Obama Pledges To Renew Efforts To Close Guantanamo

[News_Editor]

WASHINGTON, D.C. (BNO NEWS) -- U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday pledged to renew efforts to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, saying he will reengage with Congress to overcome obstacles to shutting the controversial facility where 100 inmates are now participating in a growing hunger strike.

Responding to a reporter's question during a news conference at the White House, Obama said the detention facility in Cuba is not necessary to keep Americans safe. "When I was campaigning in 2007 and 2008, and when I was elected in 2008, I said we need to close Guantanamo," he said. "I continue to believe that we've got to close Guantanamo."

The prison was opened in 2002 in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks and remains open despite Obama ordering its closure within 12 months on January 22, 2009. A total of 166 people remain imprisoned more than four years later, and only a handful of them are facing charges.

"The notion that we're going to continue to keep over a hundred individuals in a no-man's land in perpetuity, even at a time when we've wound down the war in Iraq, we're winding down the war in Afghanistan, we're having success defeating al-Qaeda's core, ... the idea that we would still maintain forever a group of individuals who have not been tried, that is contrary to who we are, it is contrary to our interests, and it needs to stop," the U.S. leader said.

"Congress determined that they would not let us close it," he added. Obama previously pointed to congressional restrictions on the transfer of prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay as an obstacle to close the prison, but observers note that Obama himself has repeatedly signed such restrictions into law.

During Tuesday's press conference, however, Obama pledged to renew his efforts to close the facility in the near future. "I've asked my team to review everything that's currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively," he said. "And I'm going to reengage with Congress to try to make the case that this is not something that's in the best interest of the American people. And it's not sustainable."

The pledge comes as 100 inmates are now participating in a growing hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay, resulting in the military force feeding at least 21 of them, which is contrary to international standards. Around 40 additional U.S. Navy medical personnel were sent to Guantanamo Bay last week to help handle the crisis, which is now entering its 12th week.

"I don't want these individuals to die," Obama said on Tuesday, referring to the hunger strike. "Obviously, the Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can."

Different from the situation at Guantanamo, Obama noted that a number of terrorism suspects have been tried in recent years and are now serving time in maximum security prisons around the country. "Justice has been served. It's been done in a way that's consistent with our Constitution, consistent with due process, consistent with rule of law, consistent with our traditions," he said.

But Obama added that he understood why the U.S. government thought there was a need for a special facility like Guantanamo Bay in the wake of the 2001 terrorist attacks, in which nineteen al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four passenger planes before crashing two of them into the World Trade Center in New York and another into the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. Nearly 3,000 people were killed in the attacks.

"I understand that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, with the traumas that had taken place, why, for a lot of Americans, the notion was somehow that we had to create a special facility like Guantanamo and we couldn't handle this in a normal, conventional fashion," Obama said. "I understand that reaction. But we're now over a decade out. We should be wiser. We should have more experience in how we prosecute terrorists."

Laura Pitter, counterterrorism advisor at Human Rights Watch, called on Obama to move swiftly to fulfill his new promises to close Guantanamo Bay. "President Obama's call to end indefinite detention at Guantanamo is encouraging after his long silence on the issue," she said. "Though he blamed Congress for the problems at Guantanamo, there are actions he could have taken and can still take now to end indefinite detention there."

(Copyright 2013 by BNO News B.V. All rights reserved. Info: [email protected].)

[allalong]

Of course it should be closed.Prosecute alleged criminals in a federal court, The USA own version of the old "Soviet Gulag". Problem is there is a majority in congress who actually believe holding these alleged criminals, protects their country. What a great recruiting image for groups who want to recruit young potential terrorists. If only a few members of Congress had a brain!!!

[Sing_Sling]

^ I'm glad you feel so strongly about it four times.

Agreed, though . . . if they haven't been found guilty by now then let them go and pay up big time. If they have and as much info as possible has been milked as possible . . . place them in jail, military or civilian but this anachronism from a bygone era needs to be shut . . . one of the unfortunately many Obama disappointments

[yourauntbob]

Let them all starve, then close it down

[bri1guy]

President Barack Obama ordered the closing of the Guantanamo detention centre when he took office in 2009.

The politicians cited security concerns, saying the presence of the detainees would encourage terror attacks in the states or cities where they were being held.

Senator Feinstein commissioned a study in 2008 to find out where the detainees could be held, if the White House was able to move ahead with Guantanamo's closure.

They were thinking of Illinois or Michigan for the "Worst of the Worst" inmates of the world, but don't think they even have a good plan yet?

[chuckd]

The problem was that none of the states were willing to accept them. I do believe the federal government was thinking about buying some Illinois prison but that deal fell through. In other words, there was no room at the inn.

This was, very simply put, just another ill thought out campaign promise made by a politician running for office.

When the politician became the President, reality set in.

[Wat dee]

Just imagine being held there illegally,tortured if you are innocent.

[attento]

President Barack Obama ordered the closing of the Guantanamo detention centre when he took office in 2009.

The politicians cited security concerns, saying the presence of the detainees would encourage terror attacks in the states or cities where they were being held.

Senator Feinstein commissioned a study in 2008 to find out where the detainees could be held, if the White House was able to move ahead with Guantanamo's closure.

They were thinking of Illinois or Michigan for the "Worst of the Worst" inmates of the world, but don't think they even have a good plan yet?

They may or may not be the "Worst of the Worst". Only a fair trial would demonstrate that. Would the citizens of Michigan or Illinois remain unmoved if some of their number were detained without recourse to the Law? Laws are written to protect both the good and the bad amongst us. This will be the most intractable problem that the President has to resolve during his term.

Edited May 1, 2013 by attento

[Publicus]

Human Rights Watch is wrongheadedly putting too much focus and heat on Prez Obama when he's the guy who all along has wanted to close the place. Prez Obama and Human Rights Watch are on the same side in this one. HRW and the far left of the Democratic party need to get their heads screwed on straight.

The Congress is keeping the place open, not Prez Obama. HRW and other interested groups and citizens need to put their focus on the derelicts who occupy soft seats in Congress. They need, frankly, to put the arm to the Congress, smack 'em between the eyes with a 2 x 4.

Additionally, the DoDefense needs to make a full public disclosure report on each of the present detainees, which doesn't have to be done by naming each one specifically. Just a report on each detainee that provides all the information, factual and/or suspicions, as to why each continues to be held at Gitmo - say, Detainee Number 1 etc and his situation and status from the moment of detention to the present. This is one thing Prez Obama can and should order to be done. I want to know who exactly each of the detainees is. I want and need to know who they all are.

At this point in time, ten years out as the president noted, the presumptive burden to justify continuing to hold each and every one of these guys is on the U.S. government. Dick Cheney, aka Darth Vader, is long gone from the vice presidency. The executive branch is free to pursue this, and if it doesn't push hard on this one, it won't get done.

Then HRW and all the interested groups of civil society and we individually can get a more clear knowledge and understanding of exactly who the detainees are, what the government thinks it's doing continuing to hold them and why. The public at this point needs a full disclosure of the detainees. The secrecy must end now as the first step towards dealing effectively with this serious stain on the moral authority of the United States.

If they're a 19 year old foreign Dzhokhar try him; if the government can't charge a detainee, send him home - the government already knows who they are.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Publicus

[Credo]

Just imagine being held there illegally,tortured if you are innocent.

I doubt torture feels any better to the guilty than it does to the innocent.

Personally, I think they should just push them out the gate and let the Cuban's deal with them. Sort of like Castro did with the Mariel Boat lift.

[Publicus]

Just imagine being held there illegally,tortured if you are innocent.

I doubt torture feels any better to the guilty than it does to the innocent.

Personally, I think they should just push them out the gate and let the Cuban's deal with them. Sort of like Castro did with the Mariel Boat lift.

It's a bit diabolical but I kind of like it.

[chuckd]

Unfortunately in many cases, their own country will not let them back in and nobody else will take them. Those remaining are the hard core that are difficult to hand off to just anybody. The recidivism rate among those released has not been particularly good.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recidivism rises among released Guantanamo detainees

By Mark Hosenball

Mon Mar 5, 2012 7:15pm EST

(Reuters) - The proportion of militants released from detention at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay who subsequently were believed to have returned to the battlefield rose slightly over the last year, according to official figures released on Monday.

In a summary report, the office of the Director of National Intelligence said that 27.9 percent of the 599 former detainees released from Guantanamo were either confirmed or suspected of later engaging in militant activity.

The figures represent a 2.9 percent rise over a 25 percent aggregate recidivism rate reported by the intelligence czar's office in December 2010.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/06/us-usa-guantanamo-recidivism-idUSTRE82501120120306

[Credo]

In places that are plagued with conflict, there is a big problem with people involved in military action. They really aren't well equipped for dealing with civil society. They have few, if any marketable skills. I mean being a graduate of an Al Queda training camp in Afghanistan really doesn't qualify you for much except working for a competing terrorist organization or perhaps a security guard at the local mall.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Credo

[attento]

In places that are plagued with conflict, there is a big problem with people involved in military action. They really aren't well equipped for dealing with civil society. They have few, if any marketable skills. I mean being a graduate of an Al Queda training camp in Afghanistan really doesn't qualify you for much except working for a competing terrorist organization or perhaps a security guard at the local mall.

Yes, they can now go to Syria, where the USA and others are lining up to give them weapons to fight against the elected regime.

[Steely Dan]

I would have thought the Boston marathon attack would act as a reminder that sometimes you are dealing with people who are to all intents enemy combatants, even if they have managed to obtain citizenship for a land they hate. In such cases a Guantanamo type detention center is indeed an option. As for the hunger strike, this is good reason not to close the place down, to do so gives the impression that similar tactics will work in future.

As for that old canard Guantanamo creates radicals I would suggest anyone who believes this is being played for fools. Where was Guantanamo when 9/11 happened? What Islamic Countries were being occupied by U.S troops pre 9/11 coming to think of it?

[chuckd]

Syria and the Middle East are on fire, the dollar is in the dumps, unemployment is sky high and the big news from this administration is closing Guantanamo.

What an absolutely ridiculous turn of events.

Edited May 1, 2013 by chuckd

[NeverSure]

President Barack Obama ordered the closing of the Guantanamo detention centre when he took office in 2009.

The politicians cited security concerns, saying the presence of the detainees would encourage terror attacks in the states or cities where they were being held.

Senator Feinstein commissioned a study in 2008 to find out where the detainees could be held, if the White House was able to move ahead with Guantanamo's closure.

They were thinking of Illinois or Michigan for the "Worst of the Worst" inmates of the world, but don't think they even have a good plan yet?

They may or may not be the "Worst of the Worst". Only a fair trial would demonstrate that. Would the citizens of Michigan or Illinois remain unmoved if some of their number were detained without recourse to the Law? Laws are written to protect both the good and the bad amongst us. This will be the most intractable problem that the President has to resolve during his term.

This is international law about prisoners of war. The US declared war if some forget. Prisoners of war who are captured outside of your home country don't get the rights that citizens get for committing crimes on native soil. They are detained because they are seen as a danger, and they have no US constitutional rights.

If they are brought onto US soil everything changes. Different laws begin to apply and they get rights they don't deserve and wouldn't get from any country at war.

If they are such misunderstood nice guys, why not just turn them loose? Oh that's right. Their own countries don't want them back.

I would like to know, since the US is a republic of states, just which state will accept them within its borders? That blew up the last time it was seriously discussed. The District of Washington DC isn't a state and is wholly federal.

They can therefore house them in the White House along with the rest of the criminals there.

[jombom]

So we have to assume the US constitution counts for nothing, and the US is operating a concentration camp.

[jbrain]

The problem was that none of the states were willing to accept them. I do believe the federal government was thinking about buying some Illinois prison but that deal fell through. In other words, there was no room at the inn.

This was, very simply put, just another ill thought out campaign promise made by a politician running for office.

When the politician became the President, reality set in.

Ever considered that the reason for his failure to keep his election promise is because he get's too much opposition from the political party who introduced the prison.

[jbrain]

Unfortunately in many cases, their own country will not let them back in

With their own country I assume you mean the country from which they carry a passport, not the country they are actually born.Why not send them back to their islamic roots, where they actually belong ?

Edited May 1, 2013 by jbrain

[Potosi]

There is no country by the name 'Islamic roots'.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Potosi

[jbrain]

There is no country by the name 'Islamic roots'.

Really ? I'm sure they have roots somewhere, which isn't the country from which they hold a passport, but a country where the general religion is Islam.

[thaicbr]

Ship them over to the war zones that many of them like so much and get them mine clearing... in hob nail boots.

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

[Wat dee]

Just imagine being held there illegally,tortured if you are innocent.

I doubt torture feels any better to the guilty than it does to the innocent.

Personally, I think they should just push them out the gate and let the Cuban's deal with them. Sort of like Castro did with the Mariel Boat lift.

It's a bit diabolical but I kind of like it.

I hope both of you get bit of karma ...

[Sing_Sling]

President Barack Obama ordered the closing of the Guantanamo detention centre when he took office in 2009.

The politicians cited security concerns, saying the presence of the detainees would encourage terror attacks in the states or cities where they were being held.

Senator Feinstein commissioned a study in 2008 to find out where the detainees could be held, if the White House was able to move ahead with Guantanamo's closure.

They were thinking of Illinois or Michigan for the "Worst of the Worst" inmates of the world, but don't think they even have a good plan yet?

They may or may not be the "Worst of the Worst". Only a fair trial would demonstrate that. Would the citizens of Michigan or Illinois remain unmoved if some of their number were detained without recourse to the Law? Laws are written to protect both the good and the bad amongst us. This will be the most intractable problem that the President has to resolve during his term.

This is international law about prisoners of war. The US declared war if some forget. Prisoners of war who are captured outside of your home country don't get the rights that citizens get for committing crimes on native soil. They are detained because they are seen as a danger, and they have no US constitutional rights.

If they are brought onto US soil everything changes. Different laws begin to apply and they get rights they don't deserve and wouldn't get from any country at war.

If they are such misunderstood nice guys, why not just turn them loose? Oh that's right. Their own countries don't want them back.

I would like to know, since the US is a republic of states, just which state will accept them within its borders? That blew up the last time it was seriously discussed. The District of Washington DC isn't a state and is wholly federal.

They can therefore house them in the White House along with the rest of the criminals there.

Your petty politicking is quite boring vis-a-vis the White House, irrespective of one's political views.

To a more interesting point, though . . . you state:

"The US declared war if some forget"

I do forget . . . Did the US declare war on Afghanistan? Did the US declare war on Iraq?

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted as well as replies.

Please stay on topic.

[geriatrickid]

Syria and the Middle East are on fire, the dollar is in the dumps, unemployment is sky high and the big news from this administration is closing Guantanamo.

What an absolutely ridiculous turn of events.

I'd rather they saved the hundreds of millions of $$ on that than furloughing air traffic controllers, border agents etc. Gitmo is a stain on the US character.

[chuckd]

The problem was that none of the states were willing to accept them. I do believe the federal government was thinking about buying some Illinois prison but that deal fell through. In other words, there was no room at the inn.

This was, very simply put, just another ill thought out campaign promise made by a politician running for office.

When the politician became the President, reality set in.

Ever considered that the reason for his failure to keep his election promise is because he get's too much opposition from the political party who introduced the prison.

The only little problem with your scenario is for the first two years of his presidency, he enjoyed a Democratically controlled House of Representatives AND Senate.

The Republicans could have done nothing during his first two years. All he had to do was issue an Executive Order and move assets around.

Bringing it up now is simply smoke screen from the administration to deflect interest from chemical weapons being used in Libya, an intensifying Benghazi investigation, more than 21 million Americans still out of work and the other failures of his agenda.

[thaicbr]

One of the reasons 21million Americans are out of work is that Americans (and most others) want products at the cheapest prices. Hell, America has had some of the cheapest products for decades. Whether that be gas or electronics.

So the factories get built in China. The services get outsourced to India or the Philippines.

The sooner we all wake up to this fact the better.

There are still many specialist companies in the US but they tend to be expensive and are not volume manufacturer's.

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

Edited May 2, 2013 by craigt3365
messed up quotes

[Scott]

The thread is about closing Guantanamo. Stay on topic, please.