Camp Delta at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, originally uploaded by Rob Bluey.

This morning I participated in a blogger call with Alan Liotta, principle director for the Pentagon’s Office of Detainee Affairs. We were talking about Guantanamo Bay, which is in the news again following an Associated Press report that the Bush administration may close its terrorist detention facility there.

Liotta didn’t address those rumors, but instead focused on the consequences of closing GITMO, where our troops have conducted some of the most sensitive and revealing interviews with terrorists since 2001. Liotta said he’s focused on the security implications related to GITMO, and therefore, he didn’t wade into any of the legal arguments.

Here’s the problem as Liotta explained it: GITMO houses about 400 of the most dangerous people in the world. Moving them to a detention facility in the continental U.S. would pose a significant terrorist threat. He cited two reasons for keeping GITMO open: 1) it keeps terrorists in an isolated location, and 2) it precludes a facility in the U.S. from having to undertake a huge security burden.

One of the problems facing GITMO is the negative stereotype developed after a relentless media assault and repeated criticism from liberals. When I asked if moving the facility would pacify critics, Liotta was skeptical. He said criticism of GITMO is focused primarily on the overall legal structure, not so much the care and treatment of terrorists who are there.

But it’s that very legal structure that Liotta said could dramatically change at a U.S.-based detention center. Housing terrorists at GITMO allows our troops to have complete access to them, Liotta said. It’s possible that a judge in the United State might restrict that access, dramatically reshaping how the military goes about interrogating terrorists.

For more information on the consequences of closing GITMO, please read this excellent paper from my Heritage colleague James Carafano.