Journalism in the Public Interest

White House Drafts Executive Order for Indefinite Detention

The Obama Administration has drafted an executive order that calls for regular reviews of the cases against Guantanamo prisoners. It calls for release of prisoners from countries like Yemen should security conditions improve.


President Barack Obama delivers an address on Guantanamo at the National Archives on May 21, 2009, during which he said that "a thorough process of periodic review" was needed to ensure that "any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified." (Official White House photo by Pete Souza)

Dec. 22: This story has been corrected and updated with the White House's response.

The White House is preparing an Executive Order on indefinite detention that will provide periodic reviews of evidence against dozens of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, according to several administration officials.

The draft order, a version of which was first considered nearly 18 months ago, is expected to be signed by President Obama early in the New Year. The order allows for the possibility that detainees from countries like Yemen might be released if circumstances there change.

But the order establishes indefinite detention as a long-term Obama administration policy and makes clear that the White House alone will manage a review process for those it chooses to hold without charge or trial.

Nearly two years after Obama's pledge to close the prison at Guantanamo, more inmates there are formally facing the prospect of lifelong detention and fewer are facing charges than the day Obama was elected.

That is in part because Congress has made it difficult to move detainees to the United States for trial. But it also stems from the president's embrace of indefinite detention and his assertion that the congressional authorization for military force, passed after the 2001 terrorist attacks, allows for such detention.

After taking office, the Obama administration reviewed the detainee population at Guantanamo Bay and chose 48 prisoners for indefinite detention. Officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that number will likely increase in coming months as some detainees are moved from a transfer category to a continued detention category.

If signed by President Obama, the new order will provide added review for detainees designated for long-term detention. The order, which is being drafted jointly by White House staff in the National Security council and the White House counsel, will offer detainees in this category a minimal review every six months and then a more lengthy annual review. Detainees will have access to an attorney, to some evidence against them and the ability to challenge their continued detention.

Prisoners who have been deemed "high-value detainees," including the alleged conspirators of the 2001 attacks, have been designated for prosecution in civilian or military courts.

"It's been clear for a while that the government would need to put in place some sort of periodic review, and that it would want it to improve on the annual review procedures used during the previous administration," said Matthew Waxman, a professor at Columbia Law School who worked on detainee issues during the Bush administration.

A White House official, who asked to speak on the condition of anonymity, later confirmed that the draft order has not yet been given to the president. The official had few details but said the order “would set up periodic review of the detention status of those detainees who cannot be tried,” in either military commissions or federal courts.

In 2008, Guantanamo detainees won the right to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in court. The executive order aims to create an executive branch review which would occur separately from the court review and would weigh the necessity of the detention, rather than its lawfulness, officials said.

"Perhaps the dangerousness of the detainee's country of origin could change, or the group that the detainee is affiliated with could cease to exist," one official explained.

Some detainees from Yemen may be sent home if security conditions there improve. Currently, there is a moratorium on transfers from Guantanamo to Yemen.

The official described the draft order as "an important piece of the government's approach to Guantanamo."

At a speech on Guantanamo in May 2009, Obama said that "a thorough process of periodic review," was needed to ensure that "any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified."

The White House first began work on an Executive Order in the spring of 2009 that was the subject of a joint story by ProPublica and the Washington Post in June 2009. An administration official at the time said the order was under consideration but had not yet been completed. Civil rights groups which oppose indefinite detention came out strongly against the possibility of an executive order.

Weeks later, administration officials said the White House had decided to work with Congress on indefinite detention, rather than through Executive Order. But by the end of 2009, the White House had said it would not support legislation.

Then, in 2010, a government task force on Guantanamo completed a year-long review that placed 48 detainees in long-term detention. In its report, task force members said those detainees would be "subject to periodic Executive Branch review."

Bobby Chesney, a law professor at the University of Texas who worked briefly on the administration's detention task force, said an executive order would provide detainees which an additional layer of review. He also said it offered a compromise since an executive order can be withdrawn at anytime.

"The order takes on additional restraints and lasts as long as the president wants. The White House gets just what it wants, no more or less. And, unlike with legislation, the order doesn't have staying power if the next administration doesn’t want it."

Jameel Jaffer, a national security lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, agreed that "more review is better." But he said that an executive order would only "normalize and institutionalize indefinite detention and other policies," that were set in place by the Bush administration.

Correction: This post originally stated that Jameel Jaffer was a national security lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Association. He is actually a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Obama channeling W again.

Brian Hartman

Dec. 21, 2010, 6:58 p.m.

I think this is a perfect example of the difference between running for president and *being* president.  As a candidate, it’s easy to look at a policy and say, “How horrible!”, but once you get in, and see the classified information the president sees, things become a lot more complex.  I don’t hold it against Obama.

George W. Bush has messed this country up for generations. :( Because of his desire to take the high road, Obama hasn’t even investigated Bush’s war crimes. Now, because Bush’s supporters are blocking justice - Barack is stuck making permanent the unlawful detainment of the Guantanamo “terrorists”.

I’m LOL that the first three comments find a way to blame this on W.  Just because W started it doesn’t mean Obama couldn’t sack up and end it.  You know, Change We Can Believe In, and all that?

Brian Hartman

Dec. 21, 2010, 7:53 p.m.


I, for one, *don’t* blame it on Bush.  I think there’s a genuine question of, “WTF do we do with these guys?”.  You or I might intuit the answer to that question, but don’t you think if “sack it up and end it” was an option, it wouldn’t ever have started in the first place? 

The real world seldom lends itself to tidy solutions.  I’m not saying there’s *not* a solution out there, but “close Guantanamo” was a politically expedient goal, not a solution to a problem.

Barack W. Obama-Bush

Dec. 21, 2010, 8:03 p.m.

This is disgusting.  I can’t believe Obama is continuing Bush’s crimes against the constitution.  What a fraud.

Brian Hartman, you know what we do with “them”?  We try them, and if we don’t have enough evidence to convict them, we deport them.  THAT’S the American Way.  Not lock people up forever just because.  It’s disgusting, it’s immoral, and it’s un-American.

I’m so disappointed in Obama.  I know I won’t be voting for him again in 2012.

What happens when the administration detains your neighbor indefinite detention, or your friend?  Or you?

Nicholas LeCompte

Dec. 21, 2010, 8:18 p.m.

I absolutely hold it against Obama, but I don’t let it drag down my otherwise high perceptions of his presidency.

It’s worth noting that we wouldn’t be in this situation if Bush hadn’t cast the criminal justice system aside for the sake of looking “tough.”  That was horrendously stupid, as even the civilian justice system could easily handle terrorists captured in Afghanistan, *provided* they were treated lawfully.

But that’s not what happened.  Instead, Bush grabbed a bunch of people, tortured them, and threw them in Gitmo.  Many have been released.  But my suspicions are that those who remain have a strong case for being dangerous terrorists, yet cannot be tried due to torture or otherwise incompetent botching of the evidence.  So they can’t be tried, yet no administration would actually release them.  A political solution seems impossible with any Congress.  So what do we do?

I really don’t think the answer is indefinite detention.  I don’t think the answer is political - I think the answer is working with the judiciary, finding an appropriate way to deal with the terrorists, and hope Republican ideologues lay off.  After all, even Scalia voted against the worst of Bush’s excesses, and I don’t think John Yoo-ism has really affected many of the nation’s courts.

But I appreciate that Obama is between a rock and a hard place on this one - look what happened to him, politically, when his DOJ attempted to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a NYC federal court.  Yet, frankly, this is a disturbing thing for any president to do, and it should be investigated, and at the very least made transparent.

Brian Hartman

Dec. 21, 2010, 8:35 p.m.


The issue with deporting them (which you’d know if you’d've read the article, or basically *any* article on the subject), is “deport them to where”?  Nobody’s lining up to receive these guys.  (And incidentally, I never referred to them as “them” in my original comment.)

I don’t know what the right answer is, but it’s not a simple situation.

Ummm folks trying to blame this on bush…

Obama’s 180’ degree turn around on EVERY “promise: transparency, bipartisanship, Gitmo, wealth differential, Taxes, military spending, lobbyist influence, bringing Wall Street in line - 180’ degree turn around…

Oh, don’t forget health care…with (to date) 110 companies pardoned from having to participate…because it would “cost them too much”

“My first act in office will be to end the war in Afghanistan and you can take this to the bank”.

Sorry, but most of you fools (yes fools or worse) are living in the “political class past” history and reality has blown past you. You are chumps and tools if you do not see the blatantly obvious.

Keep sleeping, watching the “news” and keep worrying about which political party is in office.


Steven J. Willett

Dec. 22, 2010, 12:34 a.m.

I agree with doughboy’s litany of betrayals with one caveat: he actually did practice a kind of bipartisanship by caving to every Republican objection and threat.  To the litany we can also add sovereign immunity from disclosure, excessive use of the state secrets gambit to quash trials, illegal drone strikes that mostly kill innocent civilians, right of extrajudicial assassination of US citizens not on a battlefield (the last I heard there were at least four US names on the list including Anwar al-Awlaki), warrantless wiretapping by the FBI (prohibited for now), national security letters, denial of habeas corpus for detainees at Bagram Air Base and employment of either military tribunals of civil trials for Guantanamo inmates depending on which gives the guarantee of conviction.  Obama’s hypocrisy showed itself clearly in the Senate when he promised to filibuster the FISA amendment and then violated his promise.  He has carried the shredding of our civil liberties far beyond Bush. 

During the campaign, he rashly called Afghanistan “the good war” in order to evade Republican claims he was soft on terrorism.  I doubt he believed that at the time or now, but he’s cynically willing to continue the war with all its losses among US soldiers and Afghan civilians out of political expediency for himself and the Democratic Party.  If he permits ground operations inside Pakistan, as we’re now hearing, then he will have committed the greatest foreign policy blunder of his life by potentially destabilizing a nuclear power who is supposed to be our close ally in the war against terror.  The war in Afghanistan will quickly become trivial compared with a destabilized Pakistan.  Only the bombing of Iran would top that.

Finally, there’s Israel.  As a very early supporter of J Street I’ve watched Obama’s cowardice before the arrogance of Netanyahu, a serial liar and grifter as Uri Avnery called him, permit the continued colonization of the West Bank and the imposition of draconian restrictions on Gazans in their great open air prison.  Our one-sided support for any and every crime Israel commits against the Palestinians is a key factor in Arab and Moselm hatred of the US, a factor even Gen. Petraeus realized until AIPAC shut him up.  Despite Congress’ capture by the Israeli lobby, the president does have executive measures he could take to put very considerable pressure on Israel toward a just, viable two-state solution.  He refuses to you them, again from political expediency.  As a result he and Congress are abetting Israel’s slide into one of three outcomes: (a) an apartheid state that permanently represses its Palestinian population, (2) the ethnic cleaning of the Palestinians (and possibly Israeli Arab citizens) or (3) a single bireligious, bicultural state with full civil liberties for all.  The third would entail the end of the Zionist project, but even in Israel this is being discussed with some seriousness.  Meanwhile, the demographic clock is ticking: the Palestinian and Israeli Arab population will in the near future outnumber the Jewish population.


Dec. 22, 2010, 2:38 a.m.

I think it’s hilarious that people vote.

Oh foolish man, what can you not be made to believe?

Prison and the Character of Nations: Incarceration Nation means happy sentencing, merciless and the phrase, We Believe in God. For security reason we celebrate world wide highest prisoner rate. And don’t question homemade democracy.

hind-sight is 20-20…....and let all of the detainees go and they can set up a house in your neighborhood!!

I bet all of you were cheering Bush on 9-12, BEFORE it became painfully obvious what the truth was about all that.

Steven J. Willett

Dec. 22, 2010, 3:32 a.m.

In response to Laurie, for myself, nope.  I have opposed all US wars from Vietnam down to our current military adventurism in Somalia and Yemen.  That includes of course the first invasion of Iraq, where our display of “shock and awe” destroyed the entire infrastructure of the country, an extreme violation of the Geneva Conventions and a war crime.  To this day Iraqi children suffer serious health problems from water-borne diseases and malnutrition, not to mention the some 500,000 who were killed by Clinton in his attempt to remove Saddam Hussein, itself a violation of the UN Sanctions.  Regime-change was not their purpose.

I believe it is necessary to close Guantanamo, we can not hold people detained without trial. If we want to live in a better world should condemn people for crimes established a regular process, everything else is chatter.

Makes me nervous.  Very easy to do the same thing to any American citizen once the physical and now the legal structure is in place.

Might be difficult to snag you “officially” in the U.S. of A. within sight of God (that would be “the press”) and everybody, but snagging you “unofficially” - even if that requires that you somehow end up on the other side of one of our borders or, perhaps, on the foreign land that lies within the confines of a cooperative embassy (gee…which one(s) of America’s “allies” would cooperate in an illegal rendition…) - is…

A piece of work…eh, cake.

lolll…was considering my above comment, and the number of people I know from both my time in the military and throughout the civilian realm who would instinctively say ‘Oh, they would never do that to an American citizen…’.

We’ve done a whole lot of things in the last decade that we would never have done during more democratic…more American…times.

It would appear that the America of old was taken somewhere and shot…discretely, of course.

Firstly, it wasn’t Bush or Obama that “started” “renditions”.  Been going on for decades….Read the Church Commission Report on the CIA; report done in the mid 1970’s.
Simple solution as others have noted in the comments here: Try them in Federal Courts under Criminal Law and either jail them or let them go.
That’s what our country “trumpets” to the rest of the world.
We are a terrible example of judicial honesty.
The risks go with the territory.
Either we are an “honest” (????!!!!) country or we are totalitarian.
The problem with our system is that if we try them in open Federal Court evidence will be revealed about our “secret” wars against others and the game will be afoot!
A pox on most of all the presidents of this country and a pox on both major political corrupt parties.
We lost our nation decades ago…principally since the Spanish-American War.
Read your history.
The solutions are simple; we just don’t have the courage to follow thru.


Today, 3:49 a.m.

I believe it is necessary to close Guantanamo, we can not hold people detained without trial. If we want to live in a better world should condemn people for crimes established a regular process, everything else is chatter.”

That’s the dopiest thing I’ve read in weeks.

Man, you nailed it.  Of course, anyone paying attention at all knew Obama was a liar based on his FISA vote in August of 2008.  So I can’t say I’m surprised he lied about almost everything else.

This is beyond dangerous - it changes a fundamental characteristic about America.  Death by a thousand paper cuts is what’s happening to this country and this one upped the ante for sure.  See that thing in the rear-view mirror?  It’s your country waving goodbye…

Preparing for total Guv take-over.

If you think this is just for Gitmo detainees, you are a classic lemming…

Dominos DO tip, and you DO trust your government.


The administration’s shockingly reactionary and repressive-indeed medieval-record on civil rights is, unfortunately, par for the course.

Those interested in moving beyond criticism into opposition-namely the organizing of protest against this and numerous other right wing policies are encouraged to add their signature to the Open Letter to the Left Establishment posted at

I resent they get 3 squares a day and free healthcare for which they neither would receive in their home countries and the fact that we in America do not receive.

Yemen is a source of Islamic terror. Personally I believe that should release them in Yemen and then shoot them. They, the prisners are receiving to much attention. Of course that is true of all to many Muslims.

I can almost forgive George W. for being a
( ignorant ) tyrant but Obama ( a former law professor ) understands the law in a meaningful way. He understands the legal difference between “right” and “need”. HIs actions continue to be shameful.

This is just further proof that the American government in not legitimate in the sense that it doesn’t in any way feel bound by the Constitution. The Constitution clearly provides and limits the powers of the state and there is no reference to it by the government and very rarely is there a true reference even in the media. We’re always talking about regime changes that need to happen in other countries. Well, it’s time for a *true* regime change in America! And, no, not like the last one where we exchanged a white criminal for a black one!

This is the most heinous news in my lifetime,
at sixty three have seen the worst, but to overthrow 800 years of Western civilization, that started with the Magna Carta and habeus corpus ,must be fought tooth and nail, revolution, violent or nonviolent whatever it takes, yes Nazi Germany springs to mind,  it will be you, and me, the homeless, anti war dissidents, Afro Americans, the poor, unemployed, handicapped, Muslim, and maybe Latinos, that will be targets in an emergency , sent to the already existing FEMA camps, and then,,,?
WE can imagine the worst there too, or WW lll rendering it all moot, or natural disaster, but life goes on obli dee, obla da, hope we make it, life will whatever happens, soul, spirit living forever in other dimensions, will miss the corporeal loved ones so fight for their sake first.

Could this maybe be an issue where we lefties can make common cause with the Tea Party folks who claim to believe in limited government? Or at least they’re against anything Obama is for—will they be against this?

aaronstotle emoted Yesterday, at 8:58 p.m.:  “I can almost forgive George W. for being a ( ignorant ) tyrant but Obama ( a former law professor ) understands the law in a meaningful way.”

I know what you mean.  I, too, was both saddened and shocked by this Administration’s amazing ability to alter their interpretation of the letter and spirit of the Constitution to fit what they perceive to be the need of the moment. 

It is my both my observation and sad conclusion that when those needs are political, the needs of the nation - of the American people - are thrust aside.

I learned something:  Reserve my respect for Constitutional “scholars”, for when it comes to Constitutional lawyers, the lawyer appears to outweigh the Constitution.

Forces of oppressors beyond our control may come in many forms Congress laywers judges any1 insecure about what is the truth can be munipulated into doing wrong without knowing the consequence ot their own actions ...may The Lord be with those detained unlawfully!

This is, to a great extent, George W. Bush’s fault.  The right move would have been to try these prisoners immediately in open, civilian courts of law, but W didn’t do that.  Now the question is: could we have civilian cases for these prisoners without them ending in mistrial?  All of the prisoners have been detained for so long and in such a way fair trials would not be possible, and I suspect most civilian US judges would agree (I don’t know much about military law.)  Also, any evidence the US has extracted through torture, including leads to other suspects, would be thrown out.  So I think civilian trias could not take place without changing the rules to a form I personally would not recognize as justice.

That said, I don’t know what the solution is, but it seems that the President has limited options due to his predecessor’s policies and actions.  I object to this Executive Order—it stinks of injustice.  But do we just let them go?  What better options are on the table?

What better options?

Me, I’d give them the paperwork required for them to personally apply for asylum in all of the nations of the world…on the condition that I could integrate - in the physical sense, not the electro-chemical sense - an RFID chip into a delicate area of their CNS (as one possibility…difficulty of removal being the objective).

Pretty cheap, outfitting all airports, ports, border crossings, embassies, places where people gather in large numbers, etc. etc. etc. with the right transponders.  Depending upon the design of the chip - what it told the chip to do when its identity number was read by a transponder - you could create a globally-effective ankle bracelet.

No, I’m not speaking in the terms of science fiction - I could almost do it myself with the equipment I have access to.  And I daresay imprisoning someone within the confines of a cell and/or prison is far more inhumane than imprisoning them within the confines of a particular geographical region.

Assuming, of course, that some country would be willing to accept them…that outcome would be a function of their ability to convince their prospective hosts that no, they are not, in fact, unreformed terrorists.

America is for all practical purposes a police security state.
Between the Unpatriot Acts, the Military Commissions act, FEMA camps, wholesale spying on Americans, Sneek and peek, etc, etc, etc.
Now throw in the TSA gestapo and the presidents power to imprison anyone indefinitely without charges and there you have it.
America finally destroyed.
The Constitution ground into the dirt
The Bill of Rights null and void.
If you excercise your 1st amendment right of free speech, you are considered a terrorist threat or an extremist. How many people were summarilly arrested and illegally detained at BOTH presidential conventions? Thousands!
The government in Washington is no longer our servant. It has become our master.and we, its evil malignant cancer on the republic that has turned against the citizenry fore it serves only the wealthy and power elite, the banksters and zionist israhell.
The government has become the very enemy of the American people.
It now threatens to disarm the people:The U.N. Small Arms Treaty. It is now planning to rescind your property rights, relocate American citizens and place our nation under complete U.N. control : Agenda 21.
My fellow Americans, we are losing this nation to the globalists.
This is a warning to all concerned: Act now or kiss it all goodbye, for once the government destroys all liberty, we will hard pressed to regain it.
We have very little time left.

it"s imposible to listen by CIA and to do anything to destroy lifes,to create executions against civilian persons,a cold war,an invisible one

is psychologicle tortuture,means a desire to revenge,means that you create deaths or terrorrists

CIA must be put in front of usa congress for their abuses and murders against the population

Dhani De angelis

Dec. 25, 2010, 6:12 p.m.

I can see the injustice right away. The closer we abide to the Geneva Rules of international law in treatment of Prisoners of War, the better we will saty diplomatically.  Fear and force can work for so long without destroying itself from within.  Some readings in Political history shows just that.  It seems to me that an Executive Order like this one is a example of a small elite taking over the regulations that are supposedly congressional in nature.  But, then if you look back in history and see that this country is essentially a republic and has a presidential staff; the first such ruling power in history;  you’ll see that the Presidential staff does not need the say of the people if they decide to. It is a transparency within the governmental structure of the United States.  The ample room for amendments and the Court of Appeals system leaves a lot of room for extenuation of legal arguments. If the law is not just, the law is corrupt. Absolute Power corrupts absolutely!

Yes, it is Bush’s fault…
he should have commenced military trials.

Obama can restart them tomorrow. And should.

It is also Bush’s fault that 25% of the released Guantanamo prisoners RETURNED to the battlefield; they should have been tired, convicted and jailed or executed instead of just being released. Hoping that these hardened killers would drop their hatred was just magical thinking.

BTW. The Geneva Convention allows detention during continued hostilities - no Executive Order is needed.

Sashland, The problem as I see it is that those captured off-shore should be retained at camps in those countries we have intruded in. WWII type camps would do the trick. We are treating Islamic terrorist with to much respect. Keep them no where near our shores. Those Islamic terrorist who act out in America ship them back to their country of origin and then shoot them.

Oh yes, all those in Gitmo are no doubt mooslem terrists trying to destroy Amurca.
Just how many are actually considered terrorists?
What about all those who are innocent? You know, the ones who were turned in by a neighbor who, for whatever reason decided to collect some reward money by reporting to the authorities that his neighbor was one of those terrorists. Just How many??
And if the U.S. would mind its own business and refrain from invading other sovereign states in the middleast, then in all likelihood there would be no reason for those people to be angry and upset with America. The history of U.S. involvement in the middleast is long and disgraceful. Not too mention the fact that America is israhell’s bitch and does whatever it is ordered to by the zionist/jew controllers in Washington and israhell.
Remember One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
Also consider this: Jefferson, Washington, Adams and others were considered terrorists by King George. Thomas Paine was considered seditious and had a price on his head. He would have been tried and hung if he were brought before an English court.
Now we all are considered terrorist threats by the DHS, SPLC and FBI even the TSA. How much more do we put up with before we have to put our foot down?
Do you want to end up in Gitmo like the others or in one of FEMA’s detention camps?

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Ben Franklin

The negative message indefinite detention sends the rest of the world about who we are and what we stand for only encourages others to hate us and call us hypocrites.  We give Iran and N. Korea a basis for holding their puppet prisoners.

Whether it’s in trial or tribunal, try these people and make a decision about their fate.


Well, at least you started out with some reasonable questions before you slid into your Zionist and Jew hatred…

are you telling me that you support the deliberate attacks on civilians as legitimate acts of “freedom fighters”?

You slander our revolutionary leaders by equating their struggle for freedom with genocidal mass murderers.

America’s involvment in the middleast has more to do with israhell than anything else especially in Iraq. The fact that the zionist /jews in AIPAC,& israhell have been pushing our nation into unconstitutional and illegal wars for that zionist, marxist racist state is beyond question.
I do not support the killing of innocent people through terrorism or any other means such as what the people of Iraq suffered when the boosh administration decided to attack Iraq. The wholesale destruction of one of the world’s oldest civilizations rests entirely on G.W. boosh and the zionist neocons within that administration. The number of deaths in Iraq may never be known.We do know the people of Iraq have suffered from the daily terror they experience from illegal occupation.
This is just another form of terrorism…but it’s ok when WE do it. Right?
So now what? Do we keep going… now into Iran?
Obviously you don’t get it at all. We create more enemies when our government unjustly starts wars against innocent people.
As for slandering our founding fathers…well I have more respect for our founding fathers , the Constitution and Bill of Rights they wrote than probably you. So don’t even attempt to go in that direction. The nerve.
In short, as long as the American sheeple continue to believe everything and anything this morally and criminally corrupt government in D.C.(District of Corruption), they will continue to allow the government to get away with anything.These are the people I have no respect for. I have no patience with people who allow themselve to be led around by these liars in Washington.
I have no reason to believe or support this government that is grinding the Constitution and Bill of Rights into the dirt. What you do is your own decision. Just don’t complain when the Feds come knocking in your door and haul your butt away to some concentration camp.

As far as genocidal mass murderers, you have only to consider what the boosh administration has done to the people of Iraq. No one has even come close.
Between clinton and boosh, they both have murdered 1.5 million people. Talk about terrorism….

pablodaniel says “CIA must be put in front of usa congress for their abuses and murders against the population” and who will have Congress stand for treason against our Constitution and answer for corruption?


Silly rant.
Nice to live in you world where facts don’t matter?

“The Nerve”  hahahaha

Israel told the US NOT to invade Iraq.

“The wholesale destruction of one of the world’s oldest civilizations”  hahahaha

Al-Q. and Baath folks killed many more Iraqis than the US, not even close. The people of Iraq ultimately chose to fight WITH the US against them and now have their own independent country.

“illegal occupation”? Its a sovereign state, didn’t ya notice?

I’d be more worried about YOU knocking on my door….

take a chill pill dude and stop believing those wacked-out blogs.

Sashland emoted Yesterday, at 7:39 p.m.:  “Israel told the US NOT to invade Iraq. [...] “illegal occupation”? Its a sovereign state, didn’t ya notice?”

a)  Apparently Israel forgot to CC: that strange assortment of oilmen and and pro-Israel provocateurs who were/are the bedfellows of PNAC.

b)  Were we to have a few hundred container ships full of the PRC’s People’s Liberation Army storm ashore and take up residence - by force - in America, I presume that would be justified in your eyes so long as they touted the fact that the United States of America “remained” ‘a sovereign state’?

Klaus Pfeiffer

Dec. 29, 2010, 11:08 p.m.

Let’s get back to the subject of detainees.  Does the U.S. really have proof that any of them were responsible for 9/11, the event around which all of these abysmal situations revolve?  I would like to hear in open court how they (the terrorists) were able to set up the necessary explosives that were used to bring the 3 buildings down that day.  It must have taken weeks or months of preparation for the incredible demolition we saw that day.  I would also like to know where they got the special military-grade high tech nano-thermite which was found in the dust of 9/11.  Boys and girls I have to tell you the government has more to loose in a trial than any of the detainees, ergo, there will be no trial.  If that’s o.k. with you, then you are no American, you’re a coward unable or unwilling to face the truth.  I don’t blame you because it is extremely difficult to realize that America has been hijacked and even more difficult to see just who the REAL terrorists are.  The Bush administration desperately needed to drum up a terrorist threat that was worthy of our revenge from 9/11.  His pathetic attempt to portray Saddam Hussien, a friend and ally or puppet of decades of previous administrations, was weak.  His torture chambers were an attempt to supply “proof” through personal testimony of a powerful enemy force that warranted our crushing military response.  But alas, even that didn’t work.  Where is this great enemy that is sapping our nations wealth and destroying the once admired character of America?  It doesn’t exist, at least not the way the fairy tale told by Bush/Cheney/Bush. The real enemy of America is within!  It is the new world order.  It is the rich and powerful elite who consider themselves special, above and beyond we meer mortals and the law.  Our greatest enemy hides behind secrecy, national security, and intelligence agencies.  What happened in Germany during the 30s is happening now here in America.  You don’t want to believe it, I don’t blame you.  But if you don’t want it to happen you had better look around, face the facts as they are, and help us figure out what to do with these people who think they own the world.  Time IS running out!

Klaus—That IS the answer with which I agree.

“They needed another Pearl Harbor” in order to implement their plans: The Patriot Act. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Another patriot Act. Detention without charge.
Yes Klaus, I agree with you. There’s more to 9/11 than what those in the government are telling us. It all adds up to treason.
The government in Washington is now our true enemy. It is the bureaucrats, the politicians and all those who sold us out for the NWO.
I agree: Time is running out.


Only a small number of the Gtmo prisoners are charged in relation to 9/11 or any other act of terrorism.  Those are the ones Holder wanted to try in regular courts but that’s been blocked by Congress.

Most of the Gtmo prisoners have been scheduled for release but are still in prison because of either security or human rights issues with their home country.  For example, the Yemenis can’t be released because the US doesn’t trust Yemen to ensure they are properly monitored.  The Chinese can’t be released because they’ve been identified as part of a rebel ethnic group in China and there are fears of what the Chinese government will do to them.  The US refuses to take any of these people itself.  It’s branded them as dangerous terrorists so nobody else particularly wants them either.

A few other people were charged with some kind of combat related role.  A person might have fought with the Taliban before or after 9/11, or they might have played some support role to the Taliban or Al Quaeda like the cooks or drivers or they were in a training camp or met Bin Laden or had a relative involved in Al Qaeda, etc.  But, especially given the way these people were treated at Gtmo in the early years, it’s possible they could want revenge so Obama is afraid to release them.  He would be crucified if any of them took up Jihad.  Bush was able to release or transfer over 500 such people, basically because nobody was noticing or promoting irrational fears.  Now those fears are rampant and the Pentagon keeps releasing unsubstantiated and ever increasing figures on so-called “recidivism”.  Obama’s big problem is that people are apparently even afraid of having the Gtmo prisoners in US prisons, although there must be a lot of people who actually committed terrorism in US prisons.

And then there are about 3 people in Gtmo who’ve been convicted and are still in prison.  The man who made Al Quaeda videos who boycotted his trial and is serving a life sentence.  Another man, the Taliban cook, who has about a year to go in his sentence.  And, Canada’s child soldier who was recruited into the insurgency by his father, Omar Khadr.

Omar Khadr will probably be transferred to Canada in a year and will be released in 8 years or sooner, under Canada’s parole rules.  By law, he should never have been prosecuted.  He should have been released under surveillance and controlled circumstances.  For a while, more recently, at least, he was being treated half decently at Gtmo. Now he’s in solitary confinement, in an act of utter stupidity.  Even the Prosecution’s strange psychiatrist said he should be in rehabilitation because he will be released in Canada, for the sake of the public if not his own.  Instead they have cut off anything that might have helped towards rehabiliation.

This article is part of an ongoing investigation:

The Detention Dilemma

The government remains uncertain what to do with its prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Get Updates

Our Hottest Stories