Officer says GITMO detainees declared "enemy combatants" without specific evidence

[BrainGlutton]

An officer who was personally involved in the process, that is. From the AP

Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, a 26-year veteran of military intelligence who is an Army reserve officer and a California lawyer, 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 Tribunals 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.”

<snip>

The military held Combatant Status Review Tribunals for 558 detainees at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay in 2004 and 2005, with handcuffed detainees appearing before panels made up of three officers. Detainees had a military “personal representative” instead of a defense attorney, and all but 38 were determined to be “enemy combatants.”

Abraham was asked to serve on one of the panels, and he said its members felt strong pressure to find against the detainee, saying there was “intensive scrutiny” when they declared a prisoner not to be an enemy combatant. When his panel decided the detainee wasn’t an “enemy combatant,” they were ordered to reconvene to hear more evidence, he said.

Ultimately, his panel held its ground, and he was never asked to participate in another tribunal, he said.

And from WaPo:

Abraham, who helped review government intelligence about detainees in 2004 and 2005 and served on a Combatant Status Review Tribunal, is the first person who played such a role to publicly challenge the fairness of the reviews. He said in an interview yesterday that he felt compelled to disclose his misgivings after reading public claims about the fairness of the process made by Rear Adm. James M. McGarrah, who oversaw it.

<snip>

McGarrah, who was the director of the Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants (OARDEC), where Abraham worked for six months, told the federal appeals court in a May declaration that the Pentagon carefully weighed how to determine that combatants should be detained.

Abraham said that, to the contrary, he repeatedly raised his concerns during his six-month stint in the office, including direct appeals to McGarrah. He said the evidence presented to the tribunals lacked specificity, and that exculpatory information about the detainees was unavailable and possibly withheld. He said that government agencies sometimes claimed that detainees were “enemy fighters” or “warriors” after saying that they were on a jihad or ascertaining their presence in a specific location.

Abraham also said in the interview that legal standards for the unusual tribunals were nearly nonexistent. He equated the government hearsay presented about detainees with “a game of telephone.”

In his affidavit, Abraham said there was considerable pressure from commanders for officers serving on the tribunals to determine that detainees were enemy fighters. He also said that it was “well known” that those officers who concluded otherwise would have to explain their findings to McGarrah and his top aides.

He said he and two fellow panel members were closely questioned by McGarrah and his deputy after they decided that there was not enough evidence to conclude that a prisoner was an enemy fighter, and were then ordered to hold an expanded hearing to reconsider their conclusion.

Offered without comment, except for a hearty :mad: .

[wring]

obviously wrong -we’ve been assured for years that these men were the ‘worst of the worst’ and so dangerous our national security relied on their secret detention -why we weren’t even allowed to know how many there were or nationality at first.

surely they wouldn’t have lied to us!

[jjimm]

George W. Bush, 5.29 pm EDT, July 17, 2003.[

Q: …what happens now in Guantanamo Bay to the people detained there…*

Q: Do you have concerns they’re not getting justice, the people detained there?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, the only thing I know for certain is that these are bad people…

](Briefing Room | The White House)*Edit for context.

[David_Simmons]

Abraham obviously hates America.

Is anyone surprised at this?

It’s the reason habeas corpus is so important even for those who aren’t 250% American. Arguments to the contrary are just so much legalistic bafflegab.

[El_Cid_Viscoso]

American Justice as we know it was not created in situ, in a petri dish, in an agar of good ole American Fair Play. It’s more like an ugly necklace made of pottery shards recovered from the deepest parts of the Atlantic.

The contemporary argument is that our jurisprudence has adapted itself over time and this episode is simply a spasm, a new challenge; BrainGlutton, why can’t you stop hating America long enough to let people sue for their rights? Even if it takes a decade, that’s our system.

[saoirse]

The Bush Admninistration’s guiding principle on habeas corpus seems to be that it exists because the Stupid Old Constitution says we gotta.

[bannerrefugee]

It’s so unsurprising that it has become tiresome.

This must be these guys’s goal.

[Boyo_Jim]

It turns out that these guys might be lucky to be termed “enemy combatants”. At least two recent court decisions said that because they have not been determined to be unlawful enemy combatants, they can’t be tried by these kangaroo military tribunals.

Course, maybe that means they’ll just be slapped back into holes until the administration can figure out some other travesty of justice process to cover over their crimes.

[David_Simmons]

The colonel mentioned that when his group came in without declaring their guy to be an enemy combatant they were essentially told that was unsatisfactory, go back and try again.

That’s my problem with the whole military justice system. It’s all in one branch with no independent review. The Judge Advocates are honorable and do the best they can but they are still subject to military discipline and the chain of command.

[elucidator]

I got this idea about how this happened. Just an idea, mind you…

They rounded up all these desperate terrorist criminals to Gitmo, and started leaning on them for information. And didn’t get any. So, they started to lean heavier, because they know that they’re desperate terrorists, and they’ve got information. Things get a little out of hand, a bit more Jack Bauer than the regs allow.

And gradually it began to dawn on them. A lot of these guys don’t know squat about terrorists. And we don’t know that they don’t know because we know less than squat about terrorists. So now they got a whole bunch of guys they have mistreated who aren’t guilty of anything in particular. So they cover it up, keep the lid on, quietly let some of them go, and hope to reach retirement before the shit hits the fan.

Of course, probably a bunch of them are sworn enemies of America. Now.

[Der_Trihs]

@elucidator

And gradually it began to dawn on them. A lot of these guys don’t know squat about terrorists. And we don’t know that they don’t know because we know less than squat about terrorists. So now they got a whole bunch of guys they have mistreated who aren’t guilty of anything in particular. So they cover it up, keep the lid on, quietly let some of them go, and hope to reach retirement before the shit hits the fan.

Of course, probably a bunch of them are sworn enemies of America. Now.

And others are crippled, or insane. And these people have visions of the media having a field day with photos of ex-prisoners who are paralyzed or who just stare into space or are missing body parts. Personally, I expect quite a few of these people to never be released; they will be disappeared into some CIA prison or suffer “special rendition” into some dictator’s dungeon, or just shot and dumped into the ocean.

[Zoe]

How does this invasion thing work? You know – the one where another country comes in and sets up a Democracy? Is there a waiting list? Should we take a number?

[TokyoBayer]

No, we’re only holding the ones who were able to launch WMD within 45 minutes, so we’re OK.

[Rhythmdvl]

Does anyone have a link to Colbert’s “Formidable Opponent” bit where he debates holding Gitmo prisoners? Very true to point, very prescient, and very Colbert.

[MovieMogul]

@Rhythmdvl

Does anyone have a link to Colbert’s “Formidable Opponent” bit where he debates holding Gitmo prisoners? Very true to point, very prescient, and very Colbert.

Here you go.

[BrainGlutton]

@Zoe

How does this invasion thing work? You know – the one where another country comes in and sets up a Democracy? Is there a waiting list? Should we take a number?

I’m ready to surrender to Canada!

Especially if we get universal health care out of the deal – and if the FBI gets merged into the Mounties, so all federal agents have to attend formal occasions dressed up like Dudley Do-Right!

[jayjay]

@BrainGlutton

I’m ready to surrender to Canada!

Especially if we get universal health care out of the deal – and if the FBI gets merged into the Mounties, so all federal agents have to attend formal occasions dressed up like Dudley Do-Right!

Except for J. Edgar Hoover, who would have dressed like Nell Fenwick instead…