Bush: Key Qaeda Leaders Sent To Gitmo

(CBS/AP)  President George W. Bush on Wednesday acknowledged the existence of previously secret CIA prisons around the world and said 14 high-value terrorism suspects — including the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks — have been transferred from the system to Guantanamo Bay for trials.

He said the "small number" of detainees that have been kept in CIA custody include people responsible for the bombing of the warship USS Cole in 2000 in Yemen and the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, in addition to the 2001 attacks.

"It has been necessary to move these individuals to an environment where they can be held secretly, questioned by experts and, when appropriate, prosecuted for terrorist acts," Mr. Bush said in a White House speech with families of those killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks making up part of the audience. "These are dangerous men, with unparalleled knowledge about terrorist networks and their plans of new attacks. The security of our nation and the lives of our citizens depend on our ability to learn what these terrorists know."

---

Read profiles of the 14 suspects

---

The announcement from Mr. Bush is the first time the administration has acknowledged the existence of CIA prisons, which have been a source of friction between Washington and some allies in Europe. The administration has come under criticism for its treatment of terrorism detainees. European Union lawmakers said the CIA was conducting clandestine flights in Europe to take terror suspects to countries where they could face torture.

"Today the administration finally recognized that the protections of the Geneva Convention should be applied to prisoners in order to restore our moral authority and best protect American troops," said Sen. John Kerry, who lost to Mr. Bush in the 2004 presidential election. "Today's shift in policy follows the sad legacy of five years during which this administration abused our Constitution, violated our laws, and most importantly failed to make America safe."

The president's announcement, which the White House touted beforehand and asked to be televised live on the networks, comes as Bush has sought with a series of speeches to sharpen the focus on national security two months before high-stakes congressional elections.

The president successfully emphasized the war on terror in his re-election campaign in 2004 and is trying to make it a winning issue for Republicans again this year.

Mr. Bush said the Central Intelligence Agency program has involved such suspected terrorists as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, believed to be the No. 3 al Qaeda leader before he was captured in Pakistan in 2003; Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be Sept. 11, 2001, hijacker; Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al Qaeda cells before he was also captured in Pakistan, in March 2002.

The former al Qaeda bosses were secretly flown to Guantanamo on Labor Day and immediately placed in cells segregated from the rest of the terrorist inmates. Now that they're in Guantanamo Bay, the al Qaeda leaders will be allowed Red Cross visits and treated like other prisoners. Asked how they fared during their years of secret captivity, one official told CBS News correspondent Jim Stewart, "They look better now than when we caught them."

• 1
• 2
• Next Page »

[usjl1]

This book was written by a former Islamic Scholar
"FIFTEEN YEARS AGO I was the imam of a mosque in the city of Giza, Egypt, which is where the famous Egyptian pyramids are located..." (more) by Mark A., Ph.D. Gabriel

Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad (Paperback)

3.5 star rating(77 customer reviews).

Note: Not all Muslims are bad, its the teaching and brain washing by their leaders.

[ronniehm]

2008 should be interesting. That's when Democrats will say, "Duh, you mean we spent the last four years campaigning against a guy who can't run again? Uh oh." Maybe it's time for Democrats to start explaining how they will deal with terrorism. We're well aware of what they won't do.

[long_rider]

I think that everyone here is on the same page. Write your congressmen and senators calling for impeachment. Visit the various web sites and sign petitions for impeachment. Words here identify unity in thought, take the next step, unity in action. Ask the press for a poll on impeachment. Ask the press why they are not hounding this president the way they did Nixion. Nixion lied to cover up for a simplebreak in. This administration lied to get into war. Should be a story somewhere.

[p027783]

Remember this when you go to vote this year...

It's time for change...

[random_radar]

Benjamin Franklin already addressed this issue:

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

Why do our government caretakers require us to give up our freedoms in exchange for protection? How does enslaving us make us secure? It doesn't. It is a false exchange and only fools would accept it.

If we set up the apparatus to secretly imprison and torture enemies of the state, it will come back to haunt us. Right now it is foreign terrorists, but by and by it will be domestic "persons of interest." We are acquiesing in our own demise.

If the terrorists are guilty, we should try them in the open and lay out the evidence against them so every knows and agrees. Then whatever punishment is levied against them can be just and justified.

It is a hallmark of democracy that government is open to scrutiny. It is a sign of totalitarianism that government feels compelled to hide its works in darkness. What are they afraid of?

[optimas2]

Bfroggy, I'm not so sure that torture doesn't extract useful information--the question, of course, is what is good information and what is bad.

In Col. James Rowe's book "Five Years to Freedom," he discusses his time in a North Vietnamese prison camp and how the military's former policy of "name, rank and serial number" was simply unrealistic when a prisoner was being tortured. Indeed, Col. Rowe's experience and book was a catalyst to a number of changes in the military when it comes to situations involving captivity--following his escape, Col. Rowe was key in implementing major overhauls to SERE school (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape), the completion of which is required for entrance into the Special Forces.

Whether or not torture is a moral or ethical practice is a different question altogether, but there are certainly members of the military that operate according to the presumption that torture is effective, and the military itself seems to take that position, as well.

[stevyz1]

JUST ONE MORE THING ...THE CONSERVATIVE RIGHT USES THE WORD LIBERAL LIKE IT IS A DIRTY WORD SO FOR THEIR BENIFIT I LOOKED UP THE DEFINITION...AS FOLLOWS..# broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
# having political or social views favoring reform and progress
# tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
# a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
# big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "the bounteous goodness of God"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
# a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
# free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
SO WHAT IS WRON WITH BEING LIBERAL?

[stevyz1]

IM TALKING ABOUT HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE!!!IF WE CONCENTRATED OUR EFFORTS ON SECURING THE BORDERS OF THE US.WE WOULD BE SAFER INSTEAD OF WASTING ALL THE RESOURCES WE HAVE IN IRAQ...
I DONT UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS SOMHOW BETTER TO FIGHT IN IRAQ THEN TO DEFEND US HERE AT HOME.
I THINK AMERICANS WOULD ACCEPT THIS CHALLENGE AND DEFEND THEIR HOMELAND GIVEN THE CHANCE..
LET THEM (THE TERRORISTS) TRY ..WE WILL BE WAITING FOR THEM..

[stevyz1]

you call this administration LEADERS?? i dont think we have to wipe out all terrorists worldwide to be safe. (it IMPOSSIBLE anyway !!!) ..iraq WAS A MISTAKE!!!PRESIDENT BUSH/CHENEY SHOULD NOT ONLY BE IMPEACHED BUT TRIED AS WAR CRIMINALS.....AS FOR RUMSFELD HE IS TOO ARROGANT TO STEP DOWN....(OR JUST TOO STUPID)REGARDLESS REFUSING TO TALK TO SYRIA AND OTHERS WE DISSAGREE WITH IS FOOLISH..KEEP YOUR ENEMYS CLOSE..THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS PLUNGED US INTO WAR..FOR REASONS AFTER 3 YEARS STILL NOT CLEAR..REMEMBER WMD? INCREASED THE DANGER TO FREE PEOPLE WORLWIDE SO WHO HAS DONE MORE DAMAGE TO AMERICA? I THINK THEY HAVENT GIVEN AMERICANS ENOUGH CREDIT.. I THINK WE (AMERICANS)WOULD RATHER FIGHT THE TERRORISTS HERE ON OUR OWN TURF ANYWAY.. I KNOW I WOULD FIGHT THEM HERE.. I DONT THINK IT IS A WEAKNESS TO RESPECT OTHERS OR AT LEAST LISTEN TO THEM...CLOSED MINDS HAVE ENDANGERED US MORE THAN EVER...

[one_american]

Rant all you want, stupid brain-dead liberals. Electing a weak liberal leader will not make the terrorists go away, and you know it.

Rant and rave all you want, but you know in your soul that you will vote for the next President who will have the very same policy as President Bush in order to fight the war on terror effectively.

It's an acting in your own self-interest, and liberals are good at that.