March 19th, 2006
Just finished listening to a very moving radio piece from This American Life — an amazing public radio show that every week brings the sort of stories to its audience that informs, moves and presents the world as if one were seeing it for the first time. This week This American Life brought us the stories of some Guantanamo Prison detainees. These are men so dangerous, so monstrous that the Bush Administration had to build a prison camp 90 miles outside of the US, so that these men, err, terrorists, could not harm American citizens… well, at least that’s what Administration tells us.
Of course, given all that we’ve learned about this incompetent Republican Administration over the past five years, if one still believes what comes out of their press office, then one might as well still believe in the tooth fairy, that clouds are made of cotton and that the moon is composed of cheese — only children are excused for believing in such fantasies. As this week’s This American Life episode shows us, much — if not all — that the Bush Administration has told us of the men imprisoned at Guantanamo are plain lies. For instance, according to stats mentioned in the program, only 5% of the Guantanamo detainees were processed by US forces in the field of battle; instead, the vast majority of the prisoners were handed over by "bounty hunters" in Afghanistan and elsewhere, looking to cash in on the reported $5,000 to $10,000 per head that the US military was offering locals in exchange for Al Queda or Taliban fighters. Now, one can easily imagine that, in a lawless country, like Afghanistan was right after the US invasion, that some opportunistic men would take advantage of such a situation and collect what must be a tidy sum for that part of the world — and keep in mind how much more difficult it all must have been to sort things out in the middle of an armed conflict, with language barriers and all, where virtually anybody could be the enemy… well, these are the conditions that ensnared many unwitting and innocent young men, some of which are now in Guantanamo, where they can do no harm to American citizens — and, too, where the Bush Administration does not have to abide by habeas corpus.
The radio episode also asks some more substantive questions about our legal system and about whether the current Administration has violated the long held principled of habeas corpus — a principle that’s at the very heart of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence and, too, a principle that was at the center of our American Revolution. Now, it is unmistakably clear to me that, yes, the Bush Administration has lied to us about virtually everything that’s happened since 9/11, just as it is unmistakably clear to me that this Republican president has violated and soiled the founding principles of the American Revolution; yet, in spite of it all, the most harden of his supporters, the self-deluded morons that consider themselves uber-patriots, are complicit with the Bush Administration in betraying the spirit and legacy of our nation’s war for independence.
Here’s a synopsis of this week’s This American Life episode:
The right of habeas corpus has been a part of this country’s legal tradition longer than we’ve actually been a country. It means the government has to explain why it’s holding a person in custody. But now, the war on terror has nixed many of the rules we used to think of as fundamental. At Guantanamo Bay, our government initially claimed that the prisoners should not be covered by habeas – or even by the Geneva Conventions – because they’re the most fearsome terrorist enemies we have. But is that true? Is it a camp full of terrorists, or a camp full of our mistakes?
And you can hear this week’s episode here — it’s a great show, as always.
May 17th, 2005
Billmon has it right, this is a scene we’d like to see:
Defendants in the dock at the Ango-American War Crimes Trial of 2010, held at The Hague under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.[...]
The remaining defendants were sentenced to life terms at the Guantanamo War Crimes Penitentiary — the same facility used to imprison the remaining leaders of the Al Qaeda terrorist organization, whose own war crimes trial began shortly after this picture was taken.
April 24th, 2005
I am dishearten and disgusted by the army’s decision on the Abu Ghraib torture investigation:
The US army investigation into the torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib has cleared four out of five top officers of any responsibility for the scandal that shocked America and the world. [
Guardian Unlimited -April 24, 2005]
So, while low ranking enlisted personnel are prosecuted and convicted for torture and abuse:
The conviction and sentencing of a U.S. Army reservist, Charles Graner Jr., for abusing Iraqi prisoners has raised the question of whether higher-ranking military officials will face prosecution for the abuses at Abu Ghraib and other prisons that hold insurgents captured in Iraq and Afghanistan.
[...]
More than 130 mostly low-ranking members of the military have been disciplined or face courts-martial on abuse-related charges, according to the Pentagon. Lieutenant Colonel Barry Venable, a Pentagon spokesman, said Sunday that he did not know whether others would be charged.
Graner’s defense team argued during his trial at Ford Hood, Texas, that he had been following orders from military intelligence officers and others. Lawyers said the officers had wanted him to “soften up” detainees to provide information about anti-American insurgents or planned attacks.
[...]
Critics suggest that responsibility for Abu Ghraib and similar abuses goes as high as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who temporarily authorized interrogators to use dogs to terrorize prisoners, and the former CIA chief, George Tenet, whose agency kept some detainees hidden from Red Cross inspectors. They also point to Alberto Gonzales, who as White House counsel wrote memos justifying use of torture against terror suspects. He is now the attorney general-designate. [International Herald Tribune - January 20, 2005]
Whatever happened to concepts like “Chain of Command” and “Command Responsibility“? Heck, we need not rely on such fancy terms simply to ask, What happened to decency, common sense and accountability? There’s no way that the abuses committed at Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere, — as documented here and here and here — were somehow carried out by bunch of “low-ranking” military men and women unbeknownst to their commanding officers… there’s just no way! You and I know that those further up the chain of command knew what was taking place:
Of course those further up the chain, all the way up up the chain, knew about what was taking place in Abu Ghraib — in fact, they planned on it all along (PDF):
I know that the army’s decision to clear the top brass of responsibility on the Abu Ghraib torture matter has been covered already; however, I just needed to comment on it for myself. Because, to me, the unjustified Iraq war and the Abu Ghraib tortures, in particular, embody and encapsulate what I see in my mind’s eye when I think of the Bush administration; and, please, understand that I’m not a so-called “pacifist” nor am I strictly opposed to the use of military force, — in fact, on more than on one occasion I’ve sworn to protect and bear arms on behalf of the United States and in defense of the Constitution (and I would do so without hesitation) — however, the Bush administration’s unjustified invasion of Iraq represents a direct assault against the best ideals that American democracy has stood for:
- Accountability to the people
- Tolerance and pluralism
- Shared sacrifice and responsibility
- Transparent and responsive government
- And an “honest broker” abroad
What the Bush administration has done under the guise of “defending America” has, instead, eroded our liberties at home (i.e., so-called patriot act) and isolated us from much of the world; and, unconscionably, Bush & Co. are getting away with it.
