home

Obama's New Plan to Close Guantanamo


The Wall St Journal (free link) reports President Obama is planning on closing Guantanamo through various executive actions, if necessary, to get around Congress' restrictions on detainee transfers.

Of the 149 who remain, 79 have been approved for transfer by national-security officials but remain because of political or diplomatic obstacles in repatriating them.

[More....]

Another 37 have been designated for continued detention without trial. These are men considered too dangerous to release, yet against whom the government lacks usable evidence. A further 23 have been referred for prosecution by military commission....

It's not clear where those marked for indefinite detention would go. One possibility is the brig at Charleston, S.C.

The cost of housing detainees at Gitmo is sky-high -- and while it pales by comparison, so is the cost of Supermax.

The annual cost per inmate is $2.7 million, in contrast with $78,000 at a Supermax prison on the mainland, officials say.

< Thursday Night Open Thread: "Tax Man" Time | Saturday Morning Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I hope this is not yet another float of an idea (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by ruffian on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 01:59:05 PM EST
    to get my hopes up, cuz he has worn out his welcome with those.

    So frustrating... (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:32:36 PM EST
    we don't need another new new plan, just close the f*cking thing.  He's had all the power he needs to do just that since inauguration day 2009...maybe not the way he and others wanna close it, by transferring the worst of the worst where there is no evidence of same to actually quaintly try them to other gulags...but he could close it now by simply giving Gitmo back to Cuba, bringing the staff home, and leaving the prisoners there with a months supply of food and water.

    Added bonus for anti-castro republicans, we pull a reverse Mariel in the process.

    Parent

    That's a plan kdog but... (none / 0) (#3)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:42:18 PM EST
    they would camouflage themselves as Cubans, float over here, like the Cubans and Haitians do every day, and it would be my luck they would float right up to my dock.  The Cubans and Haitians are very nice people but, the other guys, not so nice.

    Parent
    Easy now brother... (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:02:55 PM EST
    you left out the part where they go to Liberia to contract Ebola before returning to Cuba and rubber rafting it to the Keys and killing us all.

    Parent
    Can you get to Liberia by way of Benghazi? (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by ruffian on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:47:13 PM EST
    Have any arrived where you are via (none / 0) (#17)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:48:51 PM EST
    water?  NYT had an article about the vastly-increased # of "Mariels," including some who made landfall on the Keys.

    Parent
    The Marielitos that Castro released to us (none / 0) (#25)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 05:02:36 PM EST
     in the 1980 Mariel boat lifts, were the first to come in a mass group, and we accepted them.   Jimmy Carter stopped this phenomena, later the same year,  after more than 125,000, mostly criminals and mentally ill arrived.  In 1995 we set up the "wet foot, dry foot" program.  If they touch the shore we accept them, and send them to the Krome Detention Center, on the outskirts of Miami, where thousands of Cubans wait in a sort of limbo.  If caught at sea, or even ten feet from shore, they are repatriated back to Cuba, unless they are too sick from the voyage, or can prove they will be sent to prison, or persecuted in Cuba.  Now, just yesterday, some came to shore not far from my house.  They are able to round them up easily down here in the Keys since it's very long, but narrow, so they can't hide.  The ones that make it to Biscayne Bay, in Miami, have many places to hide and friends to hide with.  Only the original group were named  Marielitos.  Mariel is the name of a Cuban province.  Haitians, on the other hand, are immediately sent back to Haiti if caught either on or offshore.  My apologies, Jeralyn if this strayed from the original topic of the Guantanamo detainees.

    Parent
    My German is lots better than my non-existent (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 05:31:06 PM EST
    Spanish. Here's the NYT article, which I misread as to "Mariel."

    link

    Many of those criminals, not too surprisingly, ended up committing subsequent crimes in the U.S.. Sometimes the prosecutors and probation officers in the U. S. discovered this information and sometimes not.

    Parent

    Oculus, you had the name correct, (none / 0) (#30)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 06:30:24 PM EST
    it is Mariel.  That boat the doctor, and others, that made it to shore was one of the stranger ones.  The Miami Herald had photos of it, and that motor they speak of was in the center of the boat, because the stern and sides were so flimsy.  Not sure how they steered it, but they can build carburetors for Buicks from Studebaker carbs, and other totally crazy car "options.'

    Parent
    Actually Congress won't give him (none / 0) (#4)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:43:36 PM EST
    the funds to close it.

    Parent
    Jim, Guantanamo Bay (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:52:40 PM EST
    is a Naval base, so now is your chance to go down, and be a Naval Airman.  I'll even run you down there in my boat.  I'm sure there are funds available to move that small group without funds from Congress.

    Parent
    If you'll take him, we'll raise the money. (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by Anne on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:55:42 PM EST
    There will probably be enough left over for you to take a really nice vacation - which you would completely deserve - or host a lavish TL gathering.

    Seems like a win-win to me!

    Parent

    heh (3.00 / 3) (#10)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:00:31 PM EST
    Anyone living in the Key West area is on permanent vacation.

    ;-)

    Parent

    I think I've finally found (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Angel on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 04:17:53 PM EST
    I can feel the love (none / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 09:13:03 PM EST
    and want all of you to know that I am just here to serve up some truth for you to grit and grind over.

    ;-)

    Parent

    Since when? (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Oct 11, 2014 at 09:40:58 AM EST
    This is the part where he accuses you (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Oct 11, 2014 at 12:36:31 PM EST
    being in the tank for the Obummer Administration and thus being unable to confirm the great wisdom he displays in each and every comment he makes here.

    Parent
    Extra donations would be forthcoming (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 04:45:21 PM EST
    if his computer just happened to fall overboard during the trip.

    Parent
    Been there (none / 0) (#9)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:58:25 PM EST
    Although it was "back in the day." It was used for anti-sub and other shipping patrols.

    What I remember most is that a Cuba Libre cost 20 cents and you'd best tip a dime if you wanted some coke in the drink...

    But I'll have to decline your kind offer to be a hero to the terrorists of the world.

    Parent

    Quite amazingly, Jim, some of those (none / 0) (#26)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 05:08:26 PM EST
    submarines are quietly rusting away, right now, down in Key West.

    Parent
    Hmmmm (none / 0) (#32)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 09:11:00 PM EST
    Replaced by nuke powered ones, I guess.

    Lovely place. Lovely people. Too bad I'm too old to start over.

    ;-)

    Parent

    You can use your skills as a human lie detector (none / 0) (#28)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 05:21:24 PM EST
    to help interrogate them and find out which day of the week the jihadis are scheduled to attack from underneath your bed.

    LOL!

    Parent

    Who needs funds? (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:54:19 PM EST
    Sh*t if it comes down to it use Air Force One to ferry the staff back to the states, leave the equipment.

    Parent
    Exactly - leave it open (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by ruffian on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:44:53 PM EST
    with no people in it until Congress gets their collective heads out of their collective a**.

    Parent
    Hopefully (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:41:07 PM EST
    thIs is good.  Taking a more detached view-

    Another 37 have been designated for continued detention without trial. These are men considered too dangerous to release, yet against whom the government lacks usable evidence.

    Who are we?

    An eyeball spinner: (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by lentinel on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 04:36:57 PM EST
    Another 37 have been designated for continued detention without trial. These are men considered too dangerous to release, yet against whom the government lacks usable evidence.

    They are "too dangerous", but there is no "useable evidence"?

    Can "the government", whatever that is, at least tell us why they think, suspect, sense, that these people they are condemning to life in prison without charge or trial (in our name) are dangerous?

    What would the harm be in being a little more... transparent?

    Once we bring them here... (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by unitron on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 09:46:23 PM EST
    ...to actual U.S. territory, where we can't play word games about the legal status, how do we justify continued imprisonment without there ever having been a trial or even a formal making of charges?

    May I ask a question here? (none / 0) (#40)
    by NYShooter on Sat Oct 11, 2014 at 11:42:10 PM EST
    Why do any of the critics here think our government is keeping these 47 prisoners incarcerated still? Don't you think they would just love to get rid of these headaches, once, and for all? I do.

    Let's not forget that the so called "rules of evidence" are different for war time conditions than they are otherwise. If our soldiers had to consider our civilian rules of evidence before engaging the enemy in combat, well, do I need to say anymore?

    It's just speculation on my part here, but, my best guess is that our authorities are convinced that the prisoners in question are, in fact, guilty of the crimes they're accused of, but, simply, don't have the strict documentation that would be required were they to be tried in a civilian court.

    Does anyone have a better idea for why we don't/can't get rid of them?

    Parent

    Pure unadulerated stupidity is my guess (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Dadler on Sun Oct 12, 2014 at 09:40:30 AM EST
    Our intelligence "experts" couldn't sniff out 9/11, which, in retrospect, is about all the proof I need that American snoops are largely incompetent on this issue. As if these few dozen guys, however "evil" we believe they might be, could possibly bring down the United States of America. In short, when you have to, err on the side of glorious democratic freedom. Unless we can prove one of these cats has an actual nuke at his disposal, please, we are damaging ourselves beyond measure with this kind of dipshittery. Evolved self-awareness and self-critical ability, after all, is what is supposed to separate us from religious fanatics. Supposed to.

    Parent
    Deftly fixing what the Bush/Cheney (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Oct 11, 2014 at 01:36:19 AM EST
    Administration broke is a daunting task over and over again.  They didn't just break things, they shattered them.

    I wonder why (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 02:54:56 PM EST
    he chooses now to bring the subject back up...

    It's not like a majority of Americans want it closed.

    Two in three Americans told Gallup that they want president Obama to keep the 149 suspected terrorists being held at Gitmo under lock and key on foreign soil instead of shutting down the camp.

    Gallup 6 13 2014

    I mean it's not like he needs to do something to give Repubs another reason to be sure and vote against what ever Demo is running.

    The only thing I can think is that he's trying to rally the base.

    Jim, they're not closing the base, (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:31:12 PM EST
    they're merely speaking of moving 149 men.  There are big ships right there in Guantanamo Bay, and all kinds of your buddies fly every day from the Boca Chica Naval Air Station in Key West the less than 200 miles to Guantanamo.  Rally the base, I'm not going to even ask what you think that means.  It's been a Naval base for years and still is.  Get your mind right airman jim.

    Parent
    Uh, fishcamp (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:56:29 PM EST
    Maybe you didn't read my post..

    Two in three Americans told Gallup that they want president Obama to keep the 149 suspected terrorists being held at Gitmo under lock and key on foreign soil instead of shutting down the camp.

    More likely you are joshing me... ;-)

    I'be been to road rallies.... political rallies...team rallies...

    But never to a base rally.. Think we could get the base CO lead the Wave contingent in cheers??

     

    Parent

    More (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by lentinel on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 04:32:33 PM EST
    doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.

    Parent
    Thank you for that hilarity, seriously (none / 0) (#42)
    by Dadler on Sun Oct 12, 2014 at 09:44:11 AM EST
    I needed it. You have nailed Jim precisely. At least politically. Personally, I am sure he is a decent and caring fellow. I actually know so through at least one trusted TL source.

    Parent
    So what jim, Gallup is not the president. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 05:18:59 PM EST
    The rest of your comment makes no sense.  If you feel humorous why not go to an open thread where Jeralyn has not labored to both give and gather serious information?

    Parent
    Why did you misquote (1.50 / 2) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 09:14:34 PM EST
    what I had written??

    My original was very plain and easy to understand.

    A majority opposes this. Why does he want to do it??

    Parent

    It seems to me he always floats some red meat (5.00 / 6) (#15)
    by ruffian on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:46:18 PM EST
    for liberals a few weeks before an election to get the base feeling all warm and fuzzy.

    Not that I am cynical or anything.

    Parent

    Were you cynical b/4 you started (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 03:52:06 PM EST
    reading the comments here?

    Parent
    I don't know about ruffian, (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 04:56:47 PM EST
    But I was certainly cynical way, way before the Internet even existed.  Back when I was in (what they called then), junior high school, at least.  And that was a he!! of a long time ago.
    ;-)

    Parent
    Did you see the study about (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Oct 11, 2014 at 01:30:14 AM EST
    Individuals are were somewhat cynical as children living longer than the happy go lucky children?

    Parent
    Yeah...since the Reagan administration! (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by ruffian on Fri Oct 10, 2014 at 06:39:18 PM EST
    In the immortal words of Alice Cooper:

    I used to be such a sweet sweet thing till they got a hold of me


    Parent