General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Sanders tanked Clinton. [View all]BainsBane
(53,035 posts)Last edited Thu Sep 7, 2017, 01:36 AM - Edit history (2)
The entire issue in those votes iwas that legislators didn't want the prisoners on US soil. There is no such thing as closing the camp without putting the prisoners somewhere.
And the only proposed location was not in IL. They were proposals to send them to different prisons around the country. Congress voted those down too. And while I can hardly be surprised that the authority you site is an editorial by the White Nationalists and Trump defender Greenwald, his claims are false. Putin's chosen intermediary just coincidentally was involved in the Trump administrations' arrest of a leaker, when every other publication managed to to protect their sources, only the intercept's source ends up in prison, and of course it benefited Trump and Putin.
Legislators voted down the bills because they didn't want Arab prisoners in their states. There is no closing the camp without dealing with the prisoners. Greenwald's clam otherwise is a bold-faced lie.
You know there was more than one bill. You had to have read about it at the time. Obama tried a variety of approaches to get congress to vote to transfer prisoners and close the camp, but they voted all of them down. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/08/01/why-obama-has-failed-to-close-guantanamo
He released as many prisoners as he could, as the NYorker detailed story recounts. It remains open because congress refused to do what was ne essay to close it.
Pretending that an excerpt from a fascist shill explains why congress wouldn't allow Arab prisoners in America is bullshit. If you oppose closing Gitmo, have the courage to say so. This smokescreen could not be more transparent.