Wednesday, September 06, 2006
CIA Detainees to GTMO
Big news out of the White House today - the President just announced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Abu Zubaydah, and 11 others (including individuals linked to the 1998 East African Embassy bombing and the 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole) have been transferred from CIA custody overseas to military custody at GTMO, with war crime prosecutions in the offing as soon as Congress enacts legislation reconstituting the military commission process. The devil, of course, will be in the details of that legislation. It has just begun to circulate, and I hope to have another post up on the topic shortly.
The text of the President's remarks are not yet posted, it seems, but will be available soon here.
Another significant point from the speech: the President made clear that no detainees currently remain in CIA custody, but he also made clear that he wants the CIA option to remain available for the interrogation of high-value detainees in the future. The President also indicated that he intends to discuss with Congress ways to facilitate that program going forward.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference CIA Detainees to GTMO:
All the detainees in GTMO are bad guys. Every single one of them. How do I know? I just got back from a deployment there. I was stationed there for a year and I can tell you they are all bad men. I worked At Camp V. The worst of the worst and 3 times I had their bodily fluids thrown on me. Every day they told me they wanted to kill either me or my family. There is a guide these guys follow called the Manchester Document. Chapter 9 tells them what to do if they're ever to be confined and the American People are falling into their trap. If anyone has any sympathy for these guys... Well you're an idiot. Sorry but it's the truth. I was in the prison riot, They tried to kill all of those involved. They are still fighting the war.
Posted by: Corey York | Sep 22, 2006 10:17:45 PM
Bobby -- Ironic timing, no? It seems to me that the legislation is far more important than the transfer, since the Administration proposal is targeted at _all_ non-citizen enemy combatant habeas petitions _anywhere_, and purports to take away Geneva rights (see section 6(b), pg. 79).
I guess it's another "compromise"... :-)
Posted by: Steve Vladeck | Sep 6, 2006 2:56:46 PM