One Angry Man

Kudos to Gitmo military panel member Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham for exposing the "vague and incomplete intelligence" given to Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) members, and the pressure they were under to to rule against detainees, declaring them "enemy combatants."

"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 the 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 submitted on behalf of a Kuwaiti detainee, Fawzi al-Odah, who is challenging his classification as an 'enemy combatant' (Army officer says Gitmo panels flawed.)."

al-Odah attorney David Cynamoon says, "It proves what we all suspected, which is that the CSRTs were a complete sham."

Of course, the Pentagon tells us the "Department of Defense is preparing a response" to Abraham's allegations.

The military held CSRTs for 558 detainees at the U.S. naval base at Gitmo in 2004 and 2005. The handcuffed detainees appeared before 3-person panels made up of three officers. The detainees has a military "personal representative," but not defense attorneys. All but 38 were determined to be "enemy combatants."

Abraham said while serving on one of the panels,

"(H)e and 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."

The article discusses only the legal aspects of the commissions, but the Geneva Convention violations, torture and renditions were not addressed.

Justice, torture and military commissions should seek the truth, and not serve as lapdogs for an administration which peddles its truth du jour. This is not the American way.

Some things must remain sacrosanct, even in this society which has comodified most things. Legality is not a variable, nor a fungible, commodity.