5 ms·

January 22nd, 2009: "EXECUTIVE ORDER -- REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT THE GUANTÁNAMO BAY NAVAL BASE AND CLOSURE OF DETENTION FACILITIES By

January 22nd, 2009: "EXECUTIVE ORDER -- REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT THE GUANTÁNAMO BAY NAVAL BASE AND CLOSURE OF DETENTION FACILITIES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, in order to effect the appropriate disposition of individuals currently detained by the Department of Defense at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base (Guantánamo) and promptly to close detention facilities at Guantánamo..." - http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantanamoDetentionFacilities/ http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantana... "The bill also prohibits any spending on detention facilities in the U.S. for present-day Guantanamo detainees." - http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=741&sid=2226350 http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=741&sid=2226350

ck2 14y ago
So if that is a standing order - then they are operating Gitmo in clear defiance of a direct order by the President of the United States? Gitmo is a prison run by the military, and he is the Commander-in-Chief, so every day any soldier performs any duty there - they are in clear violation of command? Seriously? How does a country operate like this?
- GHFigs 14y ago
  Not exactly. The order concerns shutting down the prison on the base within one year, not the base as a whole. More importantly, it is contingent on the law and appropriations (i.e. money) to have any teeth. Within months, that part of the order effectively became impossible to fulfill.
  - ck2 14y ago
    I've never been in the military but if someone gives you an order, even if it's "impossible", you are still in violation? I mean how is anyone still at their post if the COMMANDER IN CHIEF tells you not to be there in a year (three years ago). It's a flagrant violation of command.
waffle_ss 14y ago
You're leaving out the part where he restarts military trials again, a few months after your referenced executive order stopped them: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8052999.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8052999.stm

ck2 14y ago

So if that is a standing order - then they are operating Gitmo in clear defiance of a direct order by the President of the United States? Gitmo is a prison run by the military, and he is the Commander-in-Chief, so every day any soldier performs any duty there - they are in clear violation of command? Seriously? How does a country operate like this?

GHFigs 14y ago
Not exactly. The order concerns shutting down the prison on the base within one year, not the base as a whole. More importantly, it is contingent on the law and appropriations (i.e. money) to have any teeth. Within months, that part of the order effectively became impossible to fulfill.
- ck2 14y ago
  I've never been in the military but if someone gives you an order, even if it's "impossible", you are still in violation? I mean how is anyone still at their post if the COMMANDER IN CHIEF tells you not to be there in a year (three years ago). It's a flagrant violation of command.

waffle_ss 14y ago

You're leaving out the part where he restarts military trials again, a few months after your referenced executive order stopped them: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8052999.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8052999.stm