The ongoing national disgrace of lawless indefinite detentions:

Stories

Unclaimed Territory – by Glenn Greenwald:

The ongoing national disgrace of lawless indefinite detentions

I’ve honestly run out of adjectives to use when discussing the Bush administration’s treatment of U.S. citizen Jose Padilla. Last month, I wrote about the torture — there is no other accurate word for it — to which Padilla alleges, quite credibly, he was subjected over the 3 1/2 years of his lawless detention. Today, The New York Times describes the apparently jarring video showing a completely dehumanized Padilla being transported from his black hole to a dentist visit. The article includes an assessment from a psychologist describing how Padilla’s humanity has basically been extinguished by his treatment.

Digby says everything that needs to be said about how depraved this specific behavior is. And any decent human being can see that for themselves. It is as self-evident as anything can be. So I want to make a few additional observations about this revelation:

(1) We are only learning about what was done to Padilla because, after 3 1/2 years of being held without any charges, he is now in the criminal judicial system and the Government’s conduct and its allegations against Padilla are both now being subjected to scrutiny (just like the pre-9/11 Founders intended and explicitly required).

But if the Bush administration had its way, Padilla would still be languishing in solitary confinement — prohibited from any contact with the outside world, including lawyers — and detained without any charges at all. Bush officials did not voluntarily indict him and transfer him to the judicial system because they suddenly woke up one day and realized that American citizens shouldn’t be imprisoned for years and years without due process. To the contrary, they still believe they have the power to detain U.S. citizens in that manner.

They only brought charges against Padilla in November, 2005 — and transferred him from his military brig to a federal prison — because the Supreme Court was set to rule on the legality of their treatment of Padilla, something they were desperate to avoid. By indicting him and finally allowing him to contest the accusations in court, the administration was able to argue — successfully — that the Supreme Court should dismiss Padilla’s case because the relief he was seeking (i.e., either be charged or released) was now granted and his claims were therefore “moot.”

But the administration continues to argue that it has the power to detain U.S. citizens — including those, like Padilla, detained not on a “battlefield,” but on U.S. soil — indefinitely and without any charges being brought. Nothing has changed in that regard.

(2) The Bush administration “justified” its treatment of Padilla through rank fear-mongering — having John Aschroft flamboyantly brand him “the Dirty Bomber” and then leak to the press over the next two years that he wanted to blow up apartment buildings. But the indictment contained none of those allegations (because the “evidence” on which they were based was flimsy from the start and, independently, was unusable because it was obtained via torture). Instead, the Indictment merely recites the vaguest possible terrorism-related conspiracy accusations against Padilla.

Now that they are forced to defend their accusations in court, the Bush administration’s case against Padilla has been revealed to be incredibly weak, as Dan Eggen’s typically excellent article in The Washington Post last month detailed:

But now, nearly a year after his abrupt transfer into a regular criminal court, the Justice Department’s prosecution of the former Chicago gang member is running into trouble.

A Republican-appointed federal judge in Miami has already dumped the most serious conspiracy count against Padilla, removing for now the possibility of a life sentence. The same judge has also disparaged the government’s case as “light on facts,” while defense lawyers have made detailed allegations that Padilla was illegally tortured, threatened and perhaps even drugged during his detention at a Navy brig in South Carolina. . . .

But some legal scholars and defense lawyers argue that the government’s case is so fundamentally weak, and its legal options so limited, that Padilla could draw a relatively minor prison term or even be acquitted. The trial has already been postponed once, until January, and is almost certain to be delayed again.

It should go without saying (though I have no doubt that, for some, it does not) that whether Padilla is ultimately found guilty has absolutely no bearing on the disgraceful crime of detaining him with no charges for years and torturing him.

But the fact that the case against Padilla is so weak ought to cause any rational person to understand the dangers of vesting the power in the President to order people imprisoned forever without any real judicial process. Unfortunately for the U.S., the majority of the Military-Commissions-Act-approving 109th Congress was not composed of people who reason that way or who actually believe in the way America was designed to work.

(3) As Jeralyn Meritt said yesterday with profound understatement: “There should be a greater outcry over this.” As I have said many times, the most astounding and disturbing fact over the last five years — and there is a very stiff competition for that title — is that we have collectively really just sat by while the U.S. Government arrests and detains people, including U.S. citizens, and then imprisons them for years without any charges of any kind. What does it say about our country that not only does our Government do that, but that we don’t really seem to mind much?

Along those lines, it is hard to express the contempt merited by the drooling sociopaths who not only endorse this behavior but, with what can only be described as serious derangement, laugh about it and revel in its cruelty and its lawlessness. Here is Boston Herald columnist and hero to the most rabid Bush followers, Jules Crittenden:

I Think We’re Supposed to Feel Bad About This

NYT offers up a day in the life of Jose Padilla. You may recall he is the gentleman from Chicago who converted to Islam, hobnobbed with al Qaeda, and, our
government has alleged, came back here with a plan to blow up apartment buildings, and now apparently lives in a state of virtual sensory deprivation while awaiting trial on charges of providing support to terrorists. A big day for Jose is having a root canal done.

Posted by jules crittenden at 1:41 AM

Of course, “our government” has not alleged that Padilla tried to “blow up apartment buildings.” They “alleged” that only through leaks to the press, but in the actual Indictment, they alleged nothing of the sort, opting instead to rely on charges of “terrorism” so vague and bereft of substance that Padilla’s lawyers have barely been able to figure out what he is being charged with and the Federal Judge has demanded more specificity.

But this is America. We don’t need any of those 9/10-era indictments, trials and convictions. Once “our government” — through “our Leader” — unilaterally decrees, in secret, that someone is a Terrorist, there is no punishment too severe for them. And we must allow our Leaders this power, otherwise our freedoms might be threatened by Terrorists.

(4) The Bush administration currently has in its custody 14,000 human beings around the world (at least) who have never been charged with any crime (needless to say, we’re not entitled to know the number or what is being done with them, because that’s Secret, like everything else). That includes legal residents of the U.S. detained on U.S. soil and a photojournalist for The Associated Press in Iraq whose photographs of the war Bush followers disliked — all simply decreed to be Guilty and held indefinitely with no process of any kind, undoubtedly in many cases subjected to the same treatment to which Padilla was subjected, if not worse.

The value of the Padilla case is that some light will at least finally be shined on the behavior of the Bush administration in its treatment of these detainees, because they will be forced to disclose information about what they have done. Between the truth-producing weapons of the criminal justice system and the imminent Congressional investigations, this relatively mundane video is only the beginning of what will be revealed in this area. It remains to be seen what the consequences of all of this will be, if any, for those who have perpetrated it.

UPDATE: Atrios has some observations regarding the effects of prolonged solitary confinement — a tiny fraction of what was done to Padilla. I had a client once who was charged with various crimes completely unrelated to the Epic Global War of Civilizations. Nonetheless, under legislation enacted in the aftermath of 9/11, he was declared by Attorney General Ashcroft to be a “domestic terrorist” and, as a result, was kept in his tiny cell, in solitary confinement, for 23 out of 24 hours a day, allowed one hour for “recreation,” by himself, in an indoor recreation room. His contact with the outside world was extremely limited.

He had no history or prior signs of mental illness. But within six months of confinement under those conditions, he was forced to take large doses of anti-depressants after he attempted suicide. His behavior changed palpably — fundamentally — and he became extremely passive and, a short time thereafter, was visibly broken. All of that occurred before he was convicted of any crime.

There are punishments as bad as, and in some cases worse than, execution. It takes a truly authoritarian mind — and a decisively un-American mentality — to want to vest the power to mete out those punishments in a Leader unburdened by the need to prove guilt.

Mindless irresponsibility seguing into dyspeptic irresponsibility.

Stories

roger said…

Actually, this is known as economizing, and should be done more often. All the war pundits can have the same piece copied and published in their usual places, and then, every six months, they can change it, usually to find somebody to blame for the total failure of what they have been advising. The Perle-to-Krauthammer stretch (I wanted a war with more closet space! A-and a jacuzzi! This war is really yucky and old. When are we going to get the war on Iran, Daddy!) is fascinating to watch – mindless irresponsibility seguing into dyspeptic irresponsibility.

So Foers might be on to something.

The president's power to imprison people forever

Stories

War Room – Salon.com:

The president’s power to imprison people forever

The administration is obviously aware of the transparent, and really quite pitiful, election-based fear that is consuming Democrats and rendering them unwilling to impede (or even object to) the administration’s seizure of more and more unchecked power in the name of fighting terrorism. As a result of this abdication by the Democrats, the Washington Post reports, the administration spent the weekend expanding even further the already-extraordinary torture and detention powers vested in it by the McCain-Warner-Graham “compromise.” To illustrate just how profoundly dangerous these powers are, it is worthwhile to review a specific, current case of an actual detainee in the administration’s custody.

Bilal Hussein is an Associated Press photographer and Iraqi citizen who has been imprisoned by the U.S. military in Iraq for more than five months, with no charges of any kind. Prior to that, he was repeatedly accused by right-wing blogs of being in cahoots with Iraqi insurgents based on the content of his photojournalism — accusations often based on allegations that proved to be completely fabricated and fictitious. The U.S. military now claims that Hussein has been lending “support” to the Iraqi insurgents, whereas Hussein maintains that his only association with them is to report on their activities as a journalist. But Hussein has no ability to contest the accusations against him or prove his innocence because the military is simply detaining him indefinitely and refusing even to charge him.

Under the military commission legislation blessed by our Guardians of Liberty in the Senate — such as John McCain and Lindsey Graham — the U.S. military could move Hussein to Guantánamo tomorrow and keep him there for the rest of his life, and he would have absolutely no recourse of any kind. It does not need to bring him before a military commission (the military only has to do that if it wants to execute someone) and as long as it doesn’t, he is blocked from seeking an order from a U.S. federal court to release him on the ground that he is completely innocent. As part of his permanent imprisonment, the military could even subject him to torture and he would have no legal recourse whatsoever to contest his detention or his treatment. As Johns Hopkins professor Hilary Bok points out, even the use of the most extreme torture techniques that are criminalized will be immune from any real challenge, since only the government (rather than detainees) will be able to enforce such prohibitions.

Put another way, this bill would give the Bush administration the power to imprison people for their entire lives, literally, without so much as charging them with any wrongdoing or giving them any forum in which to contest the accusations against them. It thus vests in the administration the singularly most tyrannical power that exists — namely, the power unilaterally to decree someone guilty of a crime and to condemn the accused to eternal imprisonment without having even to charge him with a crime, let alone defend the validity of those accusations. Just to look at one ramification, does one even need to debate whether this newly vested power of indefinite imprisonment would affect the willingness of foreign journalists to report on the activities of the Bush administration? Do Americans really want our government to have this power?

The changes that the administration reportedly secured over the weekend for this “compromise” legislation make an already dangerous bill much worse. Specifically, the changes expand the definition of who can be declared an “enemy combatant” (and therefore permanently detained and tortured) from someone who has “engaged in hostilities against the United States” (meaning actually participated in war on a battlefield) to someone who has merely “purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.”

Expanding the definition in that way would authorize, as Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies points out, the administration’s “seizure and indefinite detention of people far from the battlefield.” The administration would be able to abduct anyone, anywhere in the world, whom George W. Bush secretly decrees has “supported” hostilities against the United States. And then they could imprison any such persons at Guantánamo — even torture them — forever, without ever having to prove anything to any tribunal or commission. (The Post story also asserts that the newly worded legislation “does not rule out the possibility of designating a U.S. citizen as an unlawful combatant,” although the Supreme Court ruled [in the 2004 case of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld] that there are constitutional limits on the government’s ability to detain U.S. citizens without due process.)

The tyrannical nature of these powers is not merely theoretical. The Bush administration has already imprisoned two American citizens — Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi — and held them in solitary confinement in a military prison while claiming the power to do so indefinitely and without ever having to bring charges. And now, it is about to obtain (with the acquiescence, if not outright support, of Senate Democrats) the express statutory power to detain people permanently (while subjecting them, for good measure, to torture) without providing any venue to contest the validity of their detention. And as Democrats sit meekly by, the detention authority the administration is about to obtain continues — literally each day — to expand, and now includes some of the most dangerous and unchecked powers a government can have.

— Glenn Greenwald

All Roads Seemed to Lead to Rome in New York City This Week

Stories

 New York Magazine:

When in Rome

* By Mark Adams

For VII days, all roads seemed to lead to Rome. Emperor George Bush suffered an Et tu? moment when Jordan’s King Abdullah II and Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki stuck a last-minute dagger in his plans for a triumphant triumvirate dinner. The Baker-Hamilton commission recommended pulling the Army legions out of Iraq; the Pentagon’s Cincinnatus, Colin Powell, crossed the rhetorical Rubicon and called the conflict a civil war. (The president declared that the die was cast, and that “we can accept nothing less than victory.”) Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad asked Americans to lend him their ears, so that he could explain how the U.S. is too supportive of Zionists. Homeland Security gladiator Michael Chertoff offered a mea culpa for throwing New York City’s anti-terror funding to the lions. After cops shot a bridegroom 50 times, Ciceronian orator Al Sharpton came, saw, and conquered the media moment, even as Queens threatened to burn. Albany consuls Pataki and Spitzer bemoaned the decline and fall of the Empire State’s health-care system and backed the closing of five city hospitals with a hearty “Excelsior!” (Pataki, aware that tempus fugit, also rushed to push through the Atlantic Yards coliseum.) A Cleopatran Craigslist cutie was busted for trying to extort $125,000 from a Pepsi executive. Danny DeVito had watchers of The View running for the vomitorium after boozily bragging about the Caligulan delights he’d enjoyed on an overnight White House stay. (“Every place in that bedroom was, ah, utilized,” he slurred to a horrified Barbara Walters.) 30 Rock’s Tracy Morgan had his own in vino veritas moment during a Henry Hudson Parkway drunk-driving bust, tipsily telling cops he’d “had some beers.” Nascar held a chariot race in midtown. Coney Island’s Astroland—the Circus Maximus of Tilt-a-Whirl parks—was sold to a developer. Scientists determined that an artifact found aboard a sunken Roman ship was a 2,000-year-old astronomical computer. And soothsayers saw bad omens in the entrails of John Gotti’s grandson’s arrest report: pills, pot, and a barbarically unflattering Caesar haircut

‘Let’s take that 60 percent approval rating out for a spin, see what it gets us.’ ”

Stories

Bloomberg for President? — New York Magazine:

‘Let’s take that 60 percent approval rating out for a spin, see what it gets us.’

His American Dream

The Bloomberg-for-president scenario starts with the mayor’s growing sense of himself as a man of destiny. Throw in the country’s disgust with the two parties, add a half-a-billion bucks, and you’ve got yourself a race.

Because freedumb isn’t free!

Stories

Welcome to AJC! | ajc.com:

Because freedumb isn’t free! We just had to fight for it, quit asking me why and making me think, you’re making my head hurt. Besides, dissent is treason. I know, I know, the original argument was about WMD, and that wasn’t anywhere to be found. We can’t dwell on the past now, we must move on. Troops are on the ground now, and we need to show support. The message is that you should say whatever you have to say to get a war started, and we will feel obligated to keep it going. That’s just how it is. Don’t think we won’t get you later on for lying! In the meantime, let’s blow some limbs around! WooHoo! You know, you should go over there and freedomize something, then see if you ask why. Take a freedom bullet, put it in your freedom gun, and send some freedom into someone. Maybe you can get some freedom in you, too. Then, you can come home and vote. Yep. Haven’t you heard? Ever since Iraq threatened our freedom, of course we couldn’t vote or speak freely, but since we went over there and fought to keep us free, the Iraqis were forced to stop screwing with our democratic processes, and we are free once again. Go Freedom! Fly on, oh proud Eagle!

The Uncovered War: Permanent Bases in Iraq:

Stories

The Uncovered War: Permanent Bases in Iraq:

Liberation and liberal democracy were never the real reasons for the war to begin with. Those were just inserted in as throw enough mud to the wall and see what sticks policy. Let’s go through the litany, shall we?

1. Weapons of Mass destruction 3. America was in imminent danger from attack by Iraq (unmanned arial vehicles) 3. Ties to terrorists groups, namely Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda 4. Alleged ties to the Sept 11 War against Terror 5. Remake the Middle East 6. Fight them there so we don’t fight them here 7. Liberate Iraqis from Saddam Hussein 8. Establish Democracy in Iraq 9. Stop terror groups from getting their hands on the oil in Iraq 10. Stop the Iranians from taking control of Iraq 11. Establish safety for the state of Israel

Must we go on? I am quite sure that there are about 100 more rationales rolled out since last night for this war on Bush’s list that I have forgotten to mention……………

"Are you sure about that? That's not what I hear around TIME."

Stories

firedoglake: 12/01/2005 – 12/31/2005:

Toward the end of one of our meetings, I remember Luskin looking at me and saying something to the effect of “Karl doesn’t have a Cooper problem. He was not a source for Matt.” I responded instinctively, thinking he was trying to spin me, and said something like, “Are you sure about that? That’s not what I hear around TIME

Viveca Novak: BELTWAY CLUBHOUSE PERSON OF THE MONTH

Stories

Loose lips sink Viveca Novak’s career | Needlenose:

The week of Oct. 24, 2005, was Indictment Week. . . . It seemed clear that Scooter Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was in deep trouble, but Rove’s status was uncertain. Sometime during that week, Luskin, who was talking at length with Fitzgerald, phoned me and said he had disclosed to Fitzgerald the content of a conversation he and I had had at Cafe Deluxe more than a year earlier and that Fitzgerald might want to talk to me.

Luskin clearly thought that was going to help Rove, perhaps by explaining why Rove hadn’t told Fitzgerald or the grand jury of his conversation with my colleague Matt Cooper about former Ambassador Joe Wilson’s wife until well into the inquiry. . . .

. . . Here’s what happened. Toward the end of one of our meetings, I remember Luskin looking at me and saying something to the effect of “Karl doesn’t have a Cooper problem. He was not a source for Matt.” I responded instinctively, thinking he was trying to spin me, and said something like, “Are you sure about that? That’s not what I hear around TIME.” He looked surprised and very serious. “There’s nothing in the phone logs,” he said.

. . . I was taken aback that he seemed so surprised. . . . I hadn’t intended to tip Luskin off to anything. . . . Luskin walked me to my car and said something like, “Thank you. This is important.”

Bob Woodward, the Dumb Blonde of American Journalism

Stories

The Blog | Arianna Huffington:

Each day brings slam-dunk evidence that the doomsday threats marshaled by the administration to sell the war weren’t, in Cheney-speak, just dishonest and reprehensible but also corrupt and shameless… The web of half-truths and falsehoods used to sell the war did not happen by accident; it was woven by design and then foisted on the public by a P.R. operation built expressly for that purpose in the White House.