Four questions about The Star’s endorsement of bringing Guantanamo terrorists to Kansas City (1/24, Opinion, “No ideal solution for Gitmo detainees”):
- If Obama’s premise for closing Guantanamo is to enhance U.S. prestige, won’t the Kansas City area become a substitute for the worldwide anger that necessitates closing Guantanamo? Why will they love Kansas City more?
- If one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter, is The Star in favor of the Kansas City area becoming an international mass protest site? International travel to KCI is a breeze compared with getting to Castro’s Cuba.
- Obama has suspended the military commissions trying the Guantanamo terrorists. What is The Star’s position on the magnitude of the security, logistical and transportation challenges required to give Guantanamo terrorists their day in Kansas City civilian courts? Would those challenges be equivalent to establishing metro area light rail?
- The news article “Could Fort Leavenworth become the new Gitmo?” (1/23, A-1) quoted only Republican politicians on this critical metro area issue. The Democratic politicians with affected citizens (Sebelius, Cleaver, Moore, Funkhouser, McCaskill, Nixon) were amazingly mute. Did The Star forget to interview them? Did they have nothing newsworthy to say? Just wondering.