Our Prisons Could Safely Hold Every Gitmo Detainee
Facilities have room, necessary security: report
By Matt Cantor, Newser User
Posted Nov 29, 2012 2:54 AM CST
Updated Nov 29, 2012 6:40 AM CST
In this photo, reviewed by the US Department of Defense, a US flag waves above the the Camp Justice compound at Guantanamo Bay US Naval Base, Cuba, Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2012.   (AP Photo/Toronto Star, Michelle Shephard, Pool)

(Newser) – US prisons are capable of taking on all 166 Guantanamo Bay detainees, thereby allowing the US to close the facility, a report finds. "This report demonstrates that if the political will exists, we could finally close Guantanamo without imperiling our national security," says Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who commissioned the report in 2008. Indeed, 98 prisons across the US already hold terror convicts, the Government Accountability Office report says.

"As far as I know, there hasn't been a single security problem reported in any of these cases," Feinstein notes. "This fact outweighs not only the high cost of maintaining Guantanamo—which costs more than $114 million a year—but also provides the same degree of security without the criticism of operating a military prison in an isolated location." Six Defense Department prisons and 98 Justice Department prisons could absorb the detainees, though current inmates would have to be moved and some adjustments made to the buildings, the AP reports.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
US Prisons Able to Absorb All Gitmo Detainees is...
17%
3%
13%
4%
48%
15%
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Comments
Showing 3 of 21 comments
butch70
Nov 29, 2012 11:12 PM CST
I say leave them there (Cuba). We have enough trash in our prisons already. Enough said.
odowd80
Nov 29, 2012 9:01 AM CST
Was there ever any doubt? Terrorists are humans, not wizards.
BabyTank
Nov 29, 2012 8:26 AM CST
Feinstein misses the point. Gitmo is and was being used as a detainee camp for suspected or known Al Qaeda operatives. When captured in a foreign country, these detainees have rights under the Geneva Convention, or if brought to the USA soil, have rights under a Fifth Amendment. Under our present declarations regarding the "war on terror", neither option was thought to be sufficient. Its an obvious conflict in policy or Obama would have closed the facility with a stroke of the pen. Instead, as long as these detainees are party to an ongoing military conflict, they can be held. Incidently, some that have been released have been recaptured in active combat. Federal Courts have ruled that members of the Taliban do not qualify to be held, but Al Qaeda detainees can be held as long as there is an active conflict. That would not be the case if moved to USA soil.