressed corner of the state, the best reason for using Thomson for these inmates is that Guantanamo needs to be closed and they have to be locked up securely somewhere…
…It’s a vital responsibility that Illinois citizens are not likely to shirk.
America’s federal prisons are full of people who scare the hell out of us — mob hit men, mass murderers and international terrorists. We arrest and charge such fiends, give them a fair trial and, if they are found guilty, lock them up. We do not quake in fear. We do not shelve our values. We do not cheap out on due process — a fair day in court for even the worst human beings, homegrown or foreign.
…Kirk’s scare talk might do him wonders with the GOP base, but it won’t convince a single terrorist that this nation has a backbone.
Nor will it create a single job in northwest Illinois…
…Federal prisons are skilled in dealing with high-risk inmates (the mobster Frank Calabrese Sr. comes to mind) who try to plot from behind bars. They are subjected to special administrative measures, which typically include solitary confinement, drastic restrictions on visitors and a close eye on all communications.
In the case of the Guantanamo detainees at Thomson, they will be isolated from other prisoners and supervised by the Department of Defense. Under DOD rules, they will be allowed visits only from lawyers.
Guantanamo, where American values go to die, is nothing more than a worldwide recruitment tool for terrorists.
Even Republican stalwarts Grover Norquist, Bob Barr, and and David Keene are critical of Roskam and Kirk’s scare tactics:
The scaremongering about these issues should stop. Using a state of the art but little used prison facility like the one at Thomson, Illinois – with any appropriate security upgrades our law enforcement professionals deem necessary – makes good sense for the tax payers who invested $145 million in the facility and who are seeing millions wasted every month at the costly, inefficient Guantanamo facility. It makes sense for the community which will benefit from the related employment and has absolutely no reason to fear that prisoners will escape or be released into their communities. But most of all it makes sense for America because it is a critical link in the process of closing Guantanamo and getting this country back to using its tried and true, constitutionally sound institutions.
So I wish Peter Roskam would just shut up about Guantanamo and Thomson. His rhetoric is becoming about as attractive as that dog’s slobbery green tennis ball.
*************************************************
On to health care reform. Peter Roskam emitted another tweet this afternoon pointing to an article he wrote for Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government. (Guess the Tribune and the Sun-Times weren’t taking his calls.) The piece is titled: “Pelosi’s Healthcare Vision: Government Mandate or Jail”. It seems to be aimed directly at the Teabaggers, the only ones, I think who still take Roskam seriously.
Roskam starts out:
“Failing to purchase “acceptable health insurance coverage” could result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” Those are direct quotes from a letter of analysis done by the Joint Committee on Taxation, a non-partisan analysis committee in Congress. While that policy may not be one of Nancy Pelosi’s main talking points about her healthcare takeover legislation, it is an undoubtedly destructive portion of her healthcare bill, part of the reason it passed with only two votes to spare.”
There’s a picture of a scary prison corridor inserted after that paragraph.
Yes, more b.s. on the individual mandate. Yes, the House bill requires most Americans to purchase health insurance, with government subsidy if their income is such that they can’t afford it on their own. And yes, there is a tax that is applied only to those who opt out. The rationale for the mandate and the tax is to try to insure that everyone is covered, because when people who can afford insurance don’t buy insurance, we all end up paying for their care when they get into trouble. In effect, we are all already taxed for their irresponsibility.
When Peter Roskam refers to jail time, what he is really talking about is potential penalties that may apply to people who don’t pay their taxes. It the same as with any tax. If you refuse to pay your federal or state income taxes long enough, eventually you’ll go to jail.
In any event, imprisonment of tax evaders is usually reserved for the most outrageous cases. The letter to Camp notes that the Internal Revenue Service usually pursues unpaid taxes through the civil process — meaning no jail time. In 2008, fewer than 500 people were incarcerated because of the penalties the Republicans are fretting about.
So again, Peter Roskam, is just stirring up needless fear in the minds of his most impressionable constituents. The rest of us are just growing weary and irritated.
On a brighter note:
Our future Congressman, Ben Lowe of Wheaton, today initiated a capability for online donations at his website. I hope everyone will visit and give him some help to get his campaign up and running.
Roskam joined with the also soon-to-be retired Congressman and notable flip-flopper Mark Kirk (who was for closing Guantanamo before he was against it), Congresswoman Judy Biggert, and Congressman Don Manzullo to protest the administration’s proposal to bring prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay detention center to a largely unused facility in Thomson, Illinois.
Roskam asserts that that to bring these prisoners to Illinois would put the public at risk and “dissuade businesses from coming to the state”.
“The Obama administration’s utter inability to create jobs here does not somehow make sending some of the world’s worst terrorists to our backyard a good idea,”
And if we are to believe Mark Kirk (who actually voted for the Guantanamo closure before he fell in love with Sarah Palin), Osama Bin Laden himself is likely to take up residence in Skokie and Chicago’s most prominent landmarks immediately destroyed.
All of this is, of course, a big load of hooey. The transfer could produce 2,000-3,000 job in a state that badly needs jobs. And the state has for some time already housed terrorists in federal facilities without any of the problems that the “Frightening Four” predict.
