On January 22, 2009 Obama issued an Executive Order stating, among other things, that
The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than 1 year from the date of this order. If any individuals covered by this order remain in detention at Guantánamo at the time of closure of those detention facilities, they shall be returned to their home country, released, transferred to a third country, or transferred to another United States detention facility in a manner consistent with law and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.
That’s right. By January 22, 2010, the Guantanamo Detention Facilities will be closed. Except it didn’t happen. It’s one year later, and Guantanamo is still open. Sure some of the detainees have been transferred to other countries, and there’s talk of moving many of the inmates to another prison in Illinois (still without a trial), but bottom line, this hasn’t happened yet. Obama’s Executive Order has come due, and has been ignored. What’s the point of speaking and writing up documents when they’ll just be ignored. Was Obama hoping we’d just forget what he was saying a year ago? Maybe if he messes up the economy enough, he’ll be able to take our minds off of Guantanamo?
In the end, there is no accountability. It doesn’t matter what Obama said last year, because things are different now. We should forget about what he said the same way we’ve forgotten about bi-partisanship (when it comes to health care trying to eke by along party lines).
So Obama – don’t make promises you won’t deliver just to look good. You’ll end up looking like a fool with your pants on the ground … sorry couldn’t resist.
It’s no wonder Obama’s ratings continue to drop. There’s no way he’ll be able to keep his 510 promises, if he ever even intended to. Each broken promise will disappoint a little more.
#1 by Sonic Ninja Kitty on January 27, 2010 - 9:18 am
Quote
Wow! He made 510 promises? I don’t think I’ve made that many during my lifetime!
As for Guantanamo, that is a very good catch–I don’t think I’ve heard ANYONE on the MSM talk about this. I don’t think Obama’s even tried on that one.
#2 by Rob on January 27, 2010 - 9:24 am
Quote
I remember Obama making the Guantanamo announcement and being impressed and giving him credit for doing something good… I should have been more skeptical.
#3 by Laura on January 31, 2010 - 1:08 pm
Quote
Hi Rob, found your blog from a comment on Twobackpackers. Thanks for posting this – I am always shocked at how quick the Obama administration is to make promises and how rarely they are kept. And you are right, I had completely forgotten about this whole thing.
IMO Gitmo is a tough issue. Our detention system even on US soil lacks accountability in my personal (though not first hand!) experience. I can only imagine the things that go on down in Guantanamo, and it’s scary to think about. But of course we have a center there for a reason; what on earth else are we going to do with the detainees?
I thought Obama’s Executive Order was hasty and knee-jerk, and I am glad he has not kept his promise without a basic plan in place for what to do after Gitmo has closed. This issue requires more planning than a poorly thought-out order to get the ACLU off his back.
#4 by Charles on June 4, 2011 - 7:49 am
Quote
A politician not keeping a promise? Saying something just to get votes? I’m floored! Fact is, Gitmo serves a purpose and that’s why it is still open. Most of the people there are not innocents, just caught up in the post 9/11 rush to judgement. I’m sure there are innocent people there, but there are also many, many innocent US citizens in jail. You read everyday about people doing many years for crimes they didn’t commit. And we’ve no doubt executed innocent US citizens as well. Our system is imperfect. But when it comes to Gitmo, we have to be more careful in releasing or moving these “detainees”. It is a fact that some who have been released went right back to terrorist acts and killed innocent people.
#5 by Rob on June 4, 2011 - 11:08 am
Quote
If you admit there are innocent people there, yet you still condone it, I question your morals. You’re also forgetting that correlation doesn’t imply causality. It’s quite possible that people commiting terrorist acts after Gitmo are committing them because of what was done to them at Gitmo, not because of what they were doing before Gitmo – as revenge.
If you’re the historical type: Blackstone’s formulation – “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”
If you’re the bilblical type: See Genesis 18:23-32
If you’re the legal type: The presumption of innocence, sometimes referred by the Latin Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty) is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, recognised in many nations. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who is restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be acquitted. This presumption is seen to stem from the Latin legal principle that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies). (straight from Wikipedia and full of sources)