President Obama Officially Halts GITMO Show Trials
President Obama has ordered an abrupt halt in the Gitmo Show Trials. From Peter Finn at the Washington Post:
In one of its first actions, the Obama administration instructed military prosecutors late Tuesday to seek a 120-day suspension of legal proceedings involving detainees at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba — a clear break with the approach of the outgoing Bush administration.
The instruction came in a motion filed late Tuesday with a military court handling the case of five defendants accused of organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. The motion called for "a continuance of the proceedings" until May 20 so that "the newly inaugurated president and his administration [can] review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically."
In the legal field, this is known as an act taken "in the interests of justice". An incredibly welcome move by an administration literally only hours into its initial term. You have to hand it to President Obama, Guantanamo is a sensitive topic, especially with the neocon screechers, yet he proved the courage of his convictions and acted immediately upon being sworn in.
It appears that the action was foreshadowed at Camp Delta, as Carol Rosenberg of McClatchy already had reported, even before Obama was sworn in, that the trial of Omar Khadr had been put on hold:
A military judge on Tuesday postponed next week’s trial of Canadian captive Omar Khadr, easing pressure on the new occupant of the White House to make a swift decision on military commissions.
…
Until Tuesday, the Khadr case was shaping up to be an early test of Obama’s pledge to close the prison camps.
…
But Parrish’s indefinite delay — he set no new trial date — also derailed Pentagon plans to airlift a jury panel of U.S. military officers to this remote base this weekend.
The stay of all proceedings at Guantanamo for at least 120 days is, as stated, wonderful news; however, the better question is what it portends for the future disposition of the legal cases of the detainees including Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his co-defendants accused of organizing the 9/11 attacks.
Notably, the defense teams do not appear quite as thrilled as one might would expect by the move, citing fears that the government is simply trying to clean up the tribunal process minimally in order to continue on. Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, who represents Khadr, said:
“It appears to be an ongoing last ditch effort to save this disgusting mess,” he told The Associated Press.
….
Kuebler says the defense wants to have all pending charges formally withdrawn by the Department of Defense and says they could be refiled again under the military courts martial system or in civilian courts. The military has charges pending against 21 men.“That’s the only way you effectively freeze the system,” he said.
Ultimately, of course, Kuebler is correct. But I think President Obama is headed in the right direction here, and immediately entered an interim order to buy the necessary time and headroom to sort through the mess and provide for the correct adjudication process, exactly as Kuebler seeks.
Less than 24 hours in, and already justice feels cleaner, less politicized and more equitable. Booyah!
[ERRATA UPDATE: As skdadl points out in comments, I may not have been clear enough that while Khadr’s lawyer William Kuebler objects to the delay that will be occasioned by the motion Obama caused the prosecution to lodge, Kuebler’s objection was technically made in response to a directly analogous delay specific to Khadr’s case that was at issue hours before Obama’s general action.]
Great opening move! I feel for the defense attorneys but geeze, give the guy a day.
This really raises MY hopes.
Hate to go OT on the first reply but NO PARDONS?
(Sorry, my net access is spotty lately and I’m working outrageous hours lately, 68 last week.)
Yeah, I was never convinced bush was going to issue a bunch of pardons on the way out. And it is a double edged sword that he didn’t. On the one hand, it is good because it really would have been inappropriate; on the other hand, it would have removed the cloak of the 5th Amendment right to silence for the mopes, so they could testify openly, and would have exhibited the inherent criminality of the Bush regime. I was actually kind of hoping he would pardon a bunch of the mopes, but am not surprised in the least that he did not. I think Obama has made it clear enough that he doesn’t intend to prosecute, and Bush being mindful of what pitiful little legacy he has, decided there was no reason to pardon.
I think Obama has made it clear enough that he doesn’t intend to prosecute, and Bush being mindful of what pitiful little legacy he has, decided there was no reason to pardon.
You are right about Obama signals. But, if the evidence points to prosecution, Obama WILL give the green light. Rove, Gonzales, et.al are still, in my opinion, in legal jeopardy.
I sure hope you are right, but I see no evidence that is the case. The evidence already points to criminal culpability, and Obama has made every signal that he isn’t going there.
Obama is a poker player
so I wouldn’t be so sure of anything he intends, or doesn’t intend
ain’t no statute of limitation on war crimes
and The Mob is a fickle beast
they have even surprised me on occasion
I wonder how much discussion with Fred Fielding took place wrt the Bush pardon decision.
It seems like a fairly clear calculus:
Disadvantages:
– Pardons wipe out 5th amendment privilege, thus allowing full and frank testimony.
– Pardons for torture also start the International Criminal Court clock ticking immediately (the Court can accept only cases in which it can be persuasively argued that the offenders can’t or won’t be tried in their own country).
– There’s also the political/PR/”Bush legacy” cost of the disgust and outrage pardons would generate, and fault for shredding the “gracious and smooth transition” for which Obama has publicly thanked Bush.
Advantages:
– Protection, unnecessary if neither the new administration nor Congress is likely to launch investigations and/or prosecution, and insufficient in the case of torture because it does nothing to stop and actually enhances the chances of international prosecution.
– Some political bump with the 27-per-centers.
– And the gratitude and loyalty of those pardoned — unless the pardons did jump-start international prosecution.
I’d love to think that the signals from Obama-and-friends about not prosecuting were sent primarily to affect this calculation, and to forestall pardons. But it’s far more likely that the pardon-forestalling effect was a handy rationalization for doing the easy thing, going with the elite consensus that there’s something wrong with prosecuting high officials for crimes.
The dishonesty of language like “criminalizing policy differences” makes me crazy. It would be much easier to handle an honest admission of the reasons why they won’t investigate with an eye to prosecution.
I’m also deeply uneasy about the prospect of yet another ad hoc judicial process for defendants accused of terrorist acts. Both David Iglesias’ and Neal Katyal’s appointments, to me, point toward the likelihood of the Obama administration going that route than using the existing options open to them.
Will Obama direct the Justice Department to begin prosecutions? Why should he while he and the rest of us await the results of the Durham investigation re the interrogation videotapes destroyed by the CIA? The ACLU is already on record (see 1/12 NYT) as suggesting that investigation could be expanded to include a broader investigation of interrogations anyway.
There’s little doubt that the videotape imbroglio leads to top level of the CIA, and via that route, into the WH principals meetings. If the route to prosecution leads through a Bush/Mukasey appointed prosecutor, all the better. Why go out on a limb until that road is declared open or not? Politically, it would be most efficacious way, allowing a detour around charges of partisanship.
Jason Leopold had the story the other day re claims Hayden makes that Obama agreed there would be no prosecutions. Obama aides deny this. But the article goes on to discuss the Durham situation, as well as another possible bombshell that could drop re the 2004 CIA Inspector General Report, still classified. But will the latter remain so under Obama?
On the Durham case — the case to watch, IMHO — from Leopold’s story:
By the way, for those who doubt Jason’s track-record, my take on the Durham investigation is multiply-sourced.
Heh heh, I am a bit more circumspect about “Bull” Durham than you; but sincerely hope I am wrong. As to Leopold, I would make sure to cite the corroboration…..
I am not saying I’m counting on Durham, only that his investigation presents a possibly less contentious road to the investigations and prosecutions we need, and that there are some in Washington who are hoping for something in that direction, because otherwise it will be a very long uphill battle to get any actual prosecutions, as things stand now. (Won’t someone please leak the CIA OIG report?)
All I know is that we have to press hard and constantly in this next period.
Another potential area ripe for investigation involves the ghosting of Iraqi prisoners, as in the case of Rashul, which William Ockham investigated in the “pages” of this site not that long ago. Definite war crimes happened in that case and who knows how many more similar. I wish there had been more follow-up on that story, but the press was silent. The whole issue has (temporarily, I hope) drifted away. We know (or believe we do) that Iraqi prisoners were spirited right out of U.S. prisons in Iraq to the CIA (or Special Forces) for transfer to other countries. How did they do this? By what authority did they get by guards and show orders? How did they cover it up? All these answers will lead us to the same place as where the torture planning originated.
I overheard a few people at work wishing for criminal charges, I agree they will most likely be disappointed.
Since we are the only to up (or home), do you think Europe will follow through with war crimes? I’d love to see chimpy confined to Texas and darth to Dubai.
Geeze…only two up….
Let’s understand something: what the Government has filed with the Court is not an Order from the President as Commander-in-chief telling (i.e., directing, ordering, commanding)the military judge to stop the proceedings. This is a motion by the government asking the judge to grant a continuance for 120 days.
In so many words, the government (the Article II part which prosecutes all cases in whatever court) has come before a judge and asked the judge, just like any other litigant, for relief. Just like any other litigant. This is not the act of a dictator telling a “judge” what result to reach.
So, in the first instance, the judge could (if the judge so desired) decide to deny the continuance and proceed with the trials. This would therefore be reason #1 why the defense counsel are unhappy. Frankly, I think they are acting unhappy because (a) they did not immediately get whatever they want – dismissal of the charges – and (b) it hasn’t yet sunk in that this is a major change of direction by the administration.
A major change of direction by the administration?
Yes.
Because an administration which acts pursuant to the Rule of Law does not go into a court and tell the Court what result to reach. That sort of behavior is the kangaroo court mentality of tinhorn South American dictators who cannot abide the thought that a judge might rule against them, so they fix the trials.
An administration which acts pursuant to the Rule of Law makes its arguments, presents them to a neutral decision-maker, lets the decision come back and then reacts to the decision in the appropriate way – obeying it, seeking a stay to appeal, or just appealing it.
So, this is a major change on more levels than I (at a very early hour) can count.
I don’t condemn or denigrate people for not catching this – we’ve grown so inured to dictatorial behavior that it’s going to take some time to catch on to the fact that we’re coming out from under it. This is step one.
Quite frankly, I am not sure who you think is so unable to understand the nature of what is going on here, the WaPo report was explicit that the order was to the prosecutors. In fact, that is the lead of both the Post article and the instant post. Do you seriously, for one second, given this directive from the President, really think that the tribunal is going to go against the prosecution and the Commander in Chief and insist on plowing ahead with the trials? That thought appears very much ado about nothing and seems somewhat absurd if you ask me. Especially when you consider that the motion for a suspension ordered filed by Obama came on the same day a military judge had already temporarily adjourned the war crimes court prior to the inauguration, specifically noting that the future of the commissions was in doubt. Obama’s order was effected through the proper party, yes; but it was an order nevertheless, and one that will be respected and honored.
A lot of the reporting in the wider media is of the simple “Obama orders halt to Gitmo trials” variety, and that oversimplification is likely to become rampant and then fixed in stone if not challenged and corrected. My point obtains even here, where we know better. Allowing that oversimplification to become fixed effectively legitimates Obama as the new dictator with all the dictatorialnesses the TradMed allowed Bushie and Deadeye to grab.
Peeling all that dictatorial gloss away and throwing it into the fire is what needs be done and, to do that, we need to hold ourselves to keeping a close rein on the writing and point out when others fail to do so.
The most important point here is that the government is following the time-honored legal, and lawyerly, approach of making a motion and allowing the judge to call it.
And, the prosecutors will do what the administration tells them – they know the penalties for insubordination.
As to whether the judge will take judicial notice of whence came the order to the prosecutors to have them make the pending motion, I suppose that it is inevitable the judge will. Whether the judge will rule for or against the government is also a foregone conclusion IMHO. But, the point is the judge will have to rule.
So, this points out four further issues:
1. We need to keep the pressure on Obama to get done the “right things” – close Gitmo, put the chargeable cases into normal federal courts, and release the unchargeables and innocents. You can be sure that the torture fans are already pushing to keep on torturing and keep Gitmo open.
2. We need to go to work on tearing Appendix M or L or whatever it is from the Army Field Manual (bmaz wrote about itthe other day), so as to rip torture out root and branch and destroy it. That whole “Army Field Manual” line, which McSame was so fond of in the campaign, is a meaningless slogan of toxicity equal to the “Obama orders Gitmo Trials Stopped” line of reporting I criticized above. It’s content and process that matter, not just the label.
3. Has anyone looked to see if (a) Change.gov still exists and (b) if they’re still taking questions?
4. We need to recognize that prosecuting the Bush/Cheney junta is an issue linked to, but not congruent with, the issues of closing and sunshining Gitmo and the black-site prisons and ending torture. The prosecutions would be for actual crimes, of which there are doubtless many. The investigations can begin. I have little doubt that the Bush administration explicitly did not “read in” the transition teams on all the stuff they were doing and are leaving finding out about it to the Obama admin (as opposed to disclosing it). Some nice little easter eggs and landmines, if you will. But, the first step on the critical path to putting those thugs behind bars is to make sure that Obama’s hands are clean in this matter, and that can come only from stopping what is going on now. And, as I wrote above, if this is to be done in a way which restores the Rule of Law, then process has to be respected.
1,2 and 4 agreed
3 – change.gov has been changed to whitehouse.gov
And the “Questions” box (which we stuffed last week) is where, exactly?
Or are We no longer taking questions?
Your #4 raises the other issue that I think is in danger of being fuzzed: that the focus on GTMO may be used as a way to divert attention from the other sites overseas — Bagram, prisons in Iraq, and then other sites we don’t know about, although we have some suspicions (Diego Garcia, floating brigs, etc).
What is going on at Bagram, eg, is worse than GTMO. Prisoners there do not have the same rights that have been extended to those at GTMO, and in many cases have been held for as long.
The point is not just to be happy that GTMO is closed, however that is done, since it could be done badly, and the msm wouldn’t know or care. It is to challenge the whole body of corrupt law and behaviour that produced the military commissions and worse.
bmaz, the MSNBC story your link goes to doesn’t quote Lt-Cmdr Kuebler. Can you tell me where you got that quote? I’m wondering about context because, earlier yesterday, before Obama issued his directive, the presiding judge at Khadr’s trial, Col Parrish, delayed Khadr’s trial indefinitely, and in some ways Kuebler’s words ring truer to me as a reaction to Parrish than as a reaction to Obama.
Whichever, to me, Lt-Cmdr Kuebler is right up there with Mora and Morris Davis and the prosecutor who resigned recently — principled and committed and brilliant as a witness himself before a Commons subcommittee last year. I hope Merkins know what extraordinary people they have in some of these military lawyers, very conservative guys, often, but with such a sense of honour.
Khadr’s case is a problem because the two main issues of justice — he may be innocent (there is conflicting evidence), and he was a child soldier — are in some tension with one another. If the case is simply stopped because he is redirected into some kind of rehab program for child soldiers (probably here), then he never gets a chance to vindicate himself. And some of the interesting testimony from interrogators allowed into the record on Monday — lies about Maher Arar, eg, which have been disproved by our intel people — will still be floating about out there, which is bothering people here.
I found the AP story at the Guardian, and I’m pretty sure that story was written before Obama gave his directive, which specifies 120 days.
Kuebler and other defence attorneys are objecting there to the earlier manoeuvres of the chief prosecutor, which was put in play early on Tuesday by Col Parrish at Khadr’s trial:
So that’s not a reaction to Obama’s directive.
I replaced the former link with a different one that is to the original version. Apparently MSNBC altered their story after I set the link; sorry about that. Kuebler’s objection was not to Obama’s directed motion for a stay of proceedings specifically, but to an hours earlier action that is the functional equivalent thereto. The principle is exactly the same, however, Kuebler, and at least some other defense counsel it appears, object because they want the withdrawal of charges now as opposed to what looks to be Obama’s plan to delay, and then withdraw once he has figured out the alternative. It is understandable technically why Kuebler takes this position (I might do the same); but the bottom line is it sure appears he is going to get to the same result either way. Obama’s action is perfectly understandable and reasonable considering he had been on the job a whole couple of hours when he made the call.
Thanks bmaz
Thanks to nikiweir for opening the digg
Speaking of the 9/11 attacks:
GHW Bush and Ken Lay and Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld planned 9/11 before putting GW up for nomination. As an integral precursor, they used Lay’s Enron oil trading platform to create a completely fake energy crisis in California, sending a shock wave through the entire country – for the sole purpose of placing energy independence on the top of people’s minds.
This was the essential pretext to brainwash the American people into electing the individuals positioned as most likely to be able to put gas in cars and heat in homes. Gore was pushing new approaches and these CFR Rockefellerians were hell bent on making sure that the US remain addicted to fossil fuels…for the profits it brings to them and the broader AGENDA (New World Order) it enables.
The MOTIVE for Lay/Enron was not increased profits in the short term, it was pipelines and oil leases in the long term, in territory the US had yet to control.
Lay would profit from his Enron stock, Cheney would profit from his Halliburton stock and under the table payments, but they needed to concoct an apparently legal way for Rumsfeld to profit for his role – so they concocted the anthrax scare as part of the plan so that he could profit from his pharmaceutical holdings tied to Cipro sales.
Bush, Cheney, Lay and Rumsfeld are the co-conspirators behind 9/11. Rumsfeld knew he could count on Mossad agent Dov Zakheim to enable planes flown by wire to hit their targets, so he installed him as Comptroller at the DOD. He knew that Mossad Agent Kobi Alexander could be counted on to wiretap all of the intelligence gatherers in the US to end-run any efforts to stop them (like Able Danger) and whose software had already been installed on the most critical servers in the United States to enable the over-ride of all systems. He knew he could rely on Mossad assets (Urban Movers) to wire the buildings for demolition, and he knew that he could rely on Mossad Agent, Michael Chertoff, to cover-up any evidence of their conspiracy in its aftermath (“The Dancing Israelis” & “Israeli Art Students”).
Rumsfeld relied on Zakheim to steal not just $2.3 trillion as reported, but $7 trillion from the DOD and offshore it to Israel from which the entire coup was funded. This is why Sharon was able to so confidently and publicly proclaim less than one month after 9/11: “We control America, and America knows it!”
GHW Bush is criminal #1 where 9/11 is concerned. He enabled all of it, outsourcing many pieces to Israel’s Mossad, who clearly had their own agenda. In its aftermath, Israel opted to use its known complicity in the conspiracy to blackmail their partners in crime. The entire Bush Administration was in fact being blackmailed, with the threat that Israel would reveal the BushLayChenyRumsfeld direct role in planning and execution of 9/11 unless the Administration did exactly as Israel demanded.
I’m not making this up. I’ve confirmed it.
more available here:
http://plungerspeaks.blogspot.com
It’s high time for those who know the truth to come out from the shadows and tell it. NO MORE FEAR. We need to arrest the guilty, enable the safety of would-be whistleblowers and go get our damn money back from those who’ve stolen it or reaped profits by these illegal means.
This is what a Real President does. This is how a Real President acts.
After eight long years, we have a Real President.
That’s all that’s running through my head right now: We have a Real President.
GW was the “acting President.”
GHW Bush was the Actual President, and Cheney his VP.
Nah
— President George H.W.Bush to White House correspondent Sara McClendon, 1992
quite a quote, has it been authenticated?
Reportedly to journalist Sarah McClendon (December 1992), in response to a question about Iraq-gate and the Iran-Contra Affair. Widely quoted as being from McClendon’s newsletter of December 1992
the title of this thread, while technically true is quite misleading, sorry bmaz
“halt” is not used correctly here, it indicates the trials have been stopped, they have not
these trials are suspended, the title of this thread should be;
“President Obama suspends GITMO Show Trials”
claiming this the administration “officially halts” we certainly mean that’s the end of it these trials are fore gone and concluded.
that’s not what’s happening yet, time will tell but for now these trials are still on the books
Perhaps I should have used “suspended” in the title. Bottom line is that once the oder to the prosecutors was issued to request the suspension, the deal was done. It might as well have been an order to the military judge, the effect was the same. Scribe is exactly right, Obama followed the right process and acted through the proper party and modality, where his predecessor almost certainly would not have; however, the result was ordained. Military judges were going to enter the stay. Guaranteed.
And they already are doing just that. The 120 day stay orders are being announced as having been entered in Omar Khadr’s case just now as breaking news by CNN. Similar orders are expected to come later this morning in KSM and the other 9/11 detainee cases. If indeed they are also entered in KSM/9-11 cases as is reportedly expected, they will be in all the other cases as well.
Words…words…words. “Halt” means to “stop”. That usually means a temporary stop ( a suspension) until more information or an additional decision can be made. It doesn’t mean “terminates”, “bans”, “ends” or “eliminates”.
And I think its reasonable that Obama make such a request in order for his DOJ to look into precisely whether or not the individual cases can be integrated into the Federal Court system, whether he will order immediate releases because the cases are so tainted by prosecutorial/military abuses that they can’t be won. or if they were ever even warranted.
Then Obama has to decide how to handle the people to be released. Many are going to be excruciatingly bitter and angry. I suspect that some of those already released were initially innocent, and only became violent AFTER the process of Gitmo (the incarceration syndrome where ones associates are primarily or dominatingly hardcore criminals). Others are going to be psychologically damaged; some cannot be returned to their native countries without risk. Some may be willing to accept therapy and alternative release…but there are great issues of whether there is the capability of informed consent here.
Im doubtful the Bush Administration has even done a bit of research about what these individuals would need to allow them to re-enter society ANYWHERE as productive citizens.
The S&L Debacle of the late 80s and early 90s included deposit accounts linked to the Iran- Contra drug running operations of GHW Bush. Those accounts were refilled on the backs of you the taxpayer.
They got away with it the first time, and they are doing it again right now.
Neil Bush helped to enable the prior theft of taxpayer dollars, and George W. enabled it this time.
ALL of the evidence to arrest this crime family exists.
How many explanations can you come up with for Jeb Bush to have declared Martial Law in Florida in advance of 9/11?
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=…..#038;gl=us
that link deserves it’s own front page smoking gun expose, maybe someone here or the lake will get something like that worked up
I’ve got thousands of links as revealing as that one available for inspection, if we are ever allowed to openly discuss what ACTUALLY occurred in an intellectual way that doesn’t include personal attack or use of the term “tin foil.”
Consider how much brainwashing actually occurred over the past eight years to condition our entire culture to shun all discussion of 9/11.
It’s time to reveal the entire truth.
Each one of the current Investigations/Charges (on-going and new ones that are about to pop up)etc, bring us closer being able to get to the Truth about just who was doing what, on/during and since Sept 11. Justice is coming.
You have a lot of stuff/facts about interesting folks and their connections;) maybe you should put together a post/diary re; interesting/known individuals/companies/connections and a time-line (placing them at the scene of the crime, so to speak).
As you know, people are really smart/curious here and it would be a good way to start that conversation.
peace
I’m not sure we want to have that conversation
that subject is deep into the tinfoil
I don’t treat most of plunger’s stuff as real comments
Perhaps you could provide examples (with facts supported by links) to support your contentions, specifically.
Facts are facts.
There are too many questions/holes in the official ‘Facts’ regarding what really went down on Sept 11.
It took Bush 14 months to even convene a ‘commission’(and that was only done due to public pressure) to investigate those events and Bush/Cheney did everything they could to game the results, from handpicking members, limiting direction of investigation, refusing to testify under oath, refusing to testify unless Dicky-Boy was there, no notes, no comments, no money, limited time to complete. A complete whitewash.
Where the pictures from the Pentagon ‘crash’?
Why did Tower 7 fall down?
If there wasn’t cell phone service on board planes at that time, Who made those calls?
Why was the steel from the Twin Towers shipped out/melted without testing for explosives etc?
Why did they concrete over the lawn of the Pentagon so fast?
Etc, etc, etc.
Lots of questions still not answered. Way past time for serious discussion and questions..
Jackie:
I would welcome the opportunity to do exactly that, provided it came with the assurance that it would be posted. There has been understandable reluctance here and on most if not all other progressive blogs to allow for such in depth analysis and an open dialogue and true sharing of information.
My wish for the past several years was that someone establish a site designed specifically to enable the connecting of the thousands of dots by all who wish to participate. It does no good to create such a tool separately, as it just falls into the trap of being another “9/11 Truther” site, subject to all of the disinformation and attacks of every other such site. It’s most valuable to feature it as a work-in-progress among a community of well-grounded truthseekers with whose investigative prowess is founded in the law.
By focusing on the outcomes that have flowed from 9/11, and working each back to their source – we will all see how and where dollars and power flowed – and ultimately – come to understand the motives of the co-conspirators.
If this community (each of you) would welcome such an investigative effort, it needs to ask for the order. All of the dots do in fact connect.
Start your own. It’s free: https://www.blogger.com/start
You seem to either have missed the point of my prior statement, or don’t want such an interactive methodology posted on a “mainstream” blog where it can carry the credibility of a serious community of patriotic investigators. This isn’t about me.
plunger, this is what oxydown here at the lake is for, it can kick start an undertaking, get it going nicely and it will get front page here at the lake, from there it can get mainstream legs of it’s own
Were it only that easy.
If there is a buy-in by management, I’m very happy to do so. I don’t sense that everyone welcomes telling of the entire truth. It’s not pretty.
If there is a place, it would be at Oxdown, not here.
Compartmentalizing the truth to a “conspiracy page” serves only to further the existing status quo.
I’ll refrain from taking the discussion of 9/11 out of the mainstream dialogue, where it belongs, prominently, each and every day (in my own opinion).
Well, that is fine and why you have your own blog. And why Oxdown is available, and the others are quite right, if you sell your argument to folks at Oxdown you get put on the main page at FDL, one of the primest pieces of blog real estate around. I support all that wholeheartedly; however, that is not the purpose intended here. But we are on the same page about that, because we have had this discussion before.
” I’ll refrain from taking the discussion of 9/11 out of the mainstream dialogue, where it belongs, prominently, “
It’s time we put this issue to rest,it happened, it sucked but it’s over.
It’s time to move on ,to get past this ,don’t forget that it happened ,just don’t live it every day.
Let the healing begin!
plunger, the first rule of netiquette when discussion is happening on a forum is to stick to the topic of the discussion as closely as possible.
Granted, that doesn’t always happen, but your constant interjection of 9/11 theories into every discussion is getting quite old.
Posts and comments from the Lake are often quoted on Maddow’s and KO shows,our contributions here at the Lake are important and do have effect on MSM reporting
I ask plunger, I would love to see that, please start, I will attend every post
I hope Merkins know what extraordinary people they have in some of these military lawyers
The military lawyers (you can’t list them all and they haven’t all been the defense lawyers), and the fact that private practice lawyers like Willet (who wasn’t even a criminal defense lawyer)would give up chunks of their lives to this, have been extraordinary stories.
It’s pretty amazing that, with all the strictures of the military vis a vis chain of command and the kinds of discipline that can be visited on the JAG lawyers, that’s where the strongest voices have been found – while thousands and thousands and thousands of DOJ and administration lawyers, all in voluntary employment situations, where the worst that could happen is that they lose their ability to keep their job working for torturers and liars, never found any voice.
When torture comes out for years, and the whole of the DOJ nods and smiles and collects their checks through it – the country changes. Their failed obligations didn’t just lose a case, it lost a part of this nation’s soul and I don’t know how you get it back. Now, they are the household that all decided, collectively, to look away – or even participate in – child molestation. After years of active participation in either the acts or the cover ups, it becomes the way of life. You don’t, 6 years into enabling the depraved and giving it the indicia of normality, suddenly “find” outrage for it. And the enablers and participants are now so interwoven with each other that they really look at one another and don’t see anything repellant.
Exactly. And this is why, albeit it a hasty and early move, I am so thrilled at the initial action on Gitmo by the newly Presidential Obama. It may have been the least he could do, but dammit, for once we have a President that actually did it.
That alone feels pretty darn good.
From the Canadian Press at London Free Press:
Interesting that Kuebler seems to have lost his objection; I think he sees what I said earlier that this is the method to getting where he wants to go. Sure would be helpful if the Canadian government would help out its citizen Khadr by demanding separation of Khadr from the proceedings and return.
I don’t mean to chew on this too much, and God forbid I should argue with bmaz, but I figured that Kuebler would have something more nuanced to say after Obama’s request.
About the so-called Canadian government (which has mostly been in suspended animation since last June): Harper is the last loyal Bushie left in the world. His only public position on Khadr is now what it always has been: Khadr faces very serious legal charges, and Harper’s government will let those play out. Some of his ministers say worse. Some of them are very hang-’em-high types.
There are two things that might get Khadr repatriated: Obama brings pressure on Harper to change course; or Harper is defeated, either next week by a renewed Liberal opposition with a coalition in its back pocket, or in another election. (Parliament only comes back from prorogation next Monday.) At the moment, we can’t tell how the latter possibility is going to play out, or how soon.
But Canadian public sentiment about Khadr has shifted tremendously. Last I saw, 70 per cent were in favour of repatriation. Troubles follow from that, though. The kid is being turned into a clockwork orange.
Heh, I am here to be argued with and welcome it. Don’t like being called a “legalist”; historically in the law, that is the equivalent to calling someone unethical/immoral in their legal writing. Basically what you might accuse John Yoo of. That I’m not too keen on.
I would suspect that Kuebler will have more to say; I half suspect he had not even left the court facility when that report was made.
Here’s Morgan Reynolds, former Bush Administration chief economist U.S Dept. of Labor…listen to him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k4B6C60an0
Rumsfeld admits trillions missing just one day prior to 9/11:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..re=related
and on-topic:
this isn’t a suspension of the gitmo kangaroo courts, it’s a 120 day stop-order
without further address, the zoo will resume some time in may (I’m too lazy to do the math)
we’re still keeping innocent people in dog kennels
this just added 120 days to their infinite sentences
unless Obama moves to end this farce soon, he is just prolonging bush’s crimes
that’s how I see it …
I repeat:
geeze, give the guy a day.
from TPMMuck:
They got it right, but I suspect they read EW and BMAZ
Obama will no doubt have some unbiased prosecutors locked in a room with the files, trying to see how many of the folks in Gitmo are really problems.
The ones that shouldn’t be locked up are the “easy” ones. I hope that with Bush out, some of the countries who wouldn’t accept these folks will now. Including us, though I doubt any of the folks held there would really want to live in America after what was done to them.
The next group is probably the smallest: The folks who SHOULD be there and haven’t had the prosecutions compromised by torture or such. These can be moved to a real court under the rule of law.
The group that worries me is the group that should be locked up, but their prosecutions have been compromised. Normal procedure would be to drop the charges, but the idea of KSM walking free is a non-starter for me.
I am VERY curious what an unbiased review of the Gitmo cases will show.
Boxturtle (Is this one of the times the Constitution will force us to do something stupid?)
Obama will no doubt have some unbiased prosecutors locked in a room with the files
A commenter of long standing who participates at Obsidian Wings and is a lawyer defending a number of Guantanamo prisoners had this to say last week:
Also this:
There’s also this recent article from the Washington Post about the evidentiary disarray.
This was foreshadowed early on by an interview in November (maybe with Glenn Greenwald, or maybe Scott Horton, can’t find right now) with one of the military officials who resigned from the show-trial apparatus, that was deeply shocking even to me. The officer had expertise in intelligence and investigations, and the interview focused on the apparently deliberate near-total absence of expertise among the show trial preparers that allowed them to be stonewalled by agency after agency when requesting evidence that might be useful to the defense (or even to a competent, good-faith prosecution).
Hey Bmaz this is a great move by Obama It will send a positive message around the world.
I am hopeful that this is a sign of what’s to come from the Obama administration.
I don’t want to discuss it
study the history of the buildings, architexture, and ballistics, and flash points, and insulation properties, and a hundred other subjects, yourself
it takes about two hours to debunk all of the controlled demolition theories, and I stopped giving that lecture about two years back
suffice it to say, the WTC performed as well as I would expect a pair of 1000 ft Palisades to perform under the circumstances
and you should stop putting your faith in conspiricies and learn about the great opportunists in history
it takes longer then that, since there has never been a similar scenario these theories cannot be “debunked” until duplicated
all “debunking” I’ve read has been handily debunked themself
as far as “conspiracy theory”, any “theory” is a conspiracy since it would have to involve more then one person
the theories that “explain” the collapse are more “conspiracy” thoeries then those that claim it was controlled
Thank you, bmaz;
And, as well, thank you, to the rest of you who help the rest of us to understand.
No doubt this is a naive question which will expose the shallowness of my grasp of such matters, but what happens to the notion of the rule of law if Obama (for the choice, clearly is his, if I have understood you aright) does not pursue accountability for the (I think) malfeasance and blatantly crimminal behavoirs of the last eight years?
Or is this question of no moment to the larger majesty of the law’s purpose, noble or otherwise?
I should think it a major sticking point, but again, my purview is limited and (to be honest) prejudiced in favor of some silly notion of equality before the law, which notion, apparently is understood rather differently than I had imagined (again showing a greater ‘grounding’ in ‘fiction’ than in ‘fact’).
I am trying, seriously, to understand what this ‘choice’ of Obama’s (should it be as you suggest) may actually mean for our reading of the terms ‘truth’ and ‘justice’, assuming that there are and can be no absolutes, when it comes to the law.
I mean no disrespect with these questions, either of the law itself or of those involved in its practice and practical application.
Reading back-forth between skadl & bmaz, whatever facts of BO’s involvement in this delay, the notion behind it is very A-OK w/me.
And with that in mind, I’d offer him Obama another suggestion as well: rescind whatever remain of Maher Arar’s “illegal combatant” (not sure precisely what Bush currently has in place) status which still prevents his entry into US, issue an apology w/accompanying statement to the affect that BO’s commited to ensuring incarcerated terror suspects receive fair and timely justice w/a system efficiently dedicated to that outcome.
And talking about Arar, there was a piece yesterday in Toronto Star on this very subject, as it related to Khadr’s trial:
Whole lot of implications there… has BushCo used info obtained from Khadr, under duress of torture, to both “justify” continued silence on Arar and as basis for maintaining continued legal barriers to Arar’s entry into US?
Worse: that information extorted from Khadr may have been what was used to justify Arar’s rendition itself (8 October 2002). And then yes to your other questions. First in line for questions: Condi Rice (not because she was a first actor, but because she has been keeper of the flame), and then debrief everyone else from the top down.
I forget where Arar’s suit against the U.S. government is at now, but I’m sure it will get its sea-legs back soon.
Democratic Underground has a video of a news interview with David Iglesias, talking about his new appointment as a/the (?) Navy JAG (based at the Pentagon) working on GTMO prosecutions. (DU mistakenly says that he has been “reinstated.”)
This is obviously an Obama appointment. Admirable and nice as Iglesias is, I’m not sure this sounds all that good.
I perceive that FDL is a community of free thinkers capable of making decisions as to what to examine on their own. It appears that you are wanting a unanimous concurrence that your thing is everyones thing. You need to put it out there and let your facts and dot connections speak for themselves without some expectation that everyone will concur.
That would require that the “topic” of any given thread be “connecting the dots of 9/11″ – and as you may have noticed, that has never been the topic on this or any other highly-visited blog…therefore it always remains “off topic.”
It is not my goal to undermine all of the good work done here, as I am most appreciative of the opportunity to share my thoughts here and always invite any thoughtful rebuttal. I merely hope to expand the dialogue to include this topic as the underlying context upon which nearly all other conversation of wrong-doing seems frequently to rest.
Having such a conversation be received as “on topic” would be a nice start.
Off Topic as it is, I enjoyed your piece contained herein – more than any of your other works I’ve read so far. It is concise, logical and fun to read. I think you are correct. Is this the first time you included Ken Lay?
I have written more on the topic of Lay’s role than probably anyone. I have the man at the center of it all. Lay is said to have died on the floor of a home which I visited no less than 200 times (including a dinner with Hunter S. Thompson). I spoke to the ranch owner the morning of the discovery, who claims she saw him dead there once she was summoned by Lay’s wife. She sounded very convinced that it was him…and very shaken, as she had come to know and like him. I have heard conflicting accounts of whether it was actually him.
It is of interest, at least to me, that we all, each, have a ‘need’ of the definitive ‘answer’ or ‘truth’, especially as we, again ‘each’ seek to find and define that answer or truth.
The annoyance and frustration arises when there is a difference of opinion regarding a universe of ‘debatable’ points, and someone asserts the authority of greater ‘correctness’, ‘knowledge’, overall ‘grasp’ or revealed ‘truth’.
This becomes even more ’sticky’ when factions form around proponents of these differing ‘interpretations’ (the classic ‘US and THEM’ approach so much in vogue with our species) and the power to enforce one viewpoint over or above all others becomes more the issue than the ‘issue’ itself.
What is most remarkable, given this apparent operant ‘reality’, is that the train wrecks of complete misunderstanding or its step-children, rigid intolerance and absolute close-mindedness, do not appear to have any significant suasion (thankfully) here at the lake.
And such minor skirmishes as there are, seem, owing to an essential, shared civility, to either be deflated or defused before unbecoming ‘escalation’ obtains.
So?
Keep on as you are, for the ‘obvious’ is, too often, precisely what is not seen, considered, or dealt with.
Among the ‘universal’ human ‘truths’ (assuming that such there are) the inability to confront the obvious, is, in a word, ‘obvious’, but this is only understood from sufficient, stepped-back ‘distance’, and even then, our cultural prejudices, assumptions and conceits rush to get in the way.
It is amazing that we muddle along as ‘well’ as we do.
Very thoughtful, and well stated.
isn’t it normal for lawyers in trials to request that charges be dismissed or other mitigation when the government imposes delays… even when those delays are potentially favorable to their client?
If the defendent hasn’t already waived his right to a speedy trial, the defense can demand one. The defense will sometimes do that when they’re prepared and the prosecution isn’t. However, this will make it very unlikely that the judge will agree to any subsequent defense requested delays.
If the defendent HAS waived, then there’s really nothing they can do unless the prosecution gets abusive. Then they can appeal to the judge.
In this case, I bet the defense just shuts up. They’ve got MUCH better grounds for dismissal elsewhere.
If I’m defense, I’m trying like hell to delay so BushCo can lose a few more suits. I want my client into a real court, with real rules of evidence. Some of those folks would have been granted bail in a real court!
Boxturtle (Should we be looking at disbarring some of the lawyers involved in this?)
I didn’t know that the oxdown diaries were conspiracy pages. Ha Ha. I enjoy reading the diaries. Some great personal stories, bits of things not covered in the main posts. There are even a few wacky stories there.
Free thinkers, think away. Freedom of choice. Yay!
This will reverberate loudly in the Right Wing Echo Chamber. The simplistic argument is apparent. One or more of these “worst of the worst” (Cheney’s misnomer – many of whom Cheney referred to as the “worst of the worst” have already been released) terrists will “become linked” to an attack somewhere.
Such an event could lead to an Obama impeachment. These are the kinds of issues from which deals are made, eg: not to investigate and prosecute Bush, Cheney, et al.
me thinks if they try to impeach obama that will unleash the firestorm they need to avoid against bush
what could possibly be a basis for impeaching Obama? His presidency just started.
Prosecuting shrub should be an imperative on its own right, not quid-pro-quo for rethugs misbehaving vis-a-vis Dems.
Goopers don’t hold enough seats in congress to impeach a skunk.
they already tried that
didn’t ya see the report about the “61 recidivist terrorists” last week ???
since the pentagon papers were exposed, it seems like the military don’t even try when they gin up phony reports
no names in the report, no terrorist incidents mentioned, just an assurance that 61 released terrorists had returned to attacking America
what most people here don’t understand is that America is FUCKING SICK AND TIRED of repuglitards that cry wolf
we don’t GIVE A FUCK what the repuglitards are having a hissy fit about
cornyn has questions about Hillary ???
confim Hillary, and tell cornyn to shut his fucking pie hole
the repuglitards got a problem whit Gaither (???)
confirm him and turn the klieg lights on the repuglitards having their hissy fits
we ARE SICK OF IT
does anybody think Peter king has a snowball’s chance in hell of defeating ANY Democrat for NY’s Senate seat in 2010 ???
and after that, you can write king’s political obituary, cuz his congressional seat ain’t gonna exist in 2012
5 repuglitards in the senate are retiring already, and the repuglitard leadership looked like they were walking to their own hanging yesterday. America cheered that event, btw
people are PISSED OFF
and we’re PISSED OFF AT REPUGLITARDS
repuglitards should stop worrying about the Democrats’ failings and take a look at their track record for the past 14 fucking years
but they don’t
the contract on America reached it’s end in 2006, but America still remembers who put the contract on us
impeach Obama ???
come on
I’m the one smokin dope here
Sorry, the premise of this posting is wrong: Obama did not order a halt to the show trials, because he can’t, at least not with a stroke of the pen.
He ordered the prosecutors, who do work for him, to ask for a halt in the trials. But the judges don’t have to honor the request, and in some cases defense counsels might object, because their clients just want to get on with it even though the process is defective.
Um, did you actually read the post and the comments? Sure doesn’t look like it.
The entire Gitmo question is a real hot potato. I think that the damage done by totally inept and ignorant extra legal actions of the Bush cabal have made what should have been a guilty or not determination totally obfuscated by the criminality of bushco. The only way out may be to have third parties make the determinations of the guilt of the detainees and of the bush administration
Most of the Gitmo detainees will never be charged with anything ,and will have to be released.
You’re too optimistic. I think if thses cases get into a real court, we may have to pay the detainees to go away! Anyone who was tortured would likely have a civil suit. Ditto for wrongful imprisonment. Can the commmander of the camp be held criminally liable for mistreatment of prisoners under his command? Prison wardons can be.
See how ugly it gets? Imagine what would come out in court. Ranking democrats could be called to testify.
I smell an expensive payoff coming down the line.
Boxturtle (Would you take $10M to shut up and go away?)
OT, Interesting picture, Bush is looking at ol’ Dicky Boy, Mr President is looking away and ol’ Dicky-boy doesn’t look like he is having fun..
Interesting expressions/body language…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..59456.html
Obama will likely come up with a quasi judicial system that avoids some of the worst features of the Bushie trials- but falls well short of a typical criminal proceeding- in the meantime, he will attempt to ship off those who probably cannot be successfully prosecuted. When push came to shove- that was probably the Bush strategy as well.
Some of these people may be very dangerous and we may not be able to prosecute them with the ordinary rules of justice- those are the tricky ones- and if he lets em go, he’s toast.
GW Clusterfuck was like the dog who chased the truck and then caught it. Once he had caught his “detainees”, he was faced with the problem of what to do with em- a problem he never solved.
It looks as if we may have gotten the best president we could have found for our present situation. His instincts are to move carefully, consider all the options and potential consequences- and only then to move ahead…
What we don’t know is what sort of EXECUTOR Obama will be. Once the decision is made, he needs to go into “make it happen” mode. More presidents fail during the execution phase than in the decision making phase….There is no evidence that he will be weak in execution, but there is also no evidence that he will be strong. We should see in a few months how he handles “making it happen”.
He knows that he has a very short period of optimum time to get his most important issues implemented. Stimulus, health care, and energy.
It makes sense that Omar Khadr would get a chance to vindicate himself in a decent hearing, but am I alone in being in despair about the fact that he was 15 when he was taken prisoner as an enemy soldier? Anyone who knows 15 year olds knows they are not nearly grown. This case keeps me awake when I wake in the middle of the night. Poor kid.
No, you’re not alone, although there are consequences to this case whichever way we leap.
I’d like to hear what Kuebler’s ideal solution is (and I’d like to hear from Khadr’s two excellent Canadian lawyers, who have won a Supreme Court case for him here). My best thought is a serious commission of inquiry, as in Arar’s case, to which Lt-Cmdr Kuebler could bring everything he knows, which is more than the GTMO tribunal was going to let him do. That wouldn’t be a trial of Khadr, more like a trial of the messes made in at least three countries, Afghanistan, GTMO/the U.S., and Canada — and there are messes in all.
Omar Khadr deserves justice, but so do the people of Canada and of the U.S., and that means we need to know what was done in our names.
Sounds good to me, skdadl. Thank you for showing a possible light and a reason for this process, and not just setting him free.
It’s difficult to overstate the pernicious role of the Military Commissions Act in gumming up the choices available to the Obama administration, as well as in prolonging the illegal, process-less detention of many prisoners.
Repeal of the MCA should accompany the Obama admin’s forward moves on the treatment of the remaining prisoners, for a host of legal, political, and moral reasons.
Torture, abuse, and blatantly illegal lack of process cannot be an excuse for continued denial of legal process or (worse) newly invented show-trial process that deforms the rule of law by creating a state of exception that will be abused and expanded as the years go by.
BO’s FOIA order sounds good. I just wonder how much Info from last 8 yrs there is to free.