The Blog

Mark Kirk's Gitmo Flip Flop

Rep. Mark Kirk, fighting to be elected to Obama's former Senate seat, is leading a dangerous and counterproductive charge against the proper method of prosecution for 9/11 terrorism suspects.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

For the first time in 8 years, America is actually going to bring the 9/11 terrorists to justice. Whether transferring them to NYC for trial, or sending them to Illinois for possible detention, the Obama administration will hold terrorists accountable for their heinous act. It will also make America safer by shutting down Guantanamo, long a top recruitment tool for extremists.

But instead of supporting this effort to replace the broken Guantanamo system (which has only yielded three convictions since 9/11 while civilian courts have convicted nearly 200 terrorists) with a judicial system we know has worked in the past, many Republicans have fallen back on their customary and caustic partisanship. In doing so, they are working overtime to undermine our national security by politicizing and fearmongering this critical issue.

Rep. Mark Kirk, fighting to be elected to Obama's former Senate seat, is leading this dangerous and counterproductive charge. Case in point, Kirk said the following in a letter he sent to President Obama reacting to the reports of detainees being transferred to the Thomson, Illinois prison facility:

"If your Administration brings Al Qaeda terrorists to Illinois, our state and the Chicago Metropolitan Area will become ground zero for Jihadist terrorist plots, recruitment and radicalization...As home to America's tallest building, we should not invite Al Qaeda to make Illinois its number one target...The United States spent more than $50 million to build the Guantanamo Bay detention facility to keep terrorists away from U.S. soil..Al Qaeda terrorists should stay where they cannot endanger American citizens."

Unfortunately, the Mark Kirk of this week disagrees strongly with the Mark Kirk of last month. In October, he actually supported the Obama administration's position that certain detainees should be transferred to American soil for prosecution:

Last week, we got another slap at reality when Kirk apparently forgot he "supports" the Republican position on keeping Guantanamo Bay open. The U.S. House voted this week on H.R. 2892, transferring prisoners out of Gitmo. A large majority of House Republicans opposed it, but a faction of them did not. In the Illinois delegation, for example, Peter Roskam strongly opposed the legislation. However, Mark Kirk voted allow the Obama administration to move foreign terrorist suspects from the Guantanamo Bay prison to the United States mainland.

Clearly, this sensible vote to strengthen America's national security in October has morphed into reckless and fear-based rhetoric as pressure on Kirk to acquiesce to the GOP's increasingly erratic base continues to possess his campaign.

The bottom line is Kirk was for bringing terrorists to America for prosecution before he was against it. And under his skewed logic from this week, the Mark Kirk of October seems to have voted to "invite Al Qaeda to make Illinois its number one target" and "endanger American citizens." Is this really who Illinois wants to send to the Senate?

Popular in the Community