Is that Elba island place still available, we could use for detainees?

Napoleon came back from Elba.

Why would we move 'detainees' from one installation on foreign land to another one even farther away? It's rather chauvinistic to even consider imposing our will upon another nation (in the case you mention, Italy, to whom Elba belongs); at least there's some semblance of 'legality,' since the US holds a lease from the Cuban government for Guantanamo.

It's going to take a lot more to resolve this issue than shuttling off the 'detainees' to some out-of-sight-out-of-mind location. It will likely haunt the US government for many years past when the last surviving 'detainee' draws breath. As unpleasant as it may seem to some, the most 'legal' resolution would be to move them to prisons stateside. Nobody ever said the law of unintended consequences would be easy or convenient.

I'm looking for a return to Constitutional government.

After all, it's not like we haven't kept terrorists in lockup in the US before(McVeigh, Unibomber), it's not like we're already keeping a few dozen terrorists in custody now(Nichols among others). It's not like these people in Gitmo are somehow superhuman and will be able to break out of Leavenworth using the heat beams that shoot from their eyes or their superstrength. It's not like these facilities aren't designed to prevent people from breaking out, or contrariwise, breaking in to rescue inmates. And frankly, given the nature of our prison system, these people from Gitmo will have to be held in protective solitary confinement, otherwise they would be exposed to the tender mercies of the rest of the inmate population, and do you honestly think that the Neo-Nazis would be kind to them.

This whole argument about not bringing these people to our prisons is simply more bogus bullshit designed to stall, and ultimately prevent the closure of Gitmo. Obama needs to come out strongly on this one, and use it to slap around those who are against this. I mean honestly, the notion that the nation with the highest incarceration rate in the world can't hold a group of so called terrorists is patently absurd. It's just another ploy to keep Gitmo open, and keep the nightmare alive.

who need to be "locked up" for ANY REASON. See: http://www.torturingdemocracy.org

...you want Saint Helena.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Helena

Elba is about the same size as Martha's Vineyard, has twice as many inhabitants, is about the same distance off the coast, and has an international airport.

St. Helena is more remote; but are you seriously saying the detainees ought to be stranded somewhere?

If the evidence is so tainted that they couldn't get a conviction, and the detainee is held in a Colorado federal prison and tried in a federal court there, then he would have to be released or perhaps deported wouldn't he? So there could possibly, if we follow our laws, be one released on the streets of Colorado.

I doubt stranding them on an island where they don't want to be would be any more compatible with laws than keeping them imprisoned, though.

I am a big fan of the Queen, since as a small boy watching her coronation on weak snowy tv. She is a great lady in my opinion.

He goddam mad dog, eh?

Tourism is Elba's primary source of income; the island's population triples to nearly 100,000 in the summer. Just a guess, but I'm thinkin' the good folks of Elba may not want to jeopardize their booming tourist trade by accepting US detainess that they have absolutely no obligation to take.

It's not that far from Gitmo.