Obama Vows New Push to Close Guantanamo

[daze23]

I am curious how many times the administration has taken advantage of the power granted by Congress in 2012 to waive restrictions against releasing Gitmo detainees on a cse by case basis to countries that are considered to have less than ideal security issues?

link?

didn't the NDAA put restrictions on military funds being used for release and resettlement?

 

[daze23]

http://www.aclu.org/criminal-law-re...ty-prisoners-rights/aclu-statement-presidents

NEW YORK – At a press briefing today, President Obama restated his belief that the prison at Guantánamo should be closed. Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, responded to the president's comments by detailing immediate actions the president could take.

"We welcome the president's continuing commitment to closing Guantánamo and putting an end to the indefinite detention regime there," Romero said. "There are two things the president should do. One is to appoint a senior point person so that the administration's Guantánamo closure policy is directed by the White House and not by Pentagon bureaucrats. The president can also order the secretary of defense to start certifying for transfer detainees who have been cleared, which is more than half the Guantánamo population."

"There's more to be done, but these are the two essential first steps the president can take now to break the Guantánamo logjam," Romero said. "We couldn't agree more with President Obama's statement that 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.'"

 

[No1]

http://www.aclu.org/criminal-law-re...ty-prisoners-rights/aclu-statement-presidents

I wonder if he qould appoint someone. I don't know if you read the Times article I posted earlier but it didn't work so well the last time.

 

[Brown_Pride]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dStTyX10Ii0"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dStTyX10Ii0[/ame]

 

[OsO]

lol damn this dude cant get guantanamo closed down... are you the president or not?

 

[No1]

lol damn this dude cant get guantanamo closed down... are you the president or not?

Yo, I'm about to be out in NYC this summer and shyt...where should I definitely hit to eat...

 

[Type Username Here]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-1-2013/limbo-update

Jon Stewart went in.

 

[OsO]

Yo, I'm about to be out in NYC this summer and shyt...where should I definitely hit to eat...

depends on what you want.

to keep it a buck i have yet to have a bad meal in NYC. they take food very seriously here. even the $4 halal gyro is flames...

 

[The Real]

Yo, I'm about to be out in NYC this summer and shyt...where should I definitely hit to eat...

Depends on what kind of food you like. You can find literally anything out here.

 

[No1]

Depends on what kind of food you like. You can find literally anything out here.

I was just thinking of spots that I'm definitely SUPPOSED to hit. As long as you're not steering me towards some purely vegan spots or sushi joints, I'm flexible.

 

[Pedro Negro]

I was just thinking of spots that I'm definitely SUPPOSED to hit. As long as you're not steering me towards some purely vegan spots or sushi joints, I'm flexible.

Steak - Peter Lugers (Brooklyn)

Southern BBQ - Fette Sau (Brooklyn)

Cuban - Cuba (West Village)

Puerto Rican - Sofrito ( the city)

Thai - BKNY (Queens)

Stoner Food - Fatty's Cafe (Queens)

Brunch - Sweetwater Grill ( Brooklyn)

 

[Type Username Here]

I've preserved the emphasis of Ben Wittes, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution who writes at the always informative blog Lawfare. "The President's comments are bewildering because his own policies give rise to the vast majority of the concerns about which he so earnestly delivered himself in these remarks," Wittes commented. "Remember that Obama himself has imposed a moratorium on repatriating people to Yemen. And Obama himself has insisted that nearly 50 detainees cannot either be tried or transferred. True, he would hold such people in a domestic facility, rather than at Guantanamo Bay. But so what? Does the President not understand when he frets about 'the notion that we're going to continue to keep over 100 individuals in a no-man's land in perpetuity' that if Congress let him do exactly as he wished, he would still be doing exactly that -- except that the number might not reach 100 and the location would not be at Guantanamo?"

This is what vast swaths of the public, right and left alike, don't understand about Obama's position. Yes, he wants to close Guantanamo Bay, in the sense that he wants to shutter the island facility in Cuba. But he wants to continue indefinitely detaining people without charges or trial. And not just dangerous terrorists who can't be tried because the Bush Administration tortured them.

"For Obama to talk in the language of the ACLU when what he means is that he wishes to hold fewer people than are now at Guantanamo and to do so at Location B, rather than at Location A, is profoundly dishonest," Wittes adds. "If Obama had meant that he wants to bring to an end detention -- which is legitimate as long as hostilities continue -- as he brings hostilities to a close, he could have said as much very simply. He didn't need to go on a rant about how much we had learned about how to handle terrorists over the last ten years. He didn't need to wring his hands about how much damage Guantanamo does to America's image. He could simply have stated that detention under the laws of war is proper as long as hostilities continue, that he hopes to bring hostilities to a close in short order, that releases will be inevitable at that point, and that Congress should give him more flexibility with respect to transfers now. Instead, he described himself as fighting against a policy he has, in fact, adopted."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-obama-isnt-fooling-the-press-anymore/275494/