possible challenge to a 2008 supreme court ruling that did extend the right of habeas corpus to guantanamo detainees. from the heritage foundation, this is an hour. >> it's a great honor to welcome all of you as we continue to reck are nice the second annual protect america month with our concluding lecture today. our live webcast is getting under way at this time. i extend a special word of greeting to all of those who are joining us on my her -- on myheritage.org to watch this event. if you have if off question for our speaker, send it to heritage.org and it will be fed into the system here. those of you here in the audience will have the ability to participate as well. we have distributed question cards and they will be collected during the course and immediately after general ashcroft's lecture. a staff member will bring them up and we'll go through them and cover as many as we can in the question and answer session. with those preliminary announcements and the caveat that my colleague has probably already given to turn off all things electronic and mechanical that might buzz or otherw

rasul was not born in the united states but he was incarcerated at guantanamo as a foreign tional and enemy combatant. in theasul case, you get the courts beginning the process of migrating the idea expressed in isentrager that if you were outside the united stes you were beyond the limits of our own courts to provide habeas corpus relief. in the rasul case you get the idea that you're asking about the nature of guantanamo, asking isn't guantannmo really part of the united states? and you get inton arena of asking aut, if we don't have ck toe sovereignty, if we do have de facto sovereignty evenf we don't have deinjure sovereignty. are we controlling a pace so profoundly twe ought to say it's part of the united stes for habeas corpus rights. the court has come to the idea that you can have such profound control of an arena that it would be the space for having habeas corpus. let me just take a minute here to talk about the policy that that raises. the truth of the matter is, you don't want to incarcerate anybod anywhere, where you don't have pretty good corol. you don't want -- and if

i have been down to guantanamo and spend time there a few months ago.i had opined with a number of people in the white house that there was a possibility, and i do not know that this is politically practical but i will mention it anyway -- my staff is saying to themselves, i wish you would not go there, but i am going to go there. i think there are constitutional problems with allowing a title 3 court to sit at guantanamo. there are obviously some problems with juries. i do not think their problems with the signing a judge. perhaps a number of judges in rotating way. but i think the answer to your question is that this matter has been used in a political way by republicans, frankly, and others to inflame and instill fear in people. the bush administration did not confront that debate within his party when they pursued the disposition of cases in the civil courts. and in fact, the civil courts have been very successful in disposing of cases. i mentioned the number 300 there about. at the military tribunals have a place, and i think the administration is

so the idea of somehow you are asking about the nature of guantanamo and isn't guantanamo a part of the united states? if we do not have de facto sovereignty -- if we do have the fact of sovereignty and if you don't have legal sovereignty, all we controlling a place so profoundly that we should act as it is a sovereign part of the united states. ultimately the courts have come to the idea that you could have such profound control of an arena at that there is space for having habeus corpus. let me take a minute to talk about policy that that raises. the truth of the matter is you do not want to incarcerate anybody anywhere we do not have pretty good control. if you have control -- if the court can go there, you have to yourself, does that mean anyone is controlled? you control and doesn't invite the presence of the court? so we begin our road through this idea that we did not have the clear, bright lines of distinction that geography would provide. you begin to ask questions that relate to the circumstance. you invite the court's into the matrix of understanding and defining the conflict

in detainees generally, the experience i have related to the ci, where what you have was guantanamo. i don't think you can underestimate the value of information we had from an al qaeda member. i know there are questions about this, people dispute what we received from al qaeda members who were taught to buy cia, but as a trained analyst with 25 years, the value -- the value of any intelligence operation is sources and wires. there was a third was detainees. invaluable information. that is only half of your question. was it worth it? i think we did not have a lot of time back in 2002 and 2003 and 2004. the level of threat was high and people made the safe choices. it may be quite angry in this town that the cannot learn from the past. we simply have to attack the past. my point would be that we learned a lot from detainees and now we have the luxury of no tax and a public debate on what the american people want. if that is not what the american people want, and that seems clear to me, then let's take whatever path they want. i'm not here to judge what we did take years ago was right

i have been down to guantanamo and spend time there a few months ago. i had opined with a number of people in the white house that there was a possibility, and i do not know that this is politically practical but i will mention it anyway -- my staff is saying to themselves, i wish you would not go there, but i am going to go there. i think there are constitutional problems with allowing a title 3 court to sit at guantanamo. there are obviously some problems with juries. i do not think their problems with the signing a judge. perhaps a number of judges in rotating way. but i think the answer to your question is that this matter has been uued in a political way by republicans, frankly, and others to inflame and instill fear in people. the bush administration did not confront that debate within his party when they pursued the disposition of cases in the civil courts. and in fact, the civil courts have been very successful in disposing of cases. i mentioned the number 300 there about. at the military tribunals have a place, and i think the administration is

looking back on my deployments at guantanamo bay, i'm often asking myself if the benefits of guantanamo bay in gathering intelligence are worth the trade-offs in international perception and of thh sensitive moderates you were talking about earlier. if you could please comments on that. >> i guess the challenge i have -- i will put it in my contacts. let's talk about detainees. my experience relates to the cia. i don't think you cannot underestimate the value of intelligence we gained from those detainees. i know there are questions about that and people dispute we receive from al qaeda members who were talked to by cia, but i can tell you the value -- the core of any intelligence operation is humans and wires. there is a third pillar that started to emerge in 2002, detainees. indictable information. that is only half your question. was it worth it? i think we did not have a lot of time back in 2002 and 2003 and 2004. the level of threat was high. people made good choices. we cannot learn from the past. we have to attack the past. we have learned a lot from detainees but now we have the

. -- in guantanamo bay. is it worth the tradeoffs in international perception and the sensitive moderates that you talked about earlier. could you please comment on that? >> i guess the challenges i have -- i'll put it more in my context. let's talk about detainees. the experience i had that links to the c.i.a. or the experience you had which relates to guantanamo bay. stop. i mean, i know there are questions about this, people dispute. what we received from al qaeda members who were talked to by c.i.a. but i can tell you as a trained analyst with 25 years in it, the value -- the core of any intelligence operation, the sources and wires, human beings and technical coverage, there was a third pillar that started to emerge in 2002, that was detainees. invaluable information. that is only half your question. the other half was was it worth it? i think we didn't have a lot of time back in 2002 and 2003 and four. the level of threat was high. people made good faith choices. it makes me quate angry in this town th

courts that are guantanamo detainees. and obviously a major setback that the administration has so far, perhaps not a permanent one, is the inability to close guantanamo and transfer the detainees to the united states. how much of the problem for using the law enforcement model where we should use it is that creating for you and the justice department? and how much of that problem has been exacerbated by the reaction to the plans to try caius them or the other high level detainees in new york -- to drive ksm or other high level detainees in new york? >> there was one in the southern district that was in east africa bomber from the original indictment. no, gitmo is a vexing problem and has been for the last administration and for this administration. and i do not think that -- let me put it this way. there is a conversation going on, a political conversation, and a policy debate going on about how to deal with and what tools should be available for dealing with the gitmo detainees. which is kind of a subset of a larger con

the tension policy, though in some way changed with the executive order on guantanamo and others with respect to techniques. not much of a change in terms of what's happening not only in guantanamo but elsewhere you have basically the notion of a low defense. the bush administration approach to homeland security. there's fundamental continuity. some has been in how the legislation talked about the administration and this is one example of that. >> what about pakistan's efforts to mediate and work with the taliban? guest: clearly known that packston has it's own long standing interest in afghanistan. seeing them as defense in depth for it's conflict against india and national security. pakistan a key player with deep relationships with the taliban dating back to the start of the taliban and afghanistan, has relationships with the network in north the western tribal areas. it's clear player and in some respects has to be a player at the table. i think the question for the obama administration is what kind of player is it being? is it serving it's own purposes projected for a post americ

it is the closing of guantanamo bay. it is a tough issue. i am not trying to make it easy to accomplish the goal of closing it. one of the challenges -- i was recently down there. it is not my first time visiting there. what do we do about those detainee's that we cannot bring to trial? there is no place to really send them, and we have to detain them for a longer period of time? president obama made a commitment and senator gramm was part of that that there would be a process in place to review their status, so that we could present to the international community that we are using due process of law to make sure the people that are being detained, there is justification for their detention even though they are not brought to a criminal proceeding and released. i question the attorney general as to when we would expect to see those. more than a few days and less than a year. i would hope that you would tackle this issue and have this resolved, because in the eyes of the international community, guantanamo bay is an icon of abuse. people who

. >> you ticked off a bunch of the things you guys have been doing and you did not mention guantanamo where does that stand? >> report was recently sent to congress and recently made public of the evaluations that were done of the inmates at the guantanamo prison. i have not heard any updates on decisions about criminal trials. i have not heard that. >> does the news about a death of an american changed the white house's perspective? as you know the turks were the most vocal in criticizing the response from the white house. is there in anything about making another statement are weighing in somehow? >> i think our statement and the actions of the security council, and the president had a good conversation today is a go with the prime minister. i think it is important that a be head to understand exactlyon what the facts are. >> center web -- senator webb outlined -- is the president still committed to the dialogue with burma's military government, and is consideration being given to the special envoy? >> i do not have a lot of information on that. >> is listed the number of things you

they take this to the cases said relate to the attention of individuals at guantanamo and other settings. questions. >> thank you. we will begin with the questioning. i will start and the vice chair and mbers who led this research and investigation effort into credit rating agencies. let me start by saying the two issues of like to property gentlemen are the following -- first of all, business and management practices. corporate responsibility, management accountability. second issue is the model for credit rating agencies in the financial market. let me start with you today, mr. mcdaniel. let me ask you very direcy. the reason i want to say that these issues are important is in trying to assess howe had this run-up to the financial crisis, we have found over the course of months that there is very -- there is very little self examination. but mr. with you. under your leadership, there were very significant failures at moody's. the product that your company offered proved to be highly detective. not just by small measures but by a large amount. 83% of your aaa rated securities were downg

the incarcerated people, take them into places like guantanamo bay without any kind of court or any kind of justice, so i think that from one side, people that are global list, that like the idea of the countries coming together and the united states being somebody that actually is having policies that are creating that global is the kind of ideas, they would like the united states, the actual citizens of this country's treat us as a big threat, the united states, so i would like to see what your opinion would be. host: i think the caller mentioned in number of things, certainly challenges for america's image of the last few years, things like guantanamo, iraq. those were issues that brought down ratings for the u.s. throughout much of the world, including in europe, brought down ratings for the u.s. in predominantly muslim countries as well, and what we have seen is that since president obama took office, america's image as recounted in many ways and in many parts of the world. there has been more positive ratings for american foreign policy in many countries, but there has not been as

you did not mention guantanamo. did you put that on the shelf? where does that stand? >> i gave a report recently -- the evaluations that were done were made public of the inmates at the guantanamo prison. i have not heard updates on decisions about criminal trials. i have not heard back. >> robert, does the new about the death of an american change the white house perspective? is there any talk about the value waiting going after this -- reevaluating going after this and making another statement? >> our statement and the actions of the security council -- obviously, the president had a good conversation two days ago with the prime minister, and i think it is important, as i said before, to do a credible investigation to understand exactly what the facts are. >> robert, the president outlined his reasons for canceling his firm of visit. i am wondering -- is the president still committed to the dialogue? [laughter] >> we will get back to you on that. i am sorry. >> is the president still committed to the dialogue with the military government, and what about the special

courts apart guantÁnamo detainees.nd obviously a major setback that t administration has so far, perhaps not a permanent one is the inability to cse guantÁna nd transfer the detainees to the united states. how much o a problem for using the law-forcement model where we should se it is that creating for you and the justice departmentnd nw matched has that problem been exacerbated by the reacti o the plas to try kss and he other higher level detainees in new yk? >> so i'll try to avoid comment on particular cas other than to say there is one on th in the seven district. he was i the fabriand bomber from the original indictment. you know, get now is a very besting problem. it's a very vexing problem nd 's a ve vexing pblem for this administration. and i don't think tha -- let me put it this way, you know, there's a converti goig on, a political coersation going on and a poliy debateoing on about how to deal with and what tos are to be available for dealing with the gimo tainees, which is kind of a subset of a largerconver

eliminate the military base is not on united states soil, including guantanamo. keep medicare at 65 but raise social security to 70 and take the cap off of social security. everybody would pay into it regardless of their income level. i would do that the first week and then i would think of some other things the second week. host: a lot of ideas. north carolina. mark on the line for democrats. caller: i have like four points. for the oil, in our sound, the body of water, like some people have a day -- bay, the dredged keeps it clear. if they could dredge it and suck the oil out and figure out a way to separate, almost like a vacuum cleaner that takes the stand out of this area and redistributes it. if they could do that for all live -- it must -- for oil, and must be booked to workable. the space program. why are they cancelling the shuttle? they spent billions of dollars. when they go spend billions of dollars on something and then they trashed it, it seems like they wasted a lot of money. the third point it is social security. they need to start giving back --

prime minister's questions," john ashcroft will discuss the legal rights of terrorism suspects at guantanamo. you can watch it live at 11:00 a.m. eastern. >> this weekend on "in depth," the university of virginia law professor who has written or contributed to more than 20 books on liberal education, ethics, sexism, and legal justice. join our three-hour conversation on "in depth," on c-span2. >> we have got to read news c- span books for you. "," "the supreme court" -- " abraham lincoln." to order, go to c-span.org/book, each one a great gift for father's day. >> this weekend, bp announced the failure of their effort to stanch the flow of crude oil into the gulf of mexico. the radio program "inside new orleans" talked about it. here is a part of the program, hosted by eric. >> those of you watching around the nation on c-span, i do not have to introduce you to our next guest. he is a true louisiana hero, a hero after katrina, and he has proved to be a hero in trying to save the very history of his parish. he joins us on the station. how are you? >> i am doing good. we are on the way over to

administration attorney general john ashcroft will discuss the legal rights of terrorism suspects at guantanamoyou could watch it live at 11:00 a.m. eastern. >> next, a debate between the four republican candidates running for governor of south carolina. the primary takes place june 8. the candidates hope to replace current gov. mark sanford predict candidates are congressman gresham barrett, andrea bauer, nikki haley, and henry mcmaster. this one-hour debate is curtis wp curtis whobtw -- this one hour debate is courtesy of wptw. >> i won i thank our viewers tonight. in this first of two gubernatorial debates for south carolina sponsored by frances marion it universities. we're joined by the four gubernatorial hopefuls that hope to be south carolina's governor for the primary is one week from tonight three are candidates include andrea bauer -- andre powebauer and others. please give the candidates all warm south carolina welcome. it tonight's debate also features of panel from throughout the state. harry is also the immediate past president of the south carolina press association for joining h

great news in guantanamo bay, cuba. the five detainees charged with coordinating the september 11 attacks told a military judge on monday that they wanted to confess in full and a move that seemed to challenge the government to put them to death. well, that's great news, because we have this article on sunday saying the attorney general and this administration can't decide what to do about the trials great news, they're going to plead guilty. another quote from the article said at the start what has been listed as routine proceedings said they had written a statement from the five men charged or dated that they stop filing legal motions and %% announce our confessions to plead in full. great news. they're agreeing to plead guilty to confess everything. awesome news. awesome news. the date of this "new york times"' story was decemmer 9, 2008. the 9/11 plotters agreed to plead guilty to the atrocities regarding 9/11. ttey were not going to file any more pleadings. they were throwing in the towel. they were ready to be sen

he took questions from the audience on collateral damage in afghanistan, military tribunals, and guantanamobay detainees. he spoke at the center for strategic and international studies for about 25 minutes. >> heard i was coming, huh? >> he's got a better voice than me. we're delighted to have as our fourth speaker today one of our national leaders, congressman hoyer. he is recognized nationwide as a person who plays not only a decisive role in our congress, but play is a critical role in shaping of our national policy, collaborating in that respect with the president and the white house. he is going to address us today on the critical issue -- what ought to be the national strategy of the united states at a time of extraordinary complexity. national security in that context has to be broadly defined. it also has to be historically relevant for our security policy. it has to take into account how the world is changing. it is in this context that congressmen hoyer is going to be speaking, and his speech will be focusing on this broad range of issues. in addition to playing a leading role in