Randy's Blog

RSS Feed
Question of the week: Do you support the continuation of current law, which prohibits detainees from Guantanamo Bay from being transferred to prisons in the United States?
Posted by Randy | December 05, 2012
California Senator Dianne Feinstein released a report last week by the U.S. Government Accountability Office: Facilities and Factors for Consideration If Detainees Were Brought to the United States.  Senator Feinstein touted the report as proof that the U.S. could handle the detainees if the U.S. were to close military detention facilities at its Naval Station in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

“Since 2002, the United States has operated detention facilities in Guantánamo Bay to hold individuals detained during overseas counterterrorism operations. In 2009 the President directed the closure of these facilities within 1 year,” says the report. “Since then, a number of statutes have prohibited the transfer of Guantánamo Bay detainees to the United States. GAO was asked to review existing U.S. facilities and identify factors to be considered in the event that restrictions were lifted and Guantánamo Bay detainees were transferred to the United States.”

The GAO report lists six correctional facilities operated by the Department of Defense, including Naval Consolidated Brig Chesapeake, which are equipped to confine prisoners for more than one year.

Since 2009, Congressman Forbes has introduced and sponsored numerous pieces of legislation to prevent the transfer of detainees to Virginia and the rest of the United States. Congressman Forbes introduced legislation, H.R. 1638, to prohibit the use of federal funds to transfer detainees to locations in Virginia. Mr. Forbes was also a cosponsor of H.R. 2294, the Keep Terrorists Out of America Act and H.R. 1186, which prohibited the use of funds to transfer individuals detained Guantanamo Bay to facilities in Virginia. All these provisions were incorporated into the last three National Defense Authorization Acts and passed as law.

Question of the week: Do you support the continuation of current law, which prohibits detainees from Guantanamo Bay from being transferred to prisons in the United States?

( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) I don't know
( ) Other (Leave your comments below)


Take the poll here.

Find out the results of last week’s instapoll here.

Find out the results of my instapoll about the “Fiscal Cliff” here.
Comments
Users are solely responsible for the opinions they post here and their comments do not necessarily reflect the views of Congressman Forbes.
  • COL (Ret) Stan Hoskin commented on 12/5/2012
    Unfortunately, I am not sure I understand the issues. If they are moved and held here on American soil, do they gain some "status" advantage that would enable them to use our court system to appeal their detention? If that is true, then I oppose closing the holding jail at "GTMO." Our military laws provide for detention of combatants in the way that we have done so far. If we close the base and move them here, I believe their detention status as combatants would change and could possibly enable them to be "set free" in America...if that's the potential sequence of events, then I am ABSLUTELY AGAINST closing the facility and am IN FAVOR of keeping the current law in place.
  • David Timm commented on 12/5/2012
    What a paranoid, , silly notion!. Please explain to us, Mr. Forbes, exactly WHY properly secured and detained foreign terrorists are better and more economically detained in Foreign countries than in our own jails and prisons? If they are more secure in foreign penal institutions than in our own, why is that? Can foreigners who do not know our customs and cannot speak our language be greater threats than the likes of Charles Manson's and those of his ilk? If a rabid homegrown killer were ro break loose concurrently with an Afghan islamic terrorist, who has the potential to do the greater damage? Which individual do you suppose would be would be apprehended sooner? Ane since you are a debt hawk, tell us much dough are we blowing by duplicating overseas the perfectly good and serviceable facilities that already exist here at home. The prohibitions you write and sponsor on this subject are foolish grandstanding and a stupid waste of our tax dollars.
  • Leslie Gaiter commented on 12/5/2012
    Congressman we have prisons here in country, why are we spending the extra money to maintain additional facilities in Cuba? How much could we save by closing those prisons? Maybe another to fund Head Start for a month or two? Federal prison house our worst, but not secure enough to house these combatants? We house Timothy McVay, our home grown terrorist here without any problems that I have heard of. Why not these people and save some money?
  • Thomas G commented on 12/5/2012
    No I do not. Put these people in American prisons and honor the will of the public. With respect to the will of the people, congressional republicans should immediately cease harming the public with obstruction of the middle class tax cut, with refusing to act on the Violence Against Women act, with refusing to even vote on a fully paid for Jobs bill they have been sitting on for over a year, and they need to stop acting like kidnapper thugs with the debt ceiling, that even republican senator McConnell referred to as 'ransom'. Further, they need to respect the will of the people who in poll after poll for months have clearly counseled the congress that they do not want the Medicare eligibility age raised to 67. I guess they will have to actually read a newspaper to grasp these realities. I must say congressman Forbes, will all these critically important issues that could all have been addressed months ago the American people have not been represented sir. I am frankly shocked that this would be the question of the week? Wouldn't a better question be do we support the Disability Treaty that was rejected by republicans in the senate, in a stunning display of shame in front of wheelchair bound Bob Dole. I agree with former senator Alan Simpson, who has stated that anybody in congress who is a signatory of the Grover Norquist blackmail pledge of obstruction and destruction does not belong in the congress. To that end, after pleading with you for two years now when are you going to rescind that pledge and begin to represent the middle class you have totally abandoned in favor of millionaires and billionaires? As a member of the judiciary committee, why have you not responded in visible ways with inquiry into voter suppression that republican officials publically acknowledged was based on racist motivations to manipulate elections? A progress report on all these issues sir is on the minds of all within your district, and I'm sure new voters in the district would be very much interested in these matters.
  • Bob Williams commented on 12/5/2012
    The prison at GTMO has outlived it's usefulness and should be closed.
  • Andrew Gurganus commented on 12/5/2012
    I believe it is immoral of the United States and NATO to allow the prison. As America we need to set the example for all nations alike. If we detain someone we must give them the same protections as a citizen. What of the tables were turned? Would indefinite detention of American citizens be okay if we were held by North Korea or Iran?. I do not care for them, but all it leads to is more hate from the Arab nations, and discredits the u.s. They should be kept in an isolated place such as Alcatraz. But that is just my 2cents
  • Jason Gwaltney commented on 12/5/2012
    Respectfully, I don't care where they are imprisoned - tax payers are paying for it either way. What I do care about is them receiving a fair trial so that they can either be convicted and imprisoned or released. Right now I have no way of knowing whether or not they deserve to be imprisoned other than to trust the government. And frankly I don't.
  • Joe Kaiser commented on 12/5/2012
    We previously have experienced the problem of transferring terrorists from Guantanamo Bay to New York City. The issue was whether "enemy combatants" should be tried in a court under military jurisdiction, or a court in the civilian (public) venue. I do not agree to trials of (literal) enemy combatants in non-military courts, at public expense, and of indeterminate duration.
  • Tori Faison commented on 12/6/2012
    We have prisons here in America that obviously do the job for detaining prisoners. I don't see how detaining these terrorists would be any different than detaining our own terrorists. I'm sorry Congressman Forbes, but I think this issue is a waste of our time and tax dollars. We have bigger fish to fry here in America, and a prison here or a prison abroad is still costing us. Please move your focus to something like jobs in Virginia, healthcare in Virginia, gun control laws in Virginia, and getting rid of terrorists and drugs in Virginia.
  • Paul Langley commented on 12/6/2012
    Let's see....Federal Funds to transfer them to facilities inside the U.S. or Federal Funds to keep Guantanomo Bay Open...HMMMMMM....are we that afraid of individual terrorists being INCARCERATED inside the U.S.??? We pay one way or another Or are we afraid that with our prison system as it is, that they will have bigger and better access to the outside from inside..... V/R Paul Langley
  • Renaud Reynard commented on 12/6/2012
    I must confess that I tend to wrap myself in the flag. I believe in our system and trust the system of justice created by the founders of the nation. Yes, bring the prisoners here and subject them to trial, under military tribunal if necessary, under civil code if possible. When foreign visitors make reference to the American "Gulag" at Guantánamo Bay I feel a great sense of shame. We are better than the Soviets were, but we have adopted their practice of incarcerating prisoners we fear in gulags. That is not what we, as a nations, stand for. Frankly, in the words of many conservatives in the late 1960s, I say, America, love it or leave it. I love this nation, trust the laws, and yet recognize they can be improved. Bring the Guantánamo Bay prisoners to our shores and let the word marvel at the confidence and pride of our great nation.
Post a Comment
We encourage you to analyze and comment on the posts featured on this blog, but please understand that comments which include campaign content, engage in personal attacks, or include vulgar, profane, obscene, or inappropriate language will be removed from the site. Please note that there may be a brief delay in the publication of your comment.
Address (optional):

*By leaving a comment on this blog, you are subscribing to my e-mail newsletter.

Services

Other Services

Issues

More Issues