Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2009 > January > 25 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USGuantanamo “something beyond a travesty”
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Army Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and a prosecutor with well over a hundred criminal jury trials under his belt, was assigned in May 2007 to prosecute the case of Mohammed Jawed, a Gitmo prisoner, in the military commissions established by the Bush administration.
It was a job that Vandeveld accepted and pursued eagerly as a patriotic American. However, as he looked into the specifics of the case assigned to him, the colonel became appalled.
He learned that Jawed had been arrested in his native Afghanistan at the age of 15 or 16 and charged with throwing a hand grenade that had injured U.S. soldiers. But in the six years Jawad had been held, the military had made no attempt to examine or even compile the alleged evidence against him. Vandeveld discovered scraps of supposed evidence scattered in desk drawers, bookcases, tossed on empty desks or even thrown into a locker and forgotten. The story he tells makes it clear that the military had no real interest in Jawed’s guilt or innocence.
The most damning piece of evidence was a handwritten confession supposedly obtained by Afghan police from Jawed before he was turned over to the Americans. But Vandeveld’s faith in that document was shaken when he discovered that Jawed was illiterate, meaning he could not have written or even read that statement. Furthermore, the confession was written in Farsi; Jawed speaks only Pashto.
“It seemed increasingly likely that the statement attributed to Mr. Jawad in his original interrogation had simply been contrived by one of the Afghan policemen, which they then amateurishly sought to ‘authenticate’ by having Jawad place his thumbprint on the document,” Vandeveld concluded.
Vandeveld still continued to press his case, believing that there must be other evidence that Jawad was guilty. But he began to have reservations about the propriety of prosecuting an adolescent as a war criminal. His confidence was shaken further when Jawad claimed to have been beaten and abused by the U.S. military.
Vandeveld initially dismissed that claim as ludicrous; he believed in the probity of his colleagues in uniform, and he knew that al Qaida teaches its members to make such claims. “We accepted as an article of faith that the detainees either fabricated outright or grossly exaggerated their seemingly continual complaints of abuse,” he said.
Vandeveld also personally assumed, “based on media reports, that a small number of detainees had been subjected to less than congenial interrogation tactics, but only because the interrogators had some basis to believe that such detaineees possessed intelligence critical to our efforts to disrupt and destroy al Qaeda.”
Vandeveld was confident that a mere Afghan teenager, a boy who was at worst just a simple foot soldier in al Qaida with only a few weeks of experience in the group, would not have been treated that way. Torture and abuse were surely reserved for those who had important information that they refused to divulge.
But the prosecutor quickly discovered evidence to the contrary — the abuse was far more common that he had allowed himself to believe. At one point, for example, young Jawad had been denied sleep for two straight weeks; it damaged him so deeply that he later tried to commit suicide by banging his head against a wall. Other evidence supported Jawad’s claim that he had been physically assaulted by U.S. soldiers and shoved down a stairwell while hooded and handcuffed.
Eventually, Col. Vandeveld came to a troubling conclusion: Jawad was innocent and should be released immediately.
“It is my opinion, based on my extensive knowledge of the case, that there is no credible evidence or legal basis to justify Mr. Jawad’s detention in U.S. custody or his prosecution by military commission,” Vandeveld wrote in a signed, sworned statement taken two weeks ago. “There is, however, reliable evidence that he was badly mistreated by U.S. authorities both in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo, and he has suffered, and continues to suffer, great psychological harm. Holding Mr. Jawad for over six years, with no resolution of his case and with no terminus in sight, is something beyond a travesty.”
“Even a statement that we believed linked him to (a terrorist group) and was thought to contain Mr. Jawad’s fingerprint was sent to the Army’s crime lab for analysis, which concluded that the fingerprint was not Mr. Jawad’s,” Vandeveld wrote.
Vandeveld tried to make those arguments within the military justice system but got nowhere. He eventually concluded that even if he got the charges against Jawad dismissed, the Bush administration “would continue to hold Mr. Jawad indefinitely as an enemy combatant, no matter the paucity or unreliability of the evidence asserted against him.”
So in September 2008, Vandeveld resigned in frustration. Now in civilian life, he is supporting a legal effort to get Jawad freed through U.S. civilian courts.
“I have taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and I remain confident that I have done so, spending over four of the past seven years away from my family, my home, my civilian occupation (as deputy attorney general in Pennsylvania) — all without any expectation of or desire for any reward greater than that the knowledge that I have remained true to my word and have done my level best to rise to our nation’s defense in its time of need,” the colonel wrote in his statement, noting that two of his friends had been killed in combat and “one of my very best friends in the world had been terribly wounded.”
But if he met Jawad in Iraq or Afghanistan, “I have no doubt at all — none — that Mr. Jawad would pose no threat whatsoever to me, his former prosecutor and now-repentent persecutor. Six years is long enough for a boy of 16 to serve in virtual solitary confinement in a distant land for reasons he may never fully understand.”
Mohammed Jawed, one of the “worst of the worst,” remains in Guantanamo.
(h/t Washingtonmonthly.com)
Comments
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 4:28 PM | Link to this
{{{{But if he met Jawal in Iraq or Afghanistan, “I have no doubt at all — none — that Mr. Jawad would pose no threat whatsoever to me, his former prosecutor and now-repentent persecutor.}}}}
Yeah, no kidding.
He only throws grenades at US Soldiers, not bleeding heart al Qaeda lawyers.
What’s the US Constitution got to do with this anyway?
By Tank
January 25, 2009 4:32 PM | Link to this
Jay,
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Send them to Alcatraz.
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 4:53 PM | Link to this
{{{{Paradoxically, many of the prisoners at Guantanamo may well now suffer worse fates than if they had remained on location untried, or been processed through the military tribunals. For they will have to be sent somewhere. No country, whose citizenship they may nominally carry, is eager to receive them. Dump them on the authorities in, say, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt, and I daresay their prison conditions will not improve.
The liberal mind — now fully restored to power in the United States — is in love with symbolic gestures. It is not much enamoured of the hard prudential reasoning that is involved in choosing between two or more evils. The mystery, to me, is the consistency with which it chooses to ignore the greater evil, in order to address the lesser.-David Warren}}}}
They were getting prayer rugs, three squares and air conditioning but good liberal intentions will destroy all of that.
As usual.
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 4:58 PM | Link to this
But that’s OK with the Republicans, Jay, because he’s a terrorist and Republicans are scaredy cats and they’re afraid that a mean little 15 year old terrorist is gonna sneak across the ocean into their house in the middle of the night and abort their only begotten child and then drop a bunker buster on their house or worse. Republicans also whine too much. By the way, since when did it become a war crime to use explosive devices on the battlefield. It beats the heck out of dropping bunker busters in the middle of cities. The worse possible thing this 15 year old did was try to fight off soldiers that invaded his country.
By getalife
January 25, 2009 5:22 PM | Link to this
Drive them insane then the only accountability they get is to join aq.
The Saudi jihad rehab should be an SNL skit.
By Doggone/GA
January 25, 2009 5:38 PM | Link to this
“He only throws grenades at US Soldiers, not bleeding heart al Qaeda lawyers”
It’s OBVIOUS you didn’t read even the barest minimum of what Jay wrote. He was ACCUSED of throwing a hand grenade.
Read it, read it, read it…then reread it until it sinks in: the man assigned to PROSECUTE HIM FOR THAT “CRIME” came to the conclusion that he was INNOCENT of that crime. Not just merely “not guilty” but INNOCENT and that same man is now working to get him FREED.
Yeah, he really meets the test of “worst of the worst” doesn’t he? NOT
By Midori
January 25, 2009 5:51 PM | Link to this
Doggone,
I’m afraid you’re asking just a tad too much.
Reading and comprehension is not that one’s forte.
Name calling begins in five, four, three, two……………
By AmVet
January 25, 2009 6:03 PM | Link to this
The chicken hawk wing of the GOP is in some ways not very different from the religious barbarians themselves.
Incapable of making distinctions about who is a rel threat and some innocent kid, they hide behind platitudes and self-imposed ignorance.
The new Final Solution brought to you by America’s lunatic fringe.
Neo-cons. They’re not just for breakfast anymore.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 6:23 PM | Link to this
Why is it immoral to detain terrorism suspects without trial, yet it is not immoral to kill terrorism suspects with missile strikes without trial?
Does Jay care about the “mere teenagers” who are killed by the missile strikes that he supports?
By Mike
January 25, 2009 6:27 PM | Link to this
“By Midori January 25, 2009 5:51 PM | Link to this Name calling begins in five, four, three, two……………”
Good call, Midori. AmVet started his childish name calling right on cue.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 6:36 PM | Link to this
The Obama administration has only been up and running 5 days, but so far they haven’t done anything to the “Army Field Manual” to cut out the torture loopholes and as NYT reports Bush DOJ sat on their butts for 8 years and never made a move to get coherent files centered in one place on any of the Gitmo detainees. Their “evidence” is a joke and a total mess.
By Midori
January 25, 2009 6:40 PM | Link to this
so Mike,
I take it you deem “Neo con” as “name calling”?
I’ll remember that during your next tirade in which you freely use similar terms.
Or was it “breakfast” that got your goat?
oops!!! maybe I shouldn’t have used “goat”?
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 6:41 PM | Link to this
{{{{With his shameful order to close Guantanamo Bay, President Obama has perfectly filled the stereotype of the classic clueless ultra-Liberal - the one who can generate great passion for the rights of the guilty defendant and none for the innocent victim.-NYDailyNews}}}}
{{{{GUANTANAMO BAY NAVY BASE, Cuba — Families of the Sept. 11 victims here to observe military commission hearings reacted with fury and frustration Wednesday to President Barack Obama’s instruction to freeze the war court.
”Get this trial going,” said retired New York City Deputy Fire Chief Jim Riches, who lost his firefighter son, Jimmy, in the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.-MiamiHerald}}}}
Yeah, hopeandchange.duh.
By getalife
January 25, 2009 6:41 PM | Link to this
John Cole says:
“Here is what I don’t understand: Why is this repeatedly framed as a problem for Obama, when this really is evidence that the Bush administration accomplished NOTHING with Guantanamo? This is not a problem for Obama. This is proof that the last administration was a group of incompetent hacks. Bush decided that he had the right to detain people forever, do whatever he wanted to them, and they had no rights whatsoever, he ruined our international reputation and most likely violated dozens of laws, yet he let these allegedly dangerous people go. Why? What was the purpose of Gitmo, anyway? Why do all this stuff and STILL let the dangerous guys go free?”
Just another consequence of the w disaster. Much more to come.
By Paul
January 25, 2009 6:45 PM | Link to this
LtCol Vendeveld is the kind of officer who should have been in from the start. One can only assume that many in DoD, Justice (can I include State “not my problem” Homeland Security “huh, huh” and the intel agencies “not my job” in this) were incompetent, or worse. The people at the ground floor seem to have been given little adult supervision or guidance - the constant criticizing from political opponents with no “this is what we should do” suggestions didn’t help, as did the Court with their “we told you to do what? You did? Well, now we don’t like it” contribution.
As I said from the start - Geneva doesn’t provide a map, neither does US criminal law. But asking for creative thought appears too much for some.
Oh, and this is another reason why the US military should be taken out of the loop after the people are captured. Uncertain guidance combined with ongoing detention of people who aren’t military combatants is a receipe for…. well, heck, just read Jay’s thread again.
By Midori
January 25, 2009 6:47 PM | Link to this
Getalife,
Bush accomplished a great deal at Guantanamo!!
He successfully tried and convicted Osama’s driver.
And d*mn near got his manicurist and pool boy!!!
That pool boy was the epitome of evil!!! EVIL I tells ya!!!
Sad about the manicurist tho - I’m having problems growing my nails, and could really use his expertise.
By fed up
January 25, 2009 6:50 PM | Link to this
So this kid (now a man) may be innocent but what about the others down there? I think over 10% of the men let out of there have rejoined al Qaida with every intent to kill Americans, Europeans, etc. Why don’t we put them in the prison system in the US, they’d last about 30 minutes. None of their native countries want them.
It’s a noble gesture by Obama (to appease the far left) to say he’s going to close Guantanamo…….in a year. Then in a year what happens. Talk is cheap but a well thought out plan as to what to do with these people is definately in order. Guess that’s what he’s going to do in the next year?
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 6:54 PM | Link to this
As usual, Democrats have to be put in charge so they can clean up the messes made by the Republicans and then the Republicans counter with claims that the Democrats did something “wrong” by cleaning up the Republican messes. Poor pitiful Republicans.
By AmVet
January 25, 2009 6:54 PM | Link to this
Mike,
You sure are thin-skinned. And apparently feel compelled to take everything I write personally.
It’s not always necessary to take the bait.
Unless, of course, it applies. Then by all means continue to get your knickers in a wad…
In the strangest case of man bites dog I’ve seen in a long while the greatest American statesman since Benjamin Franklin, has some “advice” for the new CIC. I can imagine Obama rolling his eyes and thinking, “Don’t go away mad, George…”
Outgoing President George W. Bush had a warning for President-elect Barack Obama when they gathered with three former presidents at the White House — be wary of “meddlesome” Jimmy Carter.
Interestingly, Bush also told Obama that Bill Clinton had been helpful and supportive dealing with foreign leaders.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 6:55 PM | Link to this
Looks like you’re only allowed one link per post in this IT impaired setup.
ctually what Jay Bookman and the AJC don’t have the means to tell you since Creative Loafing has more national and international reporting resources at this time, is that the Obama adminstration has taken the exact same stance in two key legal proceedings that the Bush administration took. You won’t read about this in the AJC and you should have read about it from Jay in one of his editorials.
Here’s the skinny. Illegal waranteless wiretapping has been confirmed repeatedly. It’s up to the new Congress to undo the old FISA law. The little federalist martinets that dominate the DC Circuit don’t appear to have the guts to take stands against illegal wiretapping.
NSA Whistleblower: Wiretaps Were Combined with Credit Card Records of U.S. Citizens
Welcome to 1984! Not one word of this has appeared in the AJC which is now importing all of its national and international reporting from other sources. They’ve outsourced their entire national and international news coverage. Creative Loafing is covering more in both categories on its own than the AJC is.
“NSA whistleblower Russell Tice was back on Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC program Thursday evening to expand on his Wednesday revelations that the National Security Agency spied on individual U.S. journalists, entire U.S. news agencies as well as “tens of thousands” of other Americans.
Tice said on Wednesday that the NSA had vacuumed in all domestic communications of Americans, including, faxes, phone calls and network traffic.
The other day, Tice said that the spy agency also combined information from phone wiretaps with data that was mined from credit card and other financial records. He said information of tens of thousands of U.S. citizens is now in digital databases warehoused at the NSA.”
That means you sucker—your credit care info—your personal information—your phone calls and your emails. Obama isn’t changing any of this at all.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 6:56 PM | Link to this
What has the “change you can believe in administration” done already in 5 days in office mainly per Greg Craig and several key nominated DOJ officials not yet confirmed?
They’ve weighted in on an illegal wiretapping case where the Bush administration was losing to the EFF to stop immunity by trying to take up the Bush position:
Obama Administration: Wiretapping Legal Challenge Must Die
By getalife
January 25, 2009 6:57 PM | Link to this
Midori,
LOL. Poor obl has to walk and not a metrosexual anymore.
We just have to counter Andy’s RW propaganda with reality.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 6:59 PM | Link to this
Further in the “Change You’d Better Stop Believing In” The Obama administration has, in theory at least, supported Bush’s motion to appeal Judge Vaughn Walker’s al-Haramain decision.
This is the motion the Obama administration filed in the case on Thursday
They had to use the Bushies to file the motion because they don’t have a DOJ yet. And I’ll be just as happy as the thugs if they don’t have one for a good while because I don’t want Holder anywhere near DOJ. And I didn’t want Clinton anywhere near anything federal including State. That’s going to be a disaster. She and Billary have also refused to become transparent on or stop the scumbag contributions to the Clinton Foundation and Library or the money washing that Bill is doing with projects with good intentions with money from a number of shady scumbags like his HIV projects.
The Obama administration has only been up and running 5 days, but so far they haven’t done anything to the “Army Field Manual” to cut out the torture loopholes and as NYT reports Bush DOJ sat on their butts for 8 years and never made a move to get coherent files centered in one place on any of the Gitmo detainees. Their “evidence” is a joke and a total mess.
Actually what Jay Bookman and the AJC don’t have the means to tell you is that the Obama adminstration has taken the exact same stance in two key legal proceedings that the Bush administration took. You won’t read about this in the AJC and you should have read about it from Jay in one of his editorials.
And as to the Gitmo “evidence” the files are in complete disarray after eight years the Bush DOJ and CIA has had to accumulate “evidence.”
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 7:10 PM | Link to this
Why the hell do you find it necessary to hit brackets several times Andy?—Try learning to write. It’s worse than the neon signs on Buford Highway or some white trash street in any suburb outside Hotlanta.
The complete joke that are called Gitmo files belie all the MSM and talking heads who are pulling their data from their anal region about who is good and who is bad at Gitmo:
[Guantanamo Case Files in Disarray After Bush Administration Fooked them Up] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/24/AR2009012401702.html?hpid=moreheadlines)
And none of you rethugs has a clue on the disposition of each and every Gitmo prisoner whatsoever. You’ve been skeeereed into swallowing the coolaid. If your tight little butt was picked up, you’d be asking for a lot more than the manufactured heresay evidence that in the disheveled “files” at Gitmo. Until each person there is disposition properly, which is going to result in a lot of them being released, no one is going to know how many innocent people the Bush imprisoned.
Just because Bush and Rice were incompetent and allowed 911 to be so successful during the cremation at WTC and right now at Hartsfield, doesn’t mean that a good number of people held for years with no charges and no due process had anything to do with it.
The only good that comes from looking at these comments is that it ensures if this is representative of the Republican vote base, whoever the Dems put up, and it will be Obama, is going to cream the white and highly racist dead people walking the thugs have at their disposal.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 7:11 PM | Link to this
The complete joke that are called Gitmo files belie all the MSM and talking heads who are pulling their data from their anal region about who is good and who is bad at Gitmo:
[Guantanamo Case Files in Disarray After Bush Administration Fooked them Up] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/24/AR2009012401702.html?hpid=moreheadlines)
By Mike
January 25, 2009 7:11 PM | Link to this
AmVet -
I don’t take anything your say personally. I just note that your comments are usually devoid of content and full of juvenile name calling.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 7:16 PM | Link to this
“By Midori January 25, 2009 6:40 PM | Link to this so Mike,
I take it you deem “Neo con” as “name calling”?
I’ll remember that during your next tirade in which you freely use similar terms.”
Yes, “Neocon” is name calling. As is “lunatic fringe”, “chicken hawk” and “religious barbarians”.
Feel free to call me out if I ever behave so immaturely. I would like to know so I could behave more like an adult.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 7:20 PM | Link to this
Why is it immoral to detain terrorism suspects without trial, yet it is not immoral to kill terrorism suspects with missile strikes without trial?
Does Jay care about the “mere teenagers” who are killed by the missile strikes that he supports?
By Midori
January 25, 2009 7:23 PM | Link to this
Mike,
why are neo con such crybabies?
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 7:24 PM | Link to this
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{By Chad Harris January 25, 2009 7:10 PM Why the hell do you find it necessary to hit brackets several times Andy?}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Like I give a…………
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{bozo}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
By Mike
January 25, 2009 7:28 PM | Link to this
“By Midori January 25, 2009 7:23 PM | Link to this Mike,
why are neo con such crybabies?”
Please explain why I am a “neocon”? It seem that you just throw that label at anyone who doesn’t share your narrow minded views.
Better yet, answer the very legitimate question that I posed:
“Why is it immoral to detain terrorism suspects without trial, yet it is not immoral to kill terrorism suspects with missile strikes without trial?”
I doubt your will, as it is so much easier to call me meaningless names.
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 7:29 PM | Link to this
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{The 12 jurors in the Fort Dix terrorism case had no doubt that the five foreign-born Muslims on trial had intended to carry out an attack on the Army base.
“Every one of us was convinced that, in time, they were going to do it,” one of the jurors said in an interview.-Philly.com}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
What, you mean like they were serious?
Why not, kill a few thousands, get out of jail free card, kill a few thousand more.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{hopeandchange.duh}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 7:33 PM | Link to this
My bad-
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Why not, kill a few thousand Americans, get out of jail free card, kill a few thousand more.}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
By Mike
January 25, 2009 7:36 PM | Link to this
Why is it immoral to detain terrorism suspects without trial, yet it is not immoral to kill terrorism suspects with missile strikes without trial?
By ByteMe
January 25, 2009 7:59 PM | Link to this
Mike,
Why is abortion “immoral”, but war or the death penalty is not?
Same difference. People have cognitive dissonance. One of the recovery steps: Accept that which we cannot change.
By Terrence
January 25, 2009 7:59 PM | Link to this
a slurry of illiterate thugs join street gangs here in the u.s., jay. let’s give them the presumption of innocence too, shall we? it was just an innocent little drive-by that killed an 8 y.o.
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 8:06 PM | Link to this
{{{{{Mohammed Jawed, one of the “worst of the worst,” remains in Guantanamo.}}}}}
Why are you being so tough on President Obama, Jay B.?
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:21 PM | Link to this
“By ByteMe January 25, 2009 7:59 PM | Link to this Mike,
Why is abortion “immoral”, but war or the death penalty is not?”
Well, I don’t consider abortion immoral, so I don’t know why the question is posed to me.
I find it amusing how so many on this board just assume that any who don’t share their views must fulfill some stereotype of “them”.
Want to try to answer my question now? Or you unable to without demonstrating your hypocrisy? You better off call me a “neocon” or a “wingut” or some other meaningless name. It is so much easier.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 8:22 PM | Link to this
RW—
You have zero information about any Gitmo prisoner, and it may be a long time before you get it. You weren’t there. You have not a scintilla of evidence, and the only tragedy is that your butt isn’t picked up, thrown into solitary and accused of something you didn’t do based on worthless heresay which is not admitted in any court.
There aren’t even cohesive case files on any of these people.
You consider yourself “IT sophisticated” if not legally sophisticated.. I’m sure you don’t mind linking to evidence you have.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:28 PM | Link to this
Chad Harris -
How much information do you have on the terrorism suspects that Obama had killed the other day?
Do you really care about due process or not? Or put another way:
Why is it immoral to detain terrorism suspects without trial, yet it is not immoral to kill terrorism suspects with missile strikes without trial?
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 8:28 PM | Link to this
Chadly,
My you’re touchy this evening. Where, may I ask, did you get this notion that I think I have evidence of Jawad’s guilt? I merely pointed out to the host that keeping Jawad in Gitmo is Obama’s call now.
By ByteMe
January 25, 2009 8:34 PM | Link to this
Perhaps you should carefully re-read what I wrote, Mike. Maybe look up “cognitive dissonance.”
If you do, you might figure out that I might agree with you on this issue.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:37 PM | Link to this
“By Chad Harris the only tragedy is that your butt isn’t picked up, thrown into solitary and accused of something you didn’t do based on worthless heresay which is not admitted in any court.”
Even worse: he (along with anyone standing nearby) could be killed by a missile strike “based on worthless heresay which is not admitted in any court”.
Now that would be more just, right? But hey you, don’t really care about justice or human rights. You just want to play partisan games.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 8:42 PM | Link to this
In answer to “Mike”—
I don’t claim to have information about terror suspects nor have I. Read what I write and you wouldn’t have to ask questions that waste your time.
I’m not in Obama’s administration; I’m not DOD. I’m not CIA, DIA, or NSA. So I’m not consulted on the strikes.
Further, I spent time on this thread being critical of the Bushesque stances the Obama lacking DOJ holdovers took with Obama’s apparent approval in two cases Thursday.
If you confuse my stances as fully supportive of the poor choices Greg Craig has made for Obama so far—4 major bad ones, you’re wrong.
If you confuse my stances as fully supportive of Obama’s cabinet choices you’re wrong.
How the hell would I know who was struck in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq or anywhere else. I’m not part of the network alerted when they’re struck. Are you suggesting you know?
I have access to the same print media, blogs, and sites I assume you do.
WAPO purports to context the strikes here:
2 U.S. Airstrikes Offer a Concrete Sign of Obama’s Pakistan Policy
Who do Obama kill in the two strikes. You were there in what capacity? You have your security clearance in what capacity?
At RW
Nah—I’m not touchy. You seem to be. I just prefer facts here instead of wingnut fiction. When you have any you let me know.
My point and many people’s for years has been that Gitmo is one of many Bush screwups. We don’t know who the hell there did what. We have seen a lot of people released from Gitmo who did nothing and were held for 6-7 years who have young children and families. The Bush administration released a large number of them last week in fact without comment. It’s a shame they didn’t put Libby there.
Now that’s an intriguing situation. Bush didn’t pardon Libby and he didn’t pardon Cheney or Yoo pre-emptively because he doesn’t want to free them up to talk about what they all did.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:42 PM | Link to this
ByteMe -
I know what cognitive dissonance is. However, your accusation that I am a victim of it was based on your erronous belief that I find abortion immoral. I was simply pointing out your ignortant stereotyping of me. Dismissing the views of other by debasing them with ignorant stereotypes is a great example of cognitive dissonance and you provided a great example.
So I guess if you agree with me, you must think that Obama has as little respect for due process and human rights as you do Bush. Am I correct?
By jon
January 25, 2009 8:42 PM | Link to this
In the future, just shoot them on the battlefield and be done with it.
That’s what I call Due Process for terrorists.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:46 PM | Link to this
“By Chad Harris January 25, 2009 8:42 PM | Link to this In answer to “Mike”—
I’m not in Obama’s administration; I’m not DOD. I’m not CIA, DIA, or NSA. So I’m not consulted on the strikes.”
LOL. So I guess you were in Bush’s admin, DOD, CIA, DIA or NSA when you bash Bush’s decisions. LOL.
Please enlighten us and tell us about the guests at Gitmo.
Your double standards are laughable, but expected.
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 8:48 PM | Link to this
Chadly,
Now that you’re finished blustering at me how about answering my question. After all, you want me thrown into solitary confinement, not for something I said, but for some thought that’s bouncing around in that strange little place that doubles as your mind.
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 8:49 PM | Link to this
Who claims that it is not immoral to kill someone that is merely suspected of being a terrorist. All collateral damage is immoral otherwise they would not be so sanitized as collateral damage. Further, who’s to say that missile strikes were indeed authorized against a so-called suspect or that they didn’t have a trial or that they even needed a trial. Who’s to say. Why would anyone want to make up hypotheticals and cling to them as though there were some great truth to be revealed if only someone could provide a satisfactory answer.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:51 PM | Link to this
“By jon January 25, 2009 8:42 PM | Link to this In the future, just shoot them on the battlefield and be done with it.”
That is clealry what is being done. Just as likely is that the CIA is interrogating these guys, killing them, putting them in a house and blowing it up to destroy the evidence.
That’s OK, though. Just as long as Obama is doing it, that’s fine with Bookman and the rest of the Bush critics on this board. They could not care less about human rights. They just care about partisanship.
By Mike
January 25, 2009 8:57 PM | Link to this
South Paw -
Your post is very confusing, but we are not talking about hypothetical.
Obama has had these suspects killed without trial. That is a fact. Bush’s critics have attacked him for detaining suspects without trial. I am merely asking Bush’s critics why they support the former and not the latter.
Now your notion that Obama’s targets may have had a trial. That is about as hypothetical as it gets.
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 9:08 PM | Link to this
Mike,
You are confusing. Where is your proof that these people were suspects and not actual terrorists. Where is your proof of anything that you have labeled as fact. Further, why do you choose to ignore my statements regarding immoral behavior. You are just dumping illogical and hypothetical statements out in order to try and convince yourself that you are right and everyone else is wrong. Save us all the pathetic display and just come out and state that you are right and everyone else is wrong and be done with it. Come on. Show some initiative.
By jon
January 25, 2009 9:10 PM | Link to this
We could take the 245 that are at Gitmo, haul them to Pakistan or Afganistan (not Iraq because that’s a bad place to be killing terrorists according to the partisan Demos) put them in a nice house with Predator painted crosshairs on the roof - BOOM!
The Obamanauts would have no problem with that process, and the world is relieved of 245 terrorists. And Bookman and Murtha will still have their spare bedrooms empty when company comes.
By Midori
January 25, 2009 9:11 PM | Link to this
Jon,
your attitude is why we are where we are now.
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 9:14 PM | Link to this
{{{{You are confusing. Where is your proof that these people were suspects and not actual terrorists.}}}}}—Southpaw to Mike
Mike,
Good luck debating somebody with that mindset.
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 9:17 PM | Link to this
jon,
You do realize that even you could have been among those detained for years with no access to the outside world at Gitmo or that even you could be amongst those that you would dump in a house with the crosshairs on the roof. BOOM. Did you remember to update that life insurance policy so your family would have something to live on. But wait, no one ever knew that you were being detained or that you were blown up. You’re not really dead. You just ran off with an old flame to start a new life in Mexico.
By getalife
January 25, 2009 9:23 PM | Link to this
A simple question to ask the gop is:
Why did w let them go?
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 9:25 PM | Link to this
The great thing about the “jons” are that they insure the Rethugs have a lopsided minority in the House, the Senate, and don’t get near the Oval Office into infinity.
Mike—you’ve been spewing your delusions and confusing them with facts—you’ve been whining and not cited a single fact.
RW—as usual some question you’re indignant that I didn’t answer or you perceive I’m “dodging” is no where to be found. This happens all the time, and I can’t look through camouflage to find it.
By jon
January 25, 2009 9:26 PM | Link to this
Midori,
Another pointless and poorly formed thought from you. Do you remember who started this war? Do your remember an event that we now refer to as 9-11?
South Paw,
I have no idea what you are trying to say. Are you trying to say that you have a lot of concern for those that take up arms against the United States?
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 9:34 PM | Link to this
RW,
Did you have some proof that you wanted to share with everyone.
jon,
I thought I made a rather simple point — how would you like it if you were one of those so-called terrorists being detained indefinitely on some trumped up charge that turns out to be nothing more than lies, etc. You just might feel differently or maybe your family would if they only knew where you were. Now, what’s so hard to understand about that.
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 9:35 PM | Link to this
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{By getalife January 25, 2009 9:23 PM A simple question to ask the gop is: Why did w let them go?}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Because the bleeding heart liberals were whining and moaning about it and he did not want to be tried as a “war criminal.”
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{geez}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Whining has consequences, duh.
By RB from Gwinnett
January 25, 2009 9:35 PM | Link to this
Two points Jay. First, what is your message here? Since this one individual may not be guilty we should assume all the others in Gitmo are innocent bystanders and should be released to go make pita? Do you really have such low regard for our military personell to think they have a prison full of cub scouts?
Second, is your litmus test for determining guilt or innocence to just ask them? That sure would save a whole lot of time and effort in Jay’s court of justice. “Mr. Nichols, did you kill the judge and 3 others? No, Mr. Bookman, I was at home working on my plan to stop global warming”. “Well that’s good enough for me. Carry on…”
Idiot.
By getalife
January 25, 2009 9:43 PM | Link to this
Like w listened to anybody. Like Powell said, you break it, you own it.
Send them to Texas and Wyoming.
By AJC/DNC Management
January 25, 2009 9:50 PM | Link to this
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{BEIRUT, Lebanon — Two former Guantánamo Bay detainees now appear to have joined Al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch, which released a video on Friday showing them both and identifying them by their names and Guantánamo detainee numbers.}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}]]]
So let’s release the other 350!
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{hopeandchange.duh}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 9:53 PM | Link to this
Now, some of you Republicans are even whining about freeing innocent people or forcing the military to produce something more than a coerced confession. I’d like to turn the flood lights on some of you pathetic wing-nuts. CONFESS. Admit it. YOU ARE Guilty of being Republican Idiots…I could get a convincing confession from any of you Republicans. You’re scared of your own shadows. Letting this little 15 year old in Afghanistan scare you so bad that you probably wee-wee’ed in your depends. Didn’t you. ADMIT IT. YOU DID. DIDN’T YOU.
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 9:54 PM | Link to this
Chadly,
The question isn’t missing at all. I asked you what gave you the notion that I thought Jawad was guilty. Your move.
Southpaw,
I have no proof that the people Obama killed were guilty or innocent. It’s pretty hard to prove a negative, especially once you’ve blown their brains out, but I’ll admit that it’s easier than confining them and letting libs whine about their rights. Back when Bush did that sort of thing I believe your kind said he was creating terrorists and hardening Middle East sentiment against us, though.
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 9:58 PM | Link to this
Jon—
All this invective aimed towards Midori or anyone else doesn’t do jacksh*t to change the fact that 80% of the country rejects the Thuglican Bush and you won’t see any thugs in the White House—ever—nor will you see them in anything but a lopsided minority. They screwed the pooch back for eight years and the only place about 200 of ‘em are moving is to federal prison and Delay to Texas state prison. The fact that he’s playing games to let it hang over his head for about five years is just fine with me. It’ll happen.
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 10:08 PM | Link to this
RW, “my kind” just likes to deal with the facts. What about “your kind”. Do they have any particular beliefs or desires, etc., that serve to differentiate them from “other kinds”.
By Midori
January 25, 2009 10:09 PM | Link to this
Well, Chad —
that’s all they have: invective, and a place in the majority.
I suppose I would be bitter too.
Better them than me.
All they did was b*tch, whine, moan and shout down anyone who didn’t agree with them during the time that they controlled all three branches of government.
Why should they start acting like rational human beings now?
Methinks it’s in the genes.
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 10:19 PM | Link to this
Southpaw,
If you deal in facts then I would think you would want a higher standard of proof for execution than whatever Ahmed said.
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 10:26 PM | Link to this
Bush and his cronies are the cowards for not facing up to the mess that he and his administration created, including Gitmo, and actually addressing the problems rather than lie about them, ignore them, cover them up, dismiss them, conceal them… Cowardly behavior. Pathetic and cowardly.
By Midori
January 25, 2009 10:32 PM | Link to this
oops,
that should have been “minority”
By South Paw
January 25, 2009 10:40 PM | Link to this
I was asking about “your kind” RW as opposed to your description of “my kind”.
Regarding your If…then statement, you’ll need to provide me with details regarding Ahmed and what he said since I don’t know what you are referring to.
By RW-(the original)
January 25, 2009 10:50 PM | Link to this
Southpaw,
You’re the one advocating dropping a missile in anybody’s house you get a tip about and then demanding that somebody prove you weren’t right to do so.
You’ve taken “neocon” to a whole new level. Congrats!
By the way, are you still carrying spit buckets in Athens?
By Chad Harris
January 25, 2009 11:36 PM | Link to this
Cheney moved to Virginia to be closer to his trials and subpoena locations.
By Shanene
January 26, 2009 1:48 AM | Link to this
Leave it to these liberal terds to spend so much time crying about murdering terrorists. You people are a discrace.
By Dale Gribble's GOP
January 26, 2009 1:56 AM | Link to this
AC/DC: This is not porn. Stop clicking your button.
By ByteMe
January 26, 2009 5:28 AM | Link to this
Mike,
You claim I “accused” you of something. Other than now pointing out that you are either having trouble with reading recognition skills OR have a monster chip on your shoulder, I did nothing of the sort in my original post.
Get off your high horse. You are suffering from vertigo up there.
By AJC/DNC Management
January 26, 2009 5:29 AM | Link to this
{{{{Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic “stimulus” package, claiming “contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”
Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, “Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a mom,” seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury.-Drudge}}}}
ew
By AJC/DNC Management
January 26, 2009 5:35 AM | Link to this
Setting the terrorists free, prosecuting the victims-
{{{{Israel fears war-crime charges-Urinal/Jihad}}}}
That’ll teach them to protect themselves, huh, AJC?
By AJC/DNC Management
January 26, 2009 5:38 AM | Link to this
!!!!2nd Off Topic Comment!!!!
{{{{Towering inaugural spotlights crumbling Mall- But we also couldn’t help noticing the trampled grass, decaying sidewalks, crumbling foundations and scum-filled ponds that mar this special place. Decades of underfunding and deferred maintenance have taken their toll. It would be fitting if the attention focused on the Mall by Obama’s inauguration helps to finally revive it.-Urinal/kult of baraKKK}}}}
The reports of the trash cleanup really stung you, eh?
Distract the attention of the dhimmis from it with some nonsense article, blame it on…………………….Bushie.
ew
By Andy the Welcher
January 26, 2009 6:55 AM | Link to this
Andy is still a welcher.
{{{ew}}}
By South Paw
January 26, 2009 7:04 AM | Link to this
RW,
If you had been able to follow the thread, then you would know that you just lied. Then again, I really did not expect any better from a twit. You cannot even stay on topic. That OK. I have already figured out what “your kind” is anyway so you do not have to evade my question any longer. Twit.
By Copyleft
January 26, 2009 8:29 AM | Link to this
“Everyone at Guantanamo should be punished, tortured, and executed! Mere innocence is no excuse for what I think they’re probably guilty of, maybe!”
Sorry, I was just channeling Rush and Bushdrones for a minute….
By CommunistAJC
January 26, 2009 10:07 AM | Link to this
Jay Bookman is something beyond a travesty.
By sd
January 26, 2009 1:03 PM | Link to this
Another unfortunate part of this false imprisonment of so many is that these people we have taken from their families and homes and beaten and imprisoned for 7 years may have had no animosity towards America before, but now, you bet they do!
Put yourself in Jawed’s shoes. If you were him, and they let you out now, you’d probably spend the rest of your life trying to get even.
Very sad.