remember the unfulfilled promise. it will not come easily. the road ahead contains no comfortable and convenient solutions. seeing so many dedicated colleagues and sharing the stage with our dedicated attorney general . anorney general lynch keeps eye on problems too often hidden the shadows of our society, so despite the many serious and pressing challenges we face, her courage gives me great optimism in our ability to tackle them. join me in welcoming the

83rd attorney general of the united states, loretta lynch. [applause] loretto -- atty. gen. lynch: thank you all. good morning, everyone. ok, this is martin luther king day. good morning everyone! thank you for that kind introduction and for your outstanding leadership for the department, which has also been called the conscience of the department. i would like to thank my workney general for her and friendship. to serveen a pleasure

with you and an honor to work with you to lead this great department. i also want to thank richard and ofny's and their colleagues the evil opportunity staff for organizing this important event. it takes a lot to pull this together. it takes just a few minutes out of the day to recognize the importance of the legacy and how it spurs us on today. -- i also wantis to recognize the senior high colorguard. want a great? -- weren't they great? i hope their mothers are here, if not let me tell you as a mother how proud i am. can we think again that dorothy williams from the civil rights of disability center?

[applause] sitting therech: thinking, i am the attorney general i have to maintain a certain level of dignity but what i really wanted to say was, "whoo!" yourank you for sharing gifts with us on this special day. and let us congratulate norman jones, the winner of the martin luther king oratory competition. will soon seewe why. let me also thank our special atst as we occurred, she was the center of so many of the crucial triumphs of the civil rights movement and as a young college student before she came into her current career here as

a social worker and washington, d.c., she worked with the freedom riders. was one of the pillars of the student nonviolent coordinating committee, committed to raising the issue by raising the conscience of the man who was against this movement. running the march on washington, she marched from selma to montgomery. the progress we celebrate today was made possible by brave americans like her. am able to you, i stand here today because she much then and so i thank her for all that she did. [applause] it is such an honor to have misled in here today as well as a all of our special guests as we commemorate the life of the reverend -- of the reverend martin luther king junior.

dedicate ourselves to the task of continuing his unfinished work and it is indeed unfinished. or dr. king, the work was his life effort again, and frankly, was carried out throughout what he himself called "a long night of racial injustice." segregation was the law of the land. we stand here the great hall of the department of justice, we have an african-american president, and attorney general. yet there was a time when the laws we work to a poll today were used against people of color and anyone who was perceived to be different, to get them in what was perceived to be there place. if there is not anything more then described as the force of the government, the force of our own country acting to suppress our own citizens, it was that. those were those days. regulation and how right bigotry

-- and out right the good treat denied people of color at the right to vote to vote and they were dominated by fear. threatened by violence. constrained by prejudice. longarkest hours of that night, dr. king's words, provided a spark, a light. a spot in daylight of humanity. us.alled forth the best of in that spark in that light spread across the country. of thee granite steps lincoln memorial to the dark and cold cell of a turning him -- birmingham jail. a position ofted dignity and democracy. he described a beloved community, one not driven by hatred or divided by color by govern by brotherhood for all mankind. america, hed challenge this country that he loved to rise up and to live out

the meaning of its founding creed, to ensure opportunity. to promote inequality. to demand justice. thanks to the struggles and sacrifices of the working, his colleagues, in the non-untold number of ordinary citizens who believe in the possibility and necessity of a more perfect union. we live in a nation today that has indeed traveled an extraordinary distance from that long night. as dr. king wrote in his moving letter from a birmingham jail, it is indeed true and we will look back on the civil rights movement and see the heroes were the ordinary people. woman who said, my feeds is tired and my soul is at rest. the young student who stormed down the police dogs. those who fought for the future for their children and the

children of this country. because those were citizens, those heroes work willing to raise their voices and risk their safety and even to lose their lives, we live in a nation where segregation no longer receives the sanction of law. we live in a nation where no person can lawfully be denied the right to vote civilly because of their race and we live in a nation that in fact did the civil rights act of -- the did not to the civil rights and 1965, landmarks in our nation's his jury despite the issues.espite in the later campaign so many of have joined, include improving the welfare of our citizens and realizing the hubs of our nation. equality,aigns for for justice, for advancement, have rested in large part on the extraordinary example of the civil rights movement.

these are campaigns not as much as in this country, but around the world and on this day, dedicated to martin luther king, jr., it is fitting and stop toate that we appreciate how drastically the ourment he led improved common life. we do that here today and we continue to the year. to trulyif we want honor martin luther king junior and the millions who marched, and stood up, who sat in, who spoke out, we have to recognize their words and deeds are not relics of history will stop their not confined to the past but they are living challenges. they are calls to action that still echo in our hearts, urging us to continue their journey to extend their cause and to realize their vision of a more just society, in, a more beloved community. dr. king's challenge, a challenge to a nation to live up

to its defining principles still echoes today. it did indeed, my friends, it is the challenge of every generation. every generation realizes the price of freedom is constant vigilance. it is the challenge to understand we cannot erase every dark prejudice from the heart of man, but we can went to ensure the angels of our outer selves when the day. win today. cabinetonly special named for an ideal, we only testament of our determination of that effort. we vigorously defend every citizen's right to vote, upholding the wars that were asked over the blood of so many that went before. will use every legal tool available to us to enforce the

voting act in the wake of the supreme court's decision in shelby county. we're working to broaden american idiot and other -- american indian and other citizens voting rights. line -- ] full we are protecting civil rights beyond the ballot box as well. since 2009, i am proud to say our civil rights division has filed more civil rights cases and prosecuted and convict did more defenders on hate crimes charges then add any other point in the department's his story. [applause] we are alsoynch: working to ensure civil rights and criminal justice, in part by

promoting trust and strengthening the relationship between law-enforcement in the communities we also. playing a leading role in this administration's effort to reform our criminal justice system especially through our reduce work to recidivism and improve reentry outcomes. lester, our programs disperse $53 million in second it chance act grants. they went out to 43 municipalities nationwide. work is as important as the work we do in prosecuting cases, ensuring the citizens who live out our in cursive tory institutions have the ability and right to go home. our institutions have the ability and right to go home. we have also joined in with other cabinet level agencies over the departments of education, labor, and housing and urban develop in to launch

an innovative program in a number of areas. in particular, making helga rhodes, educational grants, available to some incarcerated individuals who are also working to help with record cleaning and expungement said that every american returning home has the chance to contribute to their community to make a life for themselves and to rebuild their families. [applause] atty. gen. lynch: this is tremendously vital work. importantemendously work and these cup and the pace of our work on the behalf of justice and civil rights demonstrate how far we've come the last century in indeed, it is far. but it is clear even now that we still have a long way to go to reach the promised land of which dr. king's spoke and he described so beautifully. it is also clear that everyone of us must be committed to doing

our part, and off -- and after all, as dr. king did so well, and as all of you here in this room understand, there is nothing inevitable about progress. does nothing foreordained about our advancement. we often look to act on the achievements of the civil rights movement. as of it represents a story that was written with heroes preordained to succeed. it is a great american novel come to life. how could they not reveal? the cause was unjust. how could they not win? they were so clearly right. yet, in those days there were no guarantees. never knew of their efforts would be successful or not. , john lewis, a million boynton, and nor -- dorian ladner, marched across the edmonton bridge not knowing if they would he met with accommodation or more of the armed resistance.

and yet, what they knew, which led to what they did, was that whatever the cost, they must march forward. there was no other way to go. thiss been ever true in country, a nation described both by and for the people, that the future, the future has always whoined -- belong to those dare to imagine it. to those who decide to hold it. and, to those who is often protected from those who might tear down. that is why it is incumbent upon all of us here today, upon all of our partners run the country, every citizen of the united states, all those under the sound of my voice, all of those who hear this feature hear about devote ourselves to the perfection of our union. to devote ourselves to the continuation of dr. king's gauze and we dedicate ourselves to the journey still to come.

it does when you honor dr. king's life and legacy, we must renew our commitment to the vision he embodied and hasten the arrival of the day when history will come to pass, notches for every american but for all of the world will stop dr. king understood bad our choices, our choices particularly those in the face of the problems the divine is, are what define us. he understood that even those who stood on the sidelines and allowed oppression to continue when choosing a path to support it. he understood the words of edmund are, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good and to do nothing. thank you. [applause] atty. gen. lynch: and in that americaneyond their of democracy, letters from a birmingham jail, he afforded the

rights of the south to stand up and support what was right. my friends, i tell you today and every day, we all have that choice. we all face a moment at some point in time when we have to decide, are we going to sit back and watch someone else suffer the oppression based on some incompletely outside of their control, or are we going to act? are we going to stand up for what is right? are we going to choose not to stand on the sidelines but too much. it is so telling the activity of the 1960's was a march. moving forward. taking action. you today thatto this department of justice will always choose to act. [applause] this gen. lynch: we --

department of justice will always choose to protect the week from the strong. this department of justice will always choose to lift up the essential humanity into the april rights of every american, regardless of what they look like, where they live or whom they love. and, this department of justice will always choose to work to extend the promise of equality, to extend the promise of america to all. i want to thank all of you for this dedication -- your dedication to this mission. the day oftion that martin luther king is not a day to said and watch others suffer but to keep taking action and protect those who depend upon all of us. i look forward to the work we would do in the future to make sure that to our beloved community lives up to these highest and best ideals. thank you so much.

[applause] >> can i just ask everyone to give me another round of applause for those inspiring remark is? [applause] >> it is truly an honor for those of us here at the department to work with florida. williamsime, dorothy will perform a musical selection for us in honor of dr. king's birthday.

if i can hope -- as ipass alone. care for somebody --i can living cannot in vain

in vainliving cannot be living shall not be in vain somebodyhelp pass along then my living cannot be in vain cannot living vain

cannot living vain somebodyhelp alongass then my living then my living living vain ♪ot

[applause] >> please join me and another round of applause for dorothy. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, we will now hear from norman jones, the winner of the martin luther king oratorical competition sponsored by the sorority.

go for a minute. i found out backstage that norman one for the third consecutive time in 2015. for the third consecutive time in 2015 and he is joined here today by his parents and three of his grandparents. welcome. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, norman jones. jones: hello. diverged in a. and i, i took the one less traveled by. and, that has made all the difference. today, in a country and the

different of so many roads to choose. as robert frost said, they are make a difference both positive and negative. the hardest part, however, will always be which -- choosing which road to shows. in life, when identifying our own house, we must do as we do with any ordinary street, road, or pathway. .irst, try not to go alone then, look for signs. finally, never turn back on our decision. these three steps will ensure you make the right turns in behind. not be left so, if taking the high road involves bringing others to a solution, and notice i did not say that with others to fix a problem. now, when we go out, our parents often tell us, do not go by

yourself. are they morass, and you going with other people? asy say this for assurance my government to dangerous places. when an opportunity arises, we are so focused on keeping it to ourselves that we do not share it with others that could benefit. why is this? why is it that we mind together for the problems of the low road, yet we separate for the solutions of the high road? i personally believe this is because we have become more available yet of society the in april act of society. do not ever take action until it hits home. but we cannot root for someone else to start the movement. i cannot wait for the people close to us to be put in harms way for us to do what is right. we cannot wait to join a group for change, because we have to be the group for change.

needve all of the tools we in our community. it will just have to be willing to put their hands to the plow. willing to work. to love. to change. together. no longer can we take a detour around the high road of brotherhood, but once we join together as a people, we have got to look for signs because they were point us in the right time election. during the civil rights movement, signs were highly influential components of peaceful protest. red,igns that read of civil rights for all or i am a man, people's roses and opinions could be easily identified. you could identify what they're going was. at the same token, when we are faced with a divergent road in the words of life, we have also got to look for signs. they were point us in the right direction.

there is so much information we can use today. that homicidect is and has been the leading cause of death among teenagers, they continue to turn on our radios to turn up the sounds of the songs about shootings, gangs, and other violent crimes. we're missing these signs. despite that we can show up to class consistently unprepared and not ready to learn, we can shop at a store consistently prepared to pay $200 and $300 for choose. despite that fact that anorexia is the leading cause of death among teenage girls, companies clothingto make smaller and smaller and smaller, including the new triple zero from j.crew. it seems were missing the signs. millionshe fact that of americans, every single day,

continue to blame the government for not representing their points of view and their ideas, worlduntry way 120 in the -- in the world! -- when it comes to voter turnout. seems we're missing all of these signs. there's so much information we can use to take that next step like dr. king wanted us to do. but we cannot only stare at the problems, we have got to raise the signs with these solutions. -- surround ourselves so we do not have to trip and fall and stumble over racial, religious, and gender stereotypes. [applause] buyave got to watch what we so we do not support the emotional chokehold that finances hold on our family. " as one nation under god, it is

our civic duty to come together and vote, and not every four years. [applause] we have to stay aware, we have to be alert, more importantly, we have to be the difference. because in the words of dr. king, nothing is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. [applause] we cannot only look at the issues of today. but we have to raise the signs of solution. we are the ones to fix this problem. but once we continue that path together as a people, raising the signs of solution, we have to do what it takes -- whatever it takes -- to never turn back

on our commitment and our decision to take the high road. because when you take the high road, it is a lifestyle change. , 9-5 job.a part-time a 24-7the high road is after. you have to be invested in the change. we cannot erase our efforts through riots. we cannot travel back in time through government shutdowns. we cannot possibly move forward when we are denied desperate families into this country in order to succeed. as mentioned by dr. keith savage, why is it that, as americans, we are more upset when we go into other countries to outsource our jobs then we are when people come into our country searching for

opportunity? we have to make sure that we do not race our efforts with vengeance and greed. we are the ones to fix this. we are the ones with the duty to fulfill ou. our selfish motivations cannot deter us from brotherhood. you cannot make a u-turn on the high road, because it is simple not about you. long.e road may be there may be some potholes. and there may even be some speed bumps to slow us down. but we have a choice to make. a road to choose, and we have to remember that, in choosing this road, we have to bring others along. convince someone else to take the high road, bring them along with you. then, you have to look for signs

read and also take that initiative to raise the signs with a solution. and finally, we have to do what ever it takes to never turn back on our decision to take the high road. because right now, today, two roads have diverged. and we cannot travel both, and be one people. your road and your choice may make all of the difference. thank you. [applause] announcer: attorney general loretta lynch will be on capitol hill to answer questions about executive actions on guns. an appropriations subcommittee

will hear from her and gun-control advocates about the justice department's role in implementing the new rules. that is live wednesday on c-span. on the next washington journal, georgetown university professor randy barnett talks about the debate over whether presidential candidate ted cruz is a natural born citizen. also, a look ahead to the iowa caucuses and new hampshire primary next month, with political analyst charlie cook. and duncan would discusses u.s., mexico relationships. we will also take your calls and take your comments on facebook and twitter. live every day at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> booker t. washington said to

them, you know, we have college aged kids covered here in alabama. but it is really the kids in the elementary school that are suffering. kids arean american getting poor education, horrible buildings. there is not anything separate and equal. ynnouncer: documentar filmmakers talk about "rosenwa ld." bring schools and elementary education to children in rural america. sears was together these kit houses. and the best thing booker t. washington ever did was say, no, i want to do it like we did at tuskegee. i want the community to build it. it is really amazing. 5000that, morphed into

schools, all over the south, including maryland. announcer: sunday night on c-span's q&a. next, a look at the future of guantanamo bay. speakers include the of fordham university's center on national security, and the cofounders of a group that advocates closing the facility. this is one hour and 20 minutes. >> good afternoon. people used to come to us thinking we had money. that is on the way it works. we want money from other people. i run international security center here. i am. thanks for coming. and thanks for c-span, wherever this is broadcasted. day,e 14 years, to the since guantanamo was opened. and we have one of these events featuring andy worthington and

tom wilner. greenberg, she has done this for many years. it was hard to predict we would still be here, given the fact it was george w. bush who said we should close this. and it was one of president obama's election policies when he was first elected. to consider the question of what is when to happen over the next year, what is going to happen with the prisoners at guantanamo, we have a distinguished guest. right,reenberg, to your is the director of the center for national security at fordham university. she wrote a book about guantanamo bay called "the first 100 days." it is a role very critical to where we are today, critical on a very different direction. and in fact, karen also has a book forthcoming called "rouge

justice," published in may. it examines some of the legal, and the department of justice kind of nasa nations around the issue. we have andy worthington in the middle. he knows more about the prisoners them probably anyone on the planet, and her book that really looks exactly who is being held. because when his book first came out, it was not completely clear who exactly was being held. and he put a name and a face to many of the prisoners. wilner have set up an organization called close guantanamo. we will their more about that. and tom, who argued one of the most important cases in american legal history, which was versus bush, which gives habeas corpus rights to the detainees. and there was the case that

determined the rolling back of executive claims of authority, and reestablishing what is after all a rather old principle in 1215 -- which is habeas corpus. in terms of order, we will start with andy, karen, and then tom. andy: thank you for the introduction, peter. hello, everybody. obviously, we have been doing this for such a long time, this is now the third location in america. we are moving around really quickly. sadly, it is the last one. i have just been outside the white house with campaigners from a variety of groups, amnesty international and a lot of grass root groups calling for the closing of guantanamo. so, you know, we have all been in this for the long haul. and i have to say that the feeling today was we have more reasons to be optimistic about

guantanamo finally closing then i think in any time since, obviously, 2009, when president obama came in promising to close the prison. who are any of us to think he really did not mean that? such a prominent statement, right at the beginning of his presidency. and, you know, there are a couple of reasons to think that maybe we are getting somewhere. one, the more cynical one is that his legacy is being written. and when you come and making a promise to close guantanamo within a year, and seven years later you have not closed the and you have one years ago go, it is pretty fair to say that that is not want to be a tiny footnote in the record of your presidency. that will be written there and quite big letters. he needs to sort that out. as the case is with presidents can i actually care about their legacy. but not to be cynical, there are other reasons to that within the administration, i don't think this is 100% but there are

certainly people who care about the injustice that is represented by guantanamo. and the dangers it poses to american national security. i do think there are clearly parts of the administration that do not endorse that point of view. but i think we have reached this point where prisoners are being released, where there is a push to close. and we certainly suggest there are significant forces within the administration who want to make that happen before he leaves office. todaye situation we have is that there are 103 men in guantanamo. an announcement was made to day that another prisoner has been released. of those 103, 44 of them have been told that they can leave the prison. men were approved for release from the prison by the guantanamo review task force

that president obama started. that was a high level, inter-agency group. they met once a week, and spent time looking at the cases of the men inside, whether they should be approved for release, should be approved for prosecution, or whether they should continue to be held without trial come on the basis that they were too dangerous to be released. but there was not sufficient evidence to put them on on trial. i will come back to that. those that were released six years ago, it was a shame for everybody responsible there still held. have a process where you are approved for release, and you do not release them, surely, it has been an extremely long time in this case. and i think we made the comparison, which i do think is appropriate, when dictatorships throw you in a dungeon, holding you indefinitely without charge,

which is the basis for guantanamo, they do not say, out of you what, we will have a review process. have the review process, tell people that you do not want to hold them. and then not let them go? that is a particular cruelty that i think is unacceptable. that the state department is working very hard at finding countries that will take them. just a few days ago, they looked into yemen. you don't look at a country in west africa taking in a few yemenis. these involved negotiation, cash or diplomatic favors, all that kind of stuff. it is undoubtedly going on in numerous countries, as we are talking. hopefully, that is not a particularly difficult problem for these people. the majority of the rest of the prisoners, the 59 men who are held, are not going to be

brought to trial, according to the latest assessment of who is facing trial, who is likely to face prosecution. that is just 10 men that are left. and as an additional note, if we add in the people who have already been prosecuted and have left the prison, that is a grand total of 15 people out of the 779 men -- less than 2% of the entire population of guantanamo. and theions it has cost damage it has done to america's credibility, what a shocking statistic that is. 10 men facing trials, 49 others -- this is the area that i would very much hope that president obama is would put his foot down and speed things up. these are all people that are facing the periodic review board, the latest of many review processes that have been set up

at guantanamo over the years. the periodic review or process was established in 2013, as a result of decisions that were inen by obamas task force 2009. this category of men that they called to dangerous to release, insufficient evidence exists to put them on trial. what does that mean? if you have not got evidence, that you do not really have a case. and fundamentally, i think that is true. whom,are people against there is evidence that is not conducive to the truth being told. prisoners who were tortured, who were otherwise abused, who were bribed. they were bribed with better living conditions. they were bribed with being told that they would not have to wake up in the middle of the night and go through interrogations. if only they would help them by telling them who the people were

in these photos they kept showing them. the family albums is the way they are referred to. which is, you know, what was part inimportant relentless interrogations, not just in guantanamo. of across the prisons come showing prisoners photographs and telling them, you know this guy. identify him. tell us about him. so, people dead. they told them lies. those files released by wikileaks in 2011 are packed full of unreliable witnesses, unreliable statements. and parts of the issues that o dangerous to dangerou to release, is the long threat of capture. it could well be that some of them are real. but i have to say, absolutely, a lot of the threats are the things people come up with what they are facing the kind of injustices they are faced with.

what people really want to be his release, to get on with their lives. the review process has been successful. but it is moving far too slowly. within the last two years, there have been 18 prisoners who had their cases decided, 15 of those, the review boards have decided that they are eligible for release. that is an 83% success rate. but there are over 40 man awaiting review. at the current rate, they will not be finished until 2020. obama is long gone. we are so far into the next president. who were toldmen that when the president said of the executive order to hold them, two years before the periodic review started, that these reviews would take place within a year. promising to do things within a year, not doing it. the one thing that could happen would be to speed up the review process. clearly, what is happening is

that these men are being represented in guantanamo -- able to engage fully with their lawyers. they are saying to the administration and the review made up ofhavare different agencies, i do not bear ill will against the u.s. i need to get on with my life. offers,, getting job marriages arranged, all kinds of things that these people -- who were either low levels of soldiers, they want to get on with their lives. the process is working great but it needs to speed up. obama, he ising going to have to move people from guantanamo to the u.s. mainland. and the problem with that is that he is bringing people to face trial, that is fine.

the issue is bringing from people from the mainland and holding them without charge. both tom and i are absolutely convinced that that will open up new opportunities for them to challenge the basis of their extension. they have rights under the u.s. constitution here on the mainland, which they said they do not have in guantanamo. they were supposed to have them in guantanamo, but they were shut down by the appeals court here in washington, d.c. which very cynically shut down the habeas corpus legislation that we fought so hard to get. so, speeding up that process absolutely -- get more prisoners approved for release, get more of these people freed. and put them in a place where it will make it much more difficult for congress to raise the kind of obstacles they like to raise. prisoners approved by relays from a high level, inter-agency are pretty safe from the extremely cynical right-wing

maneuvering that we see repeatedly in congress. from people who want to keep guantanamo open forever, who do not really care about the right and the wrong. they like having the notion that if they think people are dangerous, they should be able to hold them for the rest of their lives. and that is fundamentally un-american. as a british person, that is fundamentally against all of the bases on which we understand the lawshe work, of justice and fairness that we have to have in our lives. otherwise, we drift into very dangerous territory, which is where we have been for the last 14 years. i hope i have provided some kind of summary of where we are at, and my colleagues will be able to expand on these things. we will open up for questions. thank you. karen: one question is, how did we get here? i wrote this book about the first hundred days of guantanamo. which began to tell the story of how we got here, people ask me all the time, when are you going to write the last 100?

i'm trying to figure that out. i do think, and i may be an outlier here, that guantanamo will close under this president. but i am not sure it will close in a way we would define closure. that is something we can talk about. i want to talk a little bit about the expectations of what they were at the beginning of guantanamo, how they have haunted the process for a long time. if you had asked donald rumsfeld in the fall of 2001, when they were contemplating the facility, how long it was stay open, he would have said, and he did say to the commanding general, six months. when the general said no, i don't think that is true, i am feeling differently about what we're doing here, he said, i want to make a bet with you. the most is going to be is 18 months. the commanding general said, you know what, i am going to have

retired and you will have left the office, and they will still be there. this is a running debate with them. obviously, who would've thought that 14 years later guantanamo would still be open? on the other hand, you have a policy establishment has seen from the beginning that this is a war without end. we never predicted this would make the hostility and, whether killing or getting out of afghanistan, engaging in iraq and winning, what is winning? there is no definition of an end in sight. the question of guantanamo has remained elusive, to say the least. so i want to point out that at the beginning of guantanamo, there were three reasons -- consecutive reasons that build on each other, not just in the first 100 days, for the first 18 months actually. the first was preventive detention. you take them off the battlefield, put them in custody, so they cannot join the forces. they cannot harm anybody.

the problem with that notion of the tension was that if you put people in the kind of attention you had at guantanamo, then became more dangerous. if you talked to the guards and the officials, say to them why are these things so dangerous? early on in the first seven years, i interviewed a number of people. aat made you think -- as footnote to what you are saying, they're going to kill me and my family fire got out of here. that is an interesting definition of what makes people dangerous. in a wartime situation, where they have been held in that kind of detention. the second one is interrogation which happened very quickly. but not necessarily what some of the people who started guantanamo in the justice system thought it was actually going to be about. ins is not interrogation, terms of who do you know on the battlefield? in the network? ladenter, what about bin

and his network? do you know where he is? they were not sophisticated at the beginning. and this is a real problem about guantanamo, the notion that they are therefore informational value. because when the first 20 got off the plane at guantanamo, who was waiting on the ground? interpreters? no, they were arabic translators. it was ridiculous. they cannot talk to anyone. what we know about them was so scant, we needed them for what one of my former colleagues dia.s sort of gitmope we were so crushed, such a lack of information, it became an intelligence collection. this need for information, both tactical and strategic, was very much in mashed in the beginning of guantanamo.

the third thing, military commissions -- set out the possibility of military commissions in november of 2001, november 13. they were always on the horizon. but when guantanamo was created, when they were told you have 96 hours to build guantanamo, they thought they were establishing it for military trials. that is actually what they thought. it was a somewhat funny story about the commander of the base, it was a naval base, getting charged with finding the courthouse, a location. going around and finally, after weeks and weeks, nobody was asking. where is that courthouse going to be? these are principles that started it. and when you look at them discreetly, you see we are still stuck with them. it is how they are playing out through the legislation, whether elsewhere,ilitary or we have to come back to it. i want to bring this up today. but i want to point to what

george bush did before he left office, so that we understand it. brought the 9/11 defendants here, along with others who had alleged to commit attacks, high-level terrorism of which they were accused. that was a transformative moment for guantanamo, in terms of what president obama was going to face. because it addressed all of these issues all at the same time. here you have people who could not return, who were going to be detention, asnite we have seen in countless directives from inside the justice system, inside the pentagon, etc. inside the white house, actually. second of all, you had the justification of guantanamo. it was meant to be the worst of the worst. no, these works footsoldiers.

not onlyd like that, would president obama and president bush get rid of 500 individuals that they knew were not even rising to the level of potentially dangerous, but khalid sheikh mohammed, after four years in existence, guantanamo became a place where the worst of the worst actually work. in terms of intelligence value, who knew what they had to say? they had some intelligence, they had reality. finally, the military commission. there was someone actually to try, who actually have committed a crime against the u.s. or alleged what is was not material or conspiratorial. the embassy bombings attacks etc. all ofactually left these individuals here buried so when obama came into office,

this is what he inherited. he inherited all of these things, not having anything to push back against. even though 500 have been released, even though the military commission have stumbled along for so many years and push back again. now has these 3 -- let's take these three categories in today's world. preventive detention, ok. when obama took office, he was ur monthffice foir before he said indefinite detention is an option for guantanamo detainees. for many people, myself included, closing guantanamo means ending indefinite detention, holding people you do not charge and try. as soon as he said that, there was kind of panic. how can you close guantanamo? the idea of actually closing

guantanamo may have passed that particular moment. the model, we are not going to let it happen. the other thing was informational value. that seemed to dissipate under obama, finally. in 2007, i went to guantanamo. the head at the time, admiral frank hess said how is their informational value? he said, things can happen with the leadership of al qaeda. the guys here might recognize them, able to tell us something. ensee was a lingering s for the informational value we had. i don't get that anymore. i don't know if you do, but i have not seen that come up in the congressional hearings that i have seen, etc. the final thing is a military commission. the 9/11 commission gathered tremendous steam, if not activity, under president obama. you know, he had attorney

general eric holder, he decided that they would not bring the 9/11 defendants to the federal court system. he kept them in the military commission. the commission that has stumbled and fallen continually. at what point do you say these commissions do not work? someplace where we now have the expertise and the structure to try these individuals. the way i see what is happening in guantanamo, who could of thought the military commission would be the thing to keep it open? what is happened in the last 6 months is there is much more energy being placed into getting these people out of guantanamo. the media is not calling attention to it, and i think that is good.

if you look at the reasons, they are very minimal. they say they are going to rethink about the war on terror or their ideological stance. this has always been -- the way to close guantanamo is to get rid of that list. notably, the idea of charging anyone besides these 10 detainees have gone away. when obama came into office, it was always said, we will have a certain amount of indefinite detention, about 30 will be tried. where did that go? that disappeared as a category. from the point of view of someone that studies the judicial system, what does that

mean? we are not going to try terrorists anymore? the only caveat, i think they are going to close it. i think that isis is on the horizon. what that means, not for guantanamo, but for how we are going to do with individuals that don't want to declare prisoners of war. this problem started with the decision not to have prisoners of war. i don't think it's a decision that should ever be repeated. >> i never come here knowing what i'm going to say. and i still don't, even after listening. i don't know what's going to happen with guantanamo, and i'm concerned that isis is on the rise.

i think that we overflow the threat -- overblow the threat of isis. i was thinking the other day, russia is filled with nuclear weapons and we don't take it as seriously as we do isis. very strange about where we ou put our concern. but what happened in paris, in california is palpable. it's on the news all the time. cnn a great topic to speak about. i'm not confident that the obama administration will close guantanamo before the end of its term. there are all sorts of little things going on -- political things going on. very few of us seem to care about closing guantanamo. it seems very easy to stir up

passions against closing at. -- closing it. at least in the republican party to build on the demagoguery and fear to say that your releasing terrorists into the u.s. not worried about obama taking the action. i am hoping that he will. i'm not sure whether hillary clinton would want it cleared off before he leaves office or whether she will say, don't do that, it will jeopardize the election. i'm not confident. when we speak about a few other andys that karen and both spoke about. i am amazed at the washingtonian sitting in hearing the debate in congress. on this and other issues. house and much of it is premised -- how much of it is premised on misinformation. that started in the review in 2010, the obama review of the

people in guantanamo. when they created this category of people that are too dangerous to release, but not capable of prosecution. everyone reading that thought what it meant that you know these guys are dangerous formal terrorists, but there is some legal technicality that prevents them from being tried in a court. so you have to keep them. that is really not the case. what it really means is it was a horrible, stupid category. what it meant simply was that there is information and allegations against these people, made mostly by other detainees, who have been interrogated a lot. but it's not the sort of stuff that you could ever try somebody on, so flimsy would never stand up in a court of law. you have some suspicions about them, but no evidence that would

make trying them possible. we lose sight of the fact that the bulk of the people on that list, almost all of them, were people in guantanamo before the high-value detainees were transferred there 4-5 years after it opened. it was accepted through security studies at the time that the people at guantanamo, before these high-value people came in, were nothing. they were either caught by mistake, or at the most, low-level foot soldiers. these categorizations as too dangerous to release is misinformation. out, 1's that have come 8 have been conducted, 15 have been cleared. it shows that these people are not too dangerous to release. and yet, people in congress don't even know that.

they don't even know that they have been cleared. it is shocking to me. they talk and debate based on the misinformation that the people in guantanamo are trained, horrible killers. it's just a shame. i don't know whether the news media for the rest of us need to look at the facts. it's not so. that is one thing that bothers me terribly. aboutr thing andy spoke the court of appeals in the district of columbia. when we started this, we didn't count just all the legal remedy to get people out of guantanamo. but we did count on a legal remedy, the right of habeas corpus, is a fundamental precept of the united states, and the foundation for individual liberty. all it really says, enforcing the magna carta, is that a person deprived of liberty to go before a court. you would have a fair hearing to see whether there was a basis in

law for depriving this person of his liberty. since the military picked up the people from guantanamo, most were turned in for bounty. they never conducted any hearings at the time. every arab picked up and sold for bounties in afghanistan and pakistan at the time was simply shipped off to guantanamo, never had a hearing. only asked for was a simple urine before a court. is there really a basis for holding this guy? is he a shepherd or some bad guy? we won that right in russell in 2004. congress been revoked that right. -- then revoked that right. then in 2008 we want a constitutional right to habeas corpus. thisthe d.c. circuit, might seem terribly technical, but it's important. the d.c. circuit, which had been

dominated by very conservative judges, eviscerated that right. they had a series of physicians. first of all, these people may have a constitutional right to habeas corpus, but because they are foreigners they have no due process. hearingvious -- habeas doesn't need to comport with due process. then they say, these hearings don't even need to meet a standard that someone who has been convicted. here are people that never had a trial who have an even lower standard. then the court went through any evidence presented by the government in an interrogation report was presumed to be correct. it cannot be challenged. as a result, the court took away a legal remedy for these people. that happened in 2010. for the past 5 years, to get out, they've been dependent on a political