Getting Out Of Guantanamo Since the Supreme Court delivered a "
stinging rebuke of the Bush administration's flawed detention policies" last month by ruling that prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are
entitled to habeas corpus rights, the White House has been scrambling to respond. Last week, ABC News reported that "
[h]igh-level discussions among top advisers have escalated," and officials may ask Congress to "
spell out procedures for scores of suspected terrorists whom the government does not plan to bring to trial." Roughly 270 detainees remain at Guantanamo, and a total of just 20 men "have been charged as part of a
military commission system set up by Congress in 2006, including five accused of participating in the conspiracy that led to the Sept. 11 attacks." In the past, senior administration officials -- including
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- have reportedly pushed for the
closure of the detention facility but been
blocked by Vice President Cheney. This time may not be any different. President Bush insisted to Fox News on Thursday, "We're analyzing the decision and how to move forward, and there's
no decision that is imminent on Guantanamo." The issue remains as urgent as ever. Last month, former Navy general counsel Alberto Mora told the Senate Armed Services Committee, "[T]here are serving U.S. flag-rank officers who maintain that the first and second identifiable
causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq -- as judged by their effectiveness in recruiting insurgent fighters into combat -- are, respectively the symbols of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo."
BLOCKED BY CHENEY: The desire to close Guantanamo Bay has been on the minds of administration officials for years. "
I'd like to close Guantanamo," Bush said in 2006. When he first took office that same year, Gates urged the President to
shut down the detention facility "as quickly as possible" because it had become "so tainted abroad that legal proceedings...would be viewed as illegitimate." Yet voices for closure have been blocked by opponents such as Cheney and former attorney general
Alberto Gonzales. In September 2007, Gates told Congress that his push to close the facility was running into "
obstacles" from administration lawyers. A few months later, a senior administration official told the Financial Times that the effort "
lost the intensity needed to have a realistic chance of closing the prison during the Bush administration." Although Gonzales is gone, Cheney is still around, leaving open the possibility that he will once again block any progress. Additionally, Gonzales has been replaced by Michael Mukasey, who told the Senate during his confirmation hearing, "
I can't simply say we have to close Guantanamo."
A PLAN FOR CLOSURE: According to the Washington Post, administration officials are considering a proposal where "
about 80 detainees would remain at the facility in Cuba to be tried by military commissions, and about 65 others would be turned over to their native countries." The issue still left to be resolved is "what to do with about 120 remaining prisoners, who are viewed by the administration as too dangerous to release but who are unlikely to be brought before military commissions because of a lack of evidence." The Center for American Progress's Ken Gude has put forth a
five-phase plan to close Guantanamo over an 18-month period. The plan includes bringing "a small number of detainees into the United States to stand trial in regular federal or military courts," rather than under the flawed Military Commissions. It would create "a resettlement and rehabilitation program in partnership with allied countries and international organizations to find homes for detainees that can't be returned to their home countries" and transfer the remaining detainees to stand trial in the United States. Those detainees would be housed at either the U.S. Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility in Florence, CO, or at the U.S. Military Detention Barracks at Ft. Leavenworth, KS. Detainees captured in Afghanistan who are not candidates for trial but are too dangerous to be released would be transferred back to Afghanistan and held in a NATO-controlled detention program.
'MISLEADING AND INACCURATE' EXCUSES: Shortly after the release of the American Progress report, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) responded by describing the analysis as "
misleading and inaccurate," asserting that "Fort Leavenworth has neither the space nor the security arrangements to handle detainees from Guantanamo Bay." But as Gude explains, Brownback's claim seems to be nothing more than an excuse to "prevent any Guantanamo detainees
ending up in his home state of Kansas." Leavenworth is the only maximum security facility in the entire military prison system and has a state-of-the-art detention center with a special housing unit for maximum security prisoners. In fact, Brownback's close ally, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), has gone even further than Gude, proposing to move all detainees to Leavenworth. In 2007, McCain promised that as president, he would "immediately close Guantanamo Bay,
move all the prisoners to Fort Leavenworth and truly expedite the judicial proceedings in their cases."

IRAQ -- MALIKI PUSHES FOR SHORT-TERM SECURITY PACT WITH WITHDRAWAL TIMELINE: Over the weekend, "<a target="_blank" __removedlink__1380400264__href="http://app.mx3.americanprogressaction.org/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=7068&elq=EBAAA2B092ED4EECAEC5D580585C2C48">large crowds of Shiites" in Iraq gathered to protest the long-term security agreement that the U.S. and Iraq governments are currently debating, shouting, "
No, no to colonization! Out, out you occupier!" With widespread opposition to the original long-term security pact -- which would grant
nearly 60 permanent military bases to American troops -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signaled today that he's discussing "
a short-term memorandum of understanding" which "would keep U.S. troops in Iraq after the U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year." Notably, Maliki's proposal "includes a formula for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq." Allies of the Bush administration had previously dismissed the Iraqis' fierce opposition to the security pact. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) claimed the anger "i
s a sign of our success in Iraq, which is that Iraq now has a sovereign, independent, self-government." Bush agreed, claiming the opposition was proof of Iraq's "
vibrant democracy," and White House Press Secretary Dana Perino insisted it was a "
very positive thing" that Iraqis were "using politics and the press as a way to get their message out."
MEDIA -- NEW YORK TIMES CALLS OUT FOX NEWS'S 'PROPAGANDA' OF DOCTORING PHOTOS: On June 28, New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg wrote that Fox News "has seen its once formidable
advantage over CNN erode...as both CNN and MSNBC have added viewers at far more dramatic rates," even though Fox remains number one in the ratings. In response, Fox News anchors Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade aired a report calling Steinberg and his editor, Steven Redicliffe, "
attack dogs" and called the article was a "hit piece." Fox accompanied the report with
digitally altered photos of Steinberg and Redicliffe, in which "the journalists' teeth had been yellowed, their facial features exaggerated, and portions of Reddicliffe's hair moved further back on his head," Media Matters noted. Times Culture Editor Sam Sifton called the photos "
disgusting." He added that the paper did not plan to respond to Fox because "C48". Everyone gets dirty and the pig likes it." But in the Times today, media critic David Carr takes Fox to task for its "scorched earth" reaction to criticism. In particular, Carr writes that the anti-Semitic overtones to the distortion of Steinberg's photo recall "a technique familiar to students of vintage German propaganda" as "his ears were pulled out, his teeth splayed apart, his forehead lowered and his nose was widened." Fox News has
yet to apologize for the altered photos, though a spokesperson told Carr that "altering photos for humorous effect is
a common practice on cable news stations."
JUSTICE -- REJECTED JUSTICE DEPARTMENT JOB APPLICANT SUES OVER HIRING IMPROPRIETIES: Sean Gerlich, a young lawyer who now works for a firm in Brussels, Belgium, has
filed a class-action lawsuit against the Department of Justice alleging that he was rejected by the DOJ's honors program because of an illegal screening process that filtered out applicants who appeared to be liberal. Gerlich's lawyers are
charging that the department politicized the selection process, mishandled the applications, and failed to maintain the records, in violation of the Privacy Act, the Civil Service Reform Act and the Federal Records Act. Despite his work the previous summer for a DOJ department chief and his noteworthy academic credentials, Gerlich believes he was rejected because of his volunteer work for Amnesty International and for a Democratic congressional candidate. Revelations about the highly politicized hiring process came about when a
report released by the DOJ inspector general that found that starting in 2002 and continuing for five years, honors program screening committees "
improperly deselected candidates for interviews based on political and ideological affiliations." "It appears the politicization at Justice was so pervasive that even interns had to pass a partisan litmus test," House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) said last week.