UK vs USA Justice

 

Keeping an open mind...

Even as he is dying, Ady Barkan fights for justice, humanity, the vulnerable.

Obviously the Trump minions try not to pay attention.

I read the news today

Oh boy...

Justice for Sale. (Bill Moyers talks about the perversion of our judicial system, from small courtrooms to the Supreme Court.)

Rowling’s being sued for plagiarism again. (Apparently every thought she ever had is owned exclusively by weird self-published authors lurking in basements...)

Your Worst Nightmare; Conservative Success (Reminding conservatives that Georgie Bush did exactly what Republicans have been dreaming about for years... observe the wreckage.)

The NYT's mystery Op-Ed writer. (Glenn Greenwald puzzles over the bloodthirsty Op-Ed writer.)

Santorum Suggest Military Was 'Indoctrinated' Into Supporting DADT Repeal. (Because if we accept gays into the military and lose the fear of the gay, there goes most of Santorum's platform to run for president...)

Schwarzenegger says Obama's stimulus created jobs. (Ahnold steps outta line... clearly he's been too Hollywooded to be a real Republican. This headline demands this short skit. I can't stand the Gropenator, but this made me laugh.)

Interview with Darrel Vandeveld, resigned prosecutor from Gitmo

As interviewed by The Talking Dog:

Darrel Vandeveld is an attorney and former military officer, who, in civilian life is a prosecuting attorney in Erie, PA. In the military, he attained the rank of Lt. Col. in the Army Reserve, serving, among other places, in Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Africa, as well as serving as a senior prosecutor for the military commissions prosecuting Guantanamo detainees. Last year, he became the seventh attorney to resign as a prosecutor from the military commissions.

[snip]

The interview is long but well worth it. Fascinating to see what pressures this moral man came under as he tried to make sense of an immoral situation. I've posted part of Vandeveld's conclusion:

So, my advice to President Obama reduces to this: if trials in Article III courts are determined to be imprudent, time-consuming, or to involve too many Constitutional uncertainties, then reform the Commissions by the following: supplement your initial Executive Order with a more specific, imperative directive that ALL evidence be assembled on each detainee immediately, no matter the resources required to do so. Countenance no claims that the task is unattainable. Replace the current Convening Authority, Chief and Deputy Chief Prosecutors, whose failures are undeniable and who, in any event, no longer posess a shred of credibility. Instruct the military services’ top lawyers or “TJAGs” to conscript the most qualified prosecutors available, from whatever source (most probably the reserves, many of whose members are highly-experienced civilian prosecutors). Order the service TJAGs to relocate the entire operation to GTMO (currently, the prosecution and defense have offices in Northern Virginia!). Further, mandate that the Military Judges assigned to the Commissions be relocated to GTMO for the duration as well, holding court proceedings as rapidly as equity allows (before the President’s EO, the Commissions would meet at GTMO perhaps once a month – an unacceptably glacial pace), and to endeavor, consistent with the modified Commissions law and regulations, to complete all trials no later than 21 January 2010. Refuse to release any military personnel from active duty until the mission is complete. Knowing the soldier’s life as I do, this last step will instill the requisite urgency and effort all but abandoned in the preceding seven years. Finally, I would advise the President that after the fair, equitable and just trials are completed, to order the prison camps at GTMO destroyed -- bulldozed to the ground, not in an attempt to erase the past, but as a means of recognizing the abandonment of our American values that took place there. Put a decisive end to GTMO.

In sum, if the detainees cannot be tried in US federal courts, replicate the intelligent, reasoned, and highly-regarded Nuremberg trials to the extent possible at GTMO. Restore America as a force for good in the world. Complete the mission at GTMO, with honor and expeditiousness – not dishonor and expediency.

(Link via Kevin Hayden of American Street)

Update: Center for Constitutional Rights reports:

Currently at Guantánamo, the majority of detainees are being held in conditions of solitary confinement in one of two super-maximum facilities – Camps 5 and 6 – or in Camp Echo. The conditions in these camps are harshly punitive and violate international and U.S. legal standards for the humane treatment of persons deprived of their liberty. Solitary confinement, sensory deprivation, environmental manipulation, and sleep deprivation are daily realities for these men and have led to the steady deterioration of their physical and psychological health. In addition, detainees are subjected to brutal physical assaults by the Immediate Reaction Force (IRF), a team of military guards comparable to a riot squad, who are trained to respond to alleged "disciplinary infractions" with overwhelming force. Detainees have also been deprived of virtually all meaningful contact with their families, and have suffered interference with and abuse related to their right to practice their religion.

Contrary to statements by the military, conditions at Guantánamo have not improved for the majority of detainees and are still in violation of the law. In this report, we describe the current conditions of confinement for the men at Guantánamo and make recommendations for bringing Camps 5, 6 and Echo into immediate compliance with "all applicable laws" governing the conditions of confinement of detainees, as required by President Obama's Executive Order.

The descriptions of ongoing, severe solitary confinement, other forms of psychological abuse, incidents of violence and the threat of violence from guards, religious abuse, and widespread forced tube-feeding of hunger strikers indicate that the inhumane practices of the Bush Administration persist today at Guantánamo, despite President Obama's Executive Order, and should be remedied immediately.

They have a pdf report and copies of letters from detainees.

Why did anyone in the Bush administration think this was a good idea? A torture camp? Did they not study history? Not watch any WWII movies? Or did they always cheer for the Nazis and imagine people cowering before their awesome superbly tailored uniform and shiny goose-stepping boots?

Well, now even the guards are coming forward and talking. Soon we'll hear exactly which one of the perverted group in the Bush cabal pushed this torture program into existence. Maybe we'll even get to hear their dank depraved polluted soup of excuses as to why.

Remember. Some in the Bush administration actively pushed for torture and went down and watched.

I'll quote myself from this post I did in 12/07:

It's torture, Georgie. Why did your administration decide to call the Geneva Conventions quaint? Why did you want torture 'on the table'? Why were you so adamant to have these torture techniques employed? Why was Abu Gonzales asked to find a legal way to activate torture? Why was Rumsfeld scrawling notes about how easy it was to stand for eight hours and that it wasn't enough? Why was there an overheard conversation (Richard Clarke?) between high-ranking White House staff in the days after 9/11 happily discussing torture techniques to use on al-Qaeda and Iraqis? And we're supposed to believe all those dog leashes and glow sticks used on prisoners at Abu Ghraib are part of the everyday equipment of soldiers?

And when Rumsfeld became incensed over the photos of Abu Ghraib, he wasn't upset by the torture. He was upset by the existence of the photos. The acts didn't disturb him, the fact that the world now knew disturbed him.

You opened this door and are now trying to pretend that what was done with your okay and in your name hasn't happened. The truth will out and we will get to hear all the horrible details, if not now, soon. This administration thought that torture would make people be in shock and awe of them. All this did was announce to the citizens of Iraq and the United States and to the world that this administration was cowardly, craven, inept and incompetent. Losers use torture. Wise men don't need to.

And don't drag out that stupid excuse that everything changed on 9/11. Nothing changed on 9/11 except we finally joined the rest of the world in dealing with terrorists. Not every country dealing with terrorism turns into a police state and tortures people. Not every government uses such a blow to undo everything that they can't stand in the Constitution and in our laws. But your administration did, Georgie.

I bet you and your pals have watched the CIA torture tapes. Or, as you demanded of Saddam Hussein to produce proof that he did not have WMDs, prove that you haven't.

Because, by the way you are denying things and shifting times to prove you didn't know anything about anything, we're assuming you have.

crossposted at American Street

Impeachment?

Not while Bush can pardon everybody including himself.

We just need to wait for Seymour Hersh to start talking to all the eager Bush administration flunkies who are waiting for January 20th to spew. Let all of the information become public. The astonishment and anger will build. Demands will be made to punish those who demanded torture be used, that the Constitution be shredded, that treaties be ignored. As more and more people rat out the Bush cabal, investigations will have to be held. Indictments will have to be given, jail time insisted upon.

If we can't do it ourselves, other countries will try to arrest these war criminals. Bush and Cheney will not be able to travel without fear of arrest. Even though they will probably escape prosecution, they will experience scorn and shaming from their countrymen and colleagues.

Impeachment won't happen. But justice can.

Bush's Legacy: The ideology of lawlessness

Glenn Greenwald talks to Scott Horton, discussing accountability and why it is important to bring the Bush administration to justice:

Glenn Greenwald: My guest today is Scott Horton, who has written the cover story, the cover article for the current edition of Harper's, that explores various approaches for investigating and prosecuting Bush officials for crimes that have been committed over the last eight years. The article is entitled Justice After Bush: Prosecuting an Outlaw Administration.

[snip]

I want to ask about the more general point that you make: that although it's the case that in the past that presidents have broken specific laws, what has happened under the Bush administration is different in kind, not just degree, because what they've really done is assaulted the law itself. That's the argument that you've made. What did you mean by that?

SH: When we look at all these things in tandem, we see that there's a collective attitude that applies across the board, which is, they don't care about criminal law limitations on the power of the president. They believe the president has the right to ride roughshod over them. And in fact, just as a good example: if you look at Barton Gellman's book the Angler [Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency] -- excellent book -- he talks about the formation of the terrorist surveillance policy and its implementation. And he had David Addington, with the authority of Vice President Cheney, telling individuals who are putting in their proposals, to make their proposals completely disregarding the law, including the criminal law restrictions. And indeed, they specifically solicited proposals disregarding the law, and they implemented them disregarding the law -- knowing that they didn't have legitimate legal arguments to avoid the restriction, that they could just do it by force and dint of power and authority.

And they could only do that by getting high-level policy makers and people down the line to accept their position of being above the law. So they did that. They were basically governing via being at war with the law, and that's something that has not happened before. The closest case we had previously was the Nixon administration, but what I think what happened there is bland compared to what happened under George W. Bush.

GG: Yeah, I think it's a point that's often overlooked. We don't have isolated serial cases of law-breaking; it's really an ideology of lawlessness -- a principle that was adopted that the president in general has the right to act outside the law -- that distinguishes it from even the worst law-breakers that have occupied the White House and government agencies.

When I read things like this, my teeth curl with the thought of the Bush cabal escaping unscathed from their eight years of terror. We must have public exposure of their crimes and an accounting. To quote Glenn Greenwald, Scott Horton:

argues that it is imperative to investigate, expose, and prosecute the Bush administration's war crimes, particularly its torture of detainees. Scott sets forth a detailed proposal for how this should be pursued, beginning with the creation of a Truth Commission to expose what was done and to generate public support for further proceedings, followed by prosecution.

A public egging while in the stocks would be a therapeutic start...

And proud of it!

(stolen from American Street)

Killing the messenger

Wikileaks is shut down by a judge. Several mirror sites have gone up in response.

Paul Kiel of TPM:

As for why this California judge ordered the whole site taken down over a few documents, that's not clear. As the BBC reports, "The case was brought by lawyers working for the Swiss banking group Julius Baer. It concerned several documents posted on the site which allegedly reveal that the bank was involved with money laundering and tax evasion." Why didn't the judge just didn't order the documents taken down instead of the whole site? We hope to get some expert guidance on the question.

Update: Just spoke with Steve Aftergood of the Project on Government Secrecy, who offered a clue. "My hunch is that the action was dictated by the practical options. [The judge and Julius Baer] don't know who wikileaks.org is or who the responsible parties are upon whom a court order could be served. What they did know was the U.S. based internet service provider." So they got the ISP to shut the site down. "If they had known who to serve the order to – who represents Wikileaks --, then they might have chosen a more targeted action." Nevertheless, he thought the judge's move was "extraordinary," based as it was on the bank's contention that these were legally protected documents.

A large number of mirror sites have sprung up to counter the judge's move -- sites mirroring not only wikileaks, but also the Julius Baer documents at issue.

"Wikileaks had boasted that they were impervious to censorship," Aftergood told me. "This is the most serious test they've faced in their year-long existence. They may lose their current website, but dozens of mirrors around the world will endure. And I expect they will regroup."

Corporations over people, business over justice. We need to protect our whistleblowers like Sibel Edmonds, Mark Klein, and places like Wikileaks.

Just do it

Impeach.

Molly Ivors of Whiskey Fire:

When a government has been hijacked by antidemocratic forces, the only way to move forward is by going through, not around the crisis. Ask South Africa. Ask Cambodia. And we may get there someday, but probably not for a while.

Wexler's math, such as it is, is more modest. He believes that, faced with a serious threat of impeachment, a Democratic legislative agenda can be pushed through with much less opposition than it currently faces, that laws both popular and necessary can be achieved while they're distracted and trying to figure out what to shred, delete, and erase next.

We have two cars here, and they have two different bumper stickers. One says "Impeach Cheney First." The other says "All We Are Saying Is Give Impeachment a Chance." Hallelujah. Just do it.

The only way to show we still obey laws in this land is to bring lawbreakers to justice. We have had so many impeachable offenses done to our country in the last seven years. Pick one. Bring the Bush cabal to justice or else we will be struggling under an even worse administration in a few years, one that has taken up where Bush and Cheney left off.

Bring the Bush administration and all the neocons responsible to court. Impeach them. Jail them. Make them pay enormous fines because I want my money back.

Give us justice. Show us that the United States of America still governs by the rule of law.

Impeach.

Maybe they'll bring back the rack, too!

I can hardly wait!



(Via billw of Crooks and Liars who has a brilliant pic) Scott Horton of Harper's Magazine:

The Bush Administration is slowly introducing the Court of Star Chamber to the process of American justice. We see its elements everywhere. In the farcical Combat Status Review Tribunals created in Guantánamo, now repeatedly denounced even by judges serving on them as a travesty. In the Military Commissions, crafted in conscious avoidance of the standards both of American military and civilian justice. And in the steady press to lower the standards of our federal courts to introduce practices that continually tip the scales of justice in favor of prosecutors. Reports have begun to circulate that the Administration has put together a group of scholars headed by a right-wing activist judge to craft legislation to introduce a new court of Star Chamber, perhaps to be floated in the coming year. As we see in the public pronouncements of the Bush Administration, accusations leveled at detainees in the war on terror are leveled for political effect, and often to parallel partisan political campaigns. If those accusations are rejected by a court, it therefore undermines confidence in the Administration and the Party. Which is why, in the Bush view of justice, a failure to convict is unacceptable. And which is why the Bush view of justice is no justice at all.

Ve ver only followink orders

Gitmo justice:
"The prisoner had seen just a brief summary of what officials said was a thick dossier of intelligence linking him to Al Qaeda. He had not seen his own legal papers since they were taken away in an unrelated investigation. He has lawyers working on his behalf in Washington, London and Pakistan, but here his only assistance came from an Army lieutenant colonel, who stumbled as he read the prisoner’s handwritten statement.

As the hearing concluded, the detainee, who cannot be identified publicly under military rules, had a question. He is a citizen of Pakistan, he noted. He was arrested on a business trip to Thailand. On what authority or charges was he even being held?

“That question,” a Marine colonel presiding over the panel answered, “is outside the limits of what this board is permitted to consider.”"