The Belgravia Dispatch: A Sham Wrapped in A Farce Inside A Travesty

June 07, 2007

A Sham Wrapped in A Farce Inside A Travesty

Gitmo, that is. As the FT editorializes:

For five years, the administration of President George W. Bush has sought to weave a cloak of legality to clothe the wrongs it has committed in the “war on terror”.
Earlier this week, that threadbare veil was pierced yet again – as it has been so often in the past – when two military judges at the US detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba rebuked the administration for failing to follow the law.

Civilian courts, including the US Supreme Court, have long looked askance at the way the administration has warped and twisted national and international law to give it a free hand to combat terrorism. Now military judges seem in no hurry either to play their part in this absurd charade of justice.

This week’s rulings are, on the face of it, merely technical: according to a new law rammed through Congress (with bipartisan complicity) last year, the alternative justice system at Guantánamo Bay can only try “alien unlawful enemy combatants”. But the administration failed to comply with that law when it brought two Guantánamo detainees before military tribunals on Monday. Even though the administration all but wrote the relevant provisions of the law – and must have been familiar with what it required – the government did not classify the two men as “unlawful” combatants, as the law demands. (The law does not cover “lawful” combatants, such as uniformed government soldiers.)

It is unclear whether this blunder reflects stunning incompetence or arrogant disregard for the law, but either way it could prove very costly. There can be no further military tribunals until the government either gets the law rewritten, gets a special appeals court (that has not yet been created) to reinterpret the law, or takes other cumbersome steps to recharge the suspects. Either way, there will be more delays, and the path to spurious justice will again be blocked.

Taking the law back to Congress for revision could be risky for the administration: opponents of the court-stripping provisions of the law might seize this opportunity to try to rewrite that part too.

It is high time Mr Bush faced reality. For five years he has struggled to construct an alternative justice system for foreign terrorism suspects. Yet in that time he has convicted no one – and dragged America’s reputation through the dirt.

Mr Bush should abandon this farce and bring the suspects before traditional courts martial. That will doubtless be harder than trying them in kangaroo courts. But it is his only hope of salvaging even a shred of credibility. [emphasis added]

As between "stunning incompetence" and "arrogant disregard for the law", I'm gonna say a good dollop of both. Frankly, not a bad epitaph for much of the Bush 43 years, all told.

Posted by Gregory at June 7, 2007 03:26 AM

Comments

...what, the usual crowd aren't here to scream how the West is in a war for its very survival while a bunch of namby-pamby nitpickers go on about 'rule of law' and 'convictions?' This post has been up for over 12 hours, after all.
Well, let me try.

Roman centurions betrayed by decadent Imperial courtiers while the barbarians stream over the Danube! Hordes of dozens of illiterate farmers descending on us to kill us all and then force us to wear burkas! The unstoppable juggernaut of jihadism, mounting economic and military power equivalent to King Frederick County, Maryland, descending on us, and you quibble about a few words on a government document! Anyone who is not a pie-in-the-sky overeducated elitist understands that every single person in Guantanamo is guilty, trial or not, law or not, and is an existential threat to all of Western civilization! The Constitution is not a suicide pact! They must be held in captivity forever, and it is only our innate civilization that keeps us from executing them out of hand as they so richly deserve, preferably in a slow and painful way.

Sorry, Greg, I can't keep a straight enough face for this.

Posted by: Antiquated Tory at June 7, 2007 06:05 PM | Permalink to this comment

"every single person in Guantanamo is guilty.....trial or not". Don't ya just love it.

I would argue that if you reviewed Bush's life you would find that he has a stunning disregard for his own incompetence.

Posted by: jonst at June 8, 2007 11:57 AM | Permalink to this comment

I think the thing I find most discomforting about all of this is the secrecy with which most of it has been attempted.

It can be argued, with some justification, that most leaders and most governments will -- in times of real or perceived risk or danger -- push to increase the government's power at the cost of civil liberties (regardless of their then current level).

In times past, this has been the case in the U.S. -- with Lincoln during the Civil War, and in a number of other times, not the least of them being the imprisonment of people of Japanese descent during WWII. (American citizens, many of them.)

Most of those misadventures were quickly challenged and worked their way through the legal system. Not always with the results a libertarian or legal scholar might appreciate, but they were generally tested and reviewed.

With the Bush Administration, there has been an apparent attempt to push the limits and infringe on boundaries in ways that can't be easily observed and, in efect, not easily disussed, debated, or fought.

Its as though they KNOW that what they're doing is wrong and they're doing it secretly to avoid being called on their behavior. Not all of the secrecy can be attributed to an operational need... They seem certain that the END justifies the means.

That scares me more than terrorist attack.

Posted by: Walt S at June 8, 2007 03:23 PM | Permalink to this comment

Let see Omar Kadr, a Canadian national of Afghani extraction, fighting for the Taliban (a government recognized by only 3
countries as of September 11th, KSA, UAE & Pakistan) kills an
American soldier, and he's not considered an 'unlawful enemy
combatant'. I don't even know the standard used to free Osama
Hamdan, I don't want to konw. Quahtani, the poor fellow, captured with Al Harbi; self professed Al Queda bomb maker and jail house
advocate in Faisalabad in the Spring of '02, who was offended because he had woman as his interrogator; didn't like the cold
either, poor baby. The latest is the Ali Saleh al Marri case, relying
on Councilman again; for their argument. If the NCA made one mistake was letting any of these folks live at all. Rest assured, we
won't make the same again

Posted by: narciso at June 12, 2007 02:17 AM | Permalink to this comment

Looks like Antiquated Tory spoke too soon.

By the way, I hope you all caught both Tony Snow and Andrew McCarthy today officially agreeing with Emperor Palpatine's philosophy where detainees are concerned: "All suspects are GUILTY! If they weren't guilty, they wouldn't be suspects, now would they?"

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003417.php

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/06/just_round_them.html

Posted by: Bruce Moomaw at June 13, 2007 06:53 AM | Permalink to this comment

	« Zalmay's Honeymoon \| Main \| Turks and Kurds » June 07, 2007 A Sham Wrapped in A Farce Inside A Travesty Gitmo, that is. As the FT editorializes: For five years, the administration of President George W. Bush has sought to weave a cloak of legality to clothe the wrongs it has committed in the “war on terror”. Earlier this week, that threadbare veil was pierced yet again – as it has been so often in the past – when two military judges at the US detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba rebuked the administration for failing to follow the law. Civilian courts, including the US Supreme Court, have long looked askance at the way the administration has warped and twisted national and international law to give it a free hand to combat terrorism. Now military judges seem in no hurry either to play their part in this absurd charade of justice. This week’s rulings are, on the face of it, merely technical: according to a new law rammed through Congress (with bipartisan complicity) last year, the alternative justice system at Guantánamo Bay can only try “alien unlawful enemy combatants”. But the administration failed to comply with that law when it brought two Guantánamo detainees before military tribunals on Monday. Even though the administration all but wrote the relevant provisions of the law – and must have been familiar with what it required – the government did not classify the two men as “unlawful” combatants, as the law demands. (The law does not cover “lawful” combatants, such as uniformed government soldiers.) It is unclear whether this blunder reflects stunning incompetence or arrogant disregard for the law, but either way it could prove very costly. There can be no further military tribunals until the government either gets the law rewritten, gets a special appeals court (that has not yet been created) to reinterpret the law, or takes other cumbersome steps to recharge the suspects. Either way, there will be more delays, and the path to spurious justice will again be blocked. Taking the law back to Congress for revision could be risky for the administration: opponents of the court-stripping provisions of the law might seize this opportunity to try to rewrite that part too. It is high time Mr Bush faced reality. For five years he has struggled to construct an alternative justice system for foreign terrorism suspects. Yet in that time he has convicted no one – and dragged America’s reputation through the dirt. Mr Bush should abandon this farce and bring the suspects before traditional courts martial. That will doubtless be harder than trying them in kangaroo courts. But it is his only hope of salvaging even a shred of credibility. [emphasis added] As between "stunning incompetence" and "arrogant disregard for the law", I'm gonna say a good dollop of both. Frankly, not a bad epitaph for much of the Bush 43 years, all told. Posted by Gregory at June 7, 2007 03:26 AM Comments ...what, the usual crowd aren't here to scream how the West is in a war for its very survival while a bunch of namby-pamby nitpickers go on about 'rule of law' and 'convictions?' This post has been up for over 12 hours, after all. Well, let me try. Roman centurions betrayed by decadent Imperial courtiers while the barbarians stream over the Danube! Hordes of dozens of illiterate farmers descending on us to kill us all and then force us to wear burkas! The unstoppable juggernaut of jihadism, mounting economic and military power equivalent to King Frederick County, Maryland, descending on us, and you quibble about a few words on a government document! Anyone who is not a pie-in-the-sky overeducated elitist understands that every single person in Guantanamo is guilty, trial or not, law or not, and is an existential threat to all of Western civilization! The Constitution is not a suicide pact! They must be held in captivity forever, and it is only our innate civilization that keeps us from executing them out of hand as they so richly deserve, preferably in a slow and painful way. Sorry, Greg, I can't keep a straight enough face for this. Posted by: Antiquated Tory at June 7, 2007 06:05 PM \| Permalink to this comment "every single person in Guantanamo is guilty.....trial or not". Don't ya just love it. I would argue that if you reviewed Bush's life you would find that he has a stunning disregard for his own incompetence. Posted by: jonst at June 8, 2007 11:57 AM \| Permalink to this comment I think the thing I find most discomforting about all of this is the secrecy with which most of it has been attempted. It can be argued, with some justification, that most leaders and most governments will -- in times of real or perceived risk or danger -- push to increase the government's power at the cost of civil liberties (regardless of their then current level). In times past, this has been the case in the U.S. -- with Lincoln during the Civil War, and in a number of other times, not the least of them being the imprisonment of people of Japanese descent during WWII. (American citizens, many of them.) Most of those misadventures were quickly challenged and worked their way through the legal system. Not always with the results a libertarian or legal scholar might appreciate, but they were generally tested and reviewed. With the Bush Administration, there has been an apparent attempt to push the limits and infringe on boundaries in ways that can't be easily observed and, in efect, not easily disussed, debated, or fought. Its as though they KNOW that what they're doing is wrong and they're doing it secretly to avoid being called on their behavior. Not all of the secrecy can be attributed to an operational need... They seem certain that the END justifies the means. That scares me more than terrorist attack. Posted by: Walt S at June 8, 2007 03:23 PM \| Permalink to this comment Let see Omar Kadr, a Canadian national of Afghani extraction, fighting for the Taliban (a government recognized by only 3 countries as of September 11th, KSA, UAE & Pakistan) kills an American soldier, and he's not considered an 'unlawful enemy combatant'. I don't even know the standard used to free Osama Hamdan, I don't want to konw. Quahtani, the poor fellow, captured with Al Harbi; self professed Al Queda bomb maker and jail house advocate in Faisalabad in the Spring of '02, who was offended because he had woman as his interrogator; didn't like the cold either, poor baby. The latest is the Ali Saleh al Marri case, relying on Councilman again; for their argument. If the NCA made one mistake was letting any of these folks live at all. Rest assured, we won't make the same again Posted by: narciso at June 12, 2007 02:17 AM \| Permalink to this comment Looks like Antiquated Tory spoke too soon. By the way, I hope you all caught both Tony Snow and Andrew McCarthy today officially agreeing with Emperor Palpatine's philosophy where detainees are concerned: "All suspects are GUILTY! If they weren't guilty, they wouldn't be suspects, now would they?" http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003417.php http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/06/just_round_them.html Posted by: Bruce Moomaw at June 13, 2007 06:53 AM \| Permalink to this comment		Reviews of Belgravia Dispatch "Awake" --New York Times "Always-Worth Reading" --Andrew Sullivan Recent Entries A Brief (and Belated) Word on Chas Freeman What Would Real--Rather Than Rhetorical--Change in U.S. Foreign Policy Look Like? Of War, and Tent Hospitals The Obama Imperative Some Addt'l Thoughts Re: Georgia McCain: Let's Compound the Blunder! Georgia On My Mind Should We De-Emphasize The Terror Threat in U.S. Foreign Policy? (Very Belated) In-House News Straits of Hormuz Search Search this site: About the Author Email the Author English Language Media New York Times Financial Times The Economist The Times The Spectator Daily Telegraph The New Yorker Washington Post New Criterion New Republic National Review The Atlantic The American Conservative Harpers The Week The Guardian Weekly Standard The Nation WSJ Opinion Matt Drudge Real Clear Politics Foreign Affairs Commentariat Foreign Affairs Foreign Policy Le Monde Diplomatique National Interest Non-English Language Press Le Figaro Le Monde El Pais Pravda The Blogs Across the Aisle Marc Ambinder America Abroad American Footprints The American Scene Armavirumque Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker-Posner Balloon Juice &C (TNR) Phil Carter Chequer-Board Steve Clemons Juan Cole The Corner Crooked Timber Cunning Realist Clive Davis Brad DeLong Democracy Arsensal Daniel Drezner Kevin Drum James Fallows Glenn Greenwald Nikolas Gvosdev Hendrik Hertzberg Huffington Post Mickey Kaus Mark Kleiman Joshua Landis Daniel Larison Josh Marshall Eric Martin Obsidian Wings Oxblog Foreign Policy's Passport The Plank Post Global Gideon Rachman Romenesko Laura Rozen Andrew Sullivan James Taranto Katrina vanden Heuvel Volokh Conspiracy James Wolcott Matthew Yglesias Law & Finance Barron's Bloomberg Bull and Bear Wise Calculated Risk CBS Marketwatch Contrary Investor Corporate Counsel Blog Corp Law Blog DealBreaker Deal Lawyers Blog Financial Sense Forbes Fortune Hussman Funds Bruce MacEwen Gretchen Morgenson Floyd Norris Barry Ritholz Nouriel Roubini Safe Haven SCOTUS Blog The Street 10b-5 Daily Yahoo Finance Think Tanks AEI Baker Institute Brookings Carnegie Cato CFR CSIS Heritage IISS Intl Crisis Group USIP Security Janes Fed. American Scientists Defense Tech Global Security Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Books LRB NYRB NYT Book Review Paris Review TLS Granta Grand Street Arts & Letters Daily The City Curbed Eater Gothamist NY Magazine NY Post NY Press New York Observer On The Inside Tribeca Trib Vanishing NY Village Voice Archives March 2009 January 2009 November 2008 August 2008 July 2008 May 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 Syndicate this site: Belgravia Dispatch Maintained by: www.vikeny.com Powered by

	© 2007 Belgravia Dispatch