Obama Preparing Order To Close Guantanamo
President-Elect Expected To Order Shut Down Of U.S. Military Prison In First Week On The Job
-
Photo
Yesterday marked the seventh anniversary of the opening of the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where hundreds have been detained without charge. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley)
-
Interactive
Gitmo Tribunals
Detainees on trial, photos and a history of the naval base.
It's unlikely the detention facility at the Navy base in Cuba will be closed anytime soon. In an interview last weekend, Mr. Obama said it would be "a challenge" to close it even within the first 100 days of his administration.
But the order, which one adviser said could be issued as early as Jan. 20, would start the process of deciding what to do with the estimated 250 al Qaeda and Taliban suspects and potential witnesses who are being held there. Most have not been charged with a crime.
The Guantanamo directive would be one of a series of executive orders Mr. Obama is planning to issue shortly after he takes office next Tuesday, according to the two advisers. Also expected is an executive order about certain interrogation methods, but details were not immediately available Monday.
The advisers spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the orders that have not yet been finalized.
Obama transition team spokeswoman Brooke Anderson declined comment Monday.
The two advisers said the executive order will direct the new administration to look at each of the cases of the Guantanamo detainees to see whether they can be released or if they should still be held and if so, where.
Many of the Guantanamo detainees are cleared for release, and others could be sent back to their native countries and held there. But many nations have resisted Bush administration efforts to repatriate the prisoners back home. Both Obama advisers said it's hoped that nations that had initially resisted taking detainees will be more willing to do so after dealing with the new administration.
What remains the thorniest issue for Mr. Obama, the advisers said, is what to do with the rest of the prisoners including at least 15 so-called "high value detainees" considered among the most dangerous there.
Detainees held on U.S. soil would have certain legal rights that they were not entitled to while imprisoned in Cuba. It's also not clear if they would face trial through the current military tribunal system, or in federal civilian courts, or though a to-be-developed legal system that would mark a hybrid of the two.
Where to imprison the detainees also is a problem.
Mr. Obama promised during the presidential campaign to shut Guantanamo, endearing him to constitutional law experts, civil libertarians and other critics who called the Bush administration detentions a violation of international law.
But he acknowledged in an interview Sunday that the process of closing the prison would be harder and longer than initially thought.
"That's a challenge," Obama said on ABC's "This Week." "I think it's going to take some time and our legal teams are working in consultation with our national security apparatus as we speak to help design exactly what we need to do.
"But I don't want to be ambiguous about this," he said. "We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our constitution."
President George W. Bush established military tribunals to prosecute detainees at Guantanamo. He also supports closing the prison, but strongly opposes bringing prisoners to the United States.
Earlier this month on Face The Nation, Vice President Dick Cheney said he was against closing Guantanamo and that he would, if asked, advise Obama to maintain the Bush administration's controversial interrogation policies and keep Guantanamo open.
"I would hope that for the sake of the nation, that this administration and future administrations will continue those policies," said Cheney, who also said he hoped Obama would not succumb to his "campaign rhetoric" of saying that an Obama administration would not torture.
Lawmakers have moved to block transfer of the detainees to at least two potential and frequently discussed military facilities: an Army prison at Fr. Leavenworth, Kan., and a Navy brig in Charleston, S.C. A Marine Corps prison at Camp Pendleton in Southern California also is under consideration, a Pentagon official said.
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., said Monday that "it's hard to show why terror suspects should be housed in Kansas."
"If the holding facility at Guantanamo Bay is closed, a new facility should be built, designed specifically to handle detainees," Brownback said in a statement.
A Pentagon team also has been looking at how to shut Guantanamo and move its detainees but spokesman Bryan Whitman did not immediately know Monday whether it was completed.
The executive order marks only a first step at what is likely to be a long legal process. Still, American Civil Liberties Union legislative director Caroline Fredrickson called "extremely meaningful" even if the Guantanamo prison can't be closed immediately.
"It's clear that there is a process of time that will be necessary to close it properly, to make sure that human rights and respected and security is protected," Fredrickson said. "But the fact that it's set in motion is extremely good news."
© MMIX, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.



- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 213 CommentsNow, in regards to your latest er, um, post-explain why Sarah Palin is a recist?? Now, just why do you say that?
Now, in regards to your latest er, um, post-explain why Sarah Palin is a recist?? Now, just why do you say that?
Anyone who doesn''t give Obamaking a handout must be a racist.
That is about the most un-American thing that could be said. Criminals are guilty of committing a crime. If the authorities cannot even charge them, they are not criminals. Those who detain them illegally are committing a crime.
Yes, the change is starting. It will not be easy for the weak or fearful.
Oh really? Prove any of that. Maybe a few are criminals. Maybe. Most were picked off the streets. No evidence against them.
Wait till their true story''s are told. Then you''ll think about war crimes.
Um, we invaded for NO reason, a sovereign country.
What would you do if they invaded us? THE SAME THING. Hypocrit nutjobs are un-believeable, literally.
Probably some Western Republican bastion.
Oh really? Prove any of that. Maybe a few are criminals. Maybe. Most were picked off the streets. No evidence against them.
Wait till their true story''''s are told. Then you''''ll think about war crimes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by stevex47 at 05:00 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Oh, please! Those who have been determined not to be a threat or innocent have been released already over the course of the past 5 years. The ones that are left are the ones that are hardened murderous terrorists or they are those who are considered less dangerous but the US is hesistant to repatriate these guys for fear of them being tortured or executed.
I say, if they have a native country willing to take them--- send them! If they are the hardened, murderous, terrorist who has sworn to violate the rule of law-- put them to trial or find another location to house them where they will never be seen or heard from again! Close Gitmo, and let the let the libertards rejoice!
What would you do if they invaded us? THE SAME THING. Hypocrit nutjobs are un-believeable, literally.
Posted by stevex47
Steve, you need to go back and do a little refreshing on your history. Iraq started this entire thing by invading Kuwait. We should have taken Iraq at that time instead of waiting until 2003. When Hussein surrendered he was given rules that they had to live by (no fly zones, restrictions on military equipment, etc.). Most of which he blew off and we had to go back and remind him. Why don%u2019t you %u201CGoogle%u201D Operations Desert Fox, Thunder and Strike, to name a few. These were all implemented during the Clinton Administration. You will see that Hussein and the country of Iraq had been prodding the US for years and had no intention of living under the rules of the cease-fire. He deserved to be ousted.
What would you do if somebody kept poking you in the chest? Stand up and be a man or just curl up and cower like a punk?
We, the US, stood up and knocked his azz down.
Obama suffers from a common liberal delusion: that if we close Guantanamo, that Muslims around the world will suddenly love us and play nice. It will make no difference whatsoever.
In fact, because it will make the US appear weak, it will make things worse and open us up to even more terror.
do solemnly swear
that I will faithfully execute
the office of President of the United States,
and will to the best of my ability,
preserve, protect and defend
the Constitution of the United States.
Posted by Bushtarded
Yeah, he has told various other lies too. It all depends who he is in front of which lie he wants to tell.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by FloydZeppd at 05:50 PM : Jan 12, 2009
You and the your freinds at the cabin tonight? Give Boss Hogg a big sloppy kiss!
Hey, isn''t Zeppo a Jewish name?
What would you do if they invaded us? THE SAME THING. Hypocrit nutjobs are un-believeable, literally.
Posted by stevex47
Go take your Prozac, you are getting on my nerves with you BS.
It''s a set of international laws and rules that regulate the treatment of Prisoners of War.
It''''s a set of international laws and rules that regulate the treatment of Prisoners of War. Posted by shanev137
Hey Shane, how come you bleeding heart liberals always bring up the Geneva Convention about their POW''s but when it comes to the treatment of our own you don''t say sh*t. Where were you when our soldiers were getting their heads cut off and burned alive in the streets. Is that in your version of the Geneva Convention?
Yes, and most Americans with a brain strongly opposes bringing them to the United States too except for some jerk blabing on about the Geneva Convention.
Obama suffers from a common liberal delusion: that if we close Guantanamo, that Muslims around the world will suddenly love us and play nice. It will make no difference whatsoever.
In fact, because it will make the US appear weak, it will make things worse and open us up to even more terror.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by AlanW1077 at 05:59 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Hopefully, his experienced staff members will be able to talk some sense into him about this. Esecially since he seems to be extremely lacking in his ability to distinguish a terrorist threat as opposed to a simple street thug from Chicago!
If his staff can work the right angles on this, maybe they''ll all end up in their own respective countries to face their fate or they''ll end up in an undisclosed location never to be seen or heard from again. Either way, Obama wins--- no more Gitmo--- no more whining libertards!
Posted by cmc
Funny, I didnt see one of his smart azz replys to that on.
yeah, the only problem with that theory is that terrorists are not "Prisoners of War". Its their problem they played dirty, not ours. They are extralegal combatants, outside the Geneva Convention.
Already AQ and OBL are grinning ear-to-ear at the thought of dealing with a soft and lovable US prez, rather than one would kick their as*ses on a weekly basis.
Having said all that....he''d be ten times a better and more qualified President than BO. Not even close.
And better yet, our enemies are terrified of him, and that is EXACTLY the way we should want it.
DOES THE IDIOT REALLY THINK WE''''''''RE BUYING THIS AS A SOLUTION?
Posted by TexHillGirl at 06:22 PM : Jan 12, 2009
It''s OK, the libertards will shut up. They''ll have nothing to whine and cry and slobber about. Hopefully, he''ll send the real bad apples home where they get their swift punishment! He! He! He! The rest of them will go to a place where they are never seen or heard from again!!! No fuss, no muss!
Already AQ and OBL are grinning ear-to-ear at the thought of dealing with a soft and lovable US prez, rather than one would kick their as*ses on a weekly basis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by AlanW1077 at 06:27 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Maybe you shold modify your bet ----- VP Obiden clains that he''ll be tested within 6 months!!!!
Remember!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by BagdadsHere9 at 06:35 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Ecactly--- that dog hunts!!!
It''s going to scary real soon!
You might wish to leave two cells available.....
Posted by roscoe2400
lol...an extreme lib w/out a self proclaimed cause? that''s funny!! And only in the USA will you see a new commercial ''For a mere .60 cents a day, the mere price of a cup of coffee...you too can help your own personal terrorist with his AQ training - we''ll send you a photo of your recently released terrorist and give you monthly updates about his progress - but wait! if yu call now, we''ll give you not one, but two terrorists, AND an autographed holiday picture of Bin Ladin"
Remember to help control the terrorist population by having the spayed or neutered after adoption.
Remember to help control the terrorist population by having them spayed or neutered after adoption.
Posted by brianp55
I''ll go w/ the waterboarding, but I''d make them listen to Barry Manilow...
We should be very careful.
What feels "good" to civil liberties and "constitutional" experts, could get a lot of people killed.
Posted by jgg00005
''Git-mates''
If the ACLU had been there , I don''t even want to think about it.
For sure, there would be a body count, and if we were killing more of them vs. us, there would be hand wrining at the the disproportionate response. We are in purple trouble.
If the ACLU had been there , I don''t even want to think about it.
For sure, there would be a body count, and if we were killing more of them vs. us, there would be hand wrining at the the disproportionate response. We are in purple trouble.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 213 Comments