HuffPost: Obama's gonna close Gitmo!
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 23, 2024, 04:13:01 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  HuffPost: Obama's gonna close Gitmo!
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: HuffPost: Obama's gonna close Gitmo!  (Read 4819 times)
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 10, 2008, 12:29:09 PM »

Smiley Smiley

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/10/obama-plans-guantanamo-cl_n_142593.html

WASHINGTON — President-elect Obama's advisers are quietly crafting a proposal to ship dozens, if not hundreds, of imprisoned terrorism suspects to the United States to face criminal trials, a plan that would make good on his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison but could require creation of a controversial new system of justice.

During his campaign, Obama described Guantanamo as a "sad chapter in American history" and has said generally that the U.S. legal system is equipped to handle the detainees. But he has offered few details on what he planned to do once the facility is closed.

Under plans being put together in Obama's camp, some detainees would be released and many others would be prosecuted in U.S. criminal courts.

A third group of detainees _ the ones whose cases are most entangled in highly classified information _ might have to go before a new court designed especially to handle sensitive national security cases, according to advisers and Democrats involved in the talks. Advisers participating directly in the planning spoke on condition of anonymity because the plans aren't final.

The move would be a sharp deviation from the Bush administration, which established military tribunals to prosecute detainees at the Navy base in Cuba and strongly opposes bringing prisoners to the United States. Obama's Republican challenger, John McCain, had also pledged to close Guantanamo. But McCain opposed criminal trials, saying the Bush administration's tribunals should continue on U.S. soil.

The plan being developed by Obama's team has been championed by legal scholars from both political parties. But it is almost certain to face opposition from Republicans who oppose bringing terrorism suspects to the U.S. and from Democrats who oppose creating a new court system with fewer rights for detainees.

The plan drew criticism from some detainee lawyers shortly after it surfaced Monday.

"I think that creating a new alternative court system in response to the abject failure of Guantanamo would be a profound mistake," said Jonathan Hafetz, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who represents detainees. "We do not need a new court system. The last eight years are a testament to the problems of trying to create new systems."

Story continues below

Laurence Tribe, a Harvard law professor and Obama legal adviser, said discussions about plans for Guantanamo had been "theoretical" before the election but would quickly become very focused because closing the prison is a top priority. Bringing the detainees to the United States will be controversial, he said, but could be accomplished.

"I think the answer is going to be, they can be as securely guarded on U.S. soil as anywhere else," Tribe said. "We can't put people in a dungeon forever without processing whether they deserve to be there."

The tougher challenge will be allaying fears by Democrats who believe the Bush administration's military commissions were a farce and dislike the idea of giving detainees anything less than the full constitutional rights normally enjoyed by everyone on U.S. soil.

"There would be concern about establishing a completely new system," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a member of the House Judiciary Committee and former federal prosecutor who is aware of the discussions in the Obama camp. "And in the sense that establishing a regimen of detention that includes American citizens and foreign nationals that takes place on U.S. soil and departs from the criminal justice system _ trying to establish that would be very difficult."

Obama has said the civilian and military court-martial systems provide "a framework for dealing with the terrorists," and Tribe said the administration would look to those venues before creating a new legal system. But discussions of what a new system would look like have already started.

"It would have to be some sort of hybrid that involves military commissions that actually administer justice rather than just serve as kangaroo courts," Tribe said. "It will have to both be and appear to be fundamentally fair in light of the circumstances. I think people are going to give an Obama administration the benefit of the doubt in that regard."

Though a hybrid court may be unpopular, other advisers and Democrats involved in the Guantanamo Bay discussions say Obama has few other options.

Prosecuting all detainees in federal courts raises a host of problems. Evidence gathered through military interrogation or from intelligence sources might be thrown out. Defendants would have the right to confront witnesses, meaning undercover CIA officers or terrorist turncoats might have to take the stand, jeopardizing their cover and revealing classified intelligence tactics.

But Tribe said the current military commission system represents a "nonstarter" and other advisers agreed. With lax evidence rules and intense secrecy, the commissions have been criticized by human rights groups, defense attorneys and even some military prosecutors who quit in protest.

"I don't think we need to completely reinvent the wheel, but we need a better tribunal process that is more transparent," Schiff said.

That means something different would need to be done if detainees couldn't be released or prosecuted in traditional courts. Exactly what that something would look like remains unclear.

According to three advisers participating in the process, Obama is expected to propose a new court system, appointing a committee to decide how such a court would operate. Some detainees likely would be returned to the countries where they were first captured for further detention or rehabilitation. The rest could probably be prosecuted in U.S. criminal courts, one adviser said. All spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the ongoing talks, which have been private.

Waleed Alshahari, who has been following Guantanamo issues for the Yemeni Embassy in Washington, said the plan being discussed by the Obama team was an improvement over the current system. But he said he expects most detainees to be released rather than stand trial.

"If the U.S. government has any evidence against them, they would try them and put them in jail," Alshahari said. "But it has been obvious they have nothing against them. That is why they have not faced trial."

With more than 90 Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo, the country is home to the largest group of prisoners. The U.S. and Yemen have negotiated but failed to reach a deal on a prisoner release.

Whatever form Obama's plan finally takes, Tribe said the next president would move quickly.

"In reality and symbolically, the idea that we have people in legal black holes is an extremely serious black mark," Tribe said. "It has to be dealt with."
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2008, 12:33:07 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2008, 12:34:10 PM »

To States that just called Obama a "POS" (and then deleted it?): Oh boo hoo.  God forbid we have a trial with evidence in this country, if these are truly bad guys, it shouldn't be hard to prove it.

The international good will Obama gains by doing this move means that we will have increased security (more countries coming to our aid militarily), actually. 

Or we can pretend that America doesn't need the rest of the world and will always be hegemon.  Forget about that China-place, we don't need more strong allies.
Logged
elcorazon
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2008, 12:36:56 PM »

what's a POS?
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2008, 12:38:18 PM »


Piece of Poo
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,071


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2008, 12:40:57 PM »

Wonderful! Now we can clog up our justice system with terrorists! I thought we already saw with Clinton that treating this as a law enforcement case didn't work?
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,470
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2008, 12:42:49 PM »

Awesome news, if accurate. I'm skeptical, I guess.
Logged
Kalimantan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 841
Indonesia


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2008, 12:44:13 PM »

Wonderful! Now we can clog up our justice system with terrorists! I thought we already saw with Clinton that treating this as a law enforcement case didn't work?

"We can't put people in a dungeon forever without processing whether they deserve to be there."
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2008, 12:46:04 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.

POW

We held Germans here for years during WW1 @ 2. On top of that the same thing was done during the Civil War as well.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,938


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2008, 12:48:08 PM »

Awesome. Smiley
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,470
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2008, 12:48:55 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.

POW

We held Germans here for years during WW1 @ 2. On top of that the same thing was done during the Civil War as well.

And you supported Lincoln's actions there?
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2008, 12:56:04 PM »

I approve more than disapprove of this. I do not see having the facility itself as illegitimate. That's my one minor disapproval. I do see no trials as a huge problem. I'm for a fully functional republic and not a republic only when it is convenient.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2008, 12:57:23 PM »

I approve more than disapprove of this. I do not see having the facility itself as illegitimate. That's my one minor disapproval. I do see no trials as a huge problem. I'm for a fully functional republic and not a republic only when it is convenient.

Well, he's just removing the indefinite prisoners.  I think "closing" might be an overstatement, but it makes us civil-rights liberals happy to use that rhetoric Smiley
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2008, 12:59:50 PM »

I approve more than disapprove of this. I do not see having the facility itself as illegitimate. That's my one minor disapproval. I do see no trials as a huge problem. I'm for a fully functional republic and not a republic only when it is convenient.

Well, he's just removing the indefinite prisoners.  I think "closing" might be an overstatement, but it makes us civil-rights liberals happy to use that rhetoric Smiley


In that case, I'm good with it.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2008, 01:10:35 PM »

I have issues with Gitmo, as do most people...

But I've seen too many news stories along the lines of "such and such terrorist was killed today in Pakistan...believed to be responsible for such and such...had been released from Guantanamo Bay X number of years ago..."

I'm of the opinion that it should be kept but basically run as a POW camp.  I don't see why we can't keep them locked up until the Taliban and Al Qaeda stop fighting us in Afghanistan.
Logged
paul718
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,012


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2008, 01:12:17 PM »

Guantanamo needs to be closed, and it was inevitable as McCain was set on closing it as well.  So I'm happy about that.  But I'm not sure about giving these guys a trial.  

Are they criminals, or are they POWs?  This is why I think all military force should be predicated by a congressional declaration of war.  Then again, had we entered a state of war with Iraq, would captured foreign insurgents be considered agents of the Iraqi military?  I say yes, but I don't know anything about rules of war, UCMJ, etc.
Logged
paul718
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,012


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2008, 01:13:16 PM »

Knocked this off the current page, so I'll repost.

I have issues with Gitmo, as do most people...

But I've seen too many news stories along the lines of "such and such terrorist was killed today in Pakistan...believed to be responsible for such and such...had been released from Guantanamo Bay X number of years ago..."

I'm of the opinion that it should be kept but basically run as a POW camp.  I don't see why we can't keep them locked up until the Taliban and Al Qaeda stop fighting us in Afghanistan.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2008, 01:17:47 PM »

Wonderful! Now we can clog up our justice system with terrorists! I thought we already saw with Clinton that treating this as a law enforcement case didn't work?

Haha, I hardly think this tiny number of individuals will 'clog up' the justice system, Duke.  Any clogging is mainly due to vast numbers of petty drug dealers and so forth.  We live in a purittanical society, and it is a myth that it is under serious attack from 'terrorists'.
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2008, 01:29:54 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.

POW

We held Germans here for years during WW1 @ 2. On top of that the same thing was done during the Civil War as well.

That'd be valid, if there was even the semblance of ANY adherence to Geneva or the possibility for the detainees to live under humane circumstances whilst detained, but it doesnt. Even then, the whole POW argument is questionable because they are no non-political actors.

Plus the detainments in the other wars were questionable themselves.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2008, 01:31:08 PM »


In other news . . .  water is wet.

Like no one saw this coming.  Roll Eyes
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 10, 2008, 01:33:46 PM »


In other news . . .  water is wet.

Partisan hack.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2008, 01:36:24 PM »


*dies laughin*
Logged
Cashcow
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,843


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2008, 01:59:04 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.

POW

We held Germans here for years during WW1 @ 2. On top of that the same thing was done during the Civil War as well.

This makes it OK because...?
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2008, 02:02:46 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.

POW

We held Germans here for years during WW1 @ 2. On top of that the same thing was done during the Civil War as well.

This makes it OK because...?

Because it keeps them from killing others until such a time where we can return them back to their country of orgin so they can be dealt with...?
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 10, 2008, 02:04:11 PM »

SOMETHING needs to be done, at least.

States, how can you advocate people being locked up for 7 years without trial? That's dictatorial in any language.

POW

We held Germans here for years during WW1 @ 2. On top of that the same thing was done during the Civil War as well.

This makes it OK because...?

Because it keeps them from killing others until such a time where we can return them back to their country of orgin so they can be dealt with...?

Even if we accept that argument, is there any excuse for the living conditions?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.068 seconds with 13 queries.