Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

AP sources: Military-civilian terror prison eyed

Sun Aug 2, 2009 5:16 AM EDT
politics, us, guantanamo, detainees, guantanamo-detainees
Lara Jakes, Associated Press
< PreviousNext >
showing 1 of 4 photos
<p>FILE - In this May 14, 2009 file photo, reviewed by the U.S. military, Guantanamo detainees pray before dawn near a fence of razor-wire, inside Camp 4 detention facility at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, Cuba. The Obama administration is looking at creating a courtroom-within-a-prison complex in the U.S. to house suspected terrorists, combining military and civilian detention facilities at a single maximum-security prison. Several senior U.S. officials said the administration is eyeing a soon-to-be-shuttered state maximum security prison in Michigan and the 134-year-old military penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., as possible locations for a heavily guarded site to hold the 229 suspected al-Qaida, Taliban and foreign fighters now jailed at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba.  (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, File)</p>

FILE - In this May 14, 2009 file photo, reviewed by the U.S. military, Guantanamo detainees pray before dawn near a fence of razor-wire, inside Camp 4 detention facility at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, Cuba. The Obama administration is looking at creating a courtroom-within-a-prison complex in the U.S. to house suspected terrorists, combining military and civilian detention facilities at a single maximum-security prison. Several senior U.S. officials said the administration is eyeing a soon-to-be-shuttered state maximum security prison in Michigan and the 134-year-old military penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., as possible locations for a heavily guarded site to hold the 229 suspected al-Qaida, Taliban and foreign fighters now jailed at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, File)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is looking at creating a courtroom-within-a-prison complex in the U.S. to house suspected terrorists, combining military and civilian detention facilities at a single maximum-security prison.

Several senior U.S. officials said the administration is eyeing a soon-to-be-shuttered state maximum security prison in Michigan and the military penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., as possible locations for a heavily guarded site to hold the 229 suspected al-Qaida, Taliban and foreign fighters now jailed at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba.

The officials outlined the plans — the latest effort to comply with President Barack Obama's order to close the prison camp by Jan. 22, 2010, and satisfy congressional and public fears about incarcerating terror suspects on American soil — on condition of anonymity because the options are under review.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said Friday that no decisions have been made about the proposal. But the White House considers the courtroom-prison complex as the best among a series of bad options, an administration official said.

To the House Republican leader, it's an "ill-conceived plan" that would bring terrorists into the U.S. despite opposition by Congress and the American people. "The administration is going to face a severe public backlash unless it shelves this plan and goes back to the drawing board," said Antonia Ferrier, spokeswoman for Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio.

For months, government lawyers and senior officials at the Pentagon, Justice Department and the White House have struggled with how to close the internationally reviled U.S. Navy prison at Guantanamo.

Congress has blocked $80 million intended to bring the detainees to the United States. Lawmakers want the administration to say how it plans to make the moves without putting Americans at risk.

The facility would operate as a hybrid prison system jointly operated by the Justice Department, the military and the Department of Homeland Security.

The administration's plan, according to three government officials, calls for:

_Moving all the Guantanamo detainees to a single U.S. prison. The Justice Department has identified between 60 and 80 who could be prosecuted, either in military or federal criminal courts. The Pentagon would oversee the detainees who would face trial in military tribunals. The Bureau of Prisons, an arm of the Justice Department, would manage defendants in federal courts.

_Building a court facility within the prison site where military or criminal defendants would be tried. Doing so would create a single venue for almost all the criminal defendants, ending the need to transport them elsewhere in the U.S. for trial.

_Providing long-term holding cells for a small but still undetermined number of detainees who will not face trial because intelligence and counterterror officials conclude they are too dangerous to risk being freed.

_Building immigration detention cells for detainees ordered released by courts but still behind bars because countries are unwilling to take them.

Each proposal, according to experts in constitutional and national security law, faces legal and logistics problems.

Scott Silliman, director of Duke University's Center on Law, Ethics and National Security, called the proposal "totally unprecedented" and said he doubts the plan would work without Congress' involvement because new laws probably would be needed. Otherwise, "we gain nothing — all we do is create a Guantanamo in Kansas or wherever," Silliman said.

"You've got very strict jurisdictional issues on venue of a federal court. Why would you bring courts from all over the country to one facility, rather than having them prosecuted in the district where the courts sit?"

Legal experts said civilian trials held inside the prison could face jury-selection dilemmas in rural areas because of the limited number of potential jurors available.

One solution, Silliman said, would be to bring jurors from elsewhere. But that step, one official said, could also compromise security by opening up the prison to outsiders.

It is unclear whether victims — particularly survivors of Sept. 11 victims — would be allowed into the courtroom to watch the trials. Victims and family members have no assumed right under current law to attend military commissions, although the Pentagon does allow them to attend hearings at Guantanamo under a random selection process. That right is automatic in civilian federal courthouses.

"They'll have to sort it out," said Douglas Beloof, a professor at Lewis and Clark Law School in Portland, Ore., and expert on crime victims' rights. He said the new system "could create tension with victims who would protest."

The officials said that another uncertainty remains how many Guantanamo detainees would end up housed in the hybrid prison.

As many as an estimated 170 of the detainees now at Guantanamo are unlikely to be prosecuted. Some are being held indefinitely because government officials do not want to take the chance of seeing them acquitted in a trial. The rest are considered candidates for release, but the U.S. cannot find foreign countries willing to take them. Almost all have yet to be charged with crimes.

Two senior U.S. officials said one option for the proposed hybrid prison would be to use the soon-to-be-shuttered Standish maximum-security state prison in northeast Michigan. The facility already has individual cells and ample security for detainees.

Getting the Standish prison ready for the detainees would be costly. One official estimated it would cost over $100 million for security and other building upgrades.

Several Michigan lawmakers, including Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin and Rep. Bart Stupak, both Democrats, have said they would be open to moving detainees to Michigan as long as there is broad local support.

But the political support is not unanimous. Michigan Rep. Pete Hoekstra, top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee who is seeking the GOP nomination for governor next year, is against the idea.

Administration officials said the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth is under consideration because it is already a hardened high-security facility that could be further protected by the surrounding military base.

It's not clear what would happen to the military's inmates already being held there. Nearly half are members of the U.S. armed forces, and by law, cannot be housed with foreign prisoners.

Kansas' GOP-dominated congressional delegation is dead set against moving Guantanamo detainees to Leavenworth. Residents told Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., at a town hall meeting in May that 95 percent of the local community opposes it. Sen. Sam Brownback and Rep. Lynn Jenkins planned a news conference in Leavenworth on Monday to "discuss opposition to any efforts to move detainees to Fort Leavenworth."

Administration officials say they are determined to keep to his promise of closing Guantanamo in January as a worldwide example of America's commitment to humane and just treatment of the detainees.

Glenn Sulmasy, an international law professor at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy in New London, Conn., said the prison-court complex will "be difficult, but it's logical."

"This is all based on closing Gitmo by 2010, which seems to be a priority, and if we are going to do it, we have to step up to the plate and find solutions to the conundrum we're facing," said Sulmasy, who agrees with the administration's efforts. "And this seems to be the most pragmatic way ahead."

___

On the Net:

Fort Leavenworth Disciplinary Barracks: http://tinyurl.com/ln3ef9

Standish, Mich., Maximum Correctional Facility: http://tinyurl.com/len83g

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Lara Jakes's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: United States , Cuba , Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (28)
headinthegame

Gitmo in Kansas! Indefinite detention! When will America wake up to the fact that Obama is no better then Bush?

  • 3 votes
Reply#1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 11:56 AM EDT
Steve Olver Sheridan Wyoming

I am rubbing the sleep from my eyes as I keyboard this.Obama is in the fast lane to bushwhackerville sick disgusting

  • 1 vote
#1.1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:05 PM EDT
Onipupsac

Do you suggest that we just let these people run free? Obama sees now that he probably should have kept the base in Cuba open. These are dangerous people that need to be detained to keep America safe.

  • 1 vote
#1.2 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:39 PM EDT
JoulesBeef

no better than bush?
LOLOLOL
sorry man.. this may be bushesk
but the right wingers are having an epic wet dream if they think obama is near to the quality of bush.

  • 2 votes
#1.3 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 1:19 PM EDT
herecomedajudge

but the right wingers are having an epic wet dream if they think obama is near to the quality of bush.

We know Obama isn't even close to Bush and never will be. Obama is the new low in Presidents, Jimmy Carter number 2 bad.

  • 1 vote
#1.4 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 4:45 PM EDT
Kolby-1075823

I deff. have to agree with both JoulesBeef and herecomedajudge. Obama got elected because it was "popular" thing to do he has no military background and is running the country alot worse than bush ever did. At least bush cared about the military and he deffinately would never allow terrorist on American soil.

    #1.5 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 5:23 AM EDT
    Reply
    Steve Olver Sheridan Wyoming

    Why close gitmo then??its not a closing ,its a moving. U.S government just sucks by every meaning of the word.

    • 1 vote
    Reply#2 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:02 PM EDT
    JoulesBeef

    well what headinthegame above doesnt want you to know.. the big thing about gitmo is it's unique status.
    Due to wording of a treaty we forced cuba to sign, the land gitmo sits on is not officialy american soil, unlike every embassy and base on the planet.

    This leaves gitmo in a sorta of legal black hole, that no other place on the planet can claim to share.

    Moving the prisons to america, changes this fact dramatically. And actually brings the detention within compliance to world legal code.

    • 1 vote
    #2.1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 1:21 PM EDT
    Reply
    Charger Fan

    I wonder what the initial costs will be to get Levenworth ready to house these prisoners? Why close Gitmo if all we're doing is moving prisoners from one facility to another? Alot of has been spent in upgrading, remodeling and new construction at Guantanamo. Was that all a waste of taxpayers money? I don't agree with this approach. I imagine too that after one winter in Kansas, those prisoners will pray to their god to be back at Guantanamo.

    I think Obama acted hastily in this one before thinking it through. He promised to close Gitmo on the campaign trail, and now must follow through even though it's not necessarily the most efficient or sensible choice.

    • 2 votes
    Reply#3 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:20 PM EDT
    Xerxes-727854

    To all liberals:

    Fool you once, shame on me. Fool you twice, shame on you.

      Reply#4 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:53 PM EDT
      JoulesBeef

      ahh so bush was a liberal huh?
      actually it was
      "fool me once shame on me, fool me-you can't get fooled again. heh heh heh"

      • 1 vote
      #4.1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 1:23 PM EDT
      Reply
      Snelk

      Another Obamanation abomination... rob Peter, pay Paul and screw the idiots who elected him. Gee, I wonder if they'll fall under the new health care system (If Odumba ever does something and gets it passed). I hope they put the freaks in Kansas. God knows Michigan needs the money, but their idiot canuck governor can't get anything done - she's a for sure transplant running back to Canadia (yes, that mis-spelling is intentional... ever hear of Fantasia? It's just a little right of Canadia). I'm sure the reason she visits there every few months is to keep her socialist Canadian health care valid (Obama wants it so bad "for us"!!) But Mr. Silver Spoon will never have to force his family to use it. Thank goodness I still have Carlos Mencia and Johnny Quest to remind me of what could be done (or should be done) in this country.

        Reply#5 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 12:53 PM EDT
        JoulesBeef

        HUH?
        you might want to get some facts straight.. you know americasn cross the border into canada from health care reasons in far far far greater numbers than they do.. not only that but millions of us go to mexico for health care.
        It doesnt need to be validated.. it is validated by the poor in america's border states.

        heck you all you have to do is look at the free health care fairs arround the country and how people will drive to other states and sleep over night in their cars just to bring their child to a doctor.

        • 1 vote
        #5.1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 1:26 PM EDT
        Reply
        Richard-1247089

        This is just more PROOF tha Obama is NOT PLAYING WITH A FULL DECK! In every statement he's made, he's been looking back at "ISSUES HE"S INHERITED"....DUDE, what part of the statement that American's have continually made does he not understand, "WE DO NOT WANT TERRORIST ON OUR SOIL AND WE DON'T WANT TO PAY MORE TAXES". Hell, it's gonna be a long, long 3 1/2 years! I'm sure that people have thought about taking him out, only we've got two other nut jobs to take his place, Biden and Pelosi....It's the unholy trinity..We're just screwed till 2012...Hope that the people who bought "THE CHANGE" story, will be a little more cautious when they vote next time. Obama SUCKS....no matter how many times he sits down to have a beer with the guys!

          Reply#6 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 2:47 PM EDT
          Attitude Dude

          How about the White House? He can mingle with his brothers!

          • 1 vote
          Reply#7 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 3:09 PM EDT
          John Paul Todd

          Thanks Lara for another excellent article. If I read the story correctly, and I did so in some haste, I think I understand the dilemna that first Bush and now Obama is faced with: it is not only a matter of detension, but much more, the legal (read judicial) basis that these prisoners are held without being given what every one of us would want-our day in court.

          Like every major challenge this country faces now at the same time, returning to economic stability, healthcare reform, abortion rights, continued racial flare-ups,and yes this. A little sympathy and appreciation regardless of your political leanings would go a long way in understanding the tremendous burden resting upon the shoulders of our present President and the Congress.

            Reply#8 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 3:15 PM EDT
            herecomedajudge

            The new future Democrat party leadership. Obama is working on birth certificates for them as we speak. If they can't get voted in, Obama will appoint them to czarhoods.

              Reply#9 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 4:42 PM EDT
              R. Donald Snyder

              What I don't get are these idiots who say they are so afraid of "bringing terrorists into America" like these terrorists are some sort of super strength beings that can bend bars with their pinkies and have x-ray vision. We have much more terrifying people securely imprisoned in America now then any of these guys. Put them in a segregated supermax style prison (Michigan sounds good) and there they'll stay. I mean it's not like they're being brought from Gitmo and being turned loose on the streets, so grow the f up.

              • 2 votes
              Reply#10 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 8:11 PM EDT
              herecomedajudge

              We have much more terrifying people securely imprisoned in America now then any of these guys.

              So how many of those terrifying people have friends who flew airplanes into tall buildings and put explosive vests on their kids to go take out civilian innocents?

              We don't need to pollute America the Beautiful with imported terrorists. We have enough pollution with liberals. It is dumb and destructive to bring foreign terrorists here and put them on the path to citizenship.

              • 1 vote
              Reply#11 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 9:05 PM EDT
              R. Donald Snyder

              Whatever you're smoking, well I don't want any because your whole statement was way beyond high.

              • 2 votes
              #11.1 - Sun Aug 2, 2009 10:27 PM EDT
              herecomedajudge

              I'm smoking liberals.

                #11.2 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 12:01 AM EDT
                R. Donald Snyder

                No, the only explanation for the delusions you're having is someone huffing paint, glue or gasoline. Please, get help. It really does do permanent and irreparable damage and I have seen the damage it does, Really. Stop. Inhalants are not the answer to your sucky life. There are real programs and treatments that can help you and they really work if you work with them.

                • 2 votes
                #11.3 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 1:35 AM EDT
                herecomedajudge

                Which program did you find most helpful, RDS?

                • 1 vote
                #11.4 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 7:36 AM EDT
                R. Donald Snyder

                The one I worked at. Of course it was primarily geared toward mentally ill people off their meds and acting out violently, but for a lot of them the initial brain damage itself was through drugs and/or inhalants.

                • 1 vote
                #11.5 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 6:15 PM EDT
                herecomedajudge

                Is that part of the rehab, working with others that have the same self-inflicted dain bramage? Hang in there, it is a lifelong battle, but you can eventually overcome.

                • 1 vote
                #11.6 - Tue Aug 4, 2009 12:00 AM EDT
                Reply
                Kolby-1075823

                I have to agree with herecomedajudge the bottom line is this, they are know terrorist. Most have been caught more than once by our government. Over 65 percent of the detainees that are released from GITMO go right back into the terrorist cells from wich they came. R. Donald Snyder you say we have worse people in our prisons than these terroist. That may or may not be true but I have been to Afghanistan and believe me we dont want these people on American soil. Obama made another promise to get elected that he cannot keep....

                • 1 vote
                Reply#12 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 5:43 AM EDT
                Snelk

                Sure, this is Change? This is Yes We Can? Wow... Obomba really pulled the wool over their eyes, didn't he? NOTHING has Changed. Yes, "they" can raise your taxes and pretty much screw with your lives until you dump him and his lunatic ideas. Since most of the Obomba voting base was inner city, he'll probably get re-elected if he can somehow push through his "free" health care and other gimmes to the welfare loving individuals holding back the rest of the country.

                  Reply#13 - Mon Aug 3, 2009 8:41 AM EDT
                  breelaboyDeleted
                  Leave a Comment:
                  You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                  You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                  (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                  Newsvine Privacy Statement
                  As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                  FUN STUFF:
                  • Leaderboard |
                  • E-Mail Alerts |
                  • Top of the Vine |
                  • Newsvine Live |
                  • Newsvine Archives |
                  • The Greenhouse
                  COMPANY STUFF:
                  • Code of Honor |
                  • Company Info |
                  • Contact Us |
                  • Jobs |
                  • User Agreement |
                  • Privacy Policy |
                  • About our ads
                  LEGAL STUFF:
                  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com