December 19, 2008
CLOSING GUANTANAMO.... Shortly after the election, Barack Obama spoke to "60 Minutes," and explained, "I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that." Dick Cheney told Rush Limbaugh this week that he doesn't really believe the next White House will change the policy: "I think they'll discover that trying to close it is a very hard proposition."
Perhaps, but Obama appears intent on doing it anyway.
This week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates endorsed Obama's position, saying the challenges Cheney sees are "solvable," and adding that the closing of the detention facility "will be a high priority for the new administration."
What's more, the Pentagon is moving forward accordingly.
The Defense Department is drawing up plans to close the Guantanamo Bay military prison in anticipation that one of President-elect Barack Obama's first acts will be ordering the closure of the detention center associated with the abuse of terror suspects.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates "has asked his team for a proposal on how to shut (the detention center) down, what would be required specifically to close it and move the detainees from that facility while at the same time, of course, ensuring that we protect the American people from some dangerous characters," Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters on Thursday.
The prison, built to hold suspected terrorists after the 2001 U.S.-led military intervention in Afghanistan, now houses about 250 detainees, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and others accused in connection with the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Obama, who's asked Gates to stay on as his defense secretary, has said that he wants to close the prison within two years of taking office on Jan. 20. Gates also has spoken publicly about the need to close the facility.
"If this is one of the president-elect's first orders of business, the secretary wants to be prepared to help him as soon as possible," Morrell said. "The request (for a closure plan) has been made, his team is working on it so that he can be prepared to assist the president-elect should he wish to address this very early in his tenure."
The Washington Post added, "Any plan will probably address whether to also abolish the military commission system and, if so, what kind of legal framework can be substituted to put detainees on trial."
Sounds like progress, and Cheney's skepticism notwithstanding, like a commitment Obama is going to keep.
—Steve Benen 8:45 AM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (19)
Too bad they're going to close it before collecting a few more prisoners. Namely, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Gonzales. It would have been fun to see how these chicken hawk traitors and torturers would have enjoyed the varied and delicious menu and the camaraderie of their fellow felons. What fun...
Posted by: Stevio on December 19, 2008 at 8:49 AM | PERMALINK
I can not wait for this day. I hope he goes there personally to have some kind of reconciliation ceremony with the prisoners there. Footage of a wrecking ball knocking it down would be great as well. Sometimes political theater is a good thing.
Posted by: The Answer Is Green on December 19, 2008 at 8:57 AM | PERMALINK
Cheney's skepticism notwithstanding,
Sounded more like a threat to me.
Posted by: martin on December 19, 2008 at 9:15 AM | PERMALINK
"...what kind of legal system can be used..."
How about the one we had for 225 years before the Bush criminals took over??
Posted by: CN on December 19, 2008 at 9:32 AM | PERMALINK
Interestingly, Gates is drawing up plans even before Cheney walks out the front door. Talk about being given the finger.
Posted by: Carol on December 19, 2008 at 9:51 AM | PERMALINK
Predictions: Under Obama we'll still torture. We'll still rendition. We'll still have secret prison sites. We'll still circumvent Constitutional protections of due process, privacy, access to private, impartial legal representation. We'll still shoot first and ask questions later. We'll still be lied to about the nature and actual severity of threats from various bad actors (WMDs anyone?). All the same hair-on-fire, chicken little littany, lie abetted hysteria used by Bushco will continue, albeit wrapped in some sort of "We're different and better than them" packaging.
Posted by: steve duncan on December 19, 2008 at 9:55 AM | PERMALINK
Prediction-assholes like steve duncan will always see the negative and bad in people no matter what.
Posted by: Gandaalf on December 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM | PERMALINK
Wait, wait -- are you trying to tell me that Dick Cheney might be WRONG about something?
Seriously??
Posted by: chas_m on December 19, 2008 at 10:06 AM | PERMALINK
steve duncan - do you also predict the media will go along? Or are you arguing that the behavior is OK as long as you're not hypocritical?
Posted by: Danp on December 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK
Prediction-assholes like steve duncan will always see the negative and bad in people no matter what.
Posted by: Gandaalf on December 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Guilty as charged. OK, I'll play the glass half-full game. Here Goes: Dick Cheney was probably nice to his mother. There, that makes everything else he's done all better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
steve duncan - do you also predict the media will go along? Or are you arguing that the behavior is OK as long as you're not hypocritical?
Posted by: Danp on December 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Go along? Since when does it matter WTF the media have to say (or not say) about government misconduct? Some in the media have been reporting on secret prisons, torture, abuse of the Constitution and other Bushco crimes, all to mostly no avail. Do you think Obama is going to push stringing up Bush and Cheney for torturing and murdering tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis and Afghans? Hardly. The media don't have a goddmaned thing to do with either preventing executive branch crimes or helping stop their commission in the future. Obama, like Bush, will do whatever he damn well pleases. That includes sweeping the last 8 years under the rug like so many dried, dusty dog turds on a skid row hovel floor. It's all about "unity" and "moving forward" now. Hence gaybasher Rick Warren preaching at the inauguration. Maybe we should have David Duke speak on the floor of the House on MLK Day. You know, in the spirit of inclusion. Maybe Obama is a political genius. I still wouldn't invite the guy that was fucking my wife before she was my "ex" to the Christmas party. Sometimes inclusion has its limits.
Posted by: steve duncan on December 19, 2008 at 10:35 AM | PERMALINK
When the bad apples of the Bush/Chaney regime are purged, we will be better able to judge Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Posted by: captain dan on December 19, 2008 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK
steve duncan - Sorry I offended you, but I disagree that the media has no role in this. I would argue they had a lot to do with canceling the Dubai ports deal, for example. Also, Bush closed the secret prisons only after WaPo exposed them. They created an atmosphere where the Clinton impeachment was possible. They decided Watergate was a scandal, while the US Attorney scandal was minimized. Yes, there were some who exposed abuse of the Constitution, but far too few - certainly far less than Obama's "bitter" comment or Jeramaiah Wright. And I do think that any Dem (especially Obama) will be held to a far higher standard, than was Bush. Even if Obama were inclined to continue Bush policies, he wouldn't be able to, precisely because of the media.
Posted by: Danp on December 19, 2008 at 10:57 AM | PERMALINK
CN posted: "...what kind of legal system can be used..."
How about the one we had for 225 years before the Bush criminals took over??
I completely agree. Terrorists are criminals. They conspire to commit illegal acts like drug trafficing and murder. The fact that many of their crimes are on a larger scale does not change that fact.
If we suspect someone of plotting or committing crimes, then we should arrest them, present them with specific charges, allow them legal cousel and try them in a reasonable amount of time. THAT is how it is supposed to work. Sure, some will win their cases, but many will not...and in either case we will prove the moral superiority of our system.
Holding people indefinitely without charge or access to legal counsel, all while torturing them, is grossly unethical and violates the letter and spirit of our legal system. We cannot preserve rights by eliminating rights.
Posted by: independent thinker on December 19, 2008 at 11:13 AM | PERMALINK
Cheney was just trying to change reality by waving his wand under Limbaugh's nose. Hey, it works for Rush.
Posted by: Bob M on December 19, 2008 at 11:18 AM | PERMALINK
Look for Obama to bury the worst of them at Supermax, where they will never see the sun again.
Posted by: DF on December 19, 2008 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK
Great- and what do we do with the murderous Muslim slime when their home countries will no longer take them? The only ones who should be released are those who will go to those Muslim countries which will treat them in the nice, Muslim tradition of retribution.
Posted by: fred t on December 19, 2008 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK
The bushies are enamored with themselves and their policies. They see nothing wrong with the end justifying the means and totally lack imagination to provide alternative solutions that might actually accomplish what they set out to do. Instead we have endless wars and a bankrupt economy due directly to their hubris and incompetence.
Posted by: CDW on December 19, 2008 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK
After all Bush & Cheney have done and Dick says we can't close a military base. Bizarre!
Posted by: MarkH on December 19, 2008 at 5:14 PM | PERMALINK
Interestingly, Gates is drawing up plans even before Cheney walks out the front door. Talk about being given the finger.
There's one advantage to asking Gates to stay in Obama's administration. *Gates is ALREADY working for Obama.* Really, if Bush tells him to do one thing, and Obama tells him something else, who's he going to listen to? The guy who's leaving in a month, or the guy who will be there for four years after that?
Posted by: Decnavda on December 19, 2008 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK