Michele Flournoy, undersecretary of defense for policy, testified that imprisoning some Guantanamo detainees in the U.S. would make it politically easier for European allies to take custody of some of the detainees. Robert Mueller, director of the FBI, testified to some concerns about imprisoning Guantanamo detainees in the U.S., out of fears that they’ll radicalize other inmates or conduct terrorist activities from in the prisons. Are these really, as Politico’s David Cloud writes, "sharply different views" between two senior administration officials?
Cloud’s a good reporter and these are certainly views in tension. But Mueller didn’t oppose jailing Guantanamo detainees in the U.S., he brought up solid practical concerns. And they appear to have intuitive solutions. For instance: isolate the detainees or restrict their access to non-terrorist convicts. I’m not a lawyer, but none of the remaining 240 detainees are American citizens, so presumably they’d have fewer rights in prison. That could probably lead to a justification for, say, increased surveillance of their prison activities or additional restrictions on their access to visitors, communications, and so forth. (I’ll withdraw that if the premise is incorrect, of course.)
Flournoy and Mueller: pretty reconcilable.
Crossposted to The Streak.



9 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
House them in SuperMax!! Convicts don’t have any contact with each other there.
Shit, they don’t? I didn’t know that. Also: don’t you think a terrorist would have to be put in Protective Custody? If they kill child molesters in prison, what do you think they’d do to terrorists?
The press has been busy, busy bees inventing fake controversies all over the place this week. Politico, of course, is about the worst — “if it doesn’t bleed, it can’t lead” seems to be their moto.
Today was the 1st session with Obama and Volker’s advisory board, which was livestreamed. It was a very interesting discussion, with lots of different angles represented around the table. And Obama encouraged a real discussion. General consensus — have to price carbon, have to price it now, have to encourage certainty for future investment and get the structure settled so everybody can get to work on it. Then there were lots of points raised about what needed to be taken into account in attacking the problem, including features of legislation and warnings about various stuff that needed to be addressed to reduce program risks, costs etc. And Obama was a discussant and encouraged different views to be expressed.
How refreshing — people talking about real problems as adults and examining possible solutions. Costs and benefit tradeoffs. Risks and opportunities.
So how does Politico spin the meeting as? Obama challenged by handpicked photo-op puppets. Now, they patted the President on the head for actually encouraging divergent views to be expressed. But the whole story was spun from the headline: “Obama hears econ concerns on climate plan”. Well of course he did. That’s why he asked them to come talk with him.
Lord help us, make it stop!
IIRC, they have no contact with other innmates. So no, the Unibomber likely doesn’t know that Sheik Abdal Raman(sp?) is there. Or has ever seen him. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence
This point isn’t being made enough. If you put them in general population, I will gaurantee Dahmer-esque results.
Crossposted in American Heart
imprisoning some Guantanamo detainees in the U.S. would make it politically easier for European allies to take custody of some of the detainees.
Is the idea that holding people without charges on US soil would enable Europeans to do the same? I fail to see how that’s a good thing. If the idea is to persuade Europeans to take in freed detainees, how is this going to help?
”I’m not a lawyer, but none of the remaining 240 detainees are American citizens, so presumably they’d have fewer rights in prison. That could probably lead to a justification for, say, increased surveillance of their prison activities or additional restrictions on their access to visitors, communications, and so forth. ”
hey, Spencer Ackerman are you doing some parody, or spoof, of nebbishy liberal banality of evil type policy writing?
you’re not a lawyer, but are you a human being with any empathy, or something else?
what if these ’detainees’ to use your sterile, Orwellian terminology, actually never did anything wrong and were snatched up into this gulag for stupid, botched reasons?
where they were held incommunicado and likely tortured for 6 years for no fucking reason at all, even after many in the security apparat had concluded they were innocent?
Federal Judges are coming to these conclusions, and you breezily suggest that, due to their being dark-skinned foreigners, ”they’d have fewer rights in prison . . . and so forth.”
have you got the guts to go read Andy Worthington’s pieces about recent habeas reviews?
http://www.counterpunch.org/wo…..42009.html
http://counterpunch.org/worthington05192009.html
try to reconcile some of that with your smugness, Spencer Ackerman.
or better yet, hide in your bureacratese and don’t spare a thought for the cruelties these ’detainees’ have endured. After all if Dick Cheney and GW Bush have called ’terrists, thats good enough for Spencer Ackerman, right?
how very punk rock it all is.
go read some Kafka, Spency.
maybe The Trial?
”The Trial (German: Der Prozess) is a novel by Franz Kafka about a character named Josef K., who awakens one morning and, for reasons never revealed, is arrested and prosecuted for an unspecified crime.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial
you seem like you were a half-bright, eager to please undergraduate not too long ago – they never had you read Kafka at Rutgers?
Have you ever heard of a band called Black Flag? You could learn a bit about punk rock from them, maybe since you are so high profile you could share your nuanced views on lawless indefinite detention with Henry Rollins sometime, invite him to a public chat on your blog, tell him how tough you are, rebutting all challenges in the comments, you know, maybe you’d bond?