Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell assured reporters yesterday, "I see nothing to indicate that that date" — that is, the date to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, set by President Obama in a January executive order by year’s end — "is at all in jeopardy." OK. The Democratic-controlled Congress removed all money for the closure of Guantanamo from the war supplemental, demanding that the White House give them some kind of plan for what’s going to happen to the remaining 240 detainees — military commissions? Civilian courts? Hybrid courts? — rather than fund the closure while the White House deliberates. Harry Reid said they’d revisit the funding when they have the plan, but he added, "We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States, and I speak for a majority of the Senate." Conservative framing: accepted.
Over the last couple of weeks, Democratic Hill staffers have expressed astonishment, on background, about how little the White House has coordinated with them on the Guantanamo issue, and feel it slipping out of their control. The National Security Network has put out messaging from former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke upbraiding Republicans for claiming President Obama is just going to throw the gates to the prison open and suddenly you’ll see Khalid Shaikh Mohammed shopping for fertilizer at the Dubuque Home Depot. But that message comes within the vacuum of White House-Hill communications. And looking at the available polling on Guantanamo, it seems fair to summarize that the public is not particularly convinced on the virtues of closing the facility.
But the Democrats are acting with undue fear of being demagogued. While the public isn’t sold on closing Guantanamo, it isn’t hostile to the idea either: most polls show the generic question of shutting the facility down coming about even. And a generic Democrat has, for the first time in Democracy Corps’ polling history, as much public trust on national security as a generic Republican. Cautiousness is one thing, and the lack of communication is a real problem for White House-Hill relations. But it’s not as if the Democrats come to this issue with a particular disadvantage.
Crossposted to The Streak.
Login Here




40 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
Thanks Spencer
“…it’s not as if the Democrats come to this issue with a particular disadvantage.”
Other than years of ’spineless’ complicity (and fears of being demagogued)?
(Do the d’s always walk around wringing their chubby little hands and moaning, “Oh dear! Oh dear, whatever shall we do?” ?)
Haven’t they a clue?
Thanks, Spencer, for covering this.
It is heartening to hear that the public, today, trusts the dems just as much as they trust the repubs on the issue of ‘national security’. How much are the repubs trusted on ‘national security’ these days? A whole lot?
Obama just needs to communicate that he plans to hold people beyond the reach of habeas corpus and the Constitution at Bagram AFB rather than Guantanamo, that would clear up this little messaging problem!
I would like to ask Harry Reid and all the rest: What exactly is the problem with transferring prisoners from Gitmo to US facilities?
Are people really afraid that these detainees will break out of prison and crash airplanes into their houses? I mean, is that really it? Because seriously, that’s all I can come up with.
Whiny chicken-shit bitches!
Maybe Obama was never serious about shutting it down, otherwise he would not have kept Gates on.
Why do Republicans hate our military? Why are they publicly assailing the competence of America’s men and women in uniform? Why are Republicans defaming the servicemen and women at Leavenworth? When will they go to Leavenworth and apologize for slandering our troops?
Um…er…and why the flip didn’t Team Obama pivot and counterattack days ago?
The counteraatacks are so obvious – is the White House just too distracted finding new ways to give trillions to banksters?
Well I see the rethugs have won AGAIN with all the fear mongering. And the dems fold like a cheap tent-AGAIN.
This is ridiculous.
One question-why does it cost $80M to move 240 prisoners?
Harry doesn’t even want any ‘terrorists” released in America.
Now, if ‘they’ are to be released, they are no longer “terrorists”, but simply human beings who may well have done nothing to deserve being locked up for five or more years.
Harry does not distinguish among them.
For Harry, once a “terrorist”, always a “terrorist”.
It is far more simple and therefore ‘easier’ for Harry (and the majority of the Senate, for whom Harry claims to speak) to think no further than that, apparently.
Who would want to have ‘these people’ going around saying unpleasant things about being tortured or abused, anyway? Out of sight, out of mind.
Works every time. Who could have imagined?
It’s an ongoing story Spencer; the Dem’s keep letting the Repugs frame issues.
My new talking point for wingers on Gitmo is that it’s too nice. So we really should hop to and process these guys for transfer to high security prisons, stat.
Yes, that involves actual legal process, but I don’t bother their beautiful minds with all that.
I think the word “released” in your comments need quotes also. Yeah, Harry Reid said something in regards to “releasing” “terrorists” in the US.
What? Who said anything about releasing anyone in the US? And I thought they were still legally considered “suspected” “terrorists” a/k/a detainees.
I know. Has anyone ever been to Soledad (charlie manson’s home). It’s a very godforsaken part of California.
No one outside of the prison related folk stays there long enough to throw a frisbee in their “backyard”.
It is not a problem in communications but leadership. This lack of leadership is coming not just from our “Yes, we can’t” President but Republican Majority leader Harry Reid.
I agree with DWBartoo. This talk of releasing terrorists on to the streets of America just repeats the looniest of Republican nutcase framing. Here’s a thought. If Harry Reid had ever done his job anytime in the last 8+ years, this issue (and many others) might have been dealt with years ago.
A reporter called Reid on his use of “release” saying these detainees were not going to be released, just transferred somewhere. Reid said in order to be moved they had to be “released”.
Stupid moron.
got that right Hugh.
…not sure I’d wish Pelican Bay on anybody.. even ‘rrerists
May I suggest Alaska as an alternative. Just because the screaching from Governor Bible Spice would be priceless, and its one step removed from the Lower 48, which should bring comfort to some paranoid voters. Are there any Federal facilities there?
wow i didn’t even know there were two parties
2 parties? Really????
Who knew???
oh now, those verge on Forbidden Thoughts in Democratic Party online outreach forums!
it is important to accept the right wing framing that there are huge, drastic, extreme differences between the parties, that they are locked in intense combat over the fate of the country! so much is at stake! Just listen to their leaders like Rove and Limbaugh!
or, you could listen to some of their other, better educated leaders like Harvard Law Professor and former Bush OLC lawyer Jack Goldsmith who says:
eech! uncomfortable implications – close the mind to them! avoid old Glenn Greenwalds site – he is so discomfiting.
so much more comforting, the right wing framework of stirring partisan conflict, with Progressives clearly and always on the side of Justice!
Obama has been incorrect on the issue of Gitmo from the get-go. This is an unconventional war against Islamic jihadists. You need a place to acquire intelligence in a place unsullied by the ACLU and their ilk so the US can know who is going to hit us. I predict the “date” will come and go as Obama figures out that keeping Gitmo open is the most cost effective way of housing the detainees until the War is won.
Not much chance to acquire intelligence about Islamic jihadists from an isolated camp in Cuba, is there?
Best place…close to home without some being legal US territory. And islands are hard to escape from…See Napolean, etc….
Is Cuba rife with Islamic jihadists ill-advisedly island-hopping?
Just so, dosido! There is no clear knowledge that all of these people are guilty of anything! Investigations are imperative!
I think we’re receiving coordinated distraction activity. I wonder why. I don’t believe it’s fear of prisoners that is driving this at all. Perhaps withholding of funds will force increased activity to resolve the matter.
My hope would be that the prisoners who are not found guilty of being terrorists would be sent directly home rather than stateside. If these folks are not P.O.W., then their cases should be heard in civilian courts. Send the court to Cuba if necessary. If there isn’t enough evidence to confirm terrorist activity, send them home. If they’re too damaged from their experiences of the last years, then we are responsible for redress and amends.
I also wonder how safe these people would be in U.S. prisons? They might not survive the experience.
Hope this is snark because if it is not, you need to get your meds changed because you are hallucinating. The world is not, I repeat, not an episode of 24.
Yet sending some of them “home’ might well be a death sentence, consider the Chinese …
And what do we do by way of ‘compensating’ those who were never a threat, but whom we have abused?
My guess is that some judge will simply say that we can hold anybody the prez says is ‘bad’ … forever.
I don’t gamble, except on what I know to be a sure thing.
I’m willing to bet on this one though, at least in the ’short term’ …
DW
Sadly true, DW. Sounds like care centers, supervised living if needed, and long-term health care at minimum. We broke him, we owe him.
I have this sense of an attitude hanging in our decision-making atmosphere that some of us think we have a “horse with a broken leg” to be dealt with.
I don’t know what these individuals would consider proper compensation. If they’re still capable of thinking and speaking, someone really should ask them.
You are correct that judges seem to be prone to allowing leaders to do whatever they like, but I don’t think that’s legal here either, is it?
Problem solving opportunity, folks.
“… I don’t think that’s legal here …”
That is precisely what we are going to find out, carolbeth, without ‘accountability’ leaders WILL do whatever THEY wish …
I would say that the rule of law is, clearly, on the ‘line’ …
And I suspect we shall, rather soon, come to realize that the powerful have a very different ‘relationship’ to the ‘law’, and its consequence, than the rest of us.
I hope, however audaciously, that I a wrong.
I have many hopes of being totally wrong in my ‘expectations’, these days …
DW
The world IS 24. And Gibbs announcement that the decision to close was “hasty” (and may (probably will) be reversed) is a recognition of that fact. Sure send the Uighers home.. I think sending a bunch of Muslim terrorists to China would be wonderful..That would make Gitmo look like a picnic.
At some point we need to come to the conclusion that it’s a congress party and the only difference is they compete with each other for who gets to win that given session election cycle. Most of the time, I see no difference other than they ‘pretend’ they don’t like Republicans (just have lunch/dinner/attened same $ raising functions) but really both appeal to the same ‘base’ (Wall street, Banks, megacorps). It’s great Obama got elected, threw the angry masses a few bones and then went back to doing what every politician does in this country does, screwing over the citizens at the expense of the country for short term greed.
sounds like your world is Get Smart, which is a movie, shot on film, shown in theaters, and therefore even more real than Jack Bauer’s 24, which, while shot on film, is merely broadcast on TV.
I wonder why the ’terrists on 24 never take out any of the camera crews filming the series, when Jack Bauer isn’t looking. Have you ever wondered that, DLoerke? Then they could sell the expensive filmmaking equipment on Craigslist to fund their evil plans!
Get Smart is a movie?
yep, a movie, from last year.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0425061/
I did not think DLoerke would be old enough to know about the TV show, which was way better.
Your guess about some judge saying the prez could hold someone forever was right. Judge Bates issued such a decision today. He narrowed the grounds for being able to hold detainees. He said it should not be for people who merely ’supported’ those who acted against the US but for those who actually did things that can be proven.
The President is to give a speech tomorrow on the subject of Gitmo, torture, the photos and national security.
So, are we being held to a rule that it is better to indefinitely detain a thousand innocent captives that to have one guilty released and return to ‘the battlefield.?’ This is the theme the Republicans have pushed from the git-go and now Harry Reid and other Dems are repeating. Senator Webb was saying something similar last Sunday about not being able to close Gitmo and implying it was politically impossible to bring any of the detainees to stateside for trials or anything else. He was mistaken about the Uighers and was generally weak on the subject. He either did not know the facts or were deliberately ignoring them. He lost my respect. I thought he was better than that.
It seems that no Congress person who wants to get re-elected is brave enough to favor or vote for having any of the detainees brought to their districts. They seem to be looking at it as political suicide. The MSM is playing it up and whipping up hysteria on the topic. It does not matter that some of the detainees have no evidence against them even after seven long years. This just shows the same lack of moral fiber in the Congress, the media and the public as a whole that got us into this mess in the first place. The lessons have not yet been learned and cowardice still has moral courage trumped. Someone should write a book: Profiles in Cowardice.
I don’t think that you properly understand Bates’ ruling.
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2008cv1236-116
Wow. America has become disgusting. You are sliding into oblivion and it’s pretty ugly to watch. A civilised country in which supposedly mainstream, “centrist” journalists cheerlead for torture and the indefinite definition of peasants whose only crime was to piss a neighbour off? And both main parties are all for it? See how “civilised” just doesn’t fit?
Here’s the article from HuffPost about the Bates’ ruling.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..05752.html
Perhaps you could summarize the ruling more accurately. What will be the practical effects of the ruling?
President Obama could shut down Gitmo without asking the current Congress for anything…because previous rubber-stamp Republican Congresses have already done the heavy lifting.
For instance, remember the $385 million allocated by the Republican-controlled Congress several years ago to build dozens of new maximum security detention centers around the U.S., for detaining immigrants and “for other purposes”?
“For other purposes”?
Why that leaves the door wide open for President Obama to move all the detainees from Gitmo and house them securely at one of these detention cneters, like the one being offered by the U.S. citizens living in Hardin Montana, with a 400-bed maximum security facility there that is currently sitting empty.
Game. Set. Match.
But only if President Obama seizes the moment.
I would summarize it as saying that some of the prisoners are to be treated as prisoners of war and held “for the duration”. These prisoners have a legal right to try to prove that they are not prisoners of war in a legal proceeding.
The practical effect is that nobody gets held indefinitely without some kind of proof that they aren’t innocent.