Obama On Closing Gitmo: ‘I’m Going To Go Back At This’

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM




DAVID TAINTOR 11:18 AM EDT, TUESDAY APRIL 30, 2013

President Obama on Tuesday pledged to renew efforts to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, asserting that the detention facility "needs to be closed."

"I'm going to go back at this," Obama said at a White House press conference, according to a rush transcript. "I've asked my team to review everything that's being done in Guantanamo, everything we can do administratively 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."

Obama added that the current system at Guantanamo is unsustainable. "The notion we're going to keep over a hundred individuals in a no-man's land indefinitely, even at a time when we have wound down the war in Iraq, we are winding down the war in Afghanistan, we have kept the pressure on these transnational terrorist networks, when we have transferred detention authorities to Afghanistan. The idea we would still maintain, forever, a group of individuals who have been not been tried, that is contrary to who we are and our interests and it needs to stop."

A hunger strike has gripped Guantanamo in recent weeks, leading to clashes between prisoners and guards. According to The Guardian, 100 detainees are on hunger strike. Twenty-one of those inmates are being force-fed.

###

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-on-closing-gitmo-im-going-to-go

[Sunlei]

1. Pres. O, stands in front of the press for a longtime, everyone should hear this talk

for themselves first, without the opinion media twisting words.

They can hear for themselves if they go to the White House and find press conferences in the drop down menu.

[yurbud]

6. why is extrajudicial killing of the innocent easier than extrajudicial letting the innocent go free?

[Sunlei]

10. I don't know. Why do you think that is?

[NoMoreWarNow]

15. because of our stupid approach to terrorism

and the way it is politicized

[Sunlei]

21. I agree the politics and the "for profit" private contractors are like leeches.

Private interests suck America dry of all our, Federal, State and local taxpayer money.

[yurbud]

40. someone profits from the killing and imprisoning not the freeing.

[yurbud]

67. isn't it amazing when the rule of law matters and when it doesn't, or when there are conflicting law

which trumps which.

Keeping Gitmo as the basement full of boogey men is more important than a thousand years of English and American law on habeas corpus.

[midnight]

101. K&R

[Bully Taw]

2. he was supposed to close Gitmo

when we elected him four years ago...I feel a bit betrayed, so forgive me if i think that this is just more lip service.

[xtraxritical]

8. Say Bully you happen to think your obstructionist Congress had anything

to do with "just say no"?

[zipplewrath]

14. Yes, I do

I think they had "something" to do with it. I also think Obama had "something" to do with it. I also think he threw in the towel a couple of years ago when the White House closed down the office that was working this issue. I also think making plans not to close it to begin with, but to merely move it to Illinois had "something" to do with it. I also think not holding anyone responsible for the torture that happened there had "something" to do with it. I also think declaring that the US had the authority to hold people, without trial, on his authority alone, had "something" to do with it.

So you'll excuse me if I don't get excited by this declaration. As it always is with this guy, watch what he does, not what he says.

[tblue]

19. ^^^ this ^^^

Fool me once, shame on, shame on you. You fool me, can't get fooled again.

Seriously. I need more than just words.

[Maven]

42. Exactly. His promises were hot air from the word "go"

Or should I say, the word "change"

[pscot]

50. As always, watch what he does

[zeemike]

28. No they did not.

Except to play bad cop to his good cop.

Obama is the Commander in Chief of the military....that is a military base and run by the military...if he gave them an order to close it they MUST comply...or be relieved of their command and end their carrier.
No excuses...

[Tarheel_Dem]

38. That is possibly the most ridiculous assertion I've ever heard, and that's really saying something..

for DU. Not even the prisoners attorneys have made such a claim. Do you have anything in the way of legal proof for that? There was an in depth discussion of this very topic yesterday, on the Diahn Rehm Show. If it's archived, you should check it out. You can't just drop these folks off in the middle of nowhere. They have to go where someone is willing to take them. Many of them can't be returned to their homelands because they'll be tortured and killed, especially the Chinese Uyghurs.

Whether you like it or not, someone has to pay to relocate & house these people, and Congress controls the purse strings. Indefinite detention is not the answer, but sending them back to be unceremoniously tortured & killed isn't either.

[alp227]

44. Here I think is the show

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-04-29/hunger-strike-guantanamo-prison

[ieoeja]

48. "can't be returned to their homelands because they'll be tortured and killed"

Would solve the problem, would it not?

[Tarheel_Dem]

51. It would solve the problem, but only if you think torturing & killing is more humane than force.....

feeding. I can't say that I blame some of these countries, especially Yemen, if they don't want them back, but I don't care to find out that they've been tortured, killed, or even starved to death. It's a quandry, for sure.

[Psephos]

65. House and Senate were D for first two years.

Not my idea of leadership on this issue.

[Bully Taw]

108. you mean...

our obstructionist congress, don't you?

[Sunlei]

12. So exactly what did President O "not do" as far as trying to close Gitmo in your book?

You can read the mandates and reports, its public record on the white house website..so you can note please where Pres. O didn't try his best.

[zipplewrath]

29. He closed the office

He closed the office a couple of years ago that was tasked with closing gitmo. That's called giving up. Giving up isn't "trying your best".

[Sunlei]

30. did the official reports and mandates tell you that?

[zipplewrath]

31. Huh?

Do you mean did the White House announce that? yes.

[Sunlei]

35. no I mean the 100 or so pages of public record listing every prisoner and whats up with each.

not todays press release and Pres. Os question and answer session.

[zipplewrath]

36. From January

The State Department has reassigned its top diplomat charged with emptying out the prison for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay and effectively shuttered the office responsible for handling that issue.

In an internal personnel bulletin on Monday, the State Department said Ambassador Daniel Fried has been named as coordinator for sanctions policy and will leave his current post as special envoy in charge of resettling Guantanamo Bay prisoners.

In the first couple years of President Barack Obama's administration, Fried was very active in diplomatic efforts to persuade other countries to accept Guantanamo prisoners.

When Obama took office, 242 prisoners were at the facility. There are now 166 at Guantanamo. Three have died in custody since 2009 and the remainder were transferred to foreign countries on terms Fried often negotiated.

However, the pace of transfers has slowed to a trickle. Just four took place in 2012. The reduction is due to limits Congress imposed in legislation and Obama signed, while saying that he objected to those provisions. The slowdown is also attributable to a moratorium Obama imposed on transfers to Yemen in early 2010. A total of 86 of the men currently at Guantanamo are Yemeni nationals.

White House officials insist Obama still wants to close the prison at Guantanamo. However, as recently as earlier this month, Obama again signed legislation continuing the restrictions that effectively make it impossible to close the facility.

[Sunlei]

54. can I have a link to the legislation signed and who made your bolded statement, thanks.

And if we have restrictions with Yemen what to do then? Has the Yemeni Gov demanded their people back or not?

[zipplewrath]

61. Executive decision

What legislation are you asking about? This was a unilateral decision made by the executive branch to shut down the office that was working this issue without consulting Congress at all. The president can do that.

link

[Sunlei]

68. Thats because they made their reports a couple years ago. Why would they be needed now?

[zipplewrath]

69. To continue to work the problem

If it truly was a priority for the administration, you don't close down the one office actually dedicated to working the problem.

[Sunlei]

70. Everyone is listed out of the 166 and been worked as far as asking the countries to take them back.

still wondering why those 66, their own country doesn't want them back.

[zipplewrath]

73. Is it closed?

Until it is, closing the only shop doing anything to resolve the problem telegraphs that you don't consider it a priority anymore.

[Sunlei]

74. well perhaps congress will have something to say when they are asked again to do their jobs.

[zipplewrath]

75. And perhaps the president will act

And perhaps the president will reopen an office to address this problem since he has now asserted that he wants to re-engage the congress on this issue. Of course to re-engage, one has to DIS-engage, which he did, and avoided through his entire second campaign.

[Sunlei]

79. no he didn't. Didn't you even watch todays surprise presser?

[zipplewrath]

89. Yes, did you hear the word "re-engage"

It's what comes after "disengaging"

[Sunlei]

93. reengage with congress. here is the press questions and answers.

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 30, 2013
News Conference by the President 10:46 A.M. EDT
link to entire presser below.
....several questions then the Guantanamo Bay questions start here....

""Bill Plante.

Q Mr. President, as you’re probably aware, there’s a growing hunger strike on Guantanamo Bay among prisoners there. Is it any surprise really that they would prefer death rather than have no end in sight to their confinement?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, it is not a surprise to me that we've got problems in Guantanamo, which is why when I was campaigning in 2007 and 2008, and when I was elected in 2008, I said we need to close Guantanamo. I continue to believe that we've got to close Guantanamo.

Q -- can do it?


THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it is critical for us to understand that Guantanamo is not necessary to keep America safe. It is expensive. It is inefficient. It hurts us in terms of our international standing. It lessens cooperation with our allies on counterterrorism efforts. It is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs to be closed.

Now, Congress determined that they would not let us close it -- and despite the fact that there are a number of the folks who are currently in Guantanamo who the courts have said could be returned to their country of origin or potentially a third country.

I'm going to go back at this. I've asked my team to review everything that's currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively. 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 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 core, we've kept the pressure up on all these transnational terrorist networks, when we've transferred detention authority in Afghanistan -- 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.

Now, it's a hard case to make because I think for a lot of Americans the notion is out of sight, out of mind. And it's easy to demagogue the issue. That's what happened the first time this came up. I'm going to go back at it because I think it's important.
Q Meanwhile we continue to force-feed these folks --

THE PRESIDENT: I don't want these individuals to die. Obviously, the Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can. But I think all of us should reflect on why exactly are we doing this? Why are we doing this? We've got a whole bunch of individuals who have been tried who are currently in maximum security prisons around the country. Nothing has happened to them. 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.

The individual who attempted to bomb Times Square -- in prison, serving a life sentence. The individual who tried to bomb a plane in Detroit -- in prison, serving a life sentence. A Somali who was part of Al-Shabaab, who we captured -- in prison. So we can handle this.

And 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. 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.

And this is a lingering problem that is not going to get better. It’s going to get worse. It’s going to fester. And so I’m going to, as I said before, examine every option that we have administratively to try to deal with this issue, but ultimately we’re also going to need some help from Congress, and I’m going to ask some folks over there who care about fighting terrorism but also care about who we are as a people to step up and help me on it.""

...next question on healthcare continues at link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/30/news-conference-president-0

[zipplewrath]

99. And where does he discuss closing down the only office working it?

Does he mention at all closing down the only office that was dedicated to working the issue?
Does he mention not engaging the public at all in his last and final election?
Does he mention that he asserted the right to hold people without trial indefinitely upon his authority alone?
Did he mention he had no intention of "closing" Gitmo, but merely moving it to Illinois?
Did he take any responsibility at all for the fact that Gitmo is still open, or even suggest that he had been ineffective to this point?
In fact, did YOU watch the conference, with any level of critical thinking that is?

[Sunlei]

100. What's he supposed to do, ignore the restrictions from Congress?

[zipplewrath]

102. What he could have done

1) He could have worked congress BEFORE announcing it's closure
2) He could have an office in the White House (Not over at Foggy Bottom) whose responsibility is to work towards closure
3) He could ALREADY have "done everything administratively possible" in the first 4 years, instead of waiting until NOW to announce that this is what he'll do
4) He could have announced that he DOESN'T have the authority to unilaterally hold, without trial, people indefinitely.
5) He could have continued to ENGAGE congress instead of waiting until now to RE-engage congress (as he announced yesterday).
6) He could have maintained the office over at state dedicated to this issue, instead of closing it in January and dispersing the activities to several other offices with other priorities.
7) He could have made it an issue in his second and final campaign instead of ignoring it completely.

Is that a long enough list?

[Sunlei]

103. ok, that's a long enough list.

I see your points & I agree, he should put more pressure on Congress and not drop daily pressure for any issues this important. I'm sure Obama has a lot on his plate but he could ramp up the work with Congress. I'd like to see the Admin list the top 20 or so major issues and a daily report on the progress from him & the congress.

Waiting months, years and at the rate congress does their work is not acceptable to me either. I think there are only about 50? of the Gitmo prisoners that can't be released. They should be disbursed into other prison systems and send the rest home or where ever they want to go.

[tarheelsunc]

49. There's a reason for everything...

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/15749-alleged-terrorist-trial-ethics-breaches-called-possible-obama-plan-to-close-gitmo

Now, some observers are beginning to question whether a series of seemingly embarrassing gaffes might instead be part of a strategic plan by the Obama administration to shutter the military prison at Gitmo.
"Perhaps I'm wrong, but there are too many fiascos in too short an order to be the result of random chance," said Air Force Col. Morris Davis, who for two years served as chief prosecutor of the military commissions at Guantanamo.


...snip...

"I believe it is all part of a plan to tamp down outrage when President Obama announces that he's closing Gitmo, sending the majority of the detainees already cleared for transfer home, bringing the rest to the US and prosecuting them in federal courts," said Davis, who helped write parts of the 2006 Military Commissions Act passed by Congress, and has since become a vocal critic of the use of the system to prosecute terrorism suspects.
"I suspect they are painting the picture to show it's taken too long, and there's no end in sight; it's too fatally flawed to save; it creates too much damage to our standing in the eyes of our allies and enemies alike; and it costs too much money at a time when money is tight to continue trying to spit-shine the Gitmo cow-pile in hopes that someday it will shine up nice and look pretty," he said.

[zipplewrath]

76. 9 dimensional chess?

So we're back to that claim, that he's just playing some big game where he makes apparently "dumb" moves to cover up that he is really playing "smart" moves?

Or it could be that the person quoted has an axe to grind.

[grahamhgreen]

22. Still, I support him on closing shitmo 100%

[BlueCaliDem]

33. He signed the EO to close it, but Congress STOPPED him by a 90-6 in the Senate.

Read up and educate yourself on why Gitmo is still open today: http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/04/democratic-memo-why-barack-obama-cant-close-gitmo-or-try-ksm-in-new-york/

It might not fit in your "hate Obama" narrative, but the truth will set you free.

[alp227]

45. So it is now up to us to pressure congress

Otherwise this old Bobby Vinton song describes the political climate for Obama's order

[grantcart]

53. You are wasting energy by injecting facts into a discussion?

Bravo to you.

The reality is that for all of the 'progressives' in Congress the President has been alone on the issue.

[Bully Taw]

107. what does it tell you

that he cannot get his own party to support him on this.

[Tarheel_Dem]

43. And I feel "a bit betrayed" by sloven incuriosity.

Obama Signing Statement Takes On Congress’ Refusal To Close Gitmo
By: Sarah JonesDec. 23rd, 2011

http://www.politicususa.com/obama-ndaa-signing-statement.html

House Dems refuse funds to close Gitmo, relocate inmates
Tuesday, May 5th, 2009 | Posted by Veterans Today

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/05/05/house-dems-refuse-funds-to-close-gitmo-relocate-inmates/

And then there's this.......

Senate blocks transfer of Gitmo detainees
Meanwhile, federal judge says U.S. can hold detainees indefinitely

Democrats lined up with Republicans in the 90-6 vote that came on the heels of a similar move a week ago in the House, underscoring widespread apprehension among Obama's congressional allies over voters' strong feelings about bringing detainees to the U.S. from the prison in Cuba.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30826649/ns/politics-capitol_hill/t/senate-blocks-transfer-gitmo-detainees/

[gateley]

52. I think if Obama could have done it -- alone -- he would have.

[marshall]

71. I don't think he realized that he has to find some other place to put the detainees

It's easy to say close the place down, far harder to figure out what you're going to do with the people who are there. In many cases their home countries don't want them, and there would be local problems with wherever they might be sent to in the US.

[xiamiam]

3. he can do it for about 100 prisoners in a second by lifting the ban on yemen

then those prisoners cleared for release can return to their home.

[xtraxritical]

9. The point is their "home" and any other country does not want them.

[BlueCaliDem]

34. Yep. But liberal activists don't wanna hear that.

They just wanna blame President Obama. It's so much easier.

[xiamiam]

106. that is not true..it is obama who is blocking them from Yemen

that is what I have heard attorneys for the prisoners say..as recently as this am on democracy now.

[Sunlei]

13. Their own country doesn't want them back!

[Poll_Blind]

4. Campaign promise = 1,562 days later and he's still got his team looking into what can be done. nt

PB

[DonViejo]

11. Do some research on Google, he was blocked by Congress. nt

[Poll_Blind]

16. Not an unusual belief. However, for your edification:

The Obama GITMO myth

PB

[DonViejo]

17. Glenn Greenwald is a partisan hack of the libertarian variety...

Go to Google and do some real research; instead of counting the number of days the President has been in office. Used undoubtedly to help you whine.

[Poll_Blind]

18. You got no facts in opposition on this one, Don. Just smear. nt

PB

[DonViejo]

20. Smear this...

Glenn Greenwald and His Repulsive Hypocrisy

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/03/1184268/-Glenn-Greenwald-and-His-Repulsive-Hypocrisy#

Liberal Wanna Be Libertarian Obama Critics

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2012/01/liberal-wanna-be-libertarian-obama.html

On bullying: Glenn Greenwald and the ‘Obama nun rape’ smear

http://blog.reidreport.com/2012/01/on-bullying-glenn-greenwald-and-the-nun-rape-smear/

Glenn Greenwald: Neither a Liberal Nor a Progressive

http://rootedcosmopolitan.wordpress.com/2011/04/20/glenn-greenwald-neither-a-liberal-nor-a-progressive/

[Poll_Blind]

23. You're all ad hominem. Nothing yet to refute the piece. nt

PB

[DonViejo]

27. And you've yet to go do your own research...

via a Google search of this site or the web in general on the topic.

[BlueCaliDem]

37. I know anti-Obamanite Libertarians of the Glenn Greenwald kind don't want to hear the truth about

their Libertarian messiah, but to believe any criticism Glenn Greenwald spews about President Obama is tantamount to believing anything Fox "News" Channel spews about him - and just as inaccurate.

I.O.W., consider the source, and your source had been proven to be a racist, a Libertarian fooling Liberals into believing he is a Liberal (although he's never admitted to being one - how clever) and deeply flawed.

Joy Reid, however, is smart, a strong researcher of the facts, and level-headed enough to be a sound critic of President Obama if he's wrong {like with C-CPI}. Read her article and the history of why Gitmo is still not closed today: http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/04/democratic-memo-why-barack-obama-cant-close-gitmo-or-try-ksm-in-new-york/

[OnyxCollie]

60. Is this guy a partisan hack of the libertarian variety, too?

Of course, he's representing TERRORISTS at GITMO, so he can't be trusted.

A Desperate Situation at Guantánamo: Over 130 Prisoners on Hunger Strike, Dozens Being Force-Fed
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/4/29/a_desperate_situation_at_guantnamo_over

CARLOS WARNER: Unfortunately, they’re held because the president has no political will to end Guantánamo. And it falls on the left. And I’m part of the left. I’m a federal public defender. My wife campaigned for President Obama. But the bottom line is that the left isn’t pushing for the release. He, the president, is blaming this on the right and saying the right has made these restrictions. Well, what the left doesn’t understand, and the right has pointed this out, is that the president has the authority to transfer individuals if he believes that it’s in the interests of the United States. But he doesn’t have the political will to do so because 166 men in Guantánamo don’t have much pull in the United States. So—but the average American on the street does not understand that half of these men, 87 of these men—86 of them, excuse me—86 of the men are cleared for release, meaning that the government has said that not only haven’t they done anything wrong, but they’re not dangerous, that they could be released immediately. And they languish there in Guantánamo while the president is guffawing with, you know, the social elite in Washington.

We’re just asking the president to appoint somebody to start working on the problem. If the president does that, we can make incredible progress in a year. I’ve been in this situation for many years now, and I know where these men can go. And frankly, the executive knows, as well. The State Department knows where these men can be placed. And they were working on those solutions, but the president doesn’t want to implement what the State Department has done.

AMY GOODMAN: Where can they be placed?

CARLOS WARNER: Well, there are rehabilitation centers in both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, built under the eye of the United States, where—that they could go, the 86 men could go in an instant, if the president had political will to transfer them. And not every man can go there, but we could certainly start working on many of these innocent men. And if you are not on that list of 86, the president has no process for you to—for you to challenge your detention. So, many of the individuals that he has held indefinitely and say should be held indefinitely, they haven’t done anything wrong, either. But basically the president has said these are people that, if we release them, we’re afraid they’ll—they might harm us because they’re ticked off we’ve held them for 11 years without charge.

But that’s not what we—who we are as a country. As a country, we don’t hold people for what they may do in the future. So give those men process. Give them an ability to be released. Now, the left has to mobilize. Senator Feinstein came out and said, "Let’s get rid of the innocent men. Let’s get them out of Guantánamo." But the rest of the left has to do that. It starts there. And as much as I would like to cast blame on the right, can’t do it here. We have to cast blame on the president. He needs to pick up this ball and run for it—run with it, or people are going to die, Amy.

True Believers like yourself can never find fault with the President. Nope, it's always some "basher" or "hater."

Nice bubble you got there.

[Psephos]

66. good post n/t

[DonViejo]

87. Really? I'm a true believer and can never find fault with the President?...

LMAO. You don't know jack shit about me or my political beliefs but, please continue. Stare into your little crystal ball and see what other wrong headed ideas you can come up with about me.

[OnyxCollie]

88. I don't need a crystal ball.

All I have to do is read your replies in this thread.

[DonViejo]

92. Okay Onyx. You pretend to be a know it all about DonViejo, LOL

[OnyxCollie]

94. Let's tally the results.

An attack on Glenn Greenwald's character: "Glenn Greenwald is a partisan hack of the libertarian variety..."

A post with four articles attacking Glenn Greenwald's character.

An attack on Poll_Blind's character: "Used undoubtedly to help you whine."

Evidence to support your assertion: A suggestion to "Go to Google and do some real research"

Evidence that DonViejo knows what the fuck he's talking about: Jack shit.

[DonViejo]

95. LOL. Onyx. Thank for tonight's great after dinner laugh...

Yes, I do not agree with Greenwald and believe he is a libertarian partisan hack so, clearly, that makes me a bad person filled with undying loyalty to the President. Thanks for the fun tonight, like I said, you don't know jack shit about me

[OnyxCollie]

96. If only you spent as much time

on supporting your assertion about GITMO instead of attacking the messenger, you might not sound like an authoritarian follower.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
-Eleanor Roosevelt

[frazzled]

26. Read the transcript of the entire response

Q: Mr. President, as you're probably aware, there's a growing hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay, among prisoners there. Is it any surprise, really, that they would prefer death rather than have no end in sight to their confinement?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, it is not a surprise to me that we've got problems in Guantanamo, which is why, when I was campaigning in 2007 and 2008 and when I was elected in 2008, I said we need to close Guantanamo.

I continue to believe that we've got to close Guantanamo. I think -- well, you know, I think it is critical for us to understand that Guantanamo is not necessary to keep America safe. It is expensive. It is inefficient. It hurts us in terms of our international standing. It lessens cooperation with our allies on counterterrorism efforts. It is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs to be closed.

Now Congress determined that they would not let us close it and despite the fact that there are a number of the folks who are currently in Guantanamo who the courts have said could be returned to their country of origin or potentially a third country.

I'm going to go back at this. I've asked my team to review everything that's currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively, and I'm going to re-engage with Congress to try to make the case that this is not something that's in the best interests of the American people.

And it's not sustainable. I mean, 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-Qaida core, we've kept the pressure up on all these transnational terrorist networks, when we've transferred detention authority in Afghanistan -- 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.

Now, it's a hard case to make because, you know, I think for a lot of Americans, the notion is out of sight, out of mind, and it's easy to demagogue the issue. That's what happened the first time this came up. I'm going to go back at it because I think it's important.


Q: (Off mic) -- continue to force-feed these folks -- (inaudible) --

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I don't -- I don't want these individuals to die. Obviously, the Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can. But I think all of us should reflect on why exactly are we doing this. Why are we doing this?

I mean, we've got a whole bunch of individuals who have been tried who are currently in maximum security prisons around the country. Nothing's happened to them. 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. The -- the individual who attempted to bomb Times Square -- in prison serving a life sentence. Individual who tried to bomb a plane in Detroit -- in prison serving a life sentence. A Somali who was part of al-Shahab (sic) who we captured -- in prison.

So we can handle this. And 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 -- in a normal, conventional fashion. I understand that reaction.

But we're not over a decade out. We should be wiser. We should have more experience at -- in how we prosecute terrorists. And this is a lingering, you know, problem that is not going to get better. It's going to get worse. It's going to fester.

And so I'm going to -- as I've said before, we're -- examine every option that we have administratively to try to deal with this issue. But ultimately, we're also going to need some help from Congress. And I'm going to ask some -- some folks over there who, you know, care about fighting terrorism but also care about who we are as a people to -- to step up and -- and help me on it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/president-obamas-april-30-2013-news-conference-transcript/2013/04/30/0edc67b0-b1a3-11e2-baf7-5bc2a9dc6f44_story_4.html

[BlueCaliDem]

41. PB is still waiting approval by Glenn Greenwald to read the president's entire response.

I'm sure he'll get back to you when that Libertarian-posing-as-a-Liberal-who-hates-Obama says it's okay.

[grantcart]

85. That left a mark

and its not going away

[zipplewrath]

63. What's he been waiting for?

" I've asked my team to review everything that's currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively, and I'm going to re-engage with Congress..."

So what has he been waiting for? He's had the authority to do "everything that we can do administratively" for 5 years. And to RE-engage congress, one has to DIS-engage congress in the first place. Not to mention totally ignore the issue through an entire second (and final) campaign. Way to build national support for your position, by ignoring it.

[yurbud]

5. How about give the guys a habeas hearing in the US, and if they got nothing on them, give them a

plane ticket to wherever they want?

[TwilightGardener]

24. Sounds good to me. You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.

[yurbud]

25. if they're innocent, they can live next door to me.

[mike_c]

56. +1

[Earth_First]

91. So if they're innocent...

They're still unwelcome to stay within the United States if that is their wish?

#wtf

[BlueCaliDem]

39. With what funds?

Congress, where Democrats joined Republicans, have not only denied the president funds to help close Gitmo, but they have made it nearly impossible to.

Read Joy Reid's piece:

To review:

- President Obama came into office in January 2009, and two days after his inauguration, he signs his first executive order, calling for the closure of the prison at Guantanamo Bay within one year.

- Less than five months later, Congress — controlled by Democrats — votes overwhelmingly to neutralize that executive order, and to keep Gitmo open, by choking off the funds needed to enact the executive order by building new facilities, seeking deportations, etc. The vote in the Senate was 90 to 6.

- In November 2009, the Obama administration tried another tack: they plan to move 100 remaining Gitmo detainees (not including KSM and other 9/11 direct suspects) to an all-but abandoned, state-of-the-art prison in Illinois. The rural town wanted the deal, and the jobs that would come with it. Again, the deal was blocked, and demogogued, by Congressional Republicans, and as of today, the “Gitmo North” plan seems to be dead on arrival.

- Then, this past December, 2010, Congress went in for the kill: http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/04/democratic-memo-why-barack-obama-cant-close-gitmo-or-try-ksm-in-new-york/

[AllyCat]

7. There was an effort to renew?

Seriously, was an effort ever made? Maybe there was, but I don't remember it. I have no doubt the corporations will fight on this. They want it there.

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. "I" "Feel" "Betrayed"

"because" "It's" "Not" "Closed" "Already"

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

46. Obama says that he will try and close "Gitmo" again, but please understand...

...it requires an act of Congress to close Gitmo. The president is NOT a dictator. He is not a king. He is not a monarch. He is constitutionally required to work with two other houses of government: Congress and the Courts. I wish more people understood this...and accepted it...

[grantcart]

57. fact shmacts.

As many in the thread have said that if he reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllly wanted to he could have done it.



Of course I was told the same thing about getting a puppy when I was a kid and it never worked out. Some people think that if he had only clicked his heels together three times then it would have happened.

What I am curious about is what they think should be done for the detainees who have been found to be unprosecutable, the courts have ordered to be released but their home countries (like Yemen) refuse to allow them back.

It is a massive fucking problem and requires not just the actions of Congress but actions by other countries to help us. Asylum will have to be found in other countries and I know from personal experience that each one of these cases will require mountains to be moved.

[Cha]

84. It Is a Massive Problem, grantcart, and requires many forms of co-operation..

not just the President wanting it.

But, the usual suspects continue with their.. if only he clicked his heels faster and made those Senators vote Yes on closing gitmo. They won't be detered from whining about how it's all the President's fault.

Here's to there being all the right things in place one day so it can happen.

[grantcart]

57. fact shmacts.

As many in the thread have said that if he reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllly wanted to he could have done it.



Of course I was told the same thing about getting a puppy when I was a kid and it never worked out. Some people think that if he had only clicked his heels together three times then it would have happened.

What I am curious about is what they think should be done for the detainees who have been found to be unprosecutable, the courts have ordered to be released but their home countries (like Yemen) refuse to allow them back.

It is a massive fucking problem and requires not just the actions of Congress but actions by other countries to help us. Asylum will have to be found in other countries and I know from personal experience that each one of these cases will require mountains to be moved.

[zipplewrath]

62. But he can hold them on his authority alone

He's not a king or a dictator, but he asserts the right to go around the world and collect people and bring them to Gitmo, without trial, on his authority alone. Oh, and to protect the people that tortured them.

[treestar]

64. We should pressure Congress

Rather than sitting around blaming the President when here the obvious villain is Congress.

For that matter, if it is money they need, people could put their money where they mouths are and donate what they claim they are now not going to give to the Democrats, OFA, etc. and give it to a fund to close Gitmo.

[napoleon_in_rags]

77. Congress is playing a dangerous game of "Boy who cried war".

Like the boy who cried wolf. Seriously, its been what, 10 years? 10 years in this blurry, muddy, state of perpetual war. But if you went to the UN, and said "would whoever is at war with the US please stand up!" No one would. Yet congress justifies the indefinite detention of all these people as if its prisoner of war camp.

The question is, what would happen if we faced a REAL war. If, God forbid, a coalition of powerful forces stood against us. Would a declaration on the part of a future congress of "real war" even have any meaning after ten years of being at "war" with no country? It shouldn't be that way. Wars should be decisive, and have a defined end point. A future congress shouldn't find themselves at a place of peril, because all the meaning has been sucked out of their declarations by a previous congress who declared a "war" which lasted decades against an ill defined enemy, so the point where when the US was facing the real things, the present generation has no idea what it means. "War? Haven't we been at war our whole lives?" They ask, leaving the future congress to try to explain that the present war is actually an existential threat, while the previous ones were not.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

81. Exactly!!!!!

[AnotherMcIntosh]

47. To show his sincerity, he should hold a press conference in Guantanamo.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

Let the reporters bring in their camera crews.

[yurbud]

104. and then take all the innocent guys home with him in Air Force One or at least one...

to testify before Congress.

By the time the plane landed here, the public would be done with the War on Terror.

Even better: invite the Republicans who like to pretend these guys are comic book villains who can chew through concrete and steel and shit explosives to make the trip too.

If they don't come, they will look like the cowards and armchair warriors they are.

[tularetom]

55. I'll believe it when I see it

As soon as congress, the talking heads, and the pentagon lobby starts in on him, I predict he won't mention this again for a long time.

Don't forget, this was a conspicuous part of his platform in 2008. He hasn't done dick about it for five years.

[lebkuchen]

59. Write the White House on this. I did.

It's nice to see my complaint on his agenda.

CLOSE GITMO!

[Tx4obama]

72. The FACTS regarding GITMO, Obama, and Congress

The reason GITMO is still open is because of CONGRESS, not Obama.

Read the updates, from the bottom of the page upwards here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/177/close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-center/



Note: Regarding Politifact ratings: An important point about Obameter ratings: A Promise Broken rating does not necessarily constitute failure or mean that Obama failed to be an advocate for his promises. He could exert tremendous effort to fulfill any given promise but it could still die because of opposition in Congress. <SNIP> http://www.politifact.com/about/

[zipplewrath]

78. FACT

He closed the one office actually dedicated to doing something about Gitmo, and assigned the personell to another task, scattering the closed duties amongst several other offices.

THAT's showin' 'em how dedicated you are to the issue. That and not mentioning it at all during your second campaign.

[Tx4obama]

80. And apparently that 'office' was not helping to get the job done. Perhaps you...

... should read the part of the OP of this thread up above where it says...

-snip-

"I'm going to go back at this," Obama said at a White House press conference, according to a rush transcript. "I've asked my team to review everything that's being done in Guantanamo, everything we can do administratively 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."

-snip-

He is changing his strategy - I think he is doing a great job. It is the Congress that is the blame.

[Cha]

82. Thanks Tx. The good news is that PBO Is Going Back

to this. The Senate shut it down before and he knows it's Important enough to reengage.. because, indeed.. it is "not something that's in the best interest of the American people."

[zipplewrath]

90. After 5 years

Apparently it takes more than 5 years to do "everything administratively", but you can pass stimulus and health insurance reform through congress in 12 months.

[Tx4obama]

97. Obama has been president 4 years 3 months. Also, please see Comment #72

[zipplewrath]

98. Please see response 78

Which will demonstrate that I had already read post #72.

You have a point yet? Or are we going to argue significant digits all night?

[hughee99]

110. It seems even the Democrats who voted against it didn't think it was a good idea,

to close the camp without any plan on what to do with the prisoners. I don't think it's unreasonable of congress to ask what is going to be done with the prisoners BEFORE providing the funds to close the camp? I think 4 years should be enough time to at least come up with a plan.

For weeks, Republicans have opposed Obama's plan, voicing concern that the administration has not said what will happen to the approximately 240 detainees housed at the center.

"The president, unwisely, in my view, announced an arbitrary timeline for closing Guantanamo of next January without a plan to deal with the terrorists who are incarcerated down there," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

House Democrats have similar concerns; they refused to include the $80 million requested by the administration to close the facility in the war spending bill. Senate Democrats initially included the money in their $91.3 billion version of the measure, but then stripped it out by a 90-6 vote on May 20.

"This is neither the time nor the bill to deal with this," said Democratic leader Harry Reid. "Democrats under no circumstances will move forward without a comprehensive, responsible plan from the president," though Reid stressed that he still believes closing the facility is a good idea.



But I think most people's issue with the whole thing is this part where, in the presidents own EO, he plans for a periodic review of prisoners that the US is holding without charges because those individuals "in effect, remain at war with the US".

"On March 7, 2011, President Barack Obama signed an executive order making a number of changes to policies regarding those detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In a reversal of his previous policy, the order resumes military trials for Gitmo detainees. It also establishes a "periodic review" process for long-held Guantanamo detainees who have not been charged, convicted or designated for transfer, "but must continue to be detained because they 'in effect, remain at war with the United States,'" according to a White House fact-sheet."

[lovuian]

83. what is going on at GITMO is horrible and wrong

and Obama will have participated in this torture as well as Congress and Military FBI and CIA and Supreme Court

on all levels America's Justice is blinded

the hunger strike has made us look weak and desperate

[Cha]

86. Tweet from Pat Leahy on PBO and gitmo..

Sen. Patrick Leahy ✔ @SenatorLeahy

President is right on #Gitmo.It's unnecessary, expensive, inefficient & doesn't make us safer.Yet Congress stands in the way of closing it.

And, Imani's..

Imani ABL @AngryBlackLady

hey remember when POTUS ordered Gitmo closed and Congress said no? Like, four years ago? Yeah. That. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/28788175/ns/politics-white_house/t/obama-orders-cia-prisons-guantanamo-shut/#.TpYL1k_6NJE …5:15 AM - 30 Apr 2013
Obama orders CIA prisons, Guantanamo shut

President Barack Obama on Thursday moved quickly to undo Bush terror policies, ordering the CIA to close down secret prisons and the Pentagon to close down the Guantanamo prison within a year.

NBC News @NBCNews
94 Retweets 21 favorites Reply

http://theobamadiary.com/

thanks DonViejo

[Ash_F]

105. Another black mark on US history.

I support Obama's renewed efforts. Unfortunately this has already become another stain on this country's record.

[Marrah_G]

109. Blah blah blah

Actions speak louder then words.

[Pterodactyl]

111. 2009...2010...2011...2012... It's been four freakin' years.

If President Obama really wanted to close the detention facility at Gitmo, it would have happened in 2009. But, he's done the cost-benefit calculation and decided to keep it open.