"Guidebook to False Confessions"

I have clipped a few paragraphs to get you interested.....

The CIA claimed Zubaydah, who at the time was being held at a black site prison in Thailand, was "withholding imminent threat information during the initial interrogation sessions," according to documents released by the Senate Intelligence Committee in April 2009.

So, "attorneys from the CIA's Office of General Counsel [including the agency's top lawyer John Rizzo] met with the Attorney General [John Ashcroft], the National Security Adviser [Rice], the Deputy National Security Adviser [Stephen Hadley], the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council [John Bellinger], and the Counsel to the President [Alberto Gonzales] in mid-May 2002 to discuss the possible use of alternative interrogation methods that differed from the traditional methods used by the U.S."

One of the key documents handed out to Bush officials at this meeting, and at Principals Committee sessions chaired by Rice that took place between May and July 2002, was a 37-page instructional manual that contained detailed descriptions of seven of the ten techniques that ended up in the legal opinion widely referred to as the "torture memo," drafted by Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) attorney John Yoo and signed by his boss, Jay Bybee, three months later. According to Rice, Yoo had attended the Principals Committee meetings and participated in discussions about Zubaydah's torture.

That instructional manual, referred to as "Pre-Academic Laboratory (PREAL) Operating Instructions," has just been released by the Department of Defense under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The document sheds additional light on the origins of the Bush administration's torture policy and for the first time describes exactly what methods of torture Bush officials had discussed - and subsequently approved - for Zubaydah in May 2002.

CLICK here TO READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE on Truthout BY JASON LEOPOLD AND JEFF KAYE. 

WRITTEN MATERIALS NOT ALLOWED

Recently I was explaining to my friend Almerindo Ojeda at the Guantanamo Testimonials Project about some of the recent changes during visits to the base to see my client. Almerindo asked me to write out a statement for the project about one of those changes. Here it is:

My last two trips to Guantanamo were the weeks of December 5, 2011 and July 10, 2011. I think it is fair to say that the procedures for attorney client visits change frequently however the changes during the last two visits were some of the most dramatic. Before I discuss those changes I want to back track just a bit. When I first started visiting my clients in 2006 I could bring with me attorney client materials-including unclassified court pleadings, letters that I had sent to my clients and of course any notes of things that I wanted to discuss with my clients. A few years later-I want to say in 08 but I am not exactly sure when-we were no longer allowed to bring with us any materials that were not in English unless a government translator reviewed and OK’d the materials. I was in the awkward position of having my attorney client mail that I would bring with me to make sure my client had received, being read by the military. I complained but to no avail-so I stopped bringing the Arabic translations and instead brought only my English versions of the letters. That was the process until this past year. When I went to visit my client in July I went through the usual screening-having my bag looked into and the food that I brought my client reviewed for contraband (straws-plastic ware-etc) and then I walked over to the military lawyer desk and I was asked if I had anything with writing on it. I said “of course.” I was told that they wanted to review it and I said all I had with me an unclassified version of my clients Traverse (the reply to his habeas petition) and I had a letter from the DOJ counsel telling me that this was the version that I was permitted to show my client. The military lawyer reviewed the materials and allowed them in. I was then told that I was not allowed to bring my wallet (which was in my brief case) into the meeting. I said “really?” The answer was “yes.” I was told that I could put my wallet in the transport van and the escort would give it back to me after the meeting. No explanation was given to me as to why I could not bring my wallet and I didn't ask.

For my December meeting I only brought with me a pad of paper with some notes on it to remind myself of things I wanted to discuss. After going through the usual screening I went over to the military lawyer desk and they asked if I had anything with me that had writing on it. I said “no, just some notes that I made.” I was then told that they wanted to look at the notes and I said “no.” That is when I was told that I could not bring anything into the meeting with writing on it unless they approved it. I told them I would not allow them to review my notes at which point I was told that I would have to put my notes back in the bus. Instead, I reviewed my notes as I was standing there and then tore the piece of paper into tiny pieces and threw my notes in the garbage.  I was then asked if there was anything in my wallet with writing on it.  I refrained from saying “duhhhh.”  I politely asked what they meant by that question and I was told if there was anything with writing on it-IDs-money, anything with writing-then my wallet could not go with me into the meeting either. I gave my wallet to the escort and walked into my meeting with my client. I did however have one thing with writing in my briefcase. I always carry a pocket edition of the constitution in my brief case and when my brief case was screened no one mentioned it. It seemed to me to be the one thing I really needed in this day and age (and place) and since no one mentioned it during the screening I decided the constitution was safe,  for now….

From Roger Fitch and our Friends down under at Justinian

The Monte Cristo syndrome

ROGER FITCH ESQ • WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2012

Guantánamo: give evidence against other prisoners and we might let you out, one day ... As long as you're not too angry ... The new prosecution paradigm and the latest stitch-up ... Plus, the legal basis for drone killing of Americans without due process ... Roger Fitch - Our Man in Washington 

"Farcical judicial trials conducted by us will destroy confidence in the judicial process as quickly as those conducted by any other people ... there are certain things you cannot do under the guise of a judicial trial. Courts try cases, but cases also try courts." US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, Nuremberg Tribunal. 

*   *   *

"Robert Jackson ... would turn over in his grave if he knew what was going on at Guantánamo." Henry King, Jr., Associate Prosecutor, Nuremberg. 

*   *   *

The first new military commission prosecution was recently announced, against the Pakistani Majid Khan. A plea bargain quickly followed. If all goes well, Mr Khan, held without charge since 2003, will be sentenced in 2016. Is that speedy, or what?

The media were mostly cock-a-hoop over the prospect of new "war crime convictions," even though Khan, like the all the other people charged in commissions since George Bush first set them up in November 2001, will not stand convicted of any crime actually applicable to him under the law of war. 

As Melina Milazzo, counsel for the Law and Security Program, noted:  

"The US military commission system, now in its third incarnation, faces lengthy litigation over the legality of trying individuals for offenses that do not actually constitute war crimes, the potential ex post facto problems with prosecuting conduct not considered criminal until the passage of the Military Commission Act, and the scope and meaning of the rule and procedures applicable during trials."

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST....... 

Of course I have never even trusted THIS president....just sayin.

Gitmo and the Supreme Court

Since the Boumediene decision by the Supreme Court in 2008- a decision which made clear that the men at Guantanamo were entitled to meaninful habeas corpus hearings-the DC Circuit Court has spun the Supreme Court's mandate into meaninglessness....not one Guantanamo prisoner has prevailed in the appellate court-and the supreme court has not taken on another case. Now there are eight cases in the supreme court asking for review. ScotUS blog has a rundown on the cases and the issues here.

A broken writ.....a Kangaroo court.

Watching our justice system disintegrate is particularly painful for those of us who cherish(ed) being lawyers. Chicago attorney Len Goodman describes one such experience here.

SO WHAT IS GOING ON?

A number of you have emailed me to ask why I am not writing as much about Guantanamo these past weeks. I think this article by Gitmo attorney Cori Crider describes best the state of mind of many of us:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cori-crider/another-visit-to-guantana_b_1256786.html

But what else is going on? For many of us if feels like 2006 all over again with the release of this little fantasy piece by the republicans:
http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/120208-draft-report-on-detainee-policies-at-guantanamo1.pdf

Back in 2006 I wrote about these statistics for HuffingtonPost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-candace-gorman-/return-to-the-battlefield_b_43344.html

Later we learned that some of the numbers of the so called "recidivists" (it of course begs the question to ask how can you return to the battlefield if you were never at a battlefield to begin with....but I digress) were on the list because after leaving Guantanamo they dared to speak out against the gulag...
http://law.shu.edu/publications/guantanamoReports/meaning_of_battlefield_final_121007.pdf

So yes, this is so very depressing by don't think just because I am taking a little time to regroup that I am giving up.

So I leave you with one last story- a story about the guy who wrote the book....yes, the book- on the Guantanamo detainees: Andy Worthington.   check out this article by Jason Leopold:
http://www.truth-out.org/guantanamo-ten-years-later-interview-guantanamo-expert-author-and-filmmaker-andy-worthington/1328120

Moe Davis talks to the Dog

THIS IS THE VERY LAST QUESTION AND ANSWER AND AFTER READING THIS I HOPE YOU WILL CLICK HERE AND GO TO THE ARTICLE AND READ THE WHOLE AMAZING INTERVIEW:

The Talking Dog: As we come to a point in time ten years after the opening of Guantanamo Bay for military detentions of persons captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere, is there anything else I should have asked you but didn't, or anything else you believe that the public needs to know about this?

Morris Davis: One thing comes to mind. We chose Guantanamo a decade ago because some people thought that it was outside the reach of law. And now, we have 171 men stuck in a legal Alice in Wonderland. And so we continue to make bad laws, like the NDAA and the "reformed again and again military commissions” -- to continue to try to deal with men we are holding because we took short-cuts and made bad decisions years ago. My hope is that common sense prevails and we can look rationally at the big picture, and we stop trying to make even more bad laws rooted in our prior bad decisions. I hope at some point we remember who we are and what we stand for, we reckon with what we did in the past, and we stop living our lives in fear. I hope we become free and brave again.

The Talking Dog: I join all my readers in thanking Col. Morris Davis for that eye-opening interview.

READ THE WHOLE INTERVIEW HERE.

From Roger Fitch and our Friends down under at Justinian...

Sorry I am a little late posting this-but it is as timely as ever....

Happy birthday Gitmo

ROGER FITCH ESQ • THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 2012

Milestones and millstones ... Guantánamo's tenth birthday, as Bill of Rights turns 220 ... National Defence Authorisation Act allows for exciting possibilities - including military detention of US civilians ... The new Reichstag Fire Decree ... Latest from US Supremes ... Habeas - British courts step-in where DC Circuit fears to tread

The US reached a milestone on December 15: 220 years since the adoption of its famous Bill of Rights. 

It's older than the French Droits de l'Homme of 1793.

Nevertheless, for reasons best left to historians, on "Bill of Rights Day" Congress suspended large chunks of the 10 amendments (and effectively, habeas corpus) in theNational Defence Authorisation Act .


TO READ THE REST CLICK HERE

"Smuggling" accusations continue

Not too long ago one of the Guantanamo attorneys was accused of smuggling underpants to a detainee....now another attorney is accused of smuggling pamphlets....The search process before seeing a client is exhaustive---and exhausting and the notion that any one of us would risk our law licenses to bring in this trivia is beyond the pale....but that doesn't stop the military.

Read the whole story on truthout here.

Guantanamo Commander’s “Smuggling” Claim Against Military Attorney Preceded Legal Mail Order 

Saturday 21 January 2012

by: Jason Leopold, Truthout | Report

This is the front cover of a pamphlet produced by a Kuwaiti-based anti-Guantanamo organization that was set up in November to try and win the release of two Kuwaiti prisoners, pictured on the cover of the pamphlet, who are detained at the detention facility. The commander of Guantanamo, Rear Adm. David Woods, accused one of the detainee's attorneys of "smuggling" the pamphlet into Guantanamo three weeks before he issued a widely condemned order calling for a review of detainees' legal mail. (Image: Lt. Col. Barry Wingard)

Spain re-opens war crimes investigation regarding Guantanamo---

Scott Horton has more on this issue here.

Petition Request from Human Rights First

President Obama pledged to close the Guantanamo Bay prison three years ago. In the last presidential election, the major candidates all agreed that Guantanamo had undermined U.S. legitimacy and national security and endangered our troops abroad, and that the prison should be shuttered.

Ten years after it opened, the Guantanamo prison still holds 171 prisoners, at a cost of $800,000 each every year.

Please sign this petition urging the United States government to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility once and for all. If it receives 25,000 signatures, the White House has promised to respond. Click here to sign it now!

Sincerely,

Daphne Eviatar,
Human Rights First

and the men at Guantanamo speak out....

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/1/10/guantnamo_prisoners_launch_hunger_strike

and my thoughts on this "anniversary"...

as found on Michael Moore's website:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/guantanamos-dark-10th-anniversary

If you are in the DC area I hope to see you out there protesting this ominous anniversary in front of the white house tomorrow (january 11)....but wherever you are- raise your voice and tell Obama to follow through...at least on this one promise... to close Guantanamo.

Thank you U.S. Supreme Court (sigh...)

For confirming that the men at Guantanamo do not have the right to participate in their appeals... Sorry I can't post to the decision but it was just a one liner anyway....DENIED.
This was in response to the Writ of Mandamus that I filed in the U. S. Supreme Court asking them to Order the DC Circuit Court to provide an unclassified version of the documents that I filed on behalf of my client in his habeas hearing so that he could participate in his appeal.
Now it is clear- all the way up to the Supreme Court- that the men at Guantanamo cannot even help with their cases in any meaningful way....