Share This Page

Obama's stain: The Gitmo gamble

| Wednesday, Jan. 27, 2016, 9:00 p.m.

Among recent beneficiaries of President Obama's Gitmo transfer program is an explosives expert who designed mines to sink U.S. ships and the “shoe-bomb” that was used unsuccessfully in 2001 in an attempt to bring down an airliner.

Egyptian Tariq Mahmoud Ahmed al Sawah, who had been personally praised by Osama bin Laden, has been transferred to the government of Bosnia — where he had fought with the Bosnia army in the 1990s, The Washington Times reports.

Reportedly, Mr. al Sawah provided bomb-making instruction at an al-Qaida training camp. According to his private file, “Detainee participated in hostilities against U.S. and Coalition forces and is a veteran extremist combatant.”

But Joint Task Force Guantanamo deemed al Sawah to be a “medium” risk and recommended transfer, The Times reports.

Regardless of any future consequences if al Sawah resumes his bomb-making tutorials, the Obama administration remains undeterred in fulfilling a campaign promise to empty the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Over the years, the inmate population has declined from more than 700 to about 90.

Many “transferred” terrorists are said to have already rejoined the battle lines. And should any of these demented terrorist transferees who despise America successfully perpetrate an attack here or abroad, that blood will indelibly stain Barack Obama's hands.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.