The LATimes 9/29/2006 printed an article by MB who was apparently taken prisoner in January 2002 by abduction from his home in Islamabad, Pakistan. He had fled Kabul, Afghanistan where he had "helped" establish a girl's school and dig water wells. Held captive for 3 years.
The use of "Guantanamo" by this Administration to avoid the Constitution fools no one. And what is the point? How can we claim to be fighting FOR the Constitution when in fact we are ignoring it?
KHALED EL-MASRI. Today, with no explanation, the Supreme Court denied the appeal of a German citizen of Lebanese/Arab extraction. Masri claimed to have been kidnapped and tortured by the CIA (George Tenet). An appeals court had held that Masri could not sue the CIA for damages because "a trial might reveal 'state secrets'."
ReplyDeleteHere the new-found and UN-Constitutional "state secrets" doctrine is shielding the Bush Administration from accountability in the most extreme case -- where the victim was admitted to be entirely innocent -- in a case of mistaken identity. In a case of an incompetent anti-terrorist program gone utterly awry, the victim does not get an apology, and the outrages of this administration are once again "saved" by the Supreme Court.
The LA Times editorial came out on October 11, 2007 with a demand for compensation AND an apology from the President and Congress -- while reproaching the Court for its defalcation.
ReplyDeleteSTATE SECRETS? No public official can commit unconstitutional acts and then hide from retribution by claiming "State Secrets". There is no such privilege. These are PAST acts now complained of. Virtually any trial judge can impose safeguards against exposure of information which should remain sealed. However, the culpability of officials who have done violence to the Constitution is not excused by ANY "privilege."
ReplyDeleteLAT 11/9/2007: The FIRST of the long-promised Trials of the illegally-held prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay has now been announced by the Bush Administration.
ReplyDeleteThey are going to prosecute Omar Khadr, a boy who was 15 years old when he was wounded and imprisoned after combat during the Afghan War. The US prosecutor is charging this boy-soldier for murder, although he was a child and was obviously FIGHTING in a war. Whether some or all of the detainees are "unlawful combatants" is a non-issue. Omar Khadr is not a suicide bomber and he is not even accused of killing civilians.
The US prosecutor is an imbecile I am ashamed to name: Marine Major Jeff Groharing is arguing that Khadr was "an unlawful enemy combatant". The accusation is that Khadr killed an American soldier with a grenade--the accusation itself clearly makes Khadr a soldier engaged in warfare.
Groharing's evidence is a videotape showing Khadr as a child building explosive devices IN AN AL QAEDA TRAINING CAMP. The evidence clearly shows Khadr is a child at the very bottom of the war hierarchy of our enemies.
After YEARS of maneuvering and argument, the FIRST case is a travesty of injustice in which the "enemy" is a child engaged in a dangerous workshop building terrible weapons. He is obviously NOT the person who built the workshop. The prosecutor is going after someone who is not even in the decision-making process, a child very likely to have been misled and victimized by cynical men.
Now, this Khadr, is clearly being victimized again. This time by a US "prosecutor", at a cost of millions of dollars.
Who is the imbecile in charge of this prosecution? Who would even think it is important for any reason to charge Khadr with murder?