http://statenews.com. More than 200 of the most dangerous people in the world could be moving to Michigan, possibly for the rest of their lives. U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Menominee, sent a letter to President Barack Obama offering to house the detainees from Guantanamo Bay in Manistique, Mich. If Obama were to approve the site, the prisoners would move into a prison that has been closed since 2007, far from any major cities in the state. en-us Gryphon 2.2.3b-tsn (woodward)/Foundry5 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:04:19 -0400 webmaster@statenews.com http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40452 “Residents are probably more likely to see Big Foot than they are to see an escaped suspect.” Great job, State News. Make light of national security. Obama is closing down an EFFECTIVE prison in Guantanamo Bay to house them in an old prison in northern Michigan. The only thing you can do when people are concerned with safety: equate it to big foot. Big Foot does not exist. The chance of prisoners escaping does exist. When concern is raised over this, your response is trivial at best. Sun, 07 Jun 2009 22:38:37 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40452 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40456 I say we set up some variation on Alcatraz underneath the Mackinac Bridge and call it good. Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:08:26 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40456 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40466 Obama- We probably shouldn’t house any criminals here in Michigan then, since they might escape. Serial rapists, serial killers etc. are all housed here and in other states and all pose at least as great of a risk as an escaped terrorist. How about Timothy McVeigh, he’s a terrorist? I guess we better ship him off to Gitmo. Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:27:33 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40466 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40469 WHAT? “According to a March 25 article in The Washington Post, the Obama administration decided to end the use of the phrase “global war on terror” likely because of the connotations it gained after former President George W. Bush began using it to describe U.S. military initiatives abroad.” ARE YOU KIDDING ME? That is exactly what we are facing a GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR! But please let’s NOT hurt anyone’s feelings, NO let’s do the OBAMA FEEL GOOD DANCE. How crazy is this? Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:36:43 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40469 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40471 Why on earth would we want to bring detainees from Guantanamo Bay to Manistique, Mich??? How DUMB is that. They are safest where they already are and they will pose a threat to the US. bringing them here. What are we thinking, WE AREN’T!!!! Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:43:16 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40471 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40473 Moving to another part of the paper, where I meant to put my blog. Well at least my grammar is getting better, knock on wood. Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:46:40 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40473 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40498 “More than 200 of the most dangerous people in the world” when Bush was prez these people were mostly innocent people and they deserved constitutional rights and speedy trails in the U.S. Now that Obama has to deal with them they are “the most dangerous people in the world.” What a bunch of crap! Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:40:22 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40498 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40513 Grandma- Well, Bush did release around 500 individuals from Guantanamo, so even they recognized that there were a lot of innocent people there or, at the very least, people they could not prove were guilty of a crime. You are right in the sense that Obama has continued many of the practices that Buch started. Obama has continued the military tribunals and has admitted that there are some individuals who are too dangerous to be released, but against whom we don’t have enough evidence to convict of a crime. He seems intent on keeping them in custody. So there is certainly some hypocrisy, but it’s hypocrisy that should make you happy because it keeps us safe. Mon, 08 Jun 2009 14:02:22 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40513 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40524 Has anyone questioned the residents of Manistique about whether or not they think that the potential jobs are worth the risks of this proposition? It is easy for people living in the Lower Peninsula to offer up the “wilderness” of the U.P. as a place to hold terrorists, but what about the people who already call it home. It is also crucial to note that most cities in the Upper Peninsula depend on tourism for revenue and I personally would not wish to waste a vacation visiting the “new Gitmo” site. My hometown is about 2 hours away from Manistique, MI and this proposal should be considered by residents of the area, not just politicians sitting comfortably far away in Lansing. Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:44:50 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40524 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40657 This is why we still need alcatraz. Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:43:43 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40657 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40661 If I lived in Manistique, Mich I wouldn’t be very happy, would you? Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:04:19 -0400 http://statenews.com./index.php/comment/view/40661