Washington DC March Against Torture, Guantanamo & the NDAA

When: Sunday June 24th from 1PM - 2:30PM 
Where: Gather at the reflecting pool in front of the US Capitol building in Washington DC 
What: March in orange jumpsuits from the Capitol to the White House 
Why: To stand against torture, Guantanamo, indefinite detention and the National Defense Authorization Act 
Who: Amnesty International USA, National Religious Campaign Against Torture, Witness Against Torture, American Civil Liberites Union, America Come Home, Antiwar.com, Bellevue/NYU Center for Survivors of Torture, Bill of Rights Defense Committee,  Center for Constitutional Rights, CODEPINK, Council on American Islamic Relations,  Dorothy Day Catholic Worker,  Liberty Coalition,  Midwest Antiwar Mobilization, Pax Christi USA,  PEN American Center,  Physicians for Human Rights, Rabbis for Human Rights - North America, Refuge Media Project,  September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows,  Torture Abolition and Survivors Support Coalition, United Nations Association - USA East Bay Chapter,  Voices for Creative Nonviolence,  WarIsACrime.org, World Can’t Wait 
More Info: Email security@aiusa.org 
Flyer:  http://bit.ly/IunfqI 
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/Jy6IRU 

Bush and company found guilty of war crimes....

No this is not an April fools joke....

KUALA LUMPUR, 11 May 2012 (mathaba)

The five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered a guilty verdict against former United States President George W. Bush and his associates at the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal hearing that had started on Monday, May 7th.

On the charge of Crime of Torture and War Crimes, the tribunal finds the accused persons former U.S. President George W. Bush and his associates namely Richard Cheney, former U.S. Vice President, Donald Rumsfeld, former Defence Secretary, Alberto Gonzales, then Counsel to President Bush, David Addington, then General Counsel to the Vice-President, William Haynes II, then General Counsel to Secretary of Defence, Jay Bybee, then Assistant Attorney General, and John Choon Yoo, former Deputy Assistant Attorney-General guilty as charged and convicted as war criminals for Torture and Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment of the Complainant War Crime Victims.

Earlier in the week, the tribunal heard the testimonies of three witnesses namely Abbas Abid, Moazzam Begg and Jameelah Hameedi. They related the horrific tortures they had faced during their incarceration. The tribunal also heard two other Statutory Declarations of Iraqi citizen Ali Shalal and Rhuhel Ahmed, a British citizen.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE WHOLE STORY....

More on the Commissions....

I am providing a few links to articles of interest on the commission process:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/08/messy-legal-rules-and-procedures-make-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-trial-doubtful.html

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2012/05/20125772736897909.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/may/07/guantanamo-911-show-trial?newsfeed=true

The Military Commissions

A number of you have sent emails to me regarding the military commission proceedings now going on at Guantanamo. My client is not and will not be subject to a military commission-he is on the indefinite detention list. Basically what this means is that the government has no evidence for which to try him in any legal (or in the case of the military commissions-illegal) proceedings. I do read read about the military commissions- just as many of you do-but I do not consider myself an expert on the proceedings. I will post some links over the next few days for you to follow - there are many fine reporters covering the proceedings and if I had to pick just one it would definitely be Carol Rosenberg at the Miami Herald-she has been following Gitmo since the beginning. Here is one of her articles.

TWO DETAINEES RELEASED (updated)

          I was going to title this post "so much for court orders" but later I might be looking for the post that described the release of these two Uighers to El Salvador and this title will make it easier....also I was waiting to post about this release until I had time to see how long it has been since any detainee has been released from Guantanamo. I did a search of my blog today and it seems the last man release was in July 2010...sigh.
  In regards to last weeks release I am quoting the email announcement from the Pentagon:

            "The Department of Defense announced [April 19] the  the transfer of two Uighur detainees from the detention facility at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay to the Government of El Salvador.  These detainees were subject to release from Guantanamo as a result of a court order issued on October 7, 2008 by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and are voluntarily resettling in El Salvador. 
            As directed by the President's January 22, 2009, executive order, the interagency Guantanamo Review Task Force conducted a comprehensive review of these cases.  As a result of that review, which examined a number of factors, including security issues, these individuals were designated for transfer by unanimous consent among all six agencies on the task force.  In accordance with statutory reporting requirements, the administration informed Congress of its intent to transfer these individuals. 
            The United States coordinated with the government of El Salvador to ensure the transfer took place in accordance with appropriate security and humane treatment measures. 
            Today, 169 detainees remain at the detention center in Guantanamo." (emphasis added)


         So yes, the Court ordered these men to be released in 2008...but that wasn't good enough....so then the Obama Gitmo Task force in 2009 "okd" the release that had been ordered by the Court  and now three years after that the men are finally free.


Justice U.S. style.
I wish these two men the best of luck.

The Drone Murder of a US Teenager (con't)

Back in October I blogged about the American teenager that we (the US) murdered in Yemen- Abdulrahman al Awlaki. Abdulrahman had just turned 16 when he was murdered by drone. His crime was that he was the son of another US citizen that we murdered by drone a few days earlier, Anware al Awlaki. Abdulrahman was murdered along with some cousins who were enjoying a barbq in their backyard...and the US first tried to paint a picture of Abdulrahman as being someone older and more militant- as though that justified his murder-the truth was pretty muffled here in the ole U S of A but if you searched you could find it. Emptywheel now reports that the person that the US was really trying to murder was not even present. For more on AbdulRahman's death just being more collateral damage read this account by Michelle Shephard.
I don't know what else to say except to emphasize that Obama really is worse than GW.

The Zelikow memorandum....

Or....as emptywheel stated "Phillip Zelikow saves Condi Rice's hiney (again)"..... so, I first read about the memo on emptywheel and I think it is helpful to start there for the general background and the always excellent discussion that followed.
From there move on to Scott Horton's "no comment". where Scott give a more detailed look at the importance of this particular memo in the context of the war crimes that were taking place in the Bush administration and the actual knowledge by the administration that not only were these war crimes but that every single copy of the Zelikow memorandum should be destroyed.
I guess they missed one or two copies....thank the gods for incompetence.

"Guidebook to False Confessions"

I have clipped a few paragraphs to get you interested.....

The CIA claimed Zubaydah, who at the time was being held at a black site prison in Thailand, was "withholding imminent threat information during the initial interrogation sessions," according to documents released by the Senate Intelligence Committee in April 2009.

So, "attorneys from the CIA's Office of General Counsel [including the agency's top lawyer John Rizzo] met with the Attorney General [John Ashcroft], the National Security Adviser [Rice], the Deputy National Security Adviser [Stephen Hadley], the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council [John Bellinger], and the Counsel to the President [Alberto Gonzales] in mid-May 2002 to discuss the possible use of alternative interrogation methods that differed from the traditional methods used by the U.S."

One of the key documents handed out to Bush officials at this meeting, and at Principals Committee sessions chaired by Rice that took place between May and July 2002, was a 37-page instructional manual that contained detailed descriptions of seven of the ten techniques that ended up in the legal opinion widely referred to as the "torture memo," drafted by Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) attorney John Yoo and signed by his boss, Jay Bybee, three months later. According to Rice, Yoo had attended the Principals Committee meetings and participated in discussions about Zubaydah's torture.

That instructional manual, referred to as "Pre-Academic Laboratory (PREAL) Operating Instructions," has just been released by the Department of Defense under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The document sheds additional light on the origins of the Bush administration's torture policy and for the first time describes exactly what methods of torture Bush officials had discussed - and subsequently approved - for Zubaydah in May 2002.

CLICK here TO READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE on Truthout BY JASON LEOPOLD AND JEFF KAYE. 

WRITTEN MATERIALS NOT ALLOWED

Recently I was explaining to my friend Almerindo Ojeda at the Guantanamo Testimonials Project about some of the recent changes during visits to the base to see my client. Almerindo asked me to write out a statement for the project about one of those changes. Here it is:

My last two trips to Guantanamo were the weeks of December 5, 2011 and July 10, 2011. I think it is fair to say that the procedures for attorney client visits change frequently however the changes during the last two visits were some of the most dramatic. Before I discuss those changes I want to back track just a bit. When I first started visiting my clients in 2006 I could bring with me attorney client materials-including unclassified court pleadings, letters that I had sent to my clients and of course any notes of things that I wanted to discuss with my clients. A few years later-I want to say in 08 but I am not exactly sure when-we were no longer allowed to bring with us any materials that were not in English unless a government translator reviewed and OK’d the materials. I was in the awkward position of having my attorney client mail that I would bring with me to make sure my client had received, being read by the military. I complained but to no avail-so I stopped bringing the Arabic translations and instead brought only my English versions of the letters. That was the process until this past year. When I went to visit my client in July I went through the usual screening-having my bag looked into and the food that I brought my client reviewed for contraband (straws-plastic ware-etc) and then I walked over to the military lawyer desk and I was asked if I had anything with writing on it. I said “of course.” I was told that they wanted to review it and I said all I had with me an unclassified version of my clients Traverse (the reply to his habeas petition) and I had a letter from the DOJ counsel telling me that this was the version that I was permitted to show my client. The military lawyer reviewed the materials and allowed them in. I was then told that I was not allowed to bring my wallet (which was in my brief case) into the meeting. I said “really?” The answer was “yes.” I was told that I could put my wallet in the transport van and the escort would give it back to me after the meeting. No explanation was given to me as to why I could not bring my wallet and I didn't ask.

For my December meeting I only brought with me a pad of paper with some notes on it to remind myself of things I wanted to discuss. After going through the usual screening I went over to the military lawyer desk and they asked if I had anything with me that had writing on it. I said “no, just some notes that I made.” I was then told that they wanted to look at the notes and I said “no.” That is when I was told that I could not bring anything into the meeting with writing on it unless they approved it. I told them I would not allow them to review my notes at which point I was told that I would have to put my notes back in the bus. Instead, I reviewed my notes as I was standing there and then tore the piece of paper into tiny pieces and threw my notes in the garbage.  I was then asked if there was anything in my wallet with writing on it.  I refrained from saying “duhhhh.”  I politely asked what they meant by that question and I was told if there was anything with writing on it-IDs-money, anything with writing-then my wallet could not go with me into the meeting either. I gave my wallet to the escort and walked into my meeting with my client. I did however have one thing with writing in my briefcase. I always carry a pocket edition of the constitution in my brief case and when my brief case was screened no one mentioned it. It seemed to me to be the one thing I really needed in this day and age (and place) and since no one mentioned it during the screening I decided the constitution was safe,  for now….

From Roger Fitch and our Friends down under at Justinian

The Monte Cristo syndrome

ROGER FITCH ESQ • WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2012

Guantánamo: give evidence against other prisoners and we might let you out, one day ... As long as you're not too angry ... The new prosecution paradigm and the latest stitch-up ... Plus, the legal basis for drone killing of Americans without due process ... Roger Fitch - Our Man in Washington 

"Farcical judicial trials conducted by us will destroy confidence in the judicial process as quickly as those conducted by any other people ... there are certain things you cannot do under the guise of a judicial trial. Courts try cases, but cases also try courts." US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg Tribunal. 

*   *   *

"Robert Jackson ... would turn over in his grave if he knew what was going on at Guantánamo." Henry King, Jr., Associate Prosecutor, Nuremberg. 

*   *   *

The first new military commission prosecution was recently announced, against the Pakistani Majid Khan. A plea bargain quickly followed. If all goes well, Mr Khan, held without charge since 2003, will be sentenced in 2016. Is that speedy, or what?

The media were mostly cock-a-hoop over the prospect of new "war crime convictions," even though Khan, like the all the other people charged in commissions since George Bush first set them up in November 2001, will not stand convicted of any crime actually applicable to him under the law of war. 

As Melina Milazzo, counsel for the Law and Security Program, noted:  

"The US military commission system, now in its third incarnation, faces lengthy litigation over the legality of trying individuals for offenses that do not actually constitute war crimes, the potential ex post facto problems with prosecuting conduct not considered criminal until the passage of the Military Commission Act, and the scope and meaning of the rule and procedures applicable during trials."

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST....... 

Of course I have never even trusted THIS president....just sayin.

Gitmo and the Supreme Court

Since the Boumediene decision by the Supreme Court in 2008- a decision which made clear that the men at Guantanamo were entitled to meaninful habeas corpus hearings-the DC Circuit Court has spun the Supreme Court's mandate into meaninglessness....not one Guantanamo prisoner has prevailed in the appellate court-and the supreme court has not taken on another case. Now there are eight cases in the supreme court asking for review. ScotUS blog has a rundown on the cases and the issues here.

A broken writ.....a Kangaroo court.

Watching our justice system disintegrate is particularly painful for those of us who cherish(ed) being lawyers. Chicago attorney Len Goodman describes one such experience here.

SO WHAT IS GOING ON?

A number of you have emailed me to ask why I am not writing as much about Guantanamo these past weeks. I think this article by Gitmo attorney Cori Crider describes best the state of mind of many of us:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cori-crider/another-visit-to-guantana_b_1256786.html

But what else is going on? For many of us if feels like 2006 all over again with the release of this little fantasy piece by the republicans:
http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/120208-draft-report-on-detainee-policies-at-guantanamo1.pdf

Back in 2006 I wrote about these statistics for HuffingtonPost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-candace-gorman-/return-to-the-battlefield_b_43344.html

Later we learned that some of the numbers of the so called "recidivists" (it of course begs the question to ask how can you return to the battlefield if you were never at a battlefield to begin with....but I digress) were on the list because after leaving Guantanamo they dared to speak out against the gulag...
http://law.shu.edu/publications/guantanamoReports/meaning_of_battlefield_final_121007.pdf

So yes, this is so very depressing by don't think just because I am taking a little time to regroup that I am giving up.

So I leave you with one last story- a story about the guy who wrote the book....yes, the book- on the Guantanamo detainees: Andy Worthington.   check out this article by Jason Leopold:
http://www.truth-out.org/guantanamo-ten-years-later-interview-guantanamo-expert-author-and-filmmaker-andy-worthington/1328120

Moe Davis talks to the Dog

THIS IS THE VERY LAST QUESTION AND ANSWER AND AFTER READING THIS I HOPE YOU WILL CLICK HERE AND GO TO THE ARTICLE AND READ THE WHOLE AMAZING INTERVIEW:

The Talking Dog: As we come to a point in time ten years after the opening of Guantanamo Bay for military detentions of persons captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere, is there anything else I should have asked you but didn't, or anything else you believe that the public needs to know about this?

Morris Davis: One thing comes to mind. We chose Guantanamo a decade ago because some people thought that it was outside the reach of law. And now, we have 171 men stuck in a legal Alice in Wonderland. And so we continue to make bad laws, like the NDAA and the "reformed again and again military commissions” -- to continue to try to deal with men we are holding because we took short-cuts and made bad decisions years ago. My hope is that common sense prevails and we can look rationally at the big picture, and we stop trying to make even more bad laws rooted in our prior bad decisions. I hope at some point we remember who we are and what we stand for, we reckon with what we did in the past, and we stop living our lives in fear. I hope we become free and brave again.

The Talking Dog: I join all my readers in thanking Col. Morris Davis for that eye-opening interview.

READ THE WHOLE INTERVIEW HERE.