a word on palin

As many of you know I am not the biggest Obama fan... but I guess I will vote (I have to admit I am still thinking about that one for the first time in my so called adult life). Assuming I vote and as I could never vote for McCain, Obama will get my vote. So there you have it.
That being said, when McCain announced his running mate my first thought was that naming a woman was a good political move... trying to capture some of those Hillary supporters who were mad at Obama (by the way I am not particularly mad at Obama I just do not think you pluck someone up and make him president just because he gives a good speech).
It was not until I watched the VP debates that I realized that palin was not in the race to capture the Hillary voters (ok, duhhhhh). As I watched palin's "cute" smiles and that wink (was someone telling her in that little box on her back to "wink now"?) I knew she was in the race to capture a certain male voter... no serious Hillary supporter could possibly give her the time of day... but it wasn't just any male voter McCain was aiming for...and that is the funny part .... you see, I could actually picture McCain telling palin to wink and in my mind I could hear McCain saying...."they will love that" ...and "smile again" "do that grin where you stick your tongue between your teeth ...it is so cute." I can picture and hear all of this in my mind because McCain is such a known sexist. This isn’t about a running mate, this is McCain waiving his little Bunny in front of the crowd. Problem is that the men McCain is trying to impress are men like himself….and if they bother to vote they would have been voting for McCain anyway.
So anyway click on the title and sing along.
I will be back with more Guantanamo news later.... including news about more releases...(no not my clients).

As I Was Saying...

The New York Times today reports on what many of us habeas attorneys have been talking about for quite awhile and what I reported about just recently. The District Court judges continue to disregard the U.S. Supreme Court and refuse to move forward on the Habeas Petitions for the Guantanamo prisoners. CLICK ON THE TITLE TO READ THE STORY.

Are the judges hoping for another congressional intervention? Why are they so afraid to rule? (they cannot all be hoping for seats in the circuit or supreme court!).

After practicing law for more than 25 years I cannot point to a more disappointing display by our judiciary in my lifetime. I am not saying that the courts as a whole have not done worse... but in my lifetime this is the worst.

Shame on all of them...

Cheney

And just when you thought you knew more about our current VP then you ever wanted to know... you learn there is more that you need to know,including:
* How Cheney killed a State Department proposal to close secret CIA prisons, deleting it from the agenda of an NSC meeting.
Click on the title.

Bail out help needed

Of course when Bush pushes the panic button, which he regularly does, I automatically wonder what part of our constitution will be voted obsolete this time. I read that the Senate bill passed today would:

• Make permanent authority for undercover operations.
• Make permanent authority for disclosure of information relating to terrorist activities.

Does anyone have any details on these provisions?

By the way I have sent my letters to representatives and congress to stop this bill in its tracks. What about you?

British soldiers face Prosecution if they hand prisoners over to known torturer: US

So now the British are telling their soldiers they can't turn over prisoners in Iraq to the US without themselves facing prosecution because they know, as we all know, that the US tortures prisoners. Soldiers who turn prisoners over to the US would be in violation of both the Human Rights Act and the European Convention on Human Rights which forbids the turning over of prisoners to groups known to torture.
Click on the title to read the legal opinion rendered to the British Parliament by Michael Fordham QC.
A synopsis of the opinion can be found in the Guardian:

The conclusion reached by Fordham and his colleague Tom Hickman is that an offence would definitely have been committed. If acted on, the opinion could mean that UK troops would not be allowed to "render" detainees to the US military until it was clear that they would no longer face the possibility of torture or ill-treatment.

What prompted the inquiry was a statement made in February this year by Ben Griffin, a former SAS soldier who was on active service in Iraq. In his statement, Griffin said that he was "in no doubt" that individuals handed over to the US military "would be tortured". He cited what had happened to those detained at Guantánamo Bay, Bagram airbase and Abu Ghraib prison.

The opinion adds: "UK forces operating in Iraq are potentially also subject to UK criminal law, tort law and Iraqi law. Notably, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 makes it a criminal offence for a public official, whatever his nationality and wherever located, to commit an act of torture."

FROM ROGER FITCH AND OUR FRIENDS DOWN UNDER

Death throes of the Bush regime … Key case to test concept of “enemy combatants” ... Last minute election tricks in the Republican armoury … Cheney ordered not to destroy his papers … The 20 most corrupt members of Congress.

Even in its dying days the Bush administration seeks to vindicate a frightening principle and make it a permanent feature of American law.

It’s the notion that a US president, on his own say-so, can seize and indefinitely detain anyone, anywhere in the world, including US citizens and those on US soil, for any reason he chooses – without “second-guessing”, as the Bush lawyers call judicial review.

CLICK ON THE TITLE TO READ THE REST....

FIRE JOHN YOO

Wow, who knew there was a website dedicated to this cause? Check it out by clicking on the title. Now if we could get a similar one going for my client's personal war criminal, Matthew Waxman at Columbia Law School, I would really be happy.

Affidavit of latest military prosecutor forced out

Click on the title to go to the affidavit of Lt. Col. Vandeveld the lead prosecutor in the Jawed case. Col. Vendeveld stepped down (or it seems was forced out) after he realized that government and/or military agencies were withholding exculpatory evidence (that would be evidence that is helpful to the defendant). Col. Vandeveld described the discovery procedures for providing evidence to the defense as a "slipshod, uncertain procedure."
As with the other heros who have stepped forward to blow the whistle on the underhanded and illegal tactics being used in these military tribunals Col. Vandeveld has now been accused of collaborating with defense counsel and there were even cries of needing to submit Col. Vandeveld for a psychiatric examination. It seems everyone who questions these kangaroo proceedings is considered by the military to be crazy!
I for one would like to thank the good Col. for putting his career on the line in an effort to advance the truth as to what is happening at Guantanamo.

SO WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT?

When Judge Hogan first came on board as the "coordinator" for the Gitmo cases he entered an odd order. He ordered that all of the petitions that were filed as "next friend" petitions be supplemented with an authorization from the client for the attorney to represent them. Next friend petitions are petitions where the authorization comes from a family member or friend. I don't know how many of the cases are filed as "next friend" petitions and frankly I don't know why it matters. Neither of my cases is a next friend case so the matter does not directly impact me but I still wondered what this judge was up to. Is he going to dismiss the cases if the clients will not sign an authorization? Will those petitioners then have to represent themselves pro se? Will he bar the attorneys from going to see their clients? Most importantly why is he spending energy on this issue when the supreme court has said to get moving on these cases? Over the last few weeks there has been a dribbling of motions coming across the wires explaining why they cannot get authorizations, some of the reasons are mundane:attorneys have never seen their clients because they are waiting for security clearances and hurricanes have kept them from getting to the base. Other reasons are not mundane: men with severe medical and psychological problems who do not understand anything about the US legal system (I can relate to that one of late) and desperately need representation; men who have been long engaged with their lawyers but will not sign any documentation.
Todays Order entered by Judge Hogan (below) shows that for whatever reason he is keeping tabs on this issue and has something up his sleeve. So while our clients rot in that hell hole and our courts continue to sit on their hands Judge Hogan finds time only to enter orders that are meaningless in the overall scheme of things. Indications from previous Judge Hogan orders suggest to me that this is not going to have a happy ending.
Docket Text:
MINUTE ORDER granting (Docket # 595, 05-cv-2386) (Docket # 522, 08-mc-442) Petitioner Abu Rawda's Motion For More Time To Submit Authorization. Accordingly, by October 28, 2008, counsel for Petitioner Rawda shall file a signed authorization from Petitioner to pursue this action or a declaration by counsel that states Petitioner directly authorized counsel to pursue this action and explains why counsel was unable to secure a signed authorization. Signed by Judge Thomas F. Hogan on 9/26/08. (lctfh1)

Judge Hogan on Medical Records

As I reported a short while ago on this blog Judge Hogan the judge responsible for "coordinating" the habeas cases (and he has been a huge disappointment) was also considering a request from another detainee for his medical records. Marc Falkoff reported after the hearing that it went quite well and he was hopeful that they would get the records.
J. Hogan added to his less than stellar Gitmo record by denying the medical records because he doesn't believe he has jurisdiction.
--
According to Marc his client Adnan, 1)attempted suicide in June, (2) weighed about 100 pounds when Marc saw him in August, (3) has had his mattress and blankets taken away as punishment for an unspecified disciplinary infraction, and (4) again attempted suicide about two weeks ago by biting off and swallowing a piece of the feeding tube they began using to force-feed him. Judge Hogan didn't address any of those issue but instead held that -- notwithstanding Boumediene -- the MCA strips the court of jurisdiction to hear all "conditions of confinement" claims. J. Hogan did not address most of the issues raised by Marc such as the records being incident to Adnan's habeas action and necessary to assure Adnan's continued access to the court to prosecute his petition. Judge Hogan also didn't address the argument that if the government's argument is correct, Adnan could be tortured or starved to death at Guantanamo and there's nothing the courts could do about it.
More Justice American Style.

More Documents Released Showing White House Meetings on Torture (UPDATED)

I now have my hands on the actual documents and you can also click on the title to read Senator Levin's recap of what the documents show.

Another Military Prosecutor Resigns

Hats off to the talking dog for bringing this to my attention. Click on the title for more details.

No Habeas Relief for Detainees on list to be released

When the U.S. Supreme Court released the decision in Boumediene in June and ordered that Habeas hearings be held promptly for the men at Guantanamo there was cautious optimism on the part of some (not me) that something might happen. One of the first things that happened at the district court level was that most of the judges allowed their cases to be transfered to senior judge Hogan to coordinate certain "common issues." My clients cases were included in that coordinated effort. Not much has happened since that time and certainly nothing good has happened. Now Judge Hogan has added to the misery of the prisoners by deciding that the government doesn't have to provide any information regarding those prisoners who have been cleared for release. No information means no hearing.... unless Judge Hogan surprises us and decides that since the government has cleared these men their habeas petitions can just be granted as uncontested...but somehow I doubt that. I guess he thinks since they have been "cleared" to be released they no longer have a need to have habeas hearings. Thing is, most of the men on the "cleared" list have been cleared for years with no end to their imprisonment in sight.
Justice American style.

2nd Circuit Orders More Pictures Released

Thanks again to the ACLU for not letting the administration get away with burying the pictures of prisoners held in afghanistan and iraq. I believe some of those pictures will include men that have been or are continuing to be held at guantanamo as many of the men (including Al-Ghizzawi) have described pictures taken of them. Click on the title to read the actual decision from the 2nd Circuit ordering the release of those pictures.

Psychologists vote to ban helping in Gitmo Interrogations

The nation's leading psychologist's association has 
voted to ban its members from taking part in 
interrogations at the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 
and other military detention sites.

The ban means psychologists who are association members 
can't assist the U.S. military at these sites and can 
only work there for humanitarian purposes or with
non-governmental groups, according to Stephen Soldz,
 a Boston psychologist. Soldz is founder of an ethics 
coalition that has long supported the ban.

Steven Reisner, a New York psychologist who's
 running for president of the association,
said Thursday that members' votes were 
counted this week.