Gates Backs Obama’s Promise To Close Guantanamo: It Will Be A ‘High Priority’
Gates Backs Obama’s Promise To Close Guantanamo: It Will Be A ‘High Priority’
In recent days, Vice President Cheney has been vociferously defending the Bush administration’s detention policies. On Monday, he told Rush Limbaugh that Guantanamo Bay has been “very well run” and mocked President-elect Obama’s promise to close the facility. “I think they’ll discover that trying to close it is a very hard proposition,” said Cheney. More from the interview:
CHENEY: Remember, these are unlawful combatants. These are people who don’t belong to any recognized military force. They don’t obey the rules of warfare. They’re unlawful combatants. And you can’t — if you’re not going to have a place to locate them like Guantanamo, then you either have to bring them here to the continental United States — and I don’t know any member of Congress who’s volunteering to have al Qaeda terrorists deposited in his district — or you’ve got to turn them over to some foreign government.
Yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who will continue to serve under Obama, disputed Cheney’s skepticism. While Gates admitted that shutting down Guantanamo would be difficult, he said that all the potential problems are “solvable.” “I would like to see it closed,” said Gates. “And I think it will be a high priority for the new administration.” Watch it:
In his first weeks as Bush’s defense secretary, Gates also argued that Guantanamo needed to be shut down. According to the New York Times, Gates “urged that trials of terrorism suspects be moved to the United States, both to make them more credible and because Guantánamo’s continued existence hampered the broader war effort, administration officials said.” However, he was overruled by Cheney and then-attorney general Alberto Gonzales. (CAP’s Ken Gude has put together a plan on how to safely close Guantanamo and transfer the detainees.)
Transcript:
ROSE: One of the things that they say has stained America’s reputation is Guantanamo. Just — and there is — it is often said that — president-elect has said that he wants to do something about it. President Bush has said that he’s not in favor of Guantanamo. Why hasn’t it been taken down? Why hasn’t there been a change in Guantanamo? What is the problem?
GATES: Well, I think that there are some problems that need to be dealt with, probably in statute, to be able to close it. I think that we can provide alternatives to it.
But as an example, you probably want something in legislation that says if somebody is freed from Guantanamo, they don’t have an automatic right to asylum in the United States. Some of these people are very dangerous. And we don’t want them coming here into the United States.
I think these problems are solvable. And my guess is…
ROSE: So on balance, you would like to see it…
GATES: I would like to see it closed. And I think it will be a high priority for the new administration.
ROSE: How long will it take?
GATES: Well, it partly depends on statute. It partly depends on how quickly we can return some of these people — can persuade other countries to take some of these prisoners back.
Truth is, there are a number of these people we’re ready to release right now, but we can’t find a country that will take them back. Or we can’t find a country that we can be sure won’t further imprison them and mistreat them.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
closing Gitmo is only ONE part, what about the rest of it?
Such as, prosecuting Bush/Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Powell, Abrams, et al, for their WAR CRIMES!
December 18th, 2008 at 2:18 pmWhy don’t we house these dangerous criminals in the bunker that Cheney built under his house? After all, if he’s so worried about the nation’s security, he’d be the perfect person to keep us safe.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:20 pmOr we can’t find a country that we can be sure won’t further imprison them and mistreat them.
Jeezus, will they ever run out of smoke to try to blow up our arses?
I believe the true fear hear is that the country they’re returned to will HONOR them and RELEASE them.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:20 pmAs per the post below, with Condi being absolutely proud of the decision to invade Iraq, don’t forget the most important failure of all, at least to the Iraqis:
The secular government is gone. In its place is an all-but Shi’a theocracy.
Saddam was a bulwark against Iran’s fundamentalist political society. That bulwark is gone–or, it will be gone once we withdraw.
What a complete idiot Condaleeza Rice is. We had Saddam protecting millions of moderate Muslims from Iran’s theocratic approaches, for FREE, and now we’re paying trillions for much crappier infrastructure that will collapse once we leave. Heckuva job, Worst Secretary of State EVER.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:22 pmI also read today that some Iraqis tried to resurrect the Ba’ath Party, only to be quashed, arrested, outlawed. Imagine that…a political party outlawed.
That’s freedom, George W. Bush style. And the Ba’ath Party was originally the secular party–that’s why the U.S. helped it, and Saddam, become the tinpot dictator. Just ask Reagan–or James Baker, he’ll tell you.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:23 pmCHENEY: …and I don’t know any member of Congress who’s volunteering to have al Qaeda terrorists deposited in his district…
What does this have to do with anything? Since when did we start asking members of Congress for volunteers to have criminals deposited in their districts?
This discourse is just getting stupid.
The legislature has nothing to do with the status of prisoners being held for trial. We have a third branch of government which is in charge of that determination.
As I’ve said before, Republicans are the people who slept in the back row during 8th grade civics class.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:28 pmGitmo., closed or not, at the very least let the Red Cross in there.
R_B
December 18th, 2008 at 2:37 pm“…if you’re not going to have a place to locate them like Guantanamo, then you either have to bring them here to the continental United States — and I don’t know any member of Congress who’s volunteering to have al Qaeda terrorists deposited in his district — or you’ve got to turn them over to some foreign government.”
Why is it that the nega-cons always sell America short? We can’t house prisoners securely on ANY military facility?
I don’t know any member of Congress who would be willing to say a military base IN HIS/HER district, couldn’t be competent enough to secure their prisoners?
December 18th, 2008 at 2:42 pmOT- Just read that conservative icon Paul Weyrich died. more at http://www.rawstory.com
Sounds like an occasion to throw a block party.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:45 pmClosing Gitmo should not be about improving America’s reputation or helping the “war effort”. Its about doing whats right.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:55 pmHEY! Cheney! Go Cheney yourself!
December 18th, 2008 at 3:25 pmThere is absolutely NOTHING “difficult” about closing Gitmo!!!
What is “difficult” is that everyone who has kept it open all this time and extra-legal are variously guilty of torture, war crimes, and breaking more ‘prosaic’ US laws such as denial of civil rights, obstruction of justice,unlawful imprisonment, kidnapping etc., all of which would be plainly exposed IF Gitmo were closed immediately and its captives brought into the US legal system and given the public trials they are entitled to.
What’s “difficult” is that those who opened and operated Gitmo can’t ‘prove ‘ their cases against their prisoners, and they can’t ‘get rid of the evidence’ (the prisoners themselves) in a timely fashion by simply shipping them out of there back to their own countries or other countries.
Hence. closing Gitmo is “difficult“
December 18th, 2008 at 4:07 pmhttp://www.democracynow.org/2008/11/17/as_obama_reiterates_call_to_close
December 18th, 2008 at 5:24 pm“I would like to see it closed”
If this is true liberals may have to re-evaluated what we think of Gates.
December 19th, 2008 at 1:30 amThis is just crazy leftwing nonsense. No one in America wants to close Camp Delta. No one wants terrorists wandering American streets. The only alternative is to send them back to Jordan, Saudi and Pakistan where they’ll either be tortured and executed or released and given heroes’ welcomes.
Welcome to Obamaland – where reality doesn’t even begin to intrude!
December 19th, 2008 at 5:01 amthis is for “oliver” you are the one talking nonsense…….cheney said that these prisoners DON’T BELONG to any recognized military force…..if that is true,why are they being held as prisoners of war ? (war on terror) let’s find out where they come from and deport them back to their home countries so they can face trial and or execution. the problem for cheney is he knows these prisoners of war are a bunch of no bodies……they just sent these guys to gitmo because they wanted to show that were working hard catching bad guys…..so oliver…you are the one living in a fantasy world
December 19th, 2008 at 1:21 pm