The Raw Story | GOP talking points on ethics obtained; Dems targeted in battle: "
Even before the measure was taken to the full Rules Committee in the House—or the full House—Republicans were circulating talking points seeking to portray the reversal on ethics rules as Democratic foul play, RAW STORY has learned.
The talking points, reproduced below, suggest that Democrats sought to derail the ethics process, though it was Republicans who forced through a controversial ethics page in January that gave the Republican majority the upper hand on a committee that was supposed to be bipartisan.
..
"The Democratic intransigence clearly indicates their intention to use the ethics process as a tool in their political arsenal. Their cynical attempt to corrupt the process by injecting partisan rancor is odious , and will be seen for what it is--partisan hackery in the guise of "good government"
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Democrats furious over GOP efforts to rewrite amendments: rewritten as amendments designed to protect sexual predators
The Raw Story | Democrats furious over GOP efforts to rewrite amendments: "
Democrats in the House are furious over what they see as a deliberate attempt by Republicans to rewrite Democratic amendments to make the Democrats amendments look preposterous, RAW STORY has learned.
The Republican-written rewrites, along with the Democratic description of the amendments, follows. RAW STORY has also learned that Republicans have not rewritten similar amendments in the past. A copy from the Congressional record in 2002 is included below, showing the "neutral" language used in a previous Congress.
...
"The Rules Committee discovered yesterday that the Judiciary Committee Report on this very bill, which was authored by the Majority Staff, contained amendment summaries which had been re-written by committee staff for the sole purpose of distorting the original intent of the authors.
"This Committee Report took liberty to mischaracterize and even falsify the intent of several amendments offered in Committee by Democratic Members of this body.
"At least five amendments to this bill, which were designed to protect the rights of family members and innocent bystanders from prosecution under this bill, were rewritten as amendments designed to protect sexual predators from prosecution and were then included in the committee report as if that was the original intent of the authors. The thing is, sexual predators were not mentioned anywhere in any of these amendments.
Democrats in the House are furious over what they see as a deliberate attempt by Republicans to rewrite Democratic amendments to make the Democrats amendments look preposterous, RAW STORY has learned.
The Republican-written rewrites, along with the Democratic description of the amendments, follows. RAW STORY has also learned that Republicans have not rewritten similar amendments in the past. A copy from the Congressional record in 2002 is included below, showing the "neutral" language used in a previous Congress.
...
"The Rules Committee discovered yesterday that the Judiciary Committee Report on this very bill, which was authored by the Majority Staff, contained amendment summaries which had been re-written by committee staff for the sole purpose of distorting the original intent of the authors.
"This Committee Report took liberty to mischaracterize and even falsify the intent of several amendments offered in Committee by Democratic Members of this body.
"At least five amendments to this bill, which were designed to protect the rights of family members and innocent bystanders from prosecution under this bill, were rewritten as amendments designed to protect sexual predators from prosecution and were then included in the committee report as if that was the original intent of the authors. The thing is, sexual predators were not mentioned anywhere in any of these amendments.
All five Republicans on the House ethics committee have financial links to Tom DeLay ... [ who they may have to investigate]
USATODAY.com - Donations link DeLay, ethics panel: "Posted 4/26/2005 11:26 PM | By Jim Drinkard, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — All five Republicans on the House ethics committee have financial links to Tom DeLay that could raise conflict-of-interest issues should the panel investigate the GOP majority leader.
Public records show DeLay's leadership political action committee (PAC) gave $15,000 to the campaign of Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Pa. — $10,000 in 2000 and $5,000 in 2002. Hart would chair a panel to investigate DeLay if the committee moves forward with a probe.
The same political committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, also has donated to the campaigns of ethics Chairman Doc Hastings of Washington, Judy Biggert of Illinois and Tom Cole of Oklahoma. They are among scores of Republicans DeLay has contributed to. Cole and the remaining committee Republican, Lamar Smith of Texas, contributed to DeLay's legal defense fund. (Related link: Donations from Americans for Republican Majority)
There is precedent for ethics panel members recusing themselves when such conflict issues arise. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., stepped aside in 2002 in the case of then-senator Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., accused of financial misconduct. Reid had given $500 to Torricelli's legal defense fund. "Recusal is pretty much an individual choice, if there is any possibility of a conflict of interest," said Donald Ritchie, a Senate historian. ...
...
The ethics committee has admonished DeLay five times since 1997, more than any current member of Congress. ...
A DeLay investigation cannot be launched because the committee hasn't been able to solve a dispute over its rules. Rep. Alan Mollohan and other Democrats refuse to adopt the rules, saying they are designed to protect DeLay and would allow either party to protect members by refusing to act on complaints.
WASHINGTON — All five Republicans on the House ethics committee have financial links to Tom DeLay that could raise conflict-of-interest issues should the panel investigate the GOP majority leader.
Public records show DeLay's leadership political action committee (PAC) gave $15,000 to the campaign of Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Pa. — $10,000 in 2000 and $5,000 in 2002. Hart would chair a panel to investigate DeLay if the committee moves forward with a probe.
The same political committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, also has donated to the campaigns of ethics Chairman Doc Hastings of Washington, Judy Biggert of Illinois and Tom Cole of Oklahoma. They are among scores of Republicans DeLay has contributed to. Cole and the remaining committee Republican, Lamar Smith of Texas, contributed to DeLay's legal defense fund. (Related link: Donations from Americans for Republican Majority)
There is precedent for ethics panel members recusing themselves when such conflict issues arise. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., stepped aside in 2002 in the case of then-senator Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., accused of financial misconduct. Reid had given $500 to Torricelli's legal defense fund. "Recusal is pretty much an individual choice, if there is any possibility of a conflict of interest," said Donald Ritchie, a Senate historian. ...
...
The ethics committee has admonished DeLay five times since 1997, more than any current member of Congress. ...
A DeLay investigation cannot be launched because the committee hasn't been able to solve a dispute over its rules. Rep. Alan Mollohan and other Democrats refuse to adopt the rules, saying they are designed to protect DeLay and would allow either party to protect members by refusing to act on complaints.
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Obstruction of justice? investigations into child sex abuse claims: keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulth
Salon.com News | Obstruction of justice?: "Obstruction of justice? | In a confidential 2001 letter, the new pope ordered bishops to keep allegations of pedophilia secret. | By Jamie Doward | April 25, 2005
Pope Benedict XVI faced claims Saturday night that he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged that he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims would be carried out in secret. The order was made in a confidential letter, obtained by the Observer, which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.
It asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. The letter was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was elected as John Paul II's successor last week."
Pope Benedict XVI faced claims Saturday night that he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged that he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims would be carried out in secret. The order was made in a confidential letter, obtained by the Observer, which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.
It asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. The letter was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was elected as John Paul II's successor last week."
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men
The New York Times > International > Middle East > Marines From Iraq Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men: "By MICHAEL MOSS | Published: April 25, 2005
...
They were not the only losses for Company E during its six-month stint last year in Ramadi. In all, more than one-third of the unit's 185 troops were killed or wounded, the highest casualty rate of any company in the war, Marine Corps officials say.
In returning home, the leaders and Marine infantrymen have chosen to break an institutional code of silence and tell their story, one they say was punctuated not only by a lack of armor, but also by a shortage of men and planning that further hampered their efforts in battle, destroyed morale and ruined the careers of some of their fiercest warriors.
...
Sergeant Valerio and others had to scrounge for metal scraps to strengthen the Humvees they inherited from the National Guard, which occupied Ramadi before the marines arrived. Among other problems, the armor the marines slapped together included heavier doors that could not be latched, so they "chicken winged it" by holding them shut with their arms as they traveled.
"We were sitting out in the open, an easy target for everybody," Cpl. Toby G. Winn of Centerville, Tex., said of the shortages. "We complained about it every day, to anybody we could. They told us they were listening, but we didn't see it."
The company leaders say it is impossible to know how many lives may have been saved through better protection, since the insurgents became adept at overcoming improved defenses with more powerful weapons. Likewise, Pentagon officials say they do not know how many of the more than 1,500 American troops who have died in the war had insufficient protective gear.
...
They were not the only losses for Company E during its six-month stint last year in Ramadi. In all, more than one-third of the unit's 185 troops were killed or wounded, the highest casualty rate of any company in the war, Marine Corps officials say.
In returning home, the leaders and Marine infantrymen have chosen to break an institutional code of silence and tell their story, one they say was punctuated not only by a lack of armor, but also by a shortage of men and planning that further hampered their efforts in battle, destroyed morale and ruined the careers of some of their fiercest warriors.
...
Sergeant Valerio and others had to scrounge for metal scraps to strengthen the Humvees they inherited from the National Guard, which occupied Ramadi before the marines arrived. Among other problems, the armor the marines slapped together included heavier doors that could not be latched, so they "chicken winged it" by holding them shut with their arms as they traveled.
"We were sitting out in the open, an easy target for everybody," Cpl. Toby G. Winn of Centerville, Tex., said of the shortages. "We complained about it every day, to anybody we could. They told us they were listening, but we didn't see it."
The company leaders say it is impossible to know how many lives may have been saved through better protection, since the insurgents became adept at overcoming improved defenses with more powerful weapons. Likewise, Pentagon officials say they do not know how many of the more than 1,500 American troops who have died in the war had insufficient protective gear.
66% of Americans believe prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan have been tortured by Americans [... but no reactions?]
::.Angus Reid Consultants.::: "April 22, 2005 | Americans Believe Soldiers Tortured Detainees
...
Do you believe that any prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan have been tortured by Americans?
Yes ... 66% No ... 32% Not sure / Refused ... 2%
Source: Harris Interactive
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,010 American adults, conducted from Apr. 5 to Apr. 10, 2005. Margin of error is 3 per cent.
...
Do you believe that any prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan have been tortured by Americans?
Yes ... 66% No ... 32% Not sure / Refused ... 2%
Source: Harris Interactive
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,010 American adults, conducted from Apr. 5 to Apr. 10, 2005. Margin of error is 3 per cent.
Three years of torture: smearing his face with human excrement, starving him of food, and withdrawing light and clothing
News: "US guards at Guantanamo tortured me, says UK man | By Severin Carrell | 24 April 2005
A British resident has claimed he was tortured by US guards at Guantanamo Bay, suffering violent sexual assaults, near drowning and an attack in which he was blinded.
The Independent on Sunday has been given a detailed account from Omar Deghayes of repeated abuse by American and Pakistani interrogators over the past three years including electric shocks and sodomy by US guards.
The allegations, made by human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, have persuaded British ministers to take up Mr Deghayes's case.
In some of the most disturbing allegations to emerge from Guantanamo, Mr Deghayes also accuses US and Pakistani interrogators of beating him repeatedly since his arrest three years ago, smearing his face with human excrement, starving him of food, and withdrawing light and clothing.
...
* Members of the US "extreme reaction force" at Guantanamo Bay blinded him in his already weak right eye with Mace riot control gas and by gouging it with a finger;
* At Bagram airbase, Afghanistan, US guards allegedly sodomised five detainees, and forced petrol and benzene into the anuses of others;
...
The claims are understood to have shocked the Foreign Office minister Baroness Symons, and played a major part in the Government's decision to directly intervene in the cases of five British residents still held at Guantanamo Bay. Until now, the UK has refused to intervene.
...
Mr Deghayes was terrorised by one technique - shoving prisoners into a chamber nicknamed the "snake room". The Libyan claimed: "One day they took me to a room that had very large snakes in glass boxes. The room was painted black and white, with dim lights. They threatened to leave me there, and let the snakes out with me in the room. This really got to me, as these were such sick people that they must have had this room specially made."
A British resident has claimed he was tortured by US guards at Guantanamo Bay, suffering violent sexual assaults, near drowning and an attack in which he was blinded.
The Independent on Sunday has been given a detailed account from Omar Deghayes of repeated abuse by American and Pakistani interrogators over the past three years including electric shocks and sodomy by US guards.
The allegations, made by human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, have persuaded British ministers to take up Mr Deghayes's case.
In some of the most disturbing allegations to emerge from Guantanamo, Mr Deghayes also accuses US and Pakistani interrogators of beating him repeatedly since his arrest three years ago, smearing his face with human excrement, starving him of food, and withdrawing light and clothing.
...
* Members of the US "extreme reaction force" at Guantanamo Bay blinded him in his already weak right eye with Mace riot control gas and by gouging it with a finger;
* At Bagram airbase, Afghanistan, US guards allegedly sodomised five detainees, and forced petrol and benzene into the anuses of others;
...
The claims are understood to have shocked the Foreign Office minister Baroness Symons, and played a major part in the Government's decision to directly intervene in the cases of five British residents still held at Guantanamo Bay. Until now, the UK has refused to intervene.
...
Mr Deghayes was terrorised by one technique - shoving prisoners into a chamber nicknamed the "snake room". The Libyan claimed: "One day they took me to a room that had very large snakes in glass boxes. The room was painted black and white, with dim lights. They threatened to leave me there, and let the snakes out with me in the room. This really got to me, as these were such sick people that they must have had this room specially made."
The Bush Administration punishes some Democrat backers: bars them from international commission
TIME.com: Any Kerry Supporters On The Line? -- May. 02, 2005: "The Bush Administration punishes some Democrat backers | By VIVECA NOVAK AND JOHN DICKERSON | Sunday, Apr. 24, 2005
The Inter-American Telecommunication Commission meets three times a year in various cities across the Americas to discuss such dry but important issues as telecommunications standards and spectrum regulations. But for this week's meeting in Guatemala City, politics has barged onto the agenda. At least four of the two dozen or so U.S. delegates selected for the meeting, sources tell TIME, have been bumped by the White House because they supported John Kerry's 2004 campaign."
The Inter-American Telecommunication Commission meets three times a year in various cities across the Americas to discuss such dry but important issues as telecommunications standards and spectrum regulations. But for this week's meeting in Guatemala City, politics has barged onto the agenda. At least four of the two dozen or so U.S. delegates selected for the meeting, sources tell TIME, have been bumped by the White House because they supported John Kerry's 2004 campaign."
DeLay Airfare Was Charged To Lobbyist's Credit Card: House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobby
DeLay Airfare Was Charged To Lobbyist's Credit Card (washingtonpost.com): "By R. Jeffrey Smith | Washington Post Staff Writer | Sunday, April 24, 2005; Page A01
The airfare to London and Scotland in 2000 for then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was charged to an American Express card issued to Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist at the center of a federal criminal and tax probe, according to two sources who know Abramoff's credit card account number and to a copy of a travel invoice displaying that number.
DeLay's expenses during the same trip for food, phone calls and other items at a golf course hotel in Scotland were billed to a different credit card also used on the trip by a second registered Washington lobbyist, Edwin A. Buckham, according to receipts documenting that portion of the trip.
House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobbyists. DeLay, who is now House majority leader, has said that his expenses on this trip were paid by a nonprofit organization and that the financial arrangements for it were proper. ...
The airfare to London and Scotland in 2000 for then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was charged to an American Express card issued to Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist at the center of a federal criminal and tax probe, according to two sources who know Abramoff's credit card account number and to a copy of a travel invoice displaying that number.
DeLay's expenses during the same trip for food, phone calls and other items at a golf course hotel in Scotland were billed to a different credit card also used on the trip by a second registered Washington lobbyist, Edwin A. Buckham, according to receipts documenting that portion of the trip.
House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobbyists. DeLay, who is now House majority leader, has said that his expenses on this trip were paid by a nonprofit organization and that the financial arrangements for it were proper. ...
Friday, April 22, 2005
Santorum Backs Low Wages for Restaurant Workers ... Outback Steakhouses chain hosted a Florida fund-raiser [for him]
t r u t h o u t - Santorum Backs Low Wages for Restaurant Workers: "Backed Bill, Got Campaign Funds | By William Bunch | The Philadelphia Daily News | Thursday 21 April 2005
Executives for Outback Steakhouses chain hosted a Florida fund-raiser for GOP Sen. Rick Santorum just days after the Pennsylvanian pushed in the Senate for the donor's pet issue: Blocking higher minimum pay for restaurant workers.
...
Although the Santorum amendment, which was voted down, would have raised the federal minimum wage by $1 to $6.15 an hour, it also contained a little-noticed provision sought by the restaurant industry, and particularly the 70,000-employee Outback chain.
The provision would have barred states and localities from passing laws to raise the minimum base pay for tipped restaurant workers, who currently can be paid as little as $2.13 an hour.
Executives for Outback Steakhouses chain hosted a Florida fund-raiser for GOP Sen. Rick Santorum just days after the Pennsylvanian pushed in the Senate for the donor's pet issue: Blocking higher minimum pay for restaurant workers.
...
Although the Santorum amendment, which was voted down, would have raised the federal minimum wage by $1 to $6.15 an hour, it also contained a little-noticed provision sought by the restaurant industry, and particularly the 70,000-employee Outback chain.
The provision would have barred states and localities from passing laws to raise the minimum base pay for tipped restaurant workers, who currently can be paid as little as $2.13 an hour.
Monday, April 18, 2005
I urge you from the bottom of my heart to use your ability to block Mr. Bolton's nomination in committee.
Daily Kos :: Political Analysis and other daily rants on the state of the nation.: "Horrifying, personal John Bolton story | by amyindallas | Fri Apr 15th, 2005 at 07:15:42 PDT
My best friend since college, Melody Townsel, was stationed in Kyrgyzstan on a US AID project. During her stay there, she became embroiled in a controversy in which the oh-so-diplomatic John Bolton was a key player. She described the incident in a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee members (who have thus far responded with a yawn), and I wanted to share it with a larger audience.
Here's a small taste:
'Mr. Bolton proceeded to chase me through the halls of a Russian hotel -- throwing things at me, shoving threatening letters under my door and, generally, behaving like a madman.'
...
I cannot believe that this is a man being seriously considered for any diplomatic position, let alone such a critical posting to the UN. Others you may call before your committee will be able to speak better to his stated dislike for and objection to stated UN goals. I write you to speak about the very character of the man.
It took me years to get over Mr. Bolton's actions in that Moscow hotel in 1994, his intensely personal attacks and his shocking attempts to malign my character. ...
My best friend since college, Melody Townsel, was stationed in Kyrgyzstan on a US AID project. During her stay there, she became embroiled in a controversy in which the oh-so-diplomatic John Bolton was a key player. She described the incident in a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee members (who have thus far responded with a yawn), and I wanted to share it with a larger audience.
Here's a small taste:
'Mr. Bolton proceeded to chase me through the halls of a Russian hotel -- throwing things at me, shoving threatening letters under my door and, generally, behaving like a madman.'
...
I cannot believe that this is a man being seriously considered for any diplomatic position, let alone such a critical posting to the UN. Others you may call before your committee will be able to speak better to his stated dislike for and objection to stated UN goals. I write you to speak about the very character of the man.
It took me years to get over Mr. Bolton's actions in that Moscow hotel in 1994, his intensely personal attacks and his shocking attempts to malign my character. ...
Monday, April 11, 2005
Group Says Pentagon's Plan Would Expand Its Enemy List: military commanders to be authorized to declare someone an enemy combatant and detain him
The New York Times > Washington > Group Says Pentagon's Plan Would Expand Its Enemy List: "April 8, 2005 | By NEIL A. LEWIS
WASHINGTON, April 7 - Pentagon planners are proposing that military commanders be authorized to declare someone an enemy combatant and detain him if he belongs to any of hundreds of suspected terrorist organizations, a human rights group said on Thursday.
The extensive list of groups suspected of terrorism is part of a 142-page draft proposal to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that is intended to provide an all-inclusive guide for military commanders on their obligations and authority for detaining people.
John Sifton, a senior official of Human Rights Watch who provided the document, said it was a radical departure for the government to assert that membership in such a broad range of groups could qualify a person to be deemed an enemy combatant, a term that has previously been used mostly for members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
The government has used the term "enemy combatant" for detainees who are not covered by the protections of the Geneva Conventions. The Bush administration has argued that such detainees may be held indefinitely, unlike prisoners of war, who must be released when combat ends.
WASHINGTON, April 7 - Pentagon planners are proposing that military commanders be authorized to declare someone an enemy combatant and detain him if he belongs to any of hundreds of suspected terrorist organizations, a human rights group said on Thursday.
The extensive list of groups suspected of terrorism is part of a 142-page draft proposal to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that is intended to provide an all-inclusive guide for military commanders on their obligations and authority for detaining people.
John Sifton, a senior official of Human Rights Watch who provided the document, said it was a radical departure for the government to assert that membership in such a broad range of groups could qualify a person to be deemed an enemy combatant, a term that has previously been used mostly for members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
The government has used the term "enemy combatant" for detainees who are not covered by the protections of the Geneva Conventions. The Bush administration has argued that such detainees may be held indefinitely, unlike prisoners of war, who must be released when combat ends.
"DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details." ... "Everybody is lying," Abramoff told a former colleague
With Friends Like These... - Newsweek National News - MSNBC.com: "With Friends Like These...By Michael Isikoff | Newsweek | April 18 issue
A lunchtime chat with a lobbyist close to Tom DeLay suggests he may be headed for hotter water.
Once a Washington superlobbyist, Abramoff is now the target of a Justice Department criminal probe of allegations that he defrauded American Indian tribes of tens of millions of dollars in fees. As stories of his alleged excess dribble out—including the emergence of e-mails showing he derisively referred to his Native American clients as "monkeys" and "idiots"—some of Abramoff's old friends have abandoned him and treated him like a pariah. ...
"Everybody is lying," Abramoff told a former colleague. There are e-mails and records that will implicate others, he said. He was noticeably caustic about House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. For years, nobody on Washington's K Street corridor was closer to DeLay than Abramoff. They were an unlikely duo. DeLay, a conservative Christian, and Abramoff, an Orthodox Jew, traveled the world together and golfed the finest courses. Abramoff raised hundreds of thousands for DeLay's political causes and hired DeLay's aides, or kicked them business, when they left his employ. But now DeLay, too, has problems—in part because of overseas trips allegedly paid for by Abramoff's clients. In response, DeLay and his aides have said repeatedly they were unaware of Abramoff's behind-the-scenes financing role. "Those S.O.B.s," Abramoff said last week about DeLay and his staffers, according to his luncheon companion. "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details."
A lunchtime chat with a lobbyist close to Tom DeLay suggests he may be headed for hotter water.
Once a Washington superlobbyist, Abramoff is now the target of a Justice Department criminal probe of allegations that he defrauded American Indian tribes of tens of millions of dollars in fees. As stories of his alleged excess dribble out—including the emergence of e-mails showing he derisively referred to his Native American clients as "monkeys" and "idiots"—some of Abramoff's old friends have abandoned him and treated him like a pariah. ...
"Everybody is lying," Abramoff told a former colleague. There are e-mails and records that will implicate others, he said. He was noticeably caustic about House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. For years, nobody on Washington's K Street corridor was closer to DeLay than Abramoff. They were an unlikely duo. DeLay, a conservative Christian, and Abramoff, an Orthodox Jew, traveled the world together and golfed the finest courses. Abramoff raised hundreds of thousands for DeLay's political causes and hired DeLay's aides, or kicked them business, when they left his employ. But now DeLay, too, has problems—in part because of overseas trips allegedly paid for by Abramoff's clients. In response, DeLay and his aides have said repeatedly they were unaware of Abramoff's behind-the-scenes financing role. "Those S.O.B.s," Abramoff said last week about DeLay and his staffers, according to his luncheon companion. "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details."
Army reservist witnesses war crimes
Army reservist witnesses war crimesArmy reservist witnesses war crimes | New revelations about racism in the military | By Paul Rockwell | Online Journal Contributing Writer | April 1, 2005—
Aiden Delgado, an Army Reservist in the 320th Military Police Company, served in Iraq from April 1, 2003 through April 1, 2004. After spending six months in Nasiriyah in Southern Iraq, he spent six months helping to run the now-infamous Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad. The handsome 23-year-old mechanic was a witness to widespread, almost daily, U.S. war crimes in Iraq. His story contains new revelations about ongoing brutality at Abu Ghraib, information yet to be reported in national media.
I first met Delgado in a classroom at Acalanes High School in Lafayette, California, where he presented a slide show on the atrocities that he himself observed in Southern and Northern Iraq. Delgado acknowledged that the U.S. military did some good things in Iraq. "We deposed Saddam, built some schools and hospitals," he said. But he focused his testimony on the breakdown of moral order within the U.S. military, a pattern of violence and terror that exceeds the bounds of what is legally and morally permissible in time of war.
Delgado says he observed mutilation of the dead, trophy photos of dead Iraqis, mass roundups of innocent noncombatants, positioning of prisoners in the line of fire—all violations of the Geneva conventions. His own buddies—decent, Christian men, as he describes them—shot unarmed prisoners.
In one government class for seniors, Delgado presented graphic images, his own photos of a soldier playing with a skull, the charred remains of children, kids riddled with bullets, a soldier from his unit scooping out the brains of a prisoner. Some students were squeamish, like myself, and turned their heads. Others rubbed tears from their eyes. But at the end of the question period, many expressed appreciation for opening a subject that is almost taboo. "If you are old enough to go to war," Delgado said, "you are old enough to know what really goes on." It is a rare moment when American students, who play video war games more than baseball, are exposed to the realities of occupation. Delgado does not name names. Nor does he want to denigrate soldiers or undermine morale. He seeks to be a conscience for the military, and he wants Americans to take ownership of the war in all its tragic totality. ....
Aiden Delgado, an Army Reservist in the 320th Military Police Company, served in Iraq from April 1, 2003 through April 1, 2004. After spending six months in Nasiriyah in Southern Iraq, he spent six months helping to run the now-infamous Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad. The handsome 23-year-old mechanic was a witness to widespread, almost daily, U.S. war crimes in Iraq. His story contains new revelations about ongoing brutality at Abu Ghraib, information yet to be reported in national media.
I first met Delgado in a classroom at Acalanes High School in Lafayette, California, where he presented a slide show on the atrocities that he himself observed in Southern and Northern Iraq. Delgado acknowledged that the U.S. military did some good things in Iraq. "We deposed Saddam, built some schools and hospitals," he said. But he focused his testimony on the breakdown of moral order within the U.S. military, a pattern of violence and terror that exceeds the bounds of what is legally and morally permissible in time of war.
Delgado says he observed mutilation of the dead, trophy photos of dead Iraqis, mass roundups of innocent noncombatants, positioning of prisoners in the line of fire—all violations of the Geneva conventions. His own buddies—decent, Christian men, as he describes them—shot unarmed prisoners.
In one government class for seniors, Delgado presented graphic images, his own photos of a soldier playing with a skull, the charred remains of children, kids riddled with bullets, a soldier from his unit scooping out the brains of a prisoner. Some students were squeamish, like myself, and turned their heads. Others rubbed tears from their eyes. But at the end of the question period, many expressed appreciation for opening a subject that is almost taboo. "If you are old enough to go to war," Delgado said, "you are old enough to know what really goes on." It is a rare moment when American students, who play video war games more than baseball, are exposed to the realities of occupation. Delgado does not name names. Nor does he want to denigrate soldiers or undermine morale. He seeks to be a conscience for the military, and he wants Americans to take ownership of the war in all its tragic totality. ....
Sunday, April 10, 2005
White House Wants Detainee Ruling Reversed ... alow trials without seeing evidence ... `This is the law in Rwanda'' but not in the United States
The New York Times > AP > National > White House Wants Detainee Ruling Reversed: "By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS | Published: April 8, 2005 | Filed at 12:23 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Lawyers for a Guantanamo Bay detainee ran into tough questioning Thursday from a federal appeals court that is being pressed by the Bush administration to allow military trials that don't afford foreign terror suspects the same legal protections as Americans."
...
Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, one of Hamdan's Pentagon-appointed lawyers, pointed out his client was barred from the courtroom when his trial began.
``It makes no sense to say that we adhere to international law and the first thing we do at the beginning of a trial is violate a canon of international law,'' Swift told three judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. ...
...
Out of the roughly 550 detainees at Guantanamo Bay, just 15 have been designated for such trials and only four have been charged. Among them is Hamdan, a mechanic with a fourth-grade education who left his home country of Yemen looking for work. He is charged with conspiracy to engage in acts of terrorism.
...
During the appeals court arguments, Judge A. Raymond Randolph noted other countries' legal systems don't allow a defendant to be present for all parts of a trial. And some countries don't allow cross-examination of witnesses, Judge John Roberts added.
``This is the law in Rwanda'' but not in the United States, Swift replied.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Lawyers for a Guantanamo Bay detainee ran into tough questioning Thursday from a federal appeals court that is being pressed by the Bush administration to allow military trials that don't afford foreign terror suspects the same legal protections as Americans."
...
Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, one of Hamdan's Pentagon-appointed lawyers, pointed out his client was barred from the courtroom when his trial began.
``It makes no sense to say that we adhere to international law and the first thing we do at the beginning of a trial is violate a canon of international law,'' Swift told three judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. ...
...
Out of the roughly 550 detainees at Guantanamo Bay, just 15 have been designated for such trials and only four have been charged. Among them is Hamdan, a mechanic with a fourth-grade education who left his home country of Yemen looking for work. He is charged with conspiracy to engage in acts of terrorism.
...
During the appeals court arguments, Judge A. Raymond Randolph noted other countries' legal systems don't allow a defendant to be present for all parts of a trial. And some countries don't allow cross-examination of witnesses, Judge John Roberts added.
``This is the law in Rwanda'' but not in the United States, Swift replied.
Gitmo tribunals: We are not concerned with international law." ... military personnel couldn't find evidenc, so the proceedings commenced without it
t r u t h o u t - GITMO Detainees Speak Out in Court Papers: "Records Give Voice to Guant�namo Detainees | By Pete Yost and Matt Kelley | The Associated Press | Saturday 09 April 2005
A terror suspect held at Guantánamo Bay asked his US military judge a pointed question: "Is it possible to see the evidence in order to refute it?" In another case, a judge blurted out: "I don't care about international law." ...
...
"I have the right to speak," Abbasi said.
"No you don't," the tribunal president replied.
"I don't care about international law," the tribunal president told Abbasi just before he was taken from the room. "I don't want to hear the words 'international law' again. We are not concerned with international law."
The tribunal found Abbasi to have been "deeply involved" in al-Qaida, yet four months later the government released him, saying his home country of Great Britain would keep an eye on him.
...
The tribunals also had access to classified evidence that the detainees were not allowed to see, a key reason a federal judge said in January that there were constitutional problems with the tribunals. An appeals court is considering that issue.
The tribunals in some cases rejected requests for witnesses or documents that detainees said would help prove their innocence.
Boudella Al Hajj requested a copy of a court document from Bosnia. The tribunal president ordered the document produced, but military personnel couldn't locate it, so the proceedings commenced without it.
...
A terror suspect held at Guantánamo Bay asked his US military judge a pointed question: "Is it possible to see the evidence in order to refute it?" In another case, a judge blurted out: "I don't care about international law." ...
...
"I have the right to speak," Abbasi said.
"No you don't," the tribunal president replied.
"I don't care about international law," the tribunal president told Abbasi just before he was taken from the room. "I don't want to hear the words 'international law' again. We are not concerned with international law."
The tribunal found Abbasi to have been "deeply involved" in al-Qaida, yet four months later the government released him, saying his home country of Great Britain would keep an eye on him.
...
The tribunals also had access to classified evidence that the detainees were not allowed to see, a key reason a federal judge said in January that there were constitutional problems with the tribunals. An appeals court is considering that issue.
The tribunals in some cases rejected requests for witnesses or documents that detainees said would help prove their innocence.
Boudella Al Hajj requested a copy of a court document from Bosnia. The tribunal president ordered the document produced, but military personnel couldn't locate it, so the proceedings commenced without it.
...
Teachers and Classmates Express Outrage at Arrest of Girl, 16, as a Terrorist Threat
The New York Times > New York Region > Teachers and Classmates Express Outrage at Arrest of Girl, 16, as a Terrorist Threat: By NINA BERNSTEIN | Published: April 9, 2005
At Heritage High School in East Harlem, where the student idiom is hip-hop and salsa, the 16-year-old Guinean girl stood out, but not just because she wore Islamic dress. She was so well liked that when she ran for student body president, she came in second to one of her best friends - the Christian daughter of the president of the parent-teacher association, Deleen P. Carr.
Now Ms. Carr, a speech pathologist who calls herself 'a typical American citizen,' is as outraged as the girl's teachers and classmates, who have learned that the girl and another 16-year-old are being called would-be suicide bombers and are being held in an immigration detention center in Pennsylvania."
...
According to a government document provided to The New York Times by a federal official earlier this week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has asserted that both girls are "an imminent threat to the security of the United States based on evidence that they plan to be suicide bombers." No evidence was cited, and federal officials will not comment on the case.
Its mysteries deepened as teachers and neighbors gave details of the Guinean girl's life, like the jeans she wore under her Muslim garb, her lively classroom curiosity about topics like Judaism and art and her after-school care for four younger siblings while her parents, illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States since 1990, eked out a living.
At Heritage High School in East Harlem, where the student idiom is hip-hop and salsa, the 16-year-old Guinean girl stood out, but not just because she wore Islamic dress. She was so well liked that when she ran for student body president, she came in second to one of her best friends - the Christian daughter of the president of the parent-teacher association, Deleen P. Carr.
Now Ms. Carr, a speech pathologist who calls herself 'a typical American citizen,' is as outraged as the girl's teachers and classmates, who have learned that the girl and another 16-year-old are being called would-be suicide bombers and are being held in an immigration detention center in Pennsylvania."
...
According to a government document provided to The New York Times by a federal official earlier this week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has asserted that both girls are "an imminent threat to the security of the United States based on evidence that they plan to be suicide bombers." No evidence was cited, and federal officials will not comment on the case.
Its mysteries deepened as teachers and neighbors gave details of the Guinean girl's life, like the jeans she wore under her Muslim garb, her lively classroom curiosity about topics like Judaism and art and her after-school care for four younger siblings while her parents, illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States since 1990, eked out a living.
Shays: DeLay Should Quit As House Leader [over repeated ethics charges ... admonished 4 times]
Excite News: "Shays: DeLay Should Quit As House Leader | Apr 10, 5:52 PM (ET) | By LOU KESTEN
WASHINGTON (AP) - Private GOP tensions over Tom DeLay's ethics controversy spilled into public Sunday, as a Senate leader called on DeLay to explain his actions and one House Republican demanded the majority leader's resignation.
"Tom's conduct is hurting the Republican Party, is hurting this Republican majority and it is hurting any Republican who is up for re-election," Rep. Chris Shays, R-Conn., told The Associated Press in an interview, calling for DeLay to step down as majority leader.
DeLay, R-Texas, who was admonished by the House ethics committee last year, has been dogged in recent months by new reports about his overseas travel funded by special interests, campaign payments to family members and connections to a lobbyist who is under criminal investigation.
A moderate Republican from Connecticut who has battled with his party's leadership on a number of issues, Shays said efforts by the House GOP members to change ethics rules to protect DeLay only make the party look bad.
"My party is going to have to decide whether we are going to continue to make excuses for Tom to the detriment of Republicans seeking election," Shays said. ...
...
"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior," DeLay said, raising the prospect of impeaching members of a separate and independent branch of government. Later, he complained of "an arrogant and out of control judiciary that thumbs its nose at Congress and the president."
Bush, declining to endorse DeLay's comments, said Friday that he supports "an independent judiciary." He added, "I believe in proper checks and balances." ...
WASHINGTON (AP) - Private GOP tensions over Tom DeLay's ethics controversy spilled into public Sunday, as a Senate leader called on DeLay to explain his actions and one House Republican demanded the majority leader's resignation.
"Tom's conduct is hurting the Republican Party, is hurting this Republican majority and it is hurting any Republican who is up for re-election," Rep. Chris Shays, R-Conn., told The Associated Press in an interview, calling for DeLay to step down as majority leader.
DeLay, R-Texas, who was admonished by the House ethics committee last year, has been dogged in recent months by new reports about his overseas travel funded by special interests, campaign payments to family members and connections to a lobbyist who is under criminal investigation.
A moderate Republican from Connecticut who has battled with his party's leadership on a number of issues, Shays said efforts by the House GOP members to change ethics rules to protect DeLay only make the party look bad.
"My party is going to have to decide whether we are going to continue to make excuses for Tom to the detriment of Republicans seeking election," Shays said. ...
...
"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior," DeLay said, raising the prospect of impeaching members of a separate and independent branch of government. Later, he complained of "an arrogant and out of control judiciary that thumbs its nose at Congress and the president."
Bush, declining to endorse DeLay's comments, said Friday that he supports "an independent judiciary." He added, "I believe in proper checks and balances." ...
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Schaivo talking point came from GOP Senator Martinez ... in spite of denials everywhere and finger pointing at the Democrats
AMERICAblog: Because a great nation deserves the truth: "Wednesday, April 06, 2005 | I love when conservative bloggers make asses of themselves | by John in DC - 4/6/2005 10:36:00 PM
Below is what the top conservatives (I've expanded it beyond bloggers since so many of those on the right made total asses of themselves) had to say about the now-proven-real Schiavo memo:
Tucker Carlson on Chris Matthews' show:
'Last week a memo surfaced, reportedly written by the Republican members of Congress explaining how to make hay with the Terri Schiavo case, the Talking Points Memo, Ah, I think within a week or two it will become clear that that memo was a forgery, possibly written by Democrats on the hill in an effort to discredit Republicans. Bloggers are saying that now and it sounds like they may be right.'
The Washington Times: Story dated yesterday entitled 'Was the Schiavo memo a fake?'
Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah Republican, said the issue 'stinks' of a news fabrication similar to the one that engulfed CBS anchorman Dan Rather during the 2004 presidential campaign, after he reported that President Bush did not fulfill his duties while in the National Guard, citing documents that CBS later admitted could not be authenticated."
...
"Senator Martinez has never seen the memo and condemns its sentiments," spokeswoman Kerry Feehery said. "No one in our office has seen it, nor had anything to do with its creation."
Fred Barnes via the Washington Times (I think that's a two-fer):
"There wasn't a hint in these reports the memo could have any other source but Republicans. Yet there was no evidence it had come from Republicans. It was unsigned and had no letterhead or date. Nothing indicated it came from the Republican leadership or the House or Senate campaign committee or from the Republican National Committee or even from a stray Republican staffer," Mr. Barnes said.
"The only evidence was of a dirty trick -- and there wasn't much evidence of that. Powerline, the influential blog, found a version of the memo with typos cleaned up on left-wing Web sites.
...
Rush Limbaugh (not a blogger, but I had to add this blowhard):
"Truth Detector: Supposed GOP Schiavo Memo Forged by Democrats."
...
Accuracy in Media:
Accuracy in Media today questioned the authenticity of the much-publicized "GOP Talking Points" memo on the Terri Schiavo case. The document has been seized upon by ABC news, the Washington Post, CBS News and other media to accuse Republicans of having partisan motives in trying to save Terri Schiavo. Cliff Kincaid, editor of AIM, said that the major media should explain how they verified the document and why they believe it is authentic. He said evidence suggests that the memo may have been manufactured as part of an effort to make Republicans look bad.....
...
Below is what the top conservatives (I've expanded it beyond bloggers since so many of those on the right made total asses of themselves) had to say about the now-proven-real Schiavo memo:
Tucker Carlson on Chris Matthews' show:
'Last week a memo surfaced, reportedly written by the Republican members of Congress explaining how to make hay with the Terri Schiavo case, the Talking Points Memo, Ah, I think within a week or two it will become clear that that memo was a forgery, possibly written by Democrats on the hill in an effort to discredit Republicans. Bloggers are saying that now and it sounds like they may be right.'
The Washington Times: Story dated yesterday entitled 'Was the Schiavo memo a fake?'
Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah Republican, said the issue 'stinks' of a news fabrication similar to the one that engulfed CBS anchorman Dan Rather during the 2004 presidential campaign, after he reported that President Bush did not fulfill his duties while in the National Guard, citing documents that CBS later admitted could not be authenticated."
...
"Senator Martinez has never seen the memo and condemns its sentiments," spokeswoman Kerry Feehery said. "No one in our office has seen it, nor had anything to do with its creation."
Fred Barnes via the Washington Times (I think that's a two-fer):
"There wasn't a hint in these reports the memo could have any other source but Republicans. Yet there was no evidence it had come from Republicans. It was unsigned and had no letterhead or date. Nothing indicated it came from the Republican leadership or the House or Senate campaign committee or from the Republican National Committee or even from a stray Republican staffer," Mr. Barnes said.
"The only evidence was of a dirty trick -- and there wasn't much evidence of that. Powerline, the influential blog, found a version of the memo with typos cleaned up on left-wing Web sites.
...
Rush Limbaugh (not a blogger, but I had to add this blowhard):
"Truth Detector: Supposed GOP Schiavo Memo Forged by Democrats."
...
Accuracy in Media:
Accuracy in Media today questioned the authenticity of the much-publicized "GOP Talking Points" memo on the Terri Schiavo case. The document has been seized upon by ABC news, the Washington Post, CBS News and other media to accuse Republicans of having partisan motives in trying to save Terri Schiavo. Cliff Kincaid, editor of AIM, said that the major media should explain how they verified the document and why they believe it is authentic. He said evidence suggests that the memo may have been manufactured as part of an effort to make Republicans look bad.....
...
Monday, April 04, 2005
In Defense of John Paul II, Peacemaker: In life, the War Party attacked him: now they pretend to mourn his death
In Defense of John Paul II, Peacemaker- by Justin Raimondo: "April 4, 2005
Unfazed by the antiwar demonstrations that thronged the streets of London on the eve of war with Iraq, British Prime Minister Tony Blair was more concerned with the Pope's disapproval as he prepared to meet with the Holy Father. After all, this was the man who had brought down the Soviet empire through the sheer power of his moral authority, and now he was threatening to strangle the emerging Anglo-American imperium in its crib.
'A defeat for humanity' is how John Paul II characterized the Iraq conflict. The Vatican rejected the arguments of neoconservatives, who sought to replace the 'just war' theory that had ruled the Church since the time of St. Augustine with their own preemptive war doctrine, a throwback to the pagan era. As Bush and his British poodle prepared to go to war over nonexistent 'weapons of mass destruction,' the Pope sent a message to Roman Catholic military chaplains attending a Vatican-sponsored course on humanitarian law expressing the great 'comfort' given to him by the antiwar movement, which was taking to the streets in massive numbers: 'It should be clear' at this point in human history, he declared, that a 'large part of humanity' has rejected war as a means of resolving conflicts between nations. (Self-defense, he averred, is another matter). Hailing the 'vast contemporary movement in favor of peace,' the Holy Father backed up his rhetoric with action, calling on Catholics to fast in protest against the coming war and sending a diplomatic mission to Baghdad."
Unfazed by the antiwar demonstrations that thronged the streets of London on the eve of war with Iraq, British Prime Minister Tony Blair was more concerned with the Pope's disapproval as he prepared to meet with the Holy Father. After all, this was the man who had brought down the Soviet empire through the sheer power of his moral authority, and now he was threatening to strangle the emerging Anglo-American imperium in its crib.
'A defeat for humanity' is how John Paul II characterized the Iraq conflict. The Vatican rejected the arguments of neoconservatives, who sought to replace the 'just war' theory that had ruled the Church since the time of St. Augustine with their own preemptive war doctrine, a throwback to the pagan era. As Bush and his British poodle prepared to go to war over nonexistent 'weapons of mass destruction,' the Pope sent a message to Roman Catholic military chaplains attending a Vatican-sponsored course on humanitarian law expressing the great 'comfort' given to him by the antiwar movement, which was taking to the streets in massive numbers: 'It should be clear' at this point in human history, he declared, that a 'large part of humanity' has rejected war as a means of resolving conflicts between nations. (Self-defense, he averred, is another matter). Hailing the 'vast contemporary movement in favor of peace,' the Holy Father backed up his rhetoric with action, calling on Catholics to fast in protest against the coming war and sending a diplomatic mission to Baghdad."
Medford hotel owners say Bush Admin. left them with unpaid bills
FOX 12 OREGON Medford hotel owners say Bush Admin. left them with unpaid bills: "April 1, 2005, 01:40 PM
MEDFORD -- It's a distant memory for most of the country, but President Bush's campaign swing through Southern Oregon is fresh for hotel owners still waiting to get paid nearly $19,000 for expenses incurred by the administration last fall.
Three hotels, including the Rogue Regency, the Red Lion and the Jacksonville Inn, report they have been waiting almost six months for bills generated mostly by the U.S. Secret Service during President Bush's whirlwind tour through Jackson County, according to an article by the Mail Tribune newspaper.
Owed $3,332.72, the Red Lion Hotel in Medford sent a letter on March 28 to the president at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
The letter written by the hotel's accountant Kirsten Yunuba Stephens, said: 'My question to you: Is this how you help balance the budget at the White House by ripping off retailers in the towns you visit? If that is the case please do not come back to the Rogue Valley.'"
MEDFORD -- It's a distant memory for most of the country, but President Bush's campaign swing through Southern Oregon is fresh for hotel owners still waiting to get paid nearly $19,000 for expenses incurred by the administration last fall.
Three hotels, including the Rogue Regency, the Red Lion and the Jacksonville Inn, report they have been waiting almost six months for bills generated mostly by the U.S. Secret Service during President Bush's whirlwind tour through Jackson County, according to an article by the Mail Tribune newspaper.
Owed $3,332.72, the Red Lion Hotel in Medford sent a letter on March 28 to the president at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
The letter written by the hotel's accountant Kirsten Yunuba Stephens, said: 'My question to you: Is this how you help balance the budget at the White House by ripping off retailers in the towns you visit? If that is the case please do not come back to the Rogue Valley.'"
Fourth man indicted in Republican phone-jamming scheme
Boston.com / News / Local / N.H. / Fourth man indicted in Republican phone-jamming scheme: "April 4, 2005
CONCORD, N.H. -- A fourth man has been charged with taking part in a Republican scheme to jam Democrats' get-out-the-vote phone lines on Election Day 2002.
Shaun Hansen, of Spokane, Wash., headed a former telemarketing company that placed hundreds of hang-up calls to five phone lines run by Democrats and one run by the Manchester firefighters union.
Prosecutors say Hansen's Mylo Enterprises of Sandpoint, Idaho, was hired by Republican operatives to place the calls."
CONCORD, N.H. -- A fourth man has been charged with taking part in a Republican scheme to jam Democrats' get-out-the-vote phone lines on Election Day 2002.
Shaun Hansen, of Spokane, Wash., headed a former telemarketing company that placed hundreds of hang-up calls to five phone lines run by Democrats and one run by the Manchester firefighters union.
Prosecutors say Hansen's Mylo Enterprises of Sandpoint, Idaho, was hired by Republican operatives to place the calls."
Fourth man indicted in Republican phone-jamming scheme
Boston.com / News / Local / N.H. / Fourth man indicted in Republican phone-jamming scheme: "April 4, 2005
CONCORD, N.H. -- A fourth man has been charged with taking part in a Republican scheme to jam Democrats' get-out-the-vote phone lines on Election Day 2002.
Shaun Hansen, of Spokane, Wash., headed a former telemarketing company that placed hundreds of hang-up calls to five phone lines run by Democrats and one run by the Manchester firefighters union.
Prosecutors say Hansen's Mylo Enterprises of Sandpoint, Idaho, was hired by Republican operatives to place the calls."
CONCORD, N.H. -- A fourth man has been charged with taking part in a Republican scheme to jam Democrats' get-out-the-vote phone lines on Election Day 2002.
Shaun Hansen, of Spokane, Wash., headed a former telemarketing company that placed hundreds of hang-up calls to five phone lines run by Democrats and one run by the Manchester firefighters union.
Prosecutors say Hansen's Mylo Enterprises of Sandpoint, Idaho, was hired by Republican operatives to place the calls."
U.S. forces may have beaten Iraqi general ... before he died of suffocation during interrogation
USATODAY.com - U.S. forces may have beaten Iraqi general: "4/2/2005 9:21 PM | By Robert Weller, Associated Press Writer
FORT CARSON, Colo. — Previously secret court testimony indicates an Iraqi general imprisoned by U.S. forces was badly bruised and may have been severely beaten two days before he died of suffocation during interrogation.
References to the alleged beating appear in a transcript, released under court order, from a military preliminary hearing for three soldiers charged with murder and dereliction of duty in the death of Maj. Gen. Abed Mowhoush on Nov. 26, 2003. A fourth soldier faces the same charges but waived a hearing.
During the interrogation, Army prosecutors claim Mowhoush was put headfirst into a sleeping bag, wrapped with electrical cord and knocked down before the soldiers sat and stood on him, prosecutors said. The cause of death was determined to be suffocation.
FORT CARSON, Colo. — Previously secret court testimony indicates an Iraqi general imprisoned by U.S. forces was badly bruised and may have been severely beaten two days before he died of suffocation during interrogation.
References to the alleged beating appear in a transcript, released under court order, from a military preliminary hearing for three soldiers charged with murder and dereliction of duty in the death of Maj. Gen. Abed Mowhoush on Nov. 26, 2003. A fourth soldier faces the same charges but waived a hearing.
During the interrogation, Army prosecutors claim Mowhoush was put headfirst into a sleeping bag, wrapped with electrical cord and knocked down before the soldiers sat and stood on him, prosecutors said. The cause of death was determined to be suffocation.
The Pope's 'Seismic Shift' ... enounced the death penalty as 'cruel and unnecessary.' [... but Bush 157 goes to his funeral]
The Pope's 'Seismic Shift': "Monday, April 4, 2005 by The Nation | by John Nichols
Many of the most devout followers of the most famous of all victims of capital punishment, the Nazarene who was crucified on the Calvary cross, took a long time to recognize that state-sponsored execution is an affront to their history and their faith. For close to 1,500 years, the Catholic Church taught that the state had a right to punish criminals 'by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty.'
For centuries, that line in the Catechism of the Catholic Church was used by Catholic politicians--and others who sought a moral justification for their actions--to place a veneer of legitimacy on even the most cavalier executions of the young, the mentally handicapped and the innocent. Even as Pope John Paul II moved the church closer and closer to explicit opposition to the death penalty during his long tenure, the loophole in the Catechism remained.
Then, in 1997, Sister Helen Prejean, the American nun and death penalty abolitionist who authored the book Dead Man Walking, asked Pope John Paul II to close the loophole. Late that year, the Pope removed the reference to the death penalty from the Catechism and, when he visited the United States two years later, he denounced the death penalty as 'cruel and unnecessary.' Referencing moves by countries around the world to ban capital punishment, the Pope declared in St. Louis that, 'A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.'
So pointed and passionate was the Pope's message on the issue that the then-governor of Missouri, Mel Carnahan, a Baptist and a supporter of capital punishment, commuted the sentence of a condemned man who was scheduled to be put to death by the state several weeks after the Papal visit." ...
Many of the most devout followers of the most famous of all victims of capital punishment, the Nazarene who was crucified on the Calvary cross, took a long time to recognize that state-sponsored execution is an affront to their history and their faith. For close to 1,500 years, the Catholic Church taught that the state had a right to punish criminals 'by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty.'
For centuries, that line in the Catechism of the Catholic Church was used by Catholic politicians--and others who sought a moral justification for their actions--to place a veneer of legitimacy on even the most cavalier executions of the young, the mentally handicapped and the innocent. Even as Pope John Paul II moved the church closer and closer to explicit opposition to the death penalty during his long tenure, the loophole in the Catechism remained.
Then, in 1997, Sister Helen Prejean, the American nun and death penalty abolitionist who authored the book Dead Man Walking, asked Pope John Paul II to close the loophole. Late that year, the Pope removed the reference to the death penalty from the Catechism and, when he visited the United States two years later, he denounced the death penalty as 'cruel and unnecessary.' Referencing moves by countries around the world to ban capital punishment, the Pope declared in St. Louis that, 'A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.'
So pointed and passionate was the Pope's message on the issue that the then-governor of Missouri, Mel Carnahan, a Baptist and a supporter of capital punishment, commuted the sentence of a condemned man who was scheduled to be put to death by the state several weeks after the Papal visit." ...
Sunday, April 03, 2005
Definition: Bill of Attainder. ... [... what about the Schiavo bill?
Definition: Bill of Attainder.: "Bill of Attainder
Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.
The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: 'No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.'
'The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply - trial by legislature.' U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).
'These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment.' William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.
'Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community.' James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788."
Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.
The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: 'No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.'
'The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply - trial by legislature.' U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).
'These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment.' William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.
'Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community.' James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788."
The Geneva trap: Bush fight[s] terror with terror. Indefinite detention and inhumane interrogation procedures
The Geneva trap: "The Geneva trap | By Sonia Cardenas | 3/30/05 'Foreign Policy In Focus'
The administration has perpetuated the myth, which domestic public opinion and the popular media have accepted, that the Conventions do not entirely protect suspected terrorists or other non-state combatants captured abroad. This myth allowed the administration to invent a new category of detainees outside the purview of international law - "unlawful combatants" - in essence legitimating subsequent mistreatment and abuse.
Most of the controversy surrounding indefinite detention by the United States, for example, revolves around the scope of the Third and Fourth Conventions. On the one hand, the Third Geneva Convention defines "prisoners of war" (POWs) largely in state-centric terms, as members of a recognized state's armed forces who are entitled to special protections. ... On the other hand, the Fourth Geneva Convention extends basic human-rights protections (including the right to a "fair and regular trial") to all civilians in an armed conflict, whether or not they are engaged in hostilities.
The United States has focused exclusively on determining who is entitled to "prisoner of war" status (Third Convention), foreclosing an otherwise viable strategy: to extend the status of "civilians" to all non-state actors fighting the United States. Doing so would not preclude detaining suspected terrorists or restricting their freedom of movement and communication. Indeed, they would not have all of the rights accorded non-hostile civilians, but they would never have to forfeit their rights to due process and humane treatment (Article 5, Fourth Geneva Convention). Once the administration claimed exemptions to Geneva, moreover, it was free to invent the category of "unlawful combatants", further circumventing international legal obligations to protect non-POWs.
...
Ironically, the same administration that labels the Geneva Conventions anachronistic has an outdated conception of international human-rights law. Today's human-rights norms are highly inclusive; they guarantee fundamental rights to all human beings simply by virtue of being human, and some of them cannot be suspended under any scenario. Denying suspected terrorists these rights is in principle no different from other exclusionary policies that deprive people of their rights on the basis of race, religion or gender. Bush administration apologists would surely claim that terrorists threaten vital national-security interests, and any temporary suspension of their rights is justified on grounds of self-defense. The problem is that rights are always withheld in the name of a greater good. Violating detainees' rights will not make the United States safer. It is only likely to threaten America's reputation, while engendering greater terrorism and instability.
...
... In the fight against terrorism, the Bush administration has simply not been willing to treat all detainees humanely or provide them with due process. It has preferred to fight terror with terror. Indefinite detention and inhumane interrogation procedures are not unintended or isolated cases; they are the sine qua non of the US attempt to fight a global war on terror in an age of internationally recognized human rights. A selective reading of the Geneva Conventions has been the perfect cover for achieving these contradictory, but ultimately untenable, goals.
The administration has perpetuated the myth, which domestic public opinion and the popular media have accepted, that the Conventions do not entirely protect suspected terrorists or other non-state combatants captured abroad. This myth allowed the administration to invent a new category of detainees outside the purview of international law - "unlawful combatants" - in essence legitimating subsequent mistreatment and abuse.
Most of the controversy surrounding indefinite detention by the United States, for example, revolves around the scope of the Third and Fourth Conventions. On the one hand, the Third Geneva Convention defines "prisoners of war" (POWs) largely in state-centric terms, as members of a recognized state's armed forces who are entitled to special protections. ... On the other hand, the Fourth Geneva Convention extends basic human-rights protections (including the right to a "fair and regular trial") to all civilians in an armed conflict, whether or not they are engaged in hostilities.
The United States has focused exclusively on determining who is entitled to "prisoner of war" status (Third Convention), foreclosing an otherwise viable strategy: to extend the status of "civilians" to all non-state actors fighting the United States. Doing so would not preclude detaining suspected terrorists or restricting their freedom of movement and communication. Indeed, they would not have all of the rights accorded non-hostile civilians, but they would never have to forfeit their rights to due process and humane treatment (Article 5, Fourth Geneva Convention). Once the administration claimed exemptions to Geneva, moreover, it was free to invent the category of "unlawful combatants", further circumventing international legal obligations to protect non-POWs.
...
Ironically, the same administration that labels the Geneva Conventions anachronistic has an outdated conception of international human-rights law. Today's human-rights norms are highly inclusive; they guarantee fundamental rights to all human beings simply by virtue of being human, and some of them cannot be suspended under any scenario. Denying suspected terrorists these rights is in principle no different from other exclusionary policies that deprive people of their rights on the basis of race, religion or gender. Bush administration apologists would surely claim that terrorists threaten vital national-security interests, and any temporary suspension of their rights is justified on grounds of self-defense. The problem is that rights are always withheld in the name of a greater good. Violating detainees' rights will not make the United States safer. It is only likely to threaten America's reputation, while engendering greater terrorism and instability.
...
... In the fight against terrorism, the Bush administration has simply not been willing to treat all detainees humanely or provide them with due process. It has preferred to fight terror with terror. Indefinite detention and inhumane interrogation procedures are not unintended or isolated cases; they are the sine qua non of the US attempt to fight a global war on terror in an age of internationally recognized human rights. A selective reading of the Geneva Conventions has been the perfect cover for achieving these contradictory, but ultimately untenable, goals.
Green light for Iraqi prison abuse came right from the top: top general accused of perjury [... but this is Bush Administration ... he'll be promoted!
News: "Green light for Iraqi prison abuse came right from the top | 03 April 2005
Classified documents show the former US military chief in Iraq personally sanctioned measures banned by the Geneva Conventions. Andrew Buncombe reports from Washington
America's leading civil liberties group has demanded an investigation into the former US military commander Iraq after a formerly classified memo revealed that he personally sanctioned a series of coercive interrogation techniques outlawed by the Geneva Conventions. The group claims that his directives were directly linked to the sort of abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib.
Documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reveal that Lt General Ricardo Sanchez authorised techniques such as the use of dogs to intimidate prisoners, stress positions and disorientation. In the documents, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Gen Sanchez admits that some of the techniques would not be tolerated by other countries.
When he appeared last year before a Congressional committee, Gen Sanchez denied authorising such techniques. He has now been accused of perjury.
...
In the September 2003 memo, Gen Sanchez authorised the use of 29 techniques for interrogating prisoners being held by the US. These included stress positions, "yelling, loud music and light control" as well as the use of muzzled military dogs in order to "exploit Arab fear of dogs". Some of the most notorious photographs to emerge from the Abu Ghraib scandal showed hand-cuffed, naked Iraqi prisoners cowering from snarling dogs.
...
When he appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee in May 2004, Gen Sanchez flatly refused approving such techniques in Iraq, and said that a news article reporting otherwise was false. "I never approved any of those measures to be used ... at any time in the last year," he said under oath. The ACLU accuses him of committing perjury and has asked the Attorney General to investigate....
Classified documents show the former US military chief in Iraq personally sanctioned measures banned by the Geneva Conventions. Andrew Buncombe reports from Washington
America's leading civil liberties group has demanded an investigation into the former US military commander Iraq after a formerly classified memo revealed that he personally sanctioned a series of coercive interrogation techniques outlawed by the Geneva Conventions. The group claims that his directives were directly linked to the sort of abuses that took place at Abu Ghraib.
Documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reveal that Lt General Ricardo Sanchez authorised techniques such as the use of dogs to intimidate prisoners, stress positions and disorientation. In the documents, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Gen Sanchez admits that some of the techniques would not be tolerated by other countries.
When he appeared last year before a Congressional committee, Gen Sanchez denied authorising such techniques. He has now been accused of perjury.
...
In the September 2003 memo, Gen Sanchez authorised the use of 29 techniques for interrogating prisoners being held by the US. These included stress positions, "yelling, loud music and light control" as well as the use of muzzled military dogs in order to "exploit Arab fear of dogs". Some of the most notorious photographs to emerge from the Abu Ghraib scandal showed hand-cuffed, naked Iraqi prisoners cowering from snarling dogs.
...
When he appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee in May 2004, Gen Sanchez flatly refused approving such techniques in Iraq, and said that a news article reporting otherwise was false. "I never approved any of those measures to be used ... at any time in the last year," he said under oath. The ACLU accuses him of committing perjury and has asked the Attorney General to investigate....
Activists see deception in night arrivals [of injured miltary] at Walter Reed [hospital ... "Is it because they don’t want the media to cover it?"
European and Pacific Stars & Stripes: "Activists see deception in night arrivals at Walter Reed | Shielding wounded denies cost of war, say vigil attendees | By Jon R. Anderson, Stars and Stripes | Mideast edition, Thursday, March 31, 2005
Steeling against rain and cold night air, clutching candles and placards, a group of activists are standing nightly vigils at the entrance to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, protesting what they believe is the Pentagon’s attempt to hide the human toll of the war in Iraq.
With wounded troops arriving from Germany, where most receive treatment after being stabilized in the field, flights to the United States are arranged so that soldiers are admitted into Walter Reed for follow on care at night.
“When we first heard about this, we were appalled,” said vigil organizer Gael Murphy, part of nationwide grass roots women’s group dubbed Code Pink. “Why are they bringing them in only at night? Is it because they don’t want the media to cover it? Is it because they don’t want Americans to see the real cost of this war?”
Steeling against rain and cold night air, clutching candles and placards, a group of activists are standing nightly vigils at the entrance to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, protesting what they believe is the Pentagon’s attempt to hide the human toll of the war in Iraq.
With wounded troops arriving from Germany, where most receive treatment after being stabilized in the field, flights to the United States are arranged so that soldiers are admitted into Walter Reed for follow on care at night.
“When we first heard about this, we were appalled,” said vigil organizer Gael Murphy, part of nationwide grass roots women’s group dubbed Code Pink. “Why are they bringing them in only at night? Is it because they don’t want the media to cover it? Is it because they don’t want Americans to see the real cost of this war?”
Afghanistan: 'One huge US jail'
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | 'One huge US jail': "Saturday March 19, 2005 | The Guardian "
Afghanistan is the hub of a global network of detention centres, the frontline in America's 'war on terror', where arrest can be random and allegations of torture commonplace. Adrian Levy and Cathy Scott-Clark investigate on the ground and talk to former prisoners
...
Outside Kabul, Afghanistan is bleaker, its provinces more inaccessible and lawless, than it was under the Taliban. If anyone leaves town, they do so in convoys. Afghanistan is a place where it is easy for people to disappear and perilous for anyone to investigate their fate. Even a seasoned aid agency such as M�d�cins Sans Fronti�res was forced to quit after five staff members were murdered last June. Only the 17,000-strong US forces, with their all-terrain Humvees and Apache attack helicopters, have the run of the land, and they have used the haze of fear and uncertainty that has engulfed the country to advance a draconian phase in the war against terror. Afghanistan has become the new Guant�namo Bay.
...
... "The detention system in Afghanistan exists entirely outside international norms, but it is only part of a far larger and more sinister jail network that we are only now beginning to understand," Michael Posner, director of the US legal watchdog Human Rights First, told us.
...
"Many thousands of people have been rounded up and detained by them. Those who have been freed say that they were held alongside foreign detainees who've been brought to this country to be processed. No one is charged. No one is identified. No international monitors are allowed into the US jails." He pulled out a handful of files: "People who have been arrested say they've been brutalised - the tactics used are beyond belief." The jails are closed to outside observers, making it impossible to test the truth of the claims.
Last November, a man from Gardez died of hypothermia in a US military jail. When his family were called to collect the body, they were given a $100 note for the taxi ride and no explanation. In scores more cases, people have simply disappeared.
...
However, many Afghans who celebrated the fall of the Taliban have long lost faith in the US military. In Kabul, Nader Nadery, of the Human Rights Commission, told us, "Afghanistan is being transformed into an enormous US jail. What we have here is a military strategy that has spawned serious human rights abuses, a system of which Afghanistan is but one part." In the past 18 months, the commission has logged more than 800 allegations of human rights abuses committed by US troops.
Afghanistan is the hub of a global network of detention centres, the frontline in America's 'war on terror', where arrest can be random and allegations of torture commonplace. Adrian Levy and Cathy Scott-Clark investigate on the ground and talk to former prisoners
...
Outside Kabul, Afghanistan is bleaker, its provinces more inaccessible and lawless, than it was under the Taliban. If anyone leaves town, they do so in convoys. Afghanistan is a place where it is easy for people to disappear and perilous for anyone to investigate their fate. Even a seasoned aid agency such as M�d�cins Sans Fronti�res was forced to quit after five staff members were murdered last June. Only the 17,000-strong US forces, with their all-terrain Humvees and Apache attack helicopters, have the run of the land, and they have used the haze of fear and uncertainty that has engulfed the country to advance a draconian phase in the war against terror. Afghanistan has become the new Guant�namo Bay.
...
... "The detention system in Afghanistan exists entirely outside international norms, but it is only part of a far larger and more sinister jail network that we are only now beginning to understand," Michael Posner, director of the US legal watchdog Human Rights First, told us.
...
"Many thousands of people have been rounded up and detained by them. Those who have been freed say that they were held alongside foreign detainees who've been brought to this country to be processed. No one is charged. No one is identified. No international monitors are allowed into the US jails." He pulled out a handful of files: "People who have been arrested say they've been brutalised - the tactics used are beyond belief." The jails are closed to outside observers, making it impossible to test the truth of the claims.
Last November, a man from Gardez died of hypothermia in a US military jail. When his family were called to collect the body, they were given a $100 note for the taxi ride and no explanation. In scores more cases, people have simply disappeared.
...
However, many Afghans who celebrated the fall of the Taliban have long lost faith in the US military. In Kabul, Nader Nadery, of the Human Rights Commission, told us, "Afghanistan is being transformed into an enormous US jail. What we have here is a military strategy that has spawned serious human rights abuses, a system of which Afghanistan is but one part." In the past 18 months, the commission has logged more than 800 allegations of human rights abuses committed by US troops.
Bush Names Cheney Kin to Legal Post: "the president nominates individuals he believes are the best qualified for the job"
The New York Times > Washington > Bush Names Cheney Kin to Legal Post: "By ERIC LIPTON | Published: March 31, 2005
WASHINGTON, March 30 - President Bush has nominated the vice president's son-in-law, Philip J. Perry, as general counsel of the Homeland Security Department, where he would oversee 1,500 lawyers who work on legal matters like Coast Guard maritime laws and immigration.
Mr. Perry, who is married to Elizabeth Cheney, is leaving the Washington office of the Latham & Watkins law firm, where he was a partner, as well as a lobbyist for Lockheed Martin, one of the top 10 contractors for the Homeland Security Department."
...
Lockheed Martin and its partners have won hundreds of millions of dollars worth of commitments in the last two years for products and services it sells, including a contract to train airport security screeners for the Transportation Security Administration.
...
"The president," Ms. Perino said, "nominates individuals he believes are the best qualified for the job to serve the American people."
WASHINGTON, March 30 - President Bush has nominated the vice president's son-in-law, Philip J. Perry, as general counsel of the Homeland Security Department, where he would oversee 1,500 lawyers who work on legal matters like Coast Guard maritime laws and immigration.
Mr. Perry, who is married to Elizabeth Cheney, is leaving the Washington office of the Latham & Watkins law firm, where he was a partner, as well as a lobbyist for Lockheed Martin, one of the top 10 contractors for the Homeland Security Department."
...
Lockheed Martin and its partners have won hundreds of millions of dollars worth of commitments in the last two years for products and services it sells, including a contract to train airport security screeners for the Transportation Security Administration.
...
"The president," Ms. Perino said, "nominates individuals he believes are the best qualified for the job to serve the American people."
Torture Inc. Americas Brutal Prisons
Torture Inc. Americas Brutal PrisonsSavaged by dogs, Electrocuted With Cattle Prods, Burned By Toxic Chemicals, Does such barbaric abuse inside U.S. jails explain the horrors that were committed in Iraq? | By Deborah Davies
They are just some of the victims of wholesale torture taking place inside the U.S. prison system that we uncovered during a four-month investigation for BBC Channel 4 . It’s terrible to watch some of the videos and realise that you’re not only seeing torture in action but, in the most extreme cases, you are witnessing young men dying.
The prison guards stand over their captives with electric cattle prods, stun guns, and dogs. Many of the prisoners have been ordered to strip naked. The guards are yelling abuse at them, ordering them to lie on the ground and crawl. ‘Crawl, motherf*****s, crawl.’
If a prisoner doesn’t drop to the ground fast enough, a guard kicks him or stamps on his back. There’s a high-pitched scream from one man as a dog clamps its teeth onto his lower leg.
Another prisoner has a broken ankle. He can’t crawl fast enough so a guard jabs a stun gun onto his buttocks. The jolt of electricity zaps through his naked flesh and genitals. For hours afterwards his whole body shakes.
Lines of men are now slithering across the floor of the cellblock while the guards stand over them shouting, prodding and kicking.
Second by second, their humiliation is captured on a video camera by one of the guards.
The images of abuse and brutality he records are horrifyingly familiar. These were exactly the kind of pictures from inside Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad that shocked the world this time last year.
And they are similar, too, to the images of brutality against Iraqi prisoners that this week led to the conviction of three British soldiers.
But there is a difference. These prisoners are not caught up in a war zone. They are Americans, and the video comes from inside a prison in Texas
They are just some of the victims of wholesale torture taking place inside the U.S. prison system that we uncovered during a four-month investigation for Channel 4 that will be broadcast next week.
Our findings were not based on rumour or suspicion. They were based on solid evidence, chiefly videotapes that we collected from all over the U.S.
In many American states, prison regulations demand that any ‘use of force operation’, such as searching cells for drugs, must be filmed by a guard.
The theory is that the tapes will show proper procedure was followed and that no excessive force was used. In fact, many of them record the exact opposite.
Each tape provides a shocking insight into the reality of life inside the U.S. prison system – a reality that sits very uncomfortably with President Bush’s commitment to the battle for freedom and democracy against the forces of tyranny and oppression.
In fact, the Texas episode outlined above dates from 1996, when Bush was state Governor.
Frank Carlson was one of the lawyers who fought a compensation battle on behalf of the victims. I asked him about his reaction when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke last year and U.S. politicians rushed to express their astonishment and disgust that such abuses could happen at the hands of American guards.
‘I thought: “What hypocrisy,” Carlson told me. ‘Because they know we do it here every day.’ ...
...
In one horrific scene, a naked man, passive and vacant, is seen being led out of his cell by prison guards. They strap him into a medieval-looking device called a ‘restraint chair’. His hands and feet are shackled, there’s a strap across his chest, his head lolls forward. He looks dead. He’s not. Not yet.
The chair is his punishment because guards saw him in his cell with a pillowcase on his head and he refused to take it off. The man has a long history of severe schizophrenia. Sixteen hours later, they release him from the chair. And two hours after that, he dies from a blood clot resulting from his barbaric treatment.
...
The first tape, from 2001, shows a man named Charles Agster dragged in by police, handcuffed at the wrists and ankles. Agster is mentally disturbed and a drug user. He was arrested for causing a disturbance in a late-night grocery store. The police handed him over to the Sheriff’s deputies in the jail. Agster is a tiny man, weighing no more than nine stone, but he’s struggling.
The tape shows nine deputies manhandling him into the restraint chair. One of them kneels on Agster’s stomach, pushing his head forward on to his knees and pulling his arms back to strap his wrists into the chair.
Bending someone double for any length of time is dangerous – the manuals on the use of the 'restraint chair’ warn of the dangers of ‘positional asphyxia.’
Fifteen minutes later, a nurse notices Agster is unconscious. The cameras show frantic efforts to resuscitate him, but he’s already brain dead. He died three days later in hospital. Agster's family is currently suing Arizona County.
...
The tape shows a prisoner lying on an examination table in the prison hospital. The guards are instructing him to climb down into a wheelchair. ‘I can’t, I can’t!’ he shouts with increasing desperation. ‘It hurts!’
One guard then jabs him on both hips with a Taser. The man jerks as the electricity hits him and shrieks, but still won’t get into the wheelchair.
The guards grab him and drop him into the chair. As they try to bend his legs up on to the footrest, he screams in pain. The man’s lawyer told me he has a very limited mental capacity. He says he has a back injury and can’t walk or bend his legs without intense pain.
The tape becomes even more harrowing. The guards try to make the prisoner stand up and hold a walking frame. He falls on the floor, crying in agony. They Taser him again. He runs out of the energy and breath to cry and just lies there moaning.
...
Then, three weeks ago, reports emerged of 20 hours of video material from Guantanamo Bay showing prisoners being stripped, beaten and pepper sprayed. One of those affected is Omar Deghayes, one of the seven British residents still being held there.
His lawyer says Deghayes is now permanently blind in one eye. American military investigators have reviewed the tapes and apparently found ‘no evidence of systematic abuse.’
But then, as one of the prison reformers we met on our journey across the U.S. told me: ‘We’ve become immune to the abuse. The brutality has become customary.’ ...
They are just some of the victims of wholesale torture taking place inside the U.S. prison system that we uncovered during a four-month investigation for BBC Channel 4 . It’s terrible to watch some of the videos and realise that you’re not only seeing torture in action but, in the most extreme cases, you are witnessing young men dying.
The prison guards stand over their captives with electric cattle prods, stun guns, and dogs. Many of the prisoners have been ordered to strip naked. The guards are yelling abuse at them, ordering them to lie on the ground and crawl. ‘Crawl, motherf*****s, crawl.’
If a prisoner doesn’t drop to the ground fast enough, a guard kicks him or stamps on his back. There’s a high-pitched scream from one man as a dog clamps its teeth onto his lower leg.
Another prisoner has a broken ankle. He can’t crawl fast enough so a guard jabs a stun gun onto his buttocks. The jolt of electricity zaps through his naked flesh and genitals. For hours afterwards his whole body shakes.
Lines of men are now slithering across the floor of the cellblock while the guards stand over them shouting, prodding and kicking.
Second by second, their humiliation is captured on a video camera by one of the guards.
The images of abuse and brutality he records are horrifyingly familiar. These were exactly the kind of pictures from inside Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad that shocked the world this time last year.
And they are similar, too, to the images of brutality against Iraqi prisoners that this week led to the conviction of three British soldiers.
But there is a difference. These prisoners are not caught up in a war zone. They are Americans, and the video comes from inside a prison in Texas
They are just some of the victims of wholesale torture taking place inside the U.S. prison system that we uncovered during a four-month investigation for Channel 4 that will be broadcast next week.
Our findings were not based on rumour or suspicion. They were based on solid evidence, chiefly videotapes that we collected from all over the U.S.
In many American states, prison regulations demand that any ‘use of force operation’, such as searching cells for drugs, must be filmed by a guard.
The theory is that the tapes will show proper procedure was followed and that no excessive force was used. In fact, many of them record the exact opposite.
Each tape provides a shocking insight into the reality of life inside the U.S. prison system – a reality that sits very uncomfortably with President Bush’s commitment to the battle for freedom and democracy against the forces of tyranny and oppression.
In fact, the Texas episode outlined above dates from 1996, when Bush was state Governor.
Frank Carlson was one of the lawyers who fought a compensation battle on behalf of the victims. I asked him about his reaction when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke last year and U.S. politicians rushed to express their astonishment and disgust that such abuses could happen at the hands of American guards.
‘I thought: “What hypocrisy,” Carlson told me. ‘Because they know we do it here every day.’ ...
...
In one horrific scene, a naked man, passive and vacant, is seen being led out of his cell by prison guards. They strap him into a medieval-looking device called a ‘restraint chair’. His hands and feet are shackled, there’s a strap across his chest, his head lolls forward. He looks dead. He’s not. Not yet.
The chair is his punishment because guards saw him in his cell with a pillowcase on his head and he refused to take it off. The man has a long history of severe schizophrenia. Sixteen hours later, they release him from the chair. And two hours after that, he dies from a blood clot resulting from his barbaric treatment.
...
The first tape, from 2001, shows a man named Charles Agster dragged in by police, handcuffed at the wrists and ankles. Agster is mentally disturbed and a drug user. He was arrested for causing a disturbance in a late-night grocery store. The police handed him over to the Sheriff’s deputies in the jail. Agster is a tiny man, weighing no more than nine stone, but he’s struggling.
The tape shows nine deputies manhandling him into the restraint chair. One of them kneels on Agster’s stomach, pushing his head forward on to his knees and pulling his arms back to strap his wrists into the chair.
Bending someone double for any length of time is dangerous – the manuals on the use of the 'restraint chair’ warn of the dangers of ‘positional asphyxia.’
Fifteen minutes later, a nurse notices Agster is unconscious. The cameras show frantic efforts to resuscitate him, but he’s already brain dead. He died three days later in hospital. Agster's family is currently suing Arizona County.
...
The tape shows a prisoner lying on an examination table in the prison hospital. The guards are instructing him to climb down into a wheelchair. ‘I can’t, I can’t!’ he shouts with increasing desperation. ‘It hurts!’
One guard then jabs him on both hips with a Taser. The man jerks as the electricity hits him and shrieks, but still won’t get into the wheelchair.
The guards grab him and drop him into the chair. As they try to bend his legs up on to the footrest, he screams in pain. The man’s lawyer told me he has a very limited mental capacity. He says he has a back injury and can’t walk or bend his legs without intense pain.
The tape becomes even more harrowing. The guards try to make the prisoner stand up and hold a walking frame. He falls on the floor, crying in agony. They Taser him again. He runs out of the energy and breath to cry and just lies there moaning.
...
Then, three weeks ago, reports emerged of 20 hours of video material from Guantanamo Bay showing prisoners being stripped, beaten and pepper sprayed. One of those affected is Omar Deghayes, one of the seven British residents still being held there.
His lawyer says Deghayes is now permanently blind in one eye. American military investigators have reviewed the tapes and apparently found ‘no evidence of systematic abuse.’
But then, as one of the prison reformers we met on our journey across the U.S. told me: ‘We’ve become immune to the abuse. The brutality has become customary.’ ...
Friday, April 01, 2005
Why we'll never see the second round of Abu Ghraib photos
Reason: The Pentagon's Secret Stash: Why we'll never see the second round of Abu Ghraib photos: "April 2005 | The Pentagon's Secret Stash | Matt Welch
The images, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Congress, depict "acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel, and inhuman." After Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) viewed some of them in a classified briefing, he testified that his "stomach gave out." NBC News reported that they show "American soldiers beating one prisoner almost to death, apparently raping a female prisoner, acting inappropriately with a dead body, and taping Iraqi guards raping young boys." Everyone who saw the photographs and videos seemed to shudder openly when contemplating what the reaction would be when they eventually were made public.
It's not for lack of trying, at least from outside the government. Aftergood, for example, sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the Defense Department on May 12, asking generally for "photographic and video images of abuses committed against Iraqi prisoners" and specifically for the material contained on three compact discs mentioned by Rumsfeld in his testimony. The Defense Department told him to ask the U.S. Central Command, which sent him back to Defense, which said on second thought try the Army's Freedom of Information Department, which forwarded him to the Army's Crime Records Center, which hasn't yet responded. "It's not as if this is somehow an obscure matter that no one's quite ever heard of," Aftergood notes.
...
Officials have given two legal reasons for suppressing images of prisoner abuse: "unwarranted invasion of privacy" and the potential impact on law enforcement. The Freedom of Information Act's exemptions 6 and 7 (as these justifications are known, respectively) have been used repeatedly to rebuff the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which since October 2003 has unearthed more than 600 torture-related government documents but zero images.
The images, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Congress, depict "acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel, and inhuman." After Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) viewed some of them in a classified briefing, he testified that his "stomach gave out." NBC News reported that they show "American soldiers beating one prisoner almost to death, apparently raping a female prisoner, acting inappropriately with a dead body, and taping Iraqi guards raping young boys." Everyone who saw the photographs and videos seemed to shudder openly when contemplating what the reaction would be when they eventually were made public.
It's not for lack of trying, at least from outside the government. Aftergood, for example, sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the Defense Department on May 12, asking generally for "photographic and video images of abuses committed against Iraqi prisoners" and specifically for the material contained on three compact discs mentioned by Rumsfeld in his testimony. The Defense Department told him to ask the U.S. Central Command, which sent him back to Defense, which said on second thought try the Army's Freedom of Information Department, which forwarded him to the Army's Crime Records Center, which hasn't yet responded. "It's not as if this is somehow an obscure matter that no one's quite ever heard of," Aftergood notes.
...
Officials have given two legal reasons for suppressing images of prisoner abuse: "unwarranted invasion of privacy" and the potential impact on law enforcement. The Freedom of Information Act's exemptions 6 and 7 (as these justifications are known, respectively) have been used repeatedly to rebuff the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which since October 2003 has unearthed more than 600 torture-related government documents but zero images.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)