U.S. May Move Detainees To Afghan Prison

News Of Transfer Of Some Guantanamo Prisoners Comes Amid Criticism Of Tribunals By Army Lawyer

(CBS/AP)  The United States is helping build a prison in Afghanistan to take some prisoners now at Guantanamo Bay, but the White House said Friday that it's not meant as an alternative to the detainee facility in Cuba.

The news comes the same day as the release of an affadavit by an Army lawyer criticizing the evidence used by military tribunals to determine whether detainees will continue to be held.

The Bush administration has said it wants to close Guantanamo Bay and move terror suspects to prisons elsewhere. Senior officials have told The Associated Press a consensus is building among the president's top advisers on how to do it.

The administration is looking to resolve the issue swiftly, White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino told reporters Friday, although she said there's no deadline set.

"Everybody is working towards the goal to meet what the president has asked them to do, which is to do it as soon as possible," she said of shuttering the facility.

A meeting of top officials on Guantanamo was planned for Friday but it was called off when word leaked.

Even so, Perino said, the president remains committed to shutting down the jail for suspected terrorists, reports CBS News correspondent Mark Knoller. But, Perino added, "Nothing is imminent."

"America does not have any intention of being the world's jailer," Perino said. She noted that the United States has announced plans to release about 80 of some 375 detainees, and hopes to transfer several dozen Afghans back to Afghanistan in the near future.

The Pentagon announced Friday that a new detainee had been transferred to the center, but added it was doing its best to reduce the population there, now at the lowest point in its five-year history.

That word came the same day as new criticism of the military tribunals held at Guantanamo Bay was raised, this time by an Army officer with a key role in the hearings.

In an affidavit released Friday, Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, a 26-year veteran of military intelligence who is an Army reserve officer and a California lawyer, says the tribunals relied on vague and incomplete intelligence and were pressured to declare detainees "enemy combatants," often without any specific evidence.

Abraham said military prosecutors were provided with only "generic" material that didn't hold up to the most basic legal challenges.

Despite repeated requests, intelligence agencies arbitrarily refused to provide specific information that could have helped either side in the tribunals, according to Abraham, who said he served as a main liaison between the Combat Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) and those intelligence agencies.

"What were purported to be specific statements of fact lacked even the most fundamental earmarks of objectively credible evidence," Abraham said in the affidavit, filed in a Washington appeals court on behalf of a Kuwaiti detainee, Fawzi al-Odah, who is challenging his classification as an "enemy combatant."

Abraham "bravely" agreed to provide the affidavit when defense lawyers contacted him, said al-Odah attorney David Cynamon.

"It proves what we all suspected, which is that the CSRTs were a complete sham," he said.

At the White House, Perino said Mr. Bush has directed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to work with her counterparts around the world to try to repatriate detainees to their home countries, make sure they are held safely and treated humanely and that they are not allowed to perpetrate acts of terrorism.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Friday that Rice continues to work to achieve that goal while she and others in the administration struggle with how to address security concerns that could result from closing Guantanamo.

"The president has said he would like nothing better than at some point to shut down Guantanamo Bay, but there are a number of steps that need to be taken between here and that stated objective and they are tough issues," McCormack said. "There are people down at Guantanamo Bay who are very, very dangerous and you can't just let them walk free."

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman noted Defense Secretary Robert Gates supports closing the facility.

"I think that's the goal of everybody in the administration and probably most Americans — that we would rather not have to have a place like Guantanamo," he said. "But the fact remains that there are dangerous people out there that are being picked up on the battlefield that have vowed to return to the fight if released and individuals that have committed war crimes and should be held accountable for their actions."

The Pentagon announced the transfer to the center of Haroon al-Afghani, an alleged terrorist captured in the Afghan province of Nangarhar who is suspected of serving as a courier for al Qaeda leadership and commanding multiple cells of the Hezb-e-Islami militant faction.

The Guantanamo Bay prison, set up in 2002 to house terror suspects captured in military operations, mostly in Afghanistan, has been a flashpoint for criticism of the Bush administration at home and abroad.

Human rights advocates and foreign leaders have repeatedly called for its shutdown, and the prison is regarded by critics as proof of U.S. double standards on fundamental freedoms in the war on terrorism.

Some of the detainees have come from countries that are U.S. allies, including Britain, Saudi Arabia and Australia. Each of those governments raised complaints about the conditions or duration of detentions, or about the possibility that detainees might face death sentences.

A proposal gaining traction among Mr. Bush's top national security advisers would have some of the most dangerous suspects at Guantanamo transferred to one or more Defense Department facilities, including the maximum-security military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., officials say.

White House spokeswoman Perino said the Friday gathering to discuss the issue was canceled because it was determined that a "meeting wasn't necessary at this time."

"There was going to be a meeting in which Guantanamo detainee issues were discussed today, but that has been taken off the schedule," she said. "That doesn't mean that people don't continue to work on what the president has asked them to do, which is work towards getting that facility closed."

Expected to consult soon, according to the officials, are Rice, Gates, Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace.

The move is opposed by Cheney's office and the Justice Department, which argue that transferring prisoners to U.S. soil would give them undeserved rights and pose a threat to the United States.

But pressure on the administration to shut the facility has been mounting in recent months with a series of legal setbacks and some in Congress threatening to mandate it. The pressure has given advocates of closure some leverage in intense internal debate, the officials said.

[speakinup]

"70% of the installed Afghan Parlaiment members are reported to be warlords and druglords- the same warlords and druglords that sold these men to u.S. forces to rot in Guantanimo in the first place, just for the 'reward' money." Feelfree1

Yeah - sure. And you had the audacity to knock the CBS reporter the other day because you didn't like what he said. So, where did you get this information from - what reliable source?

You have HIGHLY selective hearing Feelfree1.

But, I'll give you the fact that you do know what it means to rot in jail.

[gunnerv1]

AHhhh. Club GITMO West.

[junogoose]

JEGibbons: "The Dude who claims he persomaally beheaded Daniel Perl is a GITMO along with some of his goombahs."

OMG.. they nabbed a real one? congrats! give them a (cuban) cigar.

[brianbwb-2009]

Any country which is a signatory to the Geneva Convention should not allow the US to pass illegally detained victims across their borders, or through their airspace.

I posted somewhere else a while back that Bush would kill the victims rather than have them provide evidence of hie crimes against humanity.

Here we go...

[feelfree1]

70% of the installed Afghan Parlaiment members are reported to be warlords and druglords- the same warlords and druglords that sold these men to u.S. forces to rot in Guantanimo in the first place, just for the 'reward' money.

How should we expect that they might be treated if they are returned and imprisoned in Afghanistan? Will they construct a kangroo court to deal out 'justice' for these uncharged prisoners.

[randalds]

I have no problem with the fact that there are almost certainly some very dangerous men in Gitmo. The problem is that, since none of them have been charged, tried or convicted of anything, we have no idea which of them are dangerous men and which of them are innocent men who have been swept up in our governments blind over-reaction. Our system of justice is geared toward not just sending guilty men to prison (or the gallows) but being dam*ned sure we don't do the same to the innocent ones. What is happening in Gitmo is the worst miscarriage of justice in American history and should disgust any person who actually understands what this country is supposed to stand for and what it was founded upon. Apparently there are some here who have forgotten what being an American is supposed to be. We're supposed to be the good guys, not the repressive dictatorships were fighting that do this to their political prisoners. We're supposed to be better then them, yet now we are less. Thanks to Bush.

[feelfree1]

Where would Jesus imprison and torture 'detainees', without charge?

[jegibbons]

itgrammy The Dude who claims he persomaally beheaded Daniel Perl is a GITMO along with some of his goombahs. Let's make sure we get him a good expensive ACLU attorney why don't we?

Grammy you smoking that CRACK PIPE? Why you so worried about these bad guys. You got a thing for hairy muslems or what?

[itgranny]

Eureka,

Hot off the press and exactly what I was trying to say.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-22-gitmo-flaws_N.htm

[randalds]

Loser.
Posted by SlipSter01 at 09:55 PM : Jun 22, 2007

First of all the definition of loser on the internet is a moron who posts the same message over and over again. You are a loser.

Secondly the Bush administration itself has said that these are NOT POW's, so your analogy means nothing. Nada. Zip. Doesn't fit.

The clowns currently ruining (correct spelling) our government decided to call them "enemy combatants" and thereby claim that they didn't get the same rights as if they were under the Geneva Convention (which Alberto Gonzales sarcastically referred to as "quaint") and at the same time didn't get the same rights as a criminal. The Supreme Court has ruled that they do indeed get the same rights as criminals so the government must provide them with lawyers and try them in a recognized court of law. Currently the chimp and friends are fighting to have them tried in a court for kangaroos...and are losing.

Try to keep up.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.

[slipster01]

"What about justice? When there's no trial, no jury, no place to even be heard, how can you be assured that these people are really guilty?

Posted by itgrammy at 08:01 PM : Jun 22, 2007"

What the hell are you talking about? That's not how you treat a prisoner of war. Look at history. You hold them UNTIL hostilities are over, which, if you listen to the terrorists media like ABC, means they'll be held forever.

Courts? In World War II, did German POW's get courts? Japanese POWs? American POWs?

NO. So why the fruck do you want these people to get courts? Oh, so they can immigrate to the US and vote for Hillary, that's why.

Loser.