Guantanamo inmates actually charged!

http://www.badmovies.org/movies/itopworld/itopworld7.jpg

This is
LONDON
11/03/04 - News and city section

Scandal of the detainees
By Patrick Hennessy, Deputy Political Editor

Serious questions were asked today over how four Britons could be held for two years in Guantanamo Bay - but completely cleared by British police in just 24 hours.

The four detainees flown home from the notorious American prison camp were freed late last night, while one other Briton, Jamal al-Harith, had walked free almost as soon as landing in Britain the previous evening. Today the American government faced the prospect of huge embarrassment as the men prepared to tell their stories and lift the lid on the secretive camp.

Despite being branded "the worst of the worst" by US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the four - Tarek Dergoul, Asif Iqbal, Shafiq Rasul and Ruhal Ahmed - are now free without a stain on their character.

It took only eight hours of "perfunctory" police questioning by anti-terrorist squad officersand brief consideration by the Crown Prosecution Service to conclude there was no reason to put them on trial.

The police did not even use their powers to release the men on bail, indicating there will be no further questions.

British diplomats are now braced for a transatlantic rift over the speed with which they were cleared after months of delicate negotiations to secure their release from Camp Delta in Cuba.

Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith and Home Secretary David Blunkett had promised Washington the men would be fully investigated and top-level consideration given to them being prosecuted.

The speed with which police and prosecutors dropped any prospect of a trial will infuriate hardliners in Washington and raises serious questions about the quality of the American judgment that the men should be stripped of their most basic rights and held without charge in virtual solitary confinement for two years.

Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Menzies Campbell said the fact the five detainees had been released after "perfunctory" questioning in this country raised issues which demanded answers from the British and American governments.

He said: "Why were they detained at all? Whey were they detained for so long? And why did it take two years before it was recognised in the US that they could be released? We will be demanding answers to all these questions."

British and American television networks are both trying to secure indepth interviews with the men.

PR consultant Max Clifford, who is advising the family of 26-year-old Mr Dergoul, said a series of high-profile US shows had already been in touch to express their interest.

The prospect of a former prisoner using a primetime interview to tell millions of American voters the full details of his capture, captivity and interrogation will seriously alarm the Bush administration and could hand his rival for the presidency, John Kerry, a huge political boost. Newspapers and broadcasters are likely to offer up to £300,000 for the story of the first of the detainees to speak.

Mr Clifford added: "There are a lot of people who want to talk to him - television, radio and newspapers. Some of them are offering huge sums of money."

And solicitors for two of the freed men have indicated that they plan to sue the British and American governments.

Cases would be brought in London and Washington, claiming the Pentagon had no right to incarcerate the men, and that the Foreign Office did not do enough to secure their release.

Four Britons remain interned in Cuba and their cases will now come under massive scrutiny.

Labour peer Baroness Uddin said: "It's about time they were returned. We must step up our efforts to ensure that they are returned to Britain opportunely.

"The fact that the Americans have made the four out to be different from the remaining five is now I think seriously questionable. There's a lot of speculation going on that it is politically motivated."

She said she was "deeply worried" hearing a US spokesman claiming the five had been released as a "charitable gesture" to Britain. "This is deeply flawed," she added.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080530.KHADR30/TPStory/TPInternational/America/

Judge sacked because he expected evidence to be brought forward

And solicitors for two of the freed men have indicated that they plan to sue the British and American governments.

wonder how this panned out

SCOTUS makes its ruling.

Can I just raise a glass to the continued health of John Paul Stevens?

SCOTARIFFIC

I cannot WAIT to read Hugh Hewitt's first post.

In dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts criticized his colleagues for striking down what he called "the most generous set of procedural protections ever afforded aliens detained by this country as enemy combatants."

o_O

I cannot WAIT to read Hugh Hewitt's first post.

Will Mark Levin's do?

Scalia said the nation is ''at war with radical Islamists'' and that the court's decision ''will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.''

Nice to know that this supposedly sharp legal mind is currently incapable of advancing arguments any smarter than the lowest rung of the right-wing Kool-Aid drinking blogosphere.

he's too busy bumming smokes from sjp
http://tinyurl.com/5e2vfh

Oh, christ, that Mark Levin bit: And if POWs have access to our civilian courts, how do our courts plan to handle the thousands, if not tens of thousands of cases, that will be brought to them in future conflicts?

So he sees us being involved in a conflict in the foreseeable future such that we will have "tens of thousands" of POWs to worry about? Really?

DELETE NRO.

Perhaps perversely encouraging but it's interesting that at the RedState thread about this that there are a lot of comments already basically saying "Stop acting like this is the end of civilization."

And if POWs have access to our civilian courts, how do our courts plan to handle the thousands, if not tens of thousands of cases, that will be brought to them in future conflicts? <-- thought that the detainees were distinct from POWs (aka lawful combatants under Geneva Convention) who won't need trials!

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVY BASE, Cuba -- In a stunning rebuke, a six-member U.S. military jury Thursday ignored a Pentagon prosecutor's plea for a 30 years-plus term and ordered Osama bin Laden's driver to 66 months in prison.

With credit for time served given by the judge, that means Salim Hamdan, 40, of Yemen will be sent back to the general detainee population of Camp Delta by January, and eligible to return home.

Choked with emotion on hearing the sentence, Hamdan stood and addressed the jury, unscripted, and twice more apologized for any pain his work as a $200-a-month driver had caused.

''And I would like to thank you for what you have done for me,'' he said.

The jury's decision, after just 70 minutes of deliberation, was a huge rebuke to the U.S. government, which had insisted that on his conviction for material support for terror no less than 30 years confinement would suffice.

After the jury's verdict, the judge turned to the convicted terrorist and said:

``I wish you godspeed, Mr. Hamdan. I hope the day comes when you return to your wife and your daughters and your country.''

''God willing,'' the man in traditional Yemeni robe and head scarf replied in Arabic, interrupting.

The judge continued: ``And I hope that you are able to be a father, and a provider, and a husband in the best sense of the word.''

Then the detainee said it again: ``Inshallah.''

Allred replied in Arabic. ``Inshallah.''

As the lone convict, his defense attorney told the judge, Hamdan was put in his own separate wing of Camp 5 Wednesday night.

Moments later, as he was led out of the courtroom by military guards, he turned to the spectators gallery, waved both hands in the air, and called out, ``Bye-bye, everyone.''

Wow.

yeah I was kinda surprised at the sentence too

the BBC story says
After the sentencing, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said: "He will serve out the rest of his sentence. At that time he will still be considered an enemy combatant. But he will be eligible for review by an Administrative Review Board."

so he could still be detained after the end of the sentence?

Yeah, apparently the US reserves the right to detain them indefinitely, even after they've served their sentence. I'd be surprised if they didn't release him though.

Unlikely, it's a possibility if McCain wins the election. Even then, I doubt they'd hang onto him. He clearly doesn't pose any threat to anyone if they let him go back to his family in Yemen.