[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 87 (Monday, June 27, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7397-S7402]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             GUANTANAMO BAY

  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, today I rise to speak about our operation 
at Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba. There is so much information out there that 
is untrue, it must be corrected. Yesterday, I went to Guantanamo Bay 
with my colleagues, Senator Crapo and Senator Isakson. We went to see 
for ourselves what all the so-called fuss is about down there, and we 
want to help set the record straight.
  While we were there we also saw Senator Wyden and Senator Ben Nelson. 
I am sure they will tell you what they saw when they come to speak on 
the Senate floor.
  Our soldiers assigned in Cuba are on an island within an island. The 
base is isolated from the rest of Cuba, and it is isolated from the 
rest of our military. Our troops do not just drive off post to go watch 
a movie or to go to the mall. All they have is on post, from shopping 
to entertainment to food.
  Many serving at Guantanamo leave their families behind. Some are 
National Guard troops, far away from home. It is a tough life, and they 
have a job that is mentally and physically challenging.
  As we toured the detention camps, our troops patrolled the buildings 
and open areas in full uniform. In the afternoon, the temperatures 
reached into the high 80s, and the humidity could not have gotten much 
worse. But those brave young men and women stood guard over the 
detainees to keep them in line and protect them from other detainees.
  Probably the weather and the Sun are the last things our troops are 
worried about. The people they are guarding are the terrorists. They 
are the worst of the worst. They are all dangerous. Many directly 
fought Americans on the battlefield, killing and wounding our soldiers, 
yet our young men and women watch over these terrorists and provide for 
them. They do this despite the terrorists having taken

[[Page S7398]]

up arms against fellow American servicemembers. The danger the 
terrorists pose to our military in Guantanamo is real and enduring.
  While we were inspecting one of the detention facilities, the halls 
were filled with sounds of detainees beating on metal doors of their 
cells and yelling at anyone who could hear. Weapons have been found in 
the detainees' cells and are often made from ordinary items they are 
provided.
  Our troops on the ground in Guantanamo are putting their lives on the 
line to protect and provide for terrorists. Yet some of my colleagues 
and others, commentators, suggest that these brave young men and women 
are the criminals, and when they make such outrageous statements, there 
are many in the media willing to repeat the accusation without 
bothering to check the facts for themselves.
  For example, almost any picture seen of detainees at Guantanamo is 
from Camp X-Ray. Everyone is familiar with those pictures. They are the 
ones with men in orange suits, living in open-air cells made of chain-
link fences.
  I went to Camp X-Ray. Do you know what I saw? I saw weeds several 
feet high and plants growing all over the fencing. Do you know what I 
did not see? People. Camp X-Ray has been closed since 2002. It is no 
longer used at all. But those images are the ones that continue to 
appear in print and on the news. It is no secret that Camp X-Ray is 
closed, but pictures of the new and improved facilities are never 
shown.
  I wish to talk about these new facilities. They have come a long way 
from concrete slabs surrounded by chain-link fencing. I cannot say I 
felt bad for any terrorist who had to spend the night in Camp X-Ray, 
but the new camps are significantly better. They offer the terrorists 
more privacy, space, and protection from the weather. They offer the 
terrorists areas for recreation. Some even have air-conditioning and 
semiprivate showers.
  The newest facility is modeled after the state-of-the-art prisons in 
the United States and is fully air-conditioned. New furniture is on the 
way, and an even newer facility is about to be built. But I have not 
seen any of those camps I just described on the news, and I am hopeful 
that those in the media will help clear up this issue.
  But the real issue that goes to the heart of this debate is, Are we 
serious about fighting terrorism or not? If we are, then these new 
detention facilities at Guantanamo will remain open until no more 
terrorists are plotting to harm innocent Americans. What goes on there 
is critical to our fight against terrorism and the war on terrorism. 
First and simplest, if the terrorists are locked up in Cuba, then they 
cannot kill Americans in Iraq or New York, in Afghanistan or even in 
Kentucky. Those being held at Guantanamo are the worst of the worst 
terrorists we have captured. The military has decided that they are so 
dangerous that they must be moved halfway around the world to keep them 
away from the battlefield. That is reason enough to keep Guantanamo 
open.
  There are bomb makers who are no longer making bombs because they are 
in Cuba. Terrorist training camp instructors are no longer teaching 
classes because they are being held next to a Caribbean beach. Others 
at Guantanamo were caught with heavy weapons, explosives, or anti-
aircraft missiles, but they will not get to use those weapons to kill 
Americans because we are holding them in the detention facilities. One 
person being held there very well may be the intended 20th hijacker for 
September 11, but because he is locked in a cell in Cuba, he will not 
be able to fly a plane into a building anytime soon.
  I could describe many individuals held at Guantanamo and give reasons 
they need to remain in our custody, but I only will mention a few 
more--12, to be exact. That is the number of those we know who have 
been released from Guantanamo and returned to fight against the 
coalition troops. Some have been killed and some have been recaptured. 
But we must not miss the lesson that we are dealing with dangerous 
people who will stop at nothing to kill innocent Americans.

  But there is more to Guantanamo than locking up terrorists. As 
important as keeping the terrorists from carrying out their evil plans, 
we are gaining valuable information from the detainees. Those 
terrorists are one of our greatest sources of information into 
terrorist operations, financing, and personnel. Some of them were very 
close to Osama bin Laden at one time. Others were active in planning 
terrorist attacks. Still others worked on finance and personnel 
recruitment for terrorist groups. Think of the wealth of information 
they have.
  The detainees can identify people involved in terrorist groups. They 
have helped us better understand the structure of terrorist 
organizations. They know locations and transportation routes. They can 
validate information gathered on the battlefield. To this day, they 
continue to provide us with critical information in our fight against 
terrorism.
  We are not gathering information from them in any inhuman way. I saw 
several interrogations. None of the terrorists were being beaten. There 
was no torture, and they were not being starved. Throughout the entire 
detention camp, terrorists were given clothes and bedding. They are 
given Muslim prayer rugs and Korans. There are arrows everywhere 
pointing to Mecca. We even witnessed a prayer call announcing to the 
terrorists that it was time for them to turn to Mecca and pray.
  That, Mr. President, is a far cry from the repressive regimes to 
which critics of Guantanamo have compared our military. Did the Nazis 
respect the Jewish faith? Did Stalin and Pol Pot practice religious 
tolerance? Absolutely not.
  The detainees are being fed well. In fact, their meals often cost 
more than the meals served to our troops because of their cultural 
dietary restrictions. When Hitler imprisoned Jews, he did not go to 
lengths to prepare them kosher meals that followed their faith.
  The military has constructed a hospital for the detainees. While we 
were there, we saw a detainee being transported to the hospital for an 
examination. When needed, the terrorists have access to other doctors 
and medical facilities. If a specialist is needed, then one is brought 
in. In other words, we give the terrorists the same medical care our 
troops get.
  Many get dental care and glasses for the first time in their lives. 
Others have been diagnosed with diseases and other medical issues and 
have received treatment. We have even given amputees new medical limbs.
  Again, I ask my colleagues, did Hitler and Pol Pot provide dental 
care to their prisoners before they killed them?
  And the terrorists are not being held without a review process. Each 
person brought to Guantanamo is reviewed to make sure they really are 
an enemy combatant. They are also periodically reviewed to make sure 
they still need to be held at Guantanamo or if they should be moved 
elsewhere or even released.
  The detainees are given a chance to explain their side of the story. 
International law does not require these combatants be given a review 
board. Our military is going out of its way to give these terrorists 
rights above and beyond the evil regimes the war's critics have cited. 
After all, there were not review boards in the gulags or the 
concentration camps. The Nazis did not care if their prisoners had 
taken up arms against Germany. They locked them up into slavery anyway.
  Anyone who compares our operations at Guantanamo to those ruthless 
killers is lying to the public and insulting our troops. No detainees 
at Guantanamo have died due to their treatment by our troops--none, 
zero.
  Hitler murdered 6 million Jews and caused the death of tens of 
millions more on the battlefield. Stalin had tens of millions killed. 
Pol Pot was responsible for the death of about 1 million in his 
``killing fields.''
  Of course, the detainees are not living in luxury. But these are 
dangerous killers we are talking about. They are terrorists. But we 
treat them with respect, which is much more than they have ever treated 
us with.
  Conditions improve every day at Guantanamo. But as long as they are 
dangerous to America, we must continue to hold them and gather 
information. We have a determined enemy that wants to do nothing but 
harm us. The only way to beat them is to stand strong, fight longer, 
and not back down.

[[Page S7399]]

  What we are doing at Guantanamo is a key part of our fight. These 
terrorists cannot hurt us as long as they are locked up. They will 
continue to provide us with valuable intelligence, and we continue to 
treat them with the dignity they refuse to show us.
  Finally, Mr. President, I want to say thank you to all the brave men 
and women working for our freedom at Guantanamo and throughout the 
world. I am always impressed with the fine young Americans in our 
military. And seeing them yesterday was no exception. I had the 
privilege of meeting a few soldiers from Kentucky while at Guantanamo 
Bay. I cannot say their names due to the security reasons we have and 
to ensure their future safety. They, and others, are serving our 
country with honor. I thank them and their families for their 
sacrifices.
  Mr. President, it was an unbelievable experience yesterday in Cuba at 
Guantanamo Bay, one I will remember for the rest of my life.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho is recognized.
  Mr. CRAPO. Thank you very much, Mr. President.
  Mr. President, I stand and join my colleague, Senator Bunning from 
Kentucky. I was one of those who was able to be on this trip to 
Guantanamo yesterday. Along with Senator Isakson from Georgia, we were 
joined there by two other Senators, Senator Wyden from Oregon and also 
Senator Nelson from Nebraska, who came in on a separate trip.
  We had an opportunity to view exactly what is happening at 
Guantanamo. As I said, I am glad to be able to stand with my colleague, 
Senator Bunning, and set the record straight about what the United 
States and the honorable men and women of our armed services are doing 
to serve the United States, the people of this country, and, frankly, 
the people of the world as we fight to defeat terrorism.
  I want to first thank my colleague, Senator Bunning, who has given a 
very thorough and helpful review. I will try not to repeat too many of 
the things he went through, but he has identified the core points that 
need to be made as we discuss what is truly happening at Guantanamo.
  I want to start out by going into a little bit of detail about who 
exactly is there. Secondly, I want to talk a little bit about the legal 
framework because, frankly, a lot of the debate we hear throughout the 
country and throughout the world today has to do with different points 
of view about the legal framework within which we are dealing with the 
circumstances at Guantanamo.
  Then I want to talk about the question of transparency; in other 
words, do we really know what is happening there? I know there are a 
lot of people who will say: You went there and you visited, but did you 
really see the truth? I want to talk about that. I also want to talk 
about what we saw--how are the detainees being treated.
  Finally, I want to talk about our own troops. What is their morale? 
And what is their conduct? And then, actually, the last thing I want to 
talk about is: Of what benefit to the United States and the world is 
Guantanamo?
  I am going to go back now and talk, first of all, about who is there. 
I think there has been a bit of a misconception about who it is we are 
detaining at Guantanamo.
  Since the effort began in defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan--and 
it has expanded to the war in Iraq--the United States has captured more 
than 70,000 detainees--70,000--in the conduct of the war in Afghanistan 
and Iraq. Among that number, the vast majority have been handled in 
other ways. Either they have been released or they have been turned 
over to other authorities, other nations, or they are being held in 
facilities in the area of the battle. But we are working with Iraq, 
Afghanistan, and other governments to make sure they take control of 
detainees to the maximum extent possible.
  But there are some detainees who are so dangerous that we have made 
the decision we must maintain control over them. They are also 
controlled because they have information that is critical to us in the 
battle against terrorism. And after a very thorough vetting process, 
out of 70,000 who have been captured in these battles and in other 
efforts to fight against terrorism, approximately 800 have been moved 
to Guantanamo.
  My numbers are going to be kind of rounded here, but of that 800, 
about 235 have already been released or moved into the custody of other 
countries. My colleague, Senator Bunning, indicated that is not always 
good news. At least 12 of those who have been released have been found 
again in the battlefield--some of them killed in battle, others 
captured again, and at least one was found to have ordered some very 
significant terrorist activities after being released from Guantanamo.
  But about 235 of the 800 who we determined were so dangerous they 
needed to be moved to Guantanamo have been released or put into the 
custody of other countries. Approximately 520 remain at Guantanamo. Who 
are these 520? These are terrorist trainers. These are bomb makers. 
These are recruiters and facilitators for al-Qaida and other terrorist 
groups. These are terrorist financiers. These are bodyguards of Osama 
bin Laden. And these are would-be suicide bombers--to name just a few 
of those who we have identified and the activities we are stopping by 
keeping them detained.
  I am going to come back a little bit later and talk about what we 
learn from these detainees. But I would like to talk, next, a little 
bit about some of the details of individuals whom we have identified. 
An elaborate process has been put into place, as I indicated, to 
identify whom we will return and take to Guantanamo to assess the 
threat they pose to the United States and the international community, 
and then to give regular review to this process to be sure they are 
still the threat that they were and deserve to be kept at the 
Guantanamo base.
  But as a result of this effort, we have collected the most dangerous, 
and the ones with the most information who can give us the most 
assistance, through the interrogation process, to help us pursue the 
war against terrorism.
  These detainees include terrorists who are linked to a major al-Qaida 
attack, including attacks in east Africa, the U.S. Embassy bombings, 
and the USS Cole attack; terrorists who taught or received training 
teams on arms, explosives, surveillance, and interrogation resistance 
at al-Qaida camps in Afghanistan and elsewhere; terrorists who continue 
to express their commitment to kill Americans, if released; terrorists 
who have sworn personal allegiance to Osama bin Laden; terrorists who 
have been linked to several al-Qaida operational plans, including 
possible targeting of facilities in the United States; members of al-
Qaida's international terrorism support network including the 
financiers, the couriers, the recruiters, and the operatives and those 
who participated in attempted hijacking instances.

  Let me give a couple specific examples. One al-Qaida explosives 
trainer is there who has provided information to the United States on 
the September 2001 assassination of Massoud and on the al-Qaida 
organization's use of mines; another individual who completed advanced 
terrorist training at camps in Afghanistan and participated in an 
attempted hijacking and escaped while in custody that resulted in the 
deaths of Pakistani guards; another individual who was involved in 
terrorist financing who provided information on Osama bin Laden's front 
companies, accounts, and international money movements for financing 
terror. The list goes on and on. This is who is there at Guantanamo. 
These are the people whom we seek to detain and about whom the debate 
in this country revolves. They are dangerous, and they must be kept 
under control or they will kill more Americans and threaten people 
throughout the world.
  What is the legal framework within which they are being detained? 
That is the crux, though it is not often stated that way, of the 
debate. I will get into this in more detail, but Senator Bunning has 
already indicated, the treatment that is being provided to the 
detainees is probably the most humane, high quality treatment any 
nation that has ever captured detainees at war has ever provided to its 
prisoners. I suspect no other nation today or throughout history could 
claim to be treating its detainees better. But still the question 
arises, how and under what legal framework should they be handled? 
There is an irony here. These

[[Page S7400]]

detainees do not serve in a normal army. They do not wear uniforms. 
They do not serve a nation that is a signer to the Geneva Conventions. 
They do not honor Geneva Conventions, meaning they do not refrain from 
attacking civilians and conducting terrorist activities. And because 
they do not qualify in these categories, they don't qualify under the 
Geneva Conventions as prisoners of war.
  Here is the irony. If they were prisoners of war, they wouldn't be 
entitled to the legal benefits about which we are now wrangling. They 
would be entitled to humane treatment, but they would not be entitled 
to get into the court system of the country that has captured them.
  Many throughout this Nation and throughout the world are saying we 
should provide all of the legal benefits in a criminal law system, such 
as the criminal justice system in the United States, to these 
detainees. The United States has declined to do so, stating that these 
are enemy combatants under the Geneva Conventions. But they are not 
prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions. And there is the irony. 
If we could classify them as prisoners of war under the Geneva 
Conventions, we could avoid the debate about what their rights are and 
how they should be treated. Instead, since they are not a group 
entitled to participate in the United States criminal justice system 
and are not a group entitled to be considered prisoners of war under 
the Geneva Conventions, but are instead enemy combatants under the 
Geneva Conventions in a category for which nations have not yet agreed 
on how they should be treated, the United States is embroiled in a 
debate as to how to treat them.
  How have we resolved this decision? On January 19, 2002, the 
Secretary of Defense gave specific guidance that all detainees are to 
be treated humanely. On January 21, the same year, the chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff issued executive orders to commanders that 
transmitted the Secretary of Defense order that these detainees be 
treated humanely. On February 7, 2002, President Bush determined that 
al-Qaida and Taliban detainees should be treated humanely, consistent 
with the principles of the Geneva Conventions and consistent with 
military necessity. The detention of enemy combatants in wartime is not 
an act of punishment. It is a matter of security and military 
necessity. It prevents enemy combatants from continuing to fight 
against the United States or its partners in the war on terror. 
Releasing enemy combatants before the end of hostilities and allowing 
them to rejoin the fight would only prolong the conflict and endanger 
our coalition and American forces.
  Here is the point of the debate. The United States, though these 
enemy combatants are in an uncertain category, has provided to them all 
of the humane treatment required by the Geneva Convention and more 
legal rights than they would have if they were prisoners of war. Yet 
the United States continues to be criticized because there are those--
and this is what everyone needs to understand--who will not be 
satisfied until we choose not to treat these enemy combatants in the 
context of a war but instead choose to treat them as criminals in a 
criminal justice system and thereby change the legal framework under 
which they are being handled. The United States correctly and 
properly refuses to do so. If we were to do so, we would not be able to 
defend the interests of the country against enemies who are conducting 
war against us as effectively as we can if we are able to treat them 
under the Geneva Conventions as enemy combatants. And when you hear the 
debate about how they are being treated, listen carefully, because most 
of the debate is not about their physical condition or whether they are 
being treated humanely. It is about how they are being categorized with 
regard to these legal battles that those who are engaged in the issue 
wish to see ensue.

  Let's talk about what we saw, and then I will describe how they are 
actually physically being treated and whether what we saw is true. I 
have already had those who knew that I went there ask me whether the 
opportunity we had is one which truly showed us what was happening at 
Guantanamo. To me this is an issue of transparency. What is happening 
there, and were we shown what was truly going on?
  First, we visited every facility there. Five Senators, with many 
other individuals with us from other government agencies, went through 
and visited every facility. My colleague Senator Bunning indicated that 
we even went to Camp X-Ray which has not been utilized for 2 or 3 years 
and which is literally overgrown. I walked into one of the containment 
facilities there at Camp X-Ray. I had to brush away the weeds in order 
to move through the door and to go in and see what it looked like. We 
visited Camps 1, 2, 3, and 4. And they are numbered in terms of the 
order in which they were built. These are the newer camps that were 
constructed to provide better facilities for these detainees than were 
originally there at Camp X-Ray when we first started using the base. We 
were able to see the medical facilities. We were able to observe 
literally everything at the base. And I can say that I don't think it 
would have been possible for them to have hidden from us what was 
happening.
  We were able to observe the interrogations, to interview and discuss 
with the personnel present what was happening, right down to the troops 
who were conducting the specific guarding activities inside the cell 
blocks. If that is not sufficient, the International Committee of the 
Red Cross has had 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week access to the facility at 
its discretion. They have had a permanent presence, recently changing 
that only at their choosing. The media, both national and 
international, have had 400 visits to Guantanamo, representing over 
1,000 members of the media who have been there to also observe. Lawyers 
for the detainees, who would not even be allowed if we categorized them 
as prisoners of war, have come and, in many of the habeas corpus cases, 
to observe and discuss with the detainees. And somewhere in the 
neighborhood of 15 to 20 Senators and 75 to 100 Representatives, in 
addition to over 100 congressional staff, have been there to observe.
  My point is that in terms of transparency, is the United States 
letting its own people, its Congress, and the world know what is being 
done there? I believe the answer is clearly yes.
  My colleague Senator Bunning went through the numbers of deaths in 
the Nazi concentration camps, in the gulags under Stalin, and the 
numbers, you will recall, were in the millions. Not one detainee has 
died at Guantanamo. On the contrary, they have the best medical care 
that I believe any detainees in history have ever had. So as far as 
the question goes with regard to whether we are providing a true and 
accurate picture to the public about what is happening there, the 
answer is unequivocally yes.

  What is happening there? I would like to talk a little bit about what 
we saw. As I indicated, there are a number of facilities. They are 
called Camp 1, 2, 3, and 4. They are building Camp 5 and Camp 6. They 
are different in terms of the levels of security and in terms of the 
operations. Those who are detained there are able to be in one of the 
camps versus the other camps depending on how they respond to their 
detention. If they are the more violent kind who do not follow 
instructions, then they are often in individual confinement. This 
individual confinement does not mean solitary confinement. It means 
they would be in a cell block with 40 or 50 others, and you can see 
each other through the cell. These are not enclosed. So they have the 
ability to play chess between cells and so forth. They have running 
water, sinks, and toilets in each cell.
  They have religious paraphernalia so they can practice their 
religion. They are facilitated in the practice of that religion by 
being provided with prayer calls and with directions. From wherever in 
the camp you are, you can see an arrow that points toward Mecca so you 
know the directions. They are provided recreational opportunities, 
showers, and three, good, solid meals a day, as well as outstanding 
medical care. Those are the ones who are in the most closely confined 
circumstances. Those who are more willing to follow instructions and 
less willing to attack their guards are allowed to live in more 
communal circumstances where the rooms, instead of being individual 
cell units, are in units where ten or more can live together, and then 
those groups can go out in recreational facilities and have

[[Page S7401]]

a little bit expanded recreational opportunity and the like.
  Then there is the maximum security facilities which would be 
comparable to the kinds of similar facilities that are there that you 
could find anywhere in the United States, in prison facilities that are 
subject to extensive litigation and oversight by attorneys and our own 
judicial system. Throughout this entire process, whether one is in the 
most extreme, highest maximum security circumstance or whether one is 
in some of those areas where the more responsible detainees are able to 
be, they are always provided with the best possible treatment. I don't 
believe it would be possible for a valid argument of some type of 
physical abuse to be made because there is such care there to be 
certain that even when the detainees are being interrogated--and, by 
the way, the interrogation is a very humane and, frankly, easygoing 
process which does not create physical threat to the detainees--there 
are always more than one or two or three people observing what is 
happening so there cannot be a circumstance where something goes awry 
and someone abuses the relationship and the situation.
  Let me talk a little bit about the medical care. I said they are 
getting top-notch medical care. I asked many of those who we were there 
with what the comparability would be between the medical care provided 
to these detainees and that provided to detainees by other nations in 
other wars or in other circumstances. Consistently no one could give me 
an example of better medical care ever being provided anywhere. I asked 
if it was equivalent to the kind of medical care that our own troops 
were being provided. The answer was yes. It is probably better medical 
care than these detainees have ever had in their lifetime. When they 
were first brought there, many of them had traumatic injuries from the 
battles in which they were captured. Those injuries were treated. Now 
they have reached a point that they have been there several years, some 
of them, where they are being treated for the kinds of problems you and 
I and others would want to have medical care for. They are getting 
annual checkups. They are being treated for diabetes, if they have back 
ailments or heart problems, whatever it may be, if they have dietary 
needs, they are being treated for them.
  A number of them have lost their limbs, not because they lost them in 
battle but because they lost them while they were building bombs to 
blow up Americans. And we have provided treatment for their loss of 
limbs and actually provided them with prosthetics and helped them with 
the physical therapy so they can regain the use of their bodies to the 
maximum extent we can help them. We have facilities there to do major 
surgery. We have all kinds of other support. If they have medical needs 
that go beyond what we have there available, they are taken elsewhere 
to get that medical treatment.
  In fact, I would like to move now to the discussion of what the 
morale of our troops is. I think as we met there with people at all 
levels, from the guards to those who ran the hospitals to the managers 
to everyone else, I could honestly say the morale of our troops there 
is very high. But there is a concern that was consistently expressed to 
me by them. I had the opportunity to have lunch with some of those who 
were literally on the front lines having to go into the cell blocks and 
to provide the guard service around the clock with these detainees.
  And they are concerned about what the American people and the 
international public think about them and about what they are doing 
because they believe they are treating these detainees with the highest 
respect and with the most humane treatment possible. They are 
overseeing it rigorously. If any of them steps out of line, they get 
handled and they get in trouble. Yet they are subjected constantly to 
threats and harassment and abuse from the detainees.
  It is my perspective that if anyone is being abused at Guantanamo, it 
is not the detainees, it is the good young men and women guards who are 
there on the front line, who are themselves physically threatened, 
verbally threatened, and in other ways abused. It has been reported 
what kinds of things are thrown at them through the cell blocks as they 
walk through. When they happen to go through and a detainee throws 
urine or feces on them, they have to go out, be hosed off, and go back 
into duty. If anyone is being abused at Guantanamo, it is the treatment 
that is being afforded to our men and women of the military that is 
causing the abuse to them, rather than the reverse.
  For those here in this body or anywhere else to accuse our men and 
women of mistreating those at Guantanamo is a great irony because any 
abuse or mistreatment that is happening is the reverse.
  I am proud of our men and women there. They are truly doing a great 
service for this country and for this world. Let me conclude by talking 
a little bit about what that is.
  By the way, I forgot one piece of information. I have talked about 
the medical facilities and other kinds of support that have been 
provided to these detainees to make sure they are being properly cared 
for. In the newest facilities, the prisoners even get air conditioning, 
which is not something most of the troops get, at least during their 
working hours. But what does that cost us? What kind of investment has 
the United States made? To this point, the United States has spent over 
$241 million in providing these medical facilities, these containment 
and detention facilities, and for the care and treatment and feeding of 
these detainees. The annual cost will go on probably at $100 million a 
year, until we are able to resolve this conflict. The United States has 
also spent over $140 million in existing or new detention facilities in 
Afghanistan and Iraq. So we are putting a tremendous amount in here.
  What benefit does it provide to us? As I indicated, the purpose of 
this detention, to me, is twofold. First of all, it is to stop 
dangerous terrorists from being put back into the field so they can go 
back out and continue to kill Americans and others and train and 
facilitate other terrorists in doing the same thing. The first thing is 
to stop them from committing terrorist activity. The second purpose is 
to be able to gain from them information that will help us better 
pursue or fight against terrorists around the world. The question of 
Guantanamo detainees, which I will again state is not the kind of 
interrogation that one thinks of when they think of a gulag, or what 
you might see on TV as a threatening interrogation. This is entirely 
nonthreatening interrogation. It has improved the security of our 
Nation and coalition partners by helping us to expand our understanding 
of the operations of the terrorists. It has given us an expanded 
understanding of the organizational structure of al-Qaida and other 
terrorist groups. It has given us more knowledge of the extent of the 
terrorist presence in Europe, the United States, and the Middle East. 
It has given us knowledge of al-Qaida's pursuit of weapons of mass 
destruction, of methods of recruitment and location of recruitment 
centers, terrorist skill sets, general and specialized operative 
training, and of how legitimate financial activities are being used to 
hide terrorist operations.
  The intelligence we are gaining by the interrogations of those who 
are kept at Guantanamo has prevented terrorist attacks and has saved 
American lives. Not only has no one died at Guantanamo, not only has 
the highest health care possible been provided to them, but lives have 
been saved as a result of our activities there. Detainees have revealed 
al-Qaida leadership structures and operating funding mechanisms, 
training and selection programs, travel patterns, support 
infrastructure, and plans for attacking the United Sates and other 
countries. Information has been used by our forces on the battlefield 
to identify significant military and tribal leaders who are engaged in 
or supporting attacks on coalition forces. Detainees have continuously 
provided information that confirms other reporting regarding the roles 
and intentions of al-Qaida and other terrorist operatives.
  I could get into details, but I will not do that publicly. The fact 
is, we are getting extensive, detailed information from the terrorists 
who are kept at Guantanamo, which is saving American lives and helping 
us to protect our young men and women in the military and people in 
other nations.

[[Page S7402]]

  I want to conclude my remarks by coming back to the beginning. There 
has been a lot of debate about what is going on at Guantanamo. What is 
the United States doing? Why is it doing it? Is the United States 
creating some type of a new detention circumstance in modern warfare, 
which parallels some of the most terrible examples that our critics 
have been able to throw up at us? I went down there wanting to know and 
wanting to see and to be able to report back to the American people 
about what truly is happening.

  What I found was that the U.S. men and women of our Armed Forces are 
committed, honorable, loyal, duty-bound members of the American 
military who are following the orders of their Commander in Chief to 
the letter, following the Geneva Conventions, and providing beyond what 
the Geneva Conventions even requires in terms of protection to these 
detainees, in a service to America and to the world. I found a 
circumstance where I don't believe a valid argument can be made that 
there is any nonhumane treatment of these detainees. I found a 
circumstance in which it appears to me that what is being portrayed by 
some is simply manufactured out of whole cloth in order to perpetuate a 
broader debate against the United States and our interests.
  I also became convinced that, far beyond being simply a detention 
facility, Guantanamo is one of the key strategic interrogation 
facilities necessary for the United States in pursuit of the war 
against terror in this world. As we have said in both of our remarks, 
Guantanamo is where the worst of the worst are taken. They are taken 
there to be protected so that we can be protected from them and so that 
we can gain information from them that will help us better protect 
ourselves as we continue to fight to defend against the likes of Osama 
bin Laden.
  I also stand here to commend the young men and women of our fighting 
forces--not just those who at Guantanamo are suffering the abuse of the 
detainees and the extremes of the weather and the living circumstances 
there to defend us, but those who serve throughout this world, whether 
it be in Iraq or Afghanistan or any of the other points of conflict or 
in any other of the stations around this world, where we have men and 
women deployed to defend our interests.
  The United States is at war against terrorists and we must 
acknowledge that. The efforts of the men and women in our military 
should be commended, not discredited. I stand as one Senator to thank 
the men and women of our Armed Forces for the tremendous job they do. 
They put their lives on the line daily for us and they should be given 
our thanks, not our criticism.
  With that, I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
  Mr. BUNNING. I thank my colleague from Idaho for his great 
observation of our trip yesterday. I also know that Senator Isakson was 
unable to be here, but he will make a statement later this evening. I 
hope Senator Ben Nelson and Senator Ron Wyden will also come forward 
and report what they saw at Guantanamo.
  I am happy to also thank, as Senator Crapo has, all of our men and 
women in the military who serve our great country.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burr). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________