Archive

Posts Tagged ‘habeas-corpus’

American Monsters

September 1st, 2009

We at harikari.com have been ranting about our country’s illegal policies for detention and torture since the blog was launched in 2005.  Continuing investigations have uncovered evidence supporting claims that many of the several hundreds of prisoners incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay and who knows where else have been tortured, beaten, and even killed by agents of the U.S. Government.  Subsequent releases of hundreds of detainees that were held without the right to habeus corpus proved that the overwhelming majority of prisoners were not in fact “the worst of the worst.” 

This week’s edition of This Modern World puts it all in perspective. 

Be sure to click on the image for a link to the whole comic.

America has sold its soul to the devil, and won’t even bother to stop and take a look at what it has become.

Monsters indeed…

Guantánamo Bay Prisoners: The Worst of the Worst?

June 15th, 2009

Dick Cheney on Face the Nation, May 10, 2009:

The group that’s left, the 245 or so, these are the worst of the worst. This is the hard core. You’d have a recidivism rate out of this group of maybe 50 or 60 percent. They want to get out because they want to kill more Americans. And you’re just going to find it very difficult to send them any place. Now, as I say, there has been some talk on the part of the administration about putting them in the United States.

So are they really the “worst of the worst?”

Hardly

ST. GEORGE, Bermuda — Almost exactly seven years after arriving at Guantánamo in chains as accused enemy combatants, and four days after their surprise predawn flight to Bermuda, four Uighur Muslim men basked in their new-found freedom here, grateful for the handshakes many residents had offered and marveling at the serene beauty of this tidy, postcard island.

The men were among a larger group of Uighurs (pronounced WEE-gers) who had fled what they called Chinese persecution of Muslims in western China and spent part of 2001 in a Uighur camp in Afghanistan. They fled, apparently unarmed, when the Americans bombed the camp, and were later turned in to the authorities by Pakistani villagers in return for an American bounty.

The four brought here, like 13 other Uighurs still at Guantánamo but expected to depart soon to other destinations, had been cleared by American officials and courts of taking up arms against the United States or ties to global terrorism.

But proposals to resettle them in the United States caused a political furor that the Obama administration did not want to aggravate. On Sunday, these four expressed a surprising lack of bitterness toward the United States, saying — as they had during interrogations years ago in Guantánamo — that they had never been anti-American and just wanted to get on with their lives.

From the men’s own statements, it is clear that their presence in Afghanistan was linked to their animosity toward China. Whatever they might have wished in 2001, there is no evidence they sought to become part of a global jihad.

Now, over Chinese objections, the men are being released to third countries.

Around a dozen of the Uighurs will be going to Palau, an island nation of about 20,000 people just east of The Phillipines.  A New Zealand paper reports:

Palau is one of a handful of countries that does not recognise China and maintains diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

President Johnson Toribiong said Palau was accepting the detainees “as a humanitarian gesture” intended to help them restart their lives.

And today’s Los Angeles Times quotes President Toribiong, a former defense attorney who earned his law degree at the University of Washington:

“These people are not monsters,” said Toribiong, who, with graying hair and glasses, looks pensive, even professorial. “They should be presumed innocent because no one has proven them guilty.”

That sounds perfectly reasonable to anyone with basic knowledge of Western laws and the concept of habeus corpus, but it sounds crazy to people like Dick Cheney who think the Executive Office has the power to detain and torture suspects indefinitely without ever even charging or convicting them of crimes.

Just last week Cheney said the only other option besides imprisoning “combatants” at Guantánamo was ”to kill them, and we don’t operate that way.”

Worst of the worst?  That would be Dick Cheney and his gang.

UPDATE:  or more like “backdate”  on this story…  N.J. Barnes wrote about the plight of the imprisoned Uighurs way back in 2007.  This post is about some of them being released to Albania.

George W. Bush – Torturing Tyrant King of America

March 5th, 2009

As of late, most of the news media has been reporting on our current financial crisis, and it is very important; however, I think it is also important to to point out that as recessions and depressions come and go, and as corporate greedheads come and go, (most not to where I would like to see them go), and as income taxes go up and down, we usually manage to hold on to our basic rights as citizens in this country of ours that is governed not by a king or despot, but by “We the People.”

I said usually

On Monday our government released what were known as the Bush Torture Memos, but the scope of the nine memos released on Monday is much broader than torture.  Here’s a clip from the New York Times article about the memos.  (my emphasis added).

The secret legal opinions issued by Bush administration lawyers after the Sept. 11 attacks included assertions that the president could use the nation’s military within the United States to combat terrorism suspects and to conduct raids without obtaining search warrants.

That opinion was among nine that were disclosed publicly for the first time Monday by the Justice Department, in what the Obama administration portrayed as a step toward greater transparency.

The opinions reflected a broad interpretation of presidential authority, asserting as well that the president could unilaterally abrogate foreign treaties, ignore any guidance from Congress in dealing with detainees suspected of terrorism, and conduct a program of domestic eavesdropping without warrants.

The Oct. 23 memorandum also said that “First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully.” It added that “the current campaign against terrorism may require even broader exercises of federal power domestically.”

Mr. Yoo and Mr. Delahunty said that in addition, the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally bars the military from domestic law enforcement operations, would pose no obstacle to the use of troops in a domestic fight against terrorism suspects. They reasoned that the troops would be acting in a national security function, not as law enforcers.

In another of the opinions, Mr. Yoo argued in a memorandum dated Sept. 25, 2001, that judicial precedents approving deadly force in self-defense could be extended to allow for eavesdropping without warrants.   [WTF?]

Still another memo, issued in March 2002, suggested that Congress lacked any power to limit a president’s authority to transfer detainees to other countries, a practice known as rendition that was widely used by Mr. Bush.

We here at harikari have been ranting about Bush’s heinous abuse of power since we went on line in 2005.  These memos prove that we and everyone else who made our views known to anyone who would listen were right when we said that George W. Bush was not abiding by The Constitution he swore not once, but twice, to uphold as President of the United States.  These memos prove that he and the political hacks he hired to staff his Justice Department were stretching legal opinion farther than any reasonably educated U.S. Citizen would ever dare.  These memos essentially argue that the president is above the law and that he answers to no one.  Simply put, that he is a king.

This is the issue that we should be discussing.

Obama knew of these memos before his his speech to a joint session of congress, and that is why he felt it was necessary to say:

To overcome extremism, we must also be vigilant in upholding the values our troops defend, because there is no force in the world more powerful than the example of America.  And that is why I have ordered the closing of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and will seek swift and certain justice for captured terrorists… because living our values doesn’t make us weaker.  It makes us safer, and it makes us stronger.

And that is why I can stand here tonight and say without exception or equivocation that the United States of America does not torture.  We can make that commitment here tonight.

And both sides of the aisle stood up and gave him one of their loudest and longest rounds of applause.

That applause was an affirmation that no matter what the outcome in Iraq, George W. Bush will go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever because he willingly undermined our Constitution and took away our rights.  He was NOT working FOR the people, he was working AGAINST the people.

He was, in effect, a tyrant.

Author: Brad Categories: Politics, War Tags: , , , ,

Wrong is Right

May 25th, 2007

George Says:

Scanning through web pages yesterday I was struck by a photo in The New York Times accompanying a story about how Bush continues to express confidence in Alberto Gonzales. (Okay… that’s not the actual photo.)  This was the day after, Monica Goodling, a key member of his staff, a lawyer, and a former opposition researcher for the RNC testified before Congress about how she “may have taken inappropriate political considerations into account on some occasions.”  When pressed by Representative Bobby Scott of Virginia, Goodling admitted that she had “crossed the line of civil service rules.”  Scott made it pretty clear to her that she broke the laws, not the “rules.”

This she admitted after she invoked the Fifth Amendment during her first appearance and was then granted immunity by Committee Chairman John Conyers.  So she gets away with her lawbreaking.  What about her bosses?

Mr. Bush noted that the Justice Department is conducting its own internal investigation of possible improprieties related to the dismissals of United States attorneys last year. “This will be an exhaustive investigation,” he said. “And if there’s wrongdoing, it will be taken care of.”

But the problem with that is that there is NEVER any wrongdoing!
 
It may be obvious to you and it may be obvious to me, but if you are part of the Bush Administration?  … uh, not so obvious…

  • Leak the name of a covert CIA? No wrongdoing there…
  • Torture prisoners?  That’s not wrong, it’s how we protect America from Evildoers.   Most of the current crop of R’s vying to replace Bush’s in 2008 think that using torture, er… I mean “enhanced interrogation techniques” is okay too.
  • Extradite prisoners to countries that torture people?  That’s not wrong… that’s a good thing…  It’s like outsourcing.  You inflict twice the pain you could at Guantanamo for the same price, and nobody really knows about it.
  • Hold American citizens prisoner without charging them with a crime?  What?  Is that against the law?
  • Tap phones and intercept emails of American citizens without a warrant?  What? What?  You think that’s wrong?  Well you must love the terrorists you evildoer.

So as in all the above circumstances where the Administration investigated itself, it will find that nobody did anything wrong when they fired eight federal prosecutors.

Author: Brad Categories: Politics Tags: , , , ,

Leverage

May 2nd, 2007

As expected, Bush vetoed the “Emergency” War Funding Bill sent to him by Congress.  He objected to the timetables for withdrawal. 

Congress will have to reconvene to come up with a bill more agreeable to Bush, who wants to retain what has essentially been unlimited power to wage a never ending war.

So should the Democratic Congress cave in to Bush’s demands or should they force their hand?  Given that the majority of Americans and the majority of Iraqis want the U.S. out of Iraq, I think they should find a way to force Bush into accepting benchmarks for progress and a timetable for U.S. withdrawal.

Representative John Murtha thinks so to, and he thinks their ace in hand is the threat of impeachment.  Last Sunday on Face the Nation he said: “There’s three ways or four ways to influence a president.  One is popular opinion, the election, third is impeachment and fourth is the purse.”

Impeachment you say?  I like that one.  Is it possible?  Let me count the ways:

  1. Bush did not get a majority of UN members to authorize the War against Iraq, but started it anyway – illegally.
  2. He cherry picked intelligence and advice that supported the goal of removing Saddam Hussein.
  3. He seized U.S. citizens on U.S. soil and held them indefinitely without charges.
  4. He broke laws outlined in the Foreign Intelligence Security Act by seizing telephone records of U.S. citizens without warrants and then “data mined” them for foreign intelligence information – a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.
  5. He refused to grant the prisoners captured in Afghanistan their rights outlined in the Geneva Conventions because he said they were not prisoners of war – they were “enemy combatants.”  He then claimed the right to detain the “prisoners” indefinitely on the grounds that prisoners can be detained until the war ends.
  6. He changed the definition of torture to include acts like water boarding, sleep deprivation, and other acts that were commonly believed to be “torture” and then, when he signed the Military Commissions Act that banned “torture,” he added a signing statement that said he would torture people anyway if he thought it was in the interest of national security.

So yes, they should throw the impeachment card on the table and see how he reacts to letting the bill go through with benchmarks and timetables, and then they should impeach him anyway.

(Impeachable offenses culled from Phil Worden’s excellent column that appeared in The Bangor Daily News this week.)

Dark Presidency

February 19th, 2007

On 26 September 2002, a 32-year old Syrian-born naturalized Canadian citizen by the name of Maher Arar was returning alone from a family vacation trip to Tunisia when his Montreal-bound plane made a scheduled stopover at JFK International Airport in New York.  Mr Arar was detained by United States Department of Homeland Security officials and questioned because Mr Arar’s name appeared on a watch-list and he was suspected of ties to al-Qaeda.  This information had evidently been supplied to US authorities by Canadian security officials – and has since been debunked as evidence of terrorist ties.  Despite the fact that Mr Arar carried a Canadian passport, had resided in Canada since the age of 17 and that no serious effort was made to investigate with Canadian authorities whether Mr Arar was, indeed, a terrorist, he was deported a week later, not to Canada his home, but to Syria, a country well known for its harsh treatment of prisoners.

After more than ten months of sheer unadulterated hell in a Syrian prison, during which he was tortured, Mr Arar was released by the Syrians who announced they were satisfied he had no terrorist ties.  An official enquiry in Canada reached the same conclusion and the Canadian government, which had already apologized to Mr Arar, recently announced a compensatory award of C$10.5 million (a little over US $9 million) for his pain and suffering.  An unrepentant US government, on the other hand, refused to co-operate with the Canadian enquiry and has stubbornly refused to remove his name from the DHS watch-list; this despite official protests from Canada that the evidence held by the Americans provides no justification for such listing.

Welcome to President George W Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney’s America.  This disgraceful episode epitomizes for me the attempts by the Bush administration to undermine our nation’s democracy, its international reputation as a beacon of liberty and justice and even the sense of what it means to be an American. 

It was clear from the beginning that this president came to office with an alarming view of the unfettered authority and expansive powers of the presidency, which he believed had been diminished by successive presidents and congresses.  Bush and Cheney appear to have shared a vision of a sort of elected dictatorship in which once the election was out the way, the president’s was the only power that counted and everyone else was expected to shut up and get out of the way – and to hell with checks and balances. 

Under normal circumstances they would have received short shrift from the established order.  Unfortunately, Osama bin Ladin and 9/11 intervened to breath life into the administration’s power grab.  Cleverly exploiting the fears and uncertainties of the moment, and helped by a disgracefully compliant Republican Congress and intimidated mainstream media, the administration went on an authoritarian binge that, even now, seems breathtaking in its scope.  Using national security as a fig leaf, the administration:

-         ignored the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and bypassed the FISA court to establish a programme of electronic surveillance of international communications to and from American citizens without judicial or any meaningful Congressional oversight;

-         arrested even US citizens to hold as enemy non-combatants without access to the judicial system;

-         established a series of secret prisons overseas, notably in Eastern Europe (reportedly in facilities once used during the Soviet-era), to detain and interrogate high-value terrorist suspects without disclosing their detention to the Red Cross;

-         established a detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to hold hundreds of individuals seized in Afghanistan and elsewhere, many of them on the basis of unproven and even unfounded allegations or on the flimsiest of evidence, where they have been kept for years without the opportunity to challenge their imprisonment in a court of law;

-         illegally seized individuals off the streets of such allies as Italy and Germany to detain and interrogate (and in at least two known cases, to later release when they discovered that they had made a mistake);

-         embraced the idea of torture as an interrogation method by trying to narrow its definition under international conventions and assert national executive authority to trump America’s international obligations;

-         established what amounts to nothing more than military kangaroo courts (or “military tribunals”) to try detainees at Guantanamo and elsewhere that would have allowed coerced and hearsay evidence with no opportunity for the detainee to even view the evidence if it was classified; when the US Supreme Court threw these out, the administration persuaded the GOP-led Congress, to establish new military tribunals that operate under rules which, whilst not quite as heinous, are shameful enough; to make matters worse, the definition of “enemy combatant” has been significantly broadened, and detainees have lost the right to habeas corpus or the right to challenge their detention in court;

-         shrouded its actions in secrecy to a degree unprecedented in modern presidencies and fiercely resisted efforts of those who sought to shine some light on its inner workings.

With this administration, the gloves are always off, as Mr Arar found out to his cost.  And in Alberto Gonzales the administration has the perfect face for its totalitarian proclivities. When challenged to defend its actions, Mr Gonzalez typically issues bland statements to the effect that the administration acted, of course, within the law but that for national security reasons the courts should not actually examine their legality. All too often, the courts have bought this self-serving nonsense, as in the case of Mr Arar, whose law suit against the US government was dismissed on those very grounds.  And when it confronts defeat in court, on such questions as holding US citizens without trial, or wiretapping without FISA court authority, the administration folds before the Supreme Court can rule.

There are many reasons for believing that George W Bush will be regarded by history as one of the very worst presidents in American history – and very probably the worst.  I could list a host of reasons for this that would include everything from his assault on our environment, to his fiscal irresponsibility which has not only significantly increased the amount of debt we are passing on to our children but has had the effect of widening the income disparities in US society to unhealthy levels.  And then of course there is Iraq. 

Yet, for me, all of these pale beside the immeasurable harm that has been done to our democracy, to our international reputation – to our very national soul by this administration.  In our name terrible things have been done by an American government – things I would never have believed possible before this president came along.  And he has exposed our democratic institutions and our belief in them to a withering scrutiny in which they have been found wanting.  The media let him get away with a mountain of deception, manipulation and misinformation that led us into a disastrous war; the Congress rubber stamped his assault on our civil liberties with the USA Patriot Act and, of course, his plan to attack Iraq; the courts have been slow and at times reluctant to rein in his power grab; and the American people were fooled for far too long by his tough-guy, squinty-eyed rhetoric that successfully masked, for a while, the simple fact that he was not up to the job of being president. Only someone as utterly incompetent as Mr Bush could possibly have made a mess this big.  

I realize there are plenty of Americans who support what this administration has done, even now.  Shame on them.  If they truly share Messrs Bush and Cheney’s twisted vision of America, then I feel sorry for them.

Personally, I look forward to the day when we again have a government in which we can be proud; a government that will return us to the values we as Americans must share if we are to live up to our promise as a nation; in short, a government that will find the moral courage and clarity to apologise to Mr Arar for the terrible wrong that was done to him. 

When that day comes, as I believe it will, it will not just be Mr Arar who will have reason to cheer.

Another Lesson for Alberto Gonzales

January 21st, 2007

This time the teacher is Senator Arlen Specter, former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.  On Thursday he questioned Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States—the chief law enforcement officer of the United States government—during a hearing  on  the “Oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice .”  Watch it here.

GONZALES: I will go back and look at it. The fact that the Constitution — again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it’s never been the case, and I’m not a Supreme —

SPECTER: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?

GONZALES: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except by —

SPECTER: You may be treading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney General.

GONZALES: Um.

Um?  Um, as in “am I really the chief law enforcement officer of the US government?”  Um… isn’t this guy supposed to know The Constitution inside and out?

Read it Alberto:

From Article 1, Section 9:  “The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

Alberto’s interpretation: “It simply says the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except by — “ 

Gonzales is obviously not qualified to hold office.  “We The People” need to impeach this contemptuous little twit.  

Why We Are Ashamed

October 12th, 2006

Ted Rall on The Military Commissions Act:

The Military Commissions Act signals that our traditional system of beliefs and government has irrevocably devolved into moral bankruptcy. Memo to Senator McCain: You don’t negotiate with terrorists, and you don’t compromise with torturers.

It doesn’t matter how much food aid we ship to the victims of the next global natural disaster, or how diplomatic our next president is, or whether we come to regret what we have done in the name of law and order. Our laws permit kidnapping, torture and murder. Our laws deny access to the courts. The United States has ceded the moral high ground to its enemies.

We are done.

Take some time to read the whole column.

Beholden

September 29th, 2006

On Sunday, Senator Arlen Specter said that he “vigorously” disagreed with the habeas corpus provision of the bill, and yesterday when he introduced an amendment to remove the provision, he said: “What this bill would do is take our civilization back 900 years to before the adoption of the writ of habeas corpus in medieval England.” 

So how did Senator Specter vote? 

“Yea”

Author: Brad Categories: Politics Tags: , , ,