D
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Guest
Forwarded message from MichaelP <papadop@peak.org>
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/feb2008/911-f12.shtml
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
US TO HOLD 9/11 SHOW TRIAL AT GUANTNAMO
The US military on Monday announced charges against six individuals it
alleges helped plan the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The six
prisoners--all of whom have been held incommunicado for more than six
years, deprived of any legal rights or representation, and subjected to
illegal and abusive interrogation methods--are to be tried in a single
trial before a military commission at the Guantnamo Bay prison camp. The
prosecution is seeking the death penalty for alleged war crimes.
With the announced charges, the American government is setting in motion a
vast show trial within its drumhead military tribunal system. The aim is
not to arrive at the truth of what happened on September 11 and who was
responsible, but to intimidate popular opposition to the occupation of
Iraq and bolster the "war on terror," which has served as the basic
pretext for a vast expansion of US militarism abroad and a wholesale
assault on democratic rights at home.
The process announced Monday is a travesty of justice and an affront to
any conception of due process. The timing of the announcement and likely
time-table for the proceedings--due to unfold in the midst of the 2008
presidential election campaign--point to the reactionary political
calculations underlying the project.
Air Force Brigadier General Thomas Hartmann, the legal adviser to the
convening authority of the military commission system, presented the
allegations against the six men at a Pentagon press conference. Chief
among the accused is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged organizer of the
9/11 attacks. Mohammed is one of three individuals who, as the US
officially acknowledged last week, was subjected to the torture method of
water-boarding while being held in a secret CIA prison.
The other five men charged include Mohammed al-Qahtani, who has been
labeled the "20th hijacker" and whose leaked interrogation records
indicate he was subjected to brutal treatment by the US military; Ramzi
Binalshibh, alleged to be a top intermediary between the hijackers and
leaders of Al Qaeda; Ammar al-Baluchi, nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed;
Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, alleged assistant to al-Baluchi; and Waleed bin
Attash, alleged trainer of some of the hijackers.
The six will be charged under the Military Commissions Act, a law enacted
in October 2006 after the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the Bush
administration's previous system of military commissions. The charges,
all linked to the September 11 attacks, include conspiracy, murder in
violation of the law of war, attacking civilians, and terrorism.
In announcing the charges, Hartmann sought to present the future trials as
models of due process. He insisted that the defendants would be given "a
fair trial, consistent with American standards of justice," and that they
would be treated according to the "rule of law." However, the entire
military commission system and the law upon which it is based represent a
massive assault on constitutionally mandated judicial principles and
democratic rights.
All six prisoners have been subjected to years of unlawful imprisonment.
Several have been held by the CIA in secret torture centers, from which
the International Red Cross has been barred, in violation of international
laws and conventions.
Conditions of interrogation have been leaked for two of the accused, and
it is clear that they were systematically tortured. None of the statements
made under these conditions would have any legal standing in a legitimate
judicial procedure, even under traditional US military law.
The CIA, along with Pakistani authorities, captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
in March 2003. He was reportedly transferred to a secret prison in
Jordan, known for its regular use of torture. He was later held in a CIA
prison, and last week CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged that he had
been subjected to water-boarding, among other interrogation methods.
Water-boarding is a notorious form of torture in which the prisoner is
strapped to a board, his mouth and nose covered with cloth, and water
poured over his head to induce near-drowning.
During one or more of these interrogations, Mohammed confessed that he was
responsible for the 9/11 attacks. He also reportedly confessed to
organizing the 2002 nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia and the 2002
murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.
Al-Qahtani was interrogated by the military in Guantnamo Bay under special
procedures approved by then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in 2002.
Military logs leaked by Time magazine in March 2006 revealed that he was
forcibly administered drugs and enemas and subjected to interrogation
methods that included prolonged restraint, sleep deprivation, sensory
overload, use of dogs, and exposure to extreme temperatures.
Through his lawyers, al-Qahtani later attempted to retract his confessions
and allegations made against other prisoners, saying they were made under
duress. The methods used on al-Qahtani were later transferred to Iraq,
leading ultimately to the sadistic torture of prisoners graphically
displayed in the photographs from Abu Ghraib prison.
MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT
The Military Commissions Act was enacted with the specific aim of
legitimizing anti-democratic and illegal procedures. It contains measures
revising the War Crimes Act to protect government officials who ordered
torture. The Bush administration was able to obtain passage of the act
because of the complicity of the Democratic congressional leadership.
The act explicitly allows for evidence obtained through coercion, a
provision included with the specific intent of admitting the confessions
of Mohammed, al-Qahtani and others. Hartmann said that the military judge
would determine whether such evidence could be used--meaning that it will
not be ruled out.
The law includes a series of additional measures that ensure the drumhead
character of the commissions. Hearsay evidence is allowed, and classified
evidence can be presented of which the defendant is allowed to see only an
unclassified summary. The military judge will determine whether or not a
defendant's witnesses will be made available.
Most importantly, the defendants are denied the right to habeas corpus,
meaning they cannot challenge the lawfulness of their imprisonment in US
courts.
The defendants will have the right to appeal the verdicts and sentences of
the military commission first to the Court of Military Commission Review,
then to the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, and finally the
US Supreme Court. However, appeals will be limited to the question of
whether the Military Commissions Act was followed correctly. The
defendants will not be allowed to argue against the legality of the
proceedings themselves, nor dispute the facts presented in the trial.
Interrogation records have been carefully vetted by the intelligence
agencies involved, including the CIA. In December, CIA Director Hayden
admitted that the CIA had destroyed videotapes of the water-boarding and
interrogation of two prisoners, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.
The evidence was destroyed despite ongoing and relevant legal cases and in
defiance of judicial orders. It is notable that Zubaydah is not one of
those charged on Monday, despite his alleged connection to the September
11 attacks.
While the CIA has not admitted that it videotaped the interrogation of
Mohammed or any of his co-defendants, there is every reason to believe
that the agency will withhold any evidence not helpful to the prosecution.
Hartmann admitted in response to a reporter's question that the military
tribunal will not be able to compel cooperation from any other agency.
The individuals responsible for the crime of September 11--which resulted
in the deaths of nearly 3,000 people--should be brought to justice through
the criminal court system. However, the response of the US government to
9/11 has never been guided by a desire for genuine justice. Rather, 9/11
was seized upon as a pretext for effecting a far-reaching and deeply
reactionary shift in US policy, both foreign and domestic.
The so-called "war on terror" became the ideological and political
framework for the launching of aggressive wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq--mounted in pursuit of imperialist aims centered on US control of the
energy resources of the Middle East and Central Asia--and the official
adoption of the policy of "preventive war," the very policy that was
employed by the German Nazi regime and condemned as a war crime by the
Nuremburg tribunal.
Fear-mongering, anti-Muslim racism and national chauvinism were promoted
to justify the most far-reaching attacks on democratic rights and the
erection of the framework for a police state within the US.
The officially promoted anti-terrorism hysteria--aided and abetted by the
media and the Democratic Party--served as well to block any serious
investigation into the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks and the many
unanswered questions that point either to criminal negligence or direct
complicity on the part of US government and intelligence agencies.
Even assuming that those singled out by the American government were
involved in the 9/11 attacks, there is a profound political and historical
responsibility that has been systematically ignored. That is because the
ultimate political responsibility for the attacks lies with the US
political establishment that is carrying out the prosecution.
Al Qaeda has its roots in the US-sponsored war in Afghanistan, conducted
as a proxy war against the Soviet Union beginning in 1979. Individuals who
would later form Al Qaeda, including Osama bin Laden himself, were
recruited and financed by the CIA. Anger against the United States, which
found a reactionary expression in the terrorist attacks on the Twin
Towers, has been fueled by decades of military aggression, repression of
the Palestinians, and US support for corrupt and dictatorial regimes in
the Middle East.
Instead of a serious investigation, the US government has produced a
series of confessions extracted by individuals held in solitary
confinement and tortured. It will attempt to present this mockery of
accountability as a final reckoning for the crime committed over six years
ago.
Those conducting this trial have absolutely no standing to prosecute
others for war crimes. The US military and the Bush administration have
killed hundreds of thousands, if not millions, on the pretext of the "war
on terror." The illegal and unprovoked war in Iraq alone is estimated by
highly reputable authorities to have caused over a million deaths, making
it one of the great war crimes of modern history.
Many of the charges brought against the alleged September 11 attackers,
including murder in violation of the law of war and attacking civilians,
could--and should--be brought against top officials in the American
political and military establishment.
POLITICAL CALCULATIONS
There are both domestic and international aims behind the Bush
administration's decision to hold this trial. Internationally, the trial
will be used to bolster the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said on Monday he would order a "pause"
in the drawdown of US troops in Iraq, leaving at least 130,000 US soldiers
in the country.
The day before, he warned European governments that Europe would face
terrorist attacks if it did not make more troops available to prop up the
tottering US-backed Afghan government. The coming 9/11 show trial will be
used to whip up an international atmosphere more conducive to US bullying
of its nominal allies.
In the US, the trial is designed to coincide with the 2008 US elections.
The Bush administration will seek to bombard the public with supposed
threats, while lurid details of the original plot and the horrific results
on 9/11 are reported endlessly in the newspapers and mass media.
The presumptive Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, a
hard-line supporter of the war in Iraq as well as military threats against
Iran, will seek to use the trial to cower his Democratic opponent,
painting his or her hypocritical appeals to antiwar sentiment as
capitulation to terrorism. The thrust of the Republican campaign was
indicated by Mitt Romney in his speech last week announcing his withdrawal
from the Republican primary contest, in which he said a Democratic victory
would be "a surrender to terror."
This is the response of a deeply unpopular administration to a political
crisis intensified by the growth of social discontent and a process of
political radicalization spurred on by mounting home foreclosures, rising
unemployment and all of the other consequences of economic recession.
The Democratic Party, whether its candidate is Hillary Clinton or Barack
Obama, will adapt itself to this fear-mongering and present itself as the
most consistent advocate of the "war on terror," even as it accommodates
itself to the star chamber proceedings at Guantnamo. It is entirely
complicit in the militaristic and anti-democratic policies of the Bush
administration.
o o o
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...d-of-role-in-september-11-attacks-781007.html
THE INDEPENDENT (LONDON) - Tuesday, February 12, 2008
By Andrew Gumbel
Is this justice?
US ACCUSED OF USING 'KANGAROO COURT' to try men accused of role in
September 11 attacks
The United States military announced yesterday that it was bringing death
penalty charges against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and five other men
suspected of orchestrating the September 11 attacks, and intended to try
them under the Bush administration's much-criticised military tribunal
system, which is subject only to partial oversight by the civilian appeals
system.
The decision to use Mohammed and the others as guinea-pigs in a
constitutionally dubious legal proceeding is likely to trigger a firestorm
of anti-American sentiment in the Islamic world and spark a fractious
domestic debate in an already highly charged presidential election year.
Concerns were raised last night of political interference by the White
House in the military's decision to go to trial in the middle of an
election campaign in which the Republican frontrunner, John McCain, has
made the fight against al-Qa'ida central to his election bid.
"What we are looking at is a series of show trials by the Bush
administration that are really devoid of any due process considerations,"
said Vincent Warren, the executive director head of Centre for
Constitutional Rights, which represents many Guantanamo detainees.
"Rather than playing politics the Bush administration should be seeking
speedy and fair trials," he said. "These are trials that are going to be
based on torture as confessions as well as secret evidence. There is no
way that this can be said to be fair especially as the death penalty could
be an outcome."
While few doubts have been raised, domestically or internationally, about
the men's involvement in the attacks on New York and Washington, just
about everything else about their treatment has been bitterly contested
and is likely to continue to be contested, inside the courtroom and out.
Everything is laden with potential controversy - the decision to try the
six men together rather than individually, the proposed venue at
Guantanamo Bay, where all six are being held, the threatened use of the
death penalty, and perhaps the most controversial question of all: the
admissibility of evidence gathered through waterboarding and other
coercive techniques generally defined as torture.
Even Brig-Gen Thomas Hartmann, the Pentagon official co-ordinating the
case, acknowledged yesterday that it could be several months before a
trial begins and months more, if not years, before any death penalty -
assuming it is enforced - is carried out.
General Hartmann was careful to say that he wanted the trial proceedings
to be "as completely open as possible", with lawyers and journalists
present in the courtroom - barring the possibility of some closed sessions
to consider classified information. He stressed that the men would be
regarded as innocent until proven guilty, just as they would in a civilian
court. And he promised to provide "every piece of evidence, every stitch
of evidence, every whiff of evidence" to the defendants' lawyers so they
would be fully able to prepare for trial.
That did little to stop Clive Stafford Smith, the British lawyer who has
worked on behalf of "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo, to issue a
condemnation of the "kangaroo court". He said: "Anyone can see the
hypocrisy of espousing human rights, then trampling on them. We will
infuriate our allies who firmly oppose the death penalty. We will anger
the world."
Aside from Mohammed, alleged to be the mastermind who planned and
coordinated the September 11 attacks, the defendants are Mohammed
al-Qahtani, labelled by US officials the "20th hijacker" who never made it
on board any of the planes that were crashed; Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, an
associate of Mohammed Atta's in Hamburg who is believed to have acted as
an intermediary between the hijackers and the al-Qa'ida leadership; Ali
Abd al-Aziz Ali, a nephew of Mohammed's suspected of acting as his chief
lieutenant; Waleed bin Attash, believed to have trained the hijackers;
and Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi.
But contrary to General Hartmann's assurances, it is far from clear what
rights any of these men will have. The Supreme Court, which struck down an
earlier version of the military tribunal system, is expected to rule
before July on whether the protections of the US Constitution apply to
them.
Several commentators noted yesterday that the Bush administration is
taking a risk by trying to press ahead with the trials. Its previous
efforts to pursue justice against suspected terrorists have been patchy,
if not downright disastrous.
Zacarias Moussaoui, the French national previously labelled the 20th
hijacker, escaped the death penalty at his civilian trial and emerged as a
deeply disturbed individual scarcely capable of participating in a
sophisticated guerrilla operation - much to the embarrassment of the
federal prosecutors who tried him in civilian court in Virginia.
Jose Padilla, the US citizen accused of wanting to detonate a radioactive
"dirty bomb", won the argument that he could not be held indefinitely in
military custody without trial and went on trial in civilian court. He
received a far lighter sentence than his prosecutors were seeking - 17
years instead of 30 to life.
The Bush administration appears to believe that, politically at least, it
can win the argument by stirring up the country's emotions about the worst
peacetime attack on its own soil.
Facing execution
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
The Pakistani, educated in the US, claims responsibility for 31 attacks
and plots including the 9/11 attacks and the beheading of Wall Street
Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Accused of being military commander for
al-Qa'ida's foreign operations. Captured in Pakistan in 2003 and taken to
Guantanamo Bay from secret CIA prison. During interrogation, was subjected
to simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding.
ALI ADB AL-AZIZ ALI
A nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and cousin of jailed 9/11
bomber Ramzi Yousef. Accused of facilitating the attacks by transferring
$120,000 to US-based operatives and assisting nine hijackers on their way
from Pakistan.
RAMZI BIN AL-SHIBH
The former room-mate of Mohamed Atta is accused of being a link
between al-Qa'ida and the hijackers. The Pentagon says he helped find
flight schools for the al-Qa'ida pilots.
WALID BIN ATTASH
The Yemeni, who was raised in Saudi Arabia, is accused of running
al-Qa'ida camp in Afghanistan where he trained two 9/11 hijackers. Has
admitted planning the attack on the USS Cole, and has also claimed
involvement in the bombing of the US embassy in Kenya.
MUSTAFA AHMAD AL-HAWSAWI
The Saudi national is accused of being a money-man for the 9/11
attackers. The Pentagon says he provided them with cash, Western
clothing, credit cards traveller's cheques.
MOHAMMED AL-QAHTANI
Officials say he was meant to be one of the hijackers but was
barred from the US by immigration officials at Orlando Airport. Captured
at Tora Bora caves in Afghanistan.
End of forwarded message from MichaelP <papadop@peak.org>
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/feb2008/911-f12.shtml
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
US TO HOLD 9/11 SHOW TRIAL AT GUANTNAMO
The US military on Monday announced charges against six individuals it
alleges helped plan the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The six
prisoners--all of whom have been held incommunicado for more than six
years, deprived of any legal rights or representation, and subjected to
illegal and abusive interrogation methods--are to be tried in a single
trial before a military commission at the Guantnamo Bay prison camp. The
prosecution is seeking the death penalty for alleged war crimes.
With the announced charges, the American government is setting in motion a
vast show trial within its drumhead military tribunal system. The aim is
not to arrive at the truth of what happened on September 11 and who was
responsible, but to intimidate popular opposition to the occupation of
Iraq and bolster the "war on terror," which has served as the basic
pretext for a vast expansion of US militarism abroad and a wholesale
assault on democratic rights at home.
The process announced Monday is a travesty of justice and an affront to
any conception of due process. The timing of the announcement and likely
time-table for the proceedings--due to unfold in the midst of the 2008
presidential election campaign--point to the reactionary political
calculations underlying the project.
Air Force Brigadier General Thomas Hartmann, the legal adviser to the
convening authority of the military commission system, presented the
allegations against the six men at a Pentagon press conference. Chief
among the accused is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged organizer of the
9/11 attacks. Mohammed is one of three individuals who, as the US
officially acknowledged last week, was subjected to the torture method of
water-boarding while being held in a secret CIA prison.
The other five men charged include Mohammed al-Qahtani, who has been
labeled the "20th hijacker" and whose leaked interrogation records
indicate he was subjected to brutal treatment by the US military; Ramzi
Binalshibh, alleged to be a top intermediary between the hijackers and
leaders of Al Qaeda; Ammar al-Baluchi, nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed;
Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, alleged assistant to al-Baluchi; and Waleed bin
Attash, alleged trainer of some of the hijackers.
The six will be charged under the Military Commissions Act, a law enacted
in October 2006 after the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the Bush
administration's previous system of military commissions. The charges,
all linked to the September 11 attacks, include conspiracy, murder in
violation of the law of war, attacking civilians, and terrorism.
In announcing the charges, Hartmann sought to present the future trials as
models of due process. He insisted that the defendants would be given "a
fair trial, consistent with American standards of justice," and that they
would be treated according to the "rule of law." However, the entire
military commission system and the law upon which it is based represent a
massive assault on constitutionally mandated judicial principles and
democratic rights.
All six prisoners have been subjected to years of unlawful imprisonment.
Several have been held by the CIA in secret torture centers, from which
the International Red Cross has been barred, in violation of international
laws and conventions.
Conditions of interrogation have been leaked for two of the accused, and
it is clear that they were systematically tortured. None of the statements
made under these conditions would have any legal standing in a legitimate
judicial procedure, even under traditional US military law.
The CIA, along with Pakistani authorities, captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
in March 2003. He was reportedly transferred to a secret prison in
Jordan, known for its regular use of torture. He was later held in a CIA
prison, and last week CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged that he had
been subjected to water-boarding, among other interrogation methods.
Water-boarding is a notorious form of torture in which the prisoner is
strapped to a board, his mouth and nose covered with cloth, and water
poured over his head to induce near-drowning.
During one or more of these interrogations, Mohammed confessed that he was
responsible for the 9/11 attacks. He also reportedly confessed to
organizing the 2002 nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia and the 2002
murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.
Al-Qahtani was interrogated by the military in Guantnamo Bay under special
procedures approved by then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in 2002.
Military logs leaked by Time magazine in March 2006 revealed that he was
forcibly administered drugs and enemas and subjected to interrogation
methods that included prolonged restraint, sleep deprivation, sensory
overload, use of dogs, and exposure to extreme temperatures.
Through his lawyers, al-Qahtani later attempted to retract his confessions
and allegations made against other prisoners, saying they were made under
duress. The methods used on al-Qahtani were later transferred to Iraq,
leading ultimately to the sadistic torture of prisoners graphically
displayed in the photographs from Abu Ghraib prison.
MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT
The Military Commissions Act was enacted with the specific aim of
legitimizing anti-democratic and illegal procedures. It contains measures
revising the War Crimes Act to protect government officials who ordered
torture. The Bush administration was able to obtain passage of the act
because of the complicity of the Democratic congressional leadership.
The act explicitly allows for evidence obtained through coercion, a
provision included with the specific intent of admitting the confessions
of Mohammed, al-Qahtani and others. Hartmann said that the military judge
would determine whether such evidence could be used--meaning that it will
not be ruled out.
The law includes a series of additional measures that ensure the drumhead
character of the commissions. Hearsay evidence is allowed, and classified
evidence can be presented of which the defendant is allowed to see only an
unclassified summary. The military judge will determine whether or not a
defendant's witnesses will be made available.
Most importantly, the defendants are denied the right to habeas corpus,
meaning they cannot challenge the lawfulness of their imprisonment in US
courts.
The defendants will have the right to appeal the verdicts and sentences of
the military commission first to the Court of Military Commission Review,
then to the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, and finally the
US Supreme Court. However, appeals will be limited to the question of
whether the Military Commissions Act was followed correctly. The
defendants will not be allowed to argue against the legality of the
proceedings themselves, nor dispute the facts presented in the trial.
Interrogation records have been carefully vetted by the intelligence
agencies involved, including the CIA. In December, CIA Director Hayden
admitted that the CIA had destroyed videotapes of the water-boarding and
interrogation of two prisoners, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.
The evidence was destroyed despite ongoing and relevant legal cases and in
defiance of judicial orders. It is notable that Zubaydah is not one of
those charged on Monday, despite his alleged connection to the September
11 attacks.
While the CIA has not admitted that it videotaped the interrogation of
Mohammed or any of his co-defendants, there is every reason to believe
that the agency will withhold any evidence not helpful to the prosecution.
Hartmann admitted in response to a reporter's question that the military
tribunal will not be able to compel cooperation from any other agency.
The individuals responsible for the crime of September 11--which resulted
in the deaths of nearly 3,000 people--should be brought to justice through
the criminal court system. However, the response of the US government to
9/11 has never been guided by a desire for genuine justice. Rather, 9/11
was seized upon as a pretext for effecting a far-reaching and deeply
reactionary shift in US policy, both foreign and domestic.
The so-called "war on terror" became the ideological and political
framework for the launching of aggressive wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq--mounted in pursuit of imperialist aims centered on US control of the
energy resources of the Middle East and Central Asia--and the official
adoption of the policy of "preventive war," the very policy that was
employed by the German Nazi regime and condemned as a war crime by the
Nuremburg tribunal.
Fear-mongering, anti-Muslim racism and national chauvinism were promoted
to justify the most far-reaching attacks on democratic rights and the
erection of the framework for a police state within the US.
The officially promoted anti-terrorism hysteria--aided and abetted by the
media and the Democratic Party--served as well to block any serious
investigation into the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks and the many
unanswered questions that point either to criminal negligence or direct
complicity on the part of US government and intelligence agencies.
Even assuming that those singled out by the American government were
involved in the 9/11 attacks, there is a profound political and historical
responsibility that has been systematically ignored. That is because the
ultimate political responsibility for the attacks lies with the US
political establishment that is carrying out the prosecution.
Al Qaeda has its roots in the US-sponsored war in Afghanistan, conducted
as a proxy war against the Soviet Union beginning in 1979. Individuals who
would later form Al Qaeda, including Osama bin Laden himself, were
recruited and financed by the CIA. Anger against the United States, which
found a reactionary expression in the terrorist attacks on the Twin
Towers, has been fueled by decades of military aggression, repression of
the Palestinians, and US support for corrupt and dictatorial regimes in
the Middle East.
Instead of a serious investigation, the US government has produced a
series of confessions extracted by individuals held in solitary
confinement and tortured. It will attempt to present this mockery of
accountability as a final reckoning for the crime committed over six years
ago.
Those conducting this trial have absolutely no standing to prosecute
others for war crimes. The US military and the Bush administration have
killed hundreds of thousands, if not millions, on the pretext of the "war
on terror." The illegal and unprovoked war in Iraq alone is estimated by
highly reputable authorities to have caused over a million deaths, making
it one of the great war crimes of modern history.
Many of the charges brought against the alleged September 11 attackers,
including murder in violation of the law of war and attacking civilians,
could--and should--be brought against top officials in the American
political and military establishment.
POLITICAL CALCULATIONS
There are both domestic and international aims behind the Bush
administration's decision to hold this trial. Internationally, the trial
will be used to bolster the military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said on Monday he would order a "pause"
in the drawdown of US troops in Iraq, leaving at least 130,000 US soldiers
in the country.
The day before, he warned European governments that Europe would face
terrorist attacks if it did not make more troops available to prop up the
tottering US-backed Afghan government. The coming 9/11 show trial will be
used to whip up an international atmosphere more conducive to US bullying
of its nominal allies.
In the US, the trial is designed to coincide with the 2008 US elections.
The Bush administration will seek to bombard the public with supposed
threats, while lurid details of the original plot and the horrific results
on 9/11 are reported endlessly in the newspapers and mass media.
The presumptive Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, a
hard-line supporter of the war in Iraq as well as military threats against
Iran, will seek to use the trial to cower his Democratic opponent,
painting his or her hypocritical appeals to antiwar sentiment as
capitulation to terrorism. The thrust of the Republican campaign was
indicated by Mitt Romney in his speech last week announcing his withdrawal
from the Republican primary contest, in which he said a Democratic victory
would be "a surrender to terror."
This is the response of a deeply unpopular administration to a political
crisis intensified by the growth of social discontent and a process of
political radicalization spurred on by mounting home foreclosures, rising
unemployment and all of the other consequences of economic recession.
The Democratic Party, whether its candidate is Hillary Clinton or Barack
Obama, will adapt itself to this fear-mongering and present itself as the
most consistent advocate of the "war on terror," even as it accommodates
itself to the star chamber proceedings at Guantnamo. It is entirely
complicit in the militaristic and anti-democratic policies of the Bush
administration.
o o o
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...d-of-role-in-september-11-attacks-781007.html
THE INDEPENDENT (LONDON) - Tuesday, February 12, 2008
By Andrew Gumbel
Is this justice?
US ACCUSED OF USING 'KANGAROO COURT' to try men accused of role in
September 11 attacks
The United States military announced yesterday that it was bringing death
penalty charges against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and five other men
suspected of orchestrating the September 11 attacks, and intended to try
them under the Bush administration's much-criticised military tribunal
system, which is subject only to partial oversight by the civilian appeals
system.
The decision to use Mohammed and the others as guinea-pigs in a
constitutionally dubious legal proceeding is likely to trigger a firestorm
of anti-American sentiment in the Islamic world and spark a fractious
domestic debate in an already highly charged presidential election year.
Concerns were raised last night of political interference by the White
House in the military's decision to go to trial in the middle of an
election campaign in which the Republican frontrunner, John McCain, has
made the fight against al-Qa'ida central to his election bid.
"What we are looking at is a series of show trials by the Bush
administration that are really devoid of any due process considerations,"
said Vincent Warren, the executive director head of Centre for
Constitutional Rights, which represents many Guantanamo detainees.
"Rather than playing politics the Bush administration should be seeking
speedy and fair trials," he said. "These are trials that are going to be
based on torture as confessions as well as secret evidence. There is no
way that this can be said to be fair especially as the death penalty could
be an outcome."
While few doubts have been raised, domestically or internationally, about
the men's involvement in the attacks on New York and Washington, just
about everything else about their treatment has been bitterly contested
and is likely to continue to be contested, inside the courtroom and out.
Everything is laden with potential controversy - the decision to try the
six men together rather than individually, the proposed venue at
Guantanamo Bay, where all six are being held, the threatened use of the
death penalty, and perhaps the most controversial question of all: the
admissibility of evidence gathered through waterboarding and other
coercive techniques generally defined as torture.
Even Brig-Gen Thomas Hartmann, the Pentagon official co-ordinating the
case, acknowledged yesterday that it could be several months before a
trial begins and months more, if not years, before any death penalty -
assuming it is enforced - is carried out.
General Hartmann was careful to say that he wanted the trial proceedings
to be "as completely open as possible", with lawyers and journalists
present in the courtroom - barring the possibility of some closed sessions
to consider classified information. He stressed that the men would be
regarded as innocent until proven guilty, just as they would in a civilian
court. And he promised to provide "every piece of evidence, every stitch
of evidence, every whiff of evidence" to the defendants' lawyers so they
would be fully able to prepare for trial.
That did little to stop Clive Stafford Smith, the British lawyer who has
worked on behalf of "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo, to issue a
condemnation of the "kangaroo court". He said: "Anyone can see the
hypocrisy of espousing human rights, then trampling on them. We will
infuriate our allies who firmly oppose the death penalty. We will anger
the world."
Aside from Mohammed, alleged to be the mastermind who planned and
coordinated the September 11 attacks, the defendants are Mohammed
al-Qahtani, labelled by US officials the "20th hijacker" who never made it
on board any of the planes that were crashed; Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, an
associate of Mohammed Atta's in Hamburg who is believed to have acted as
an intermediary between the hijackers and the al-Qa'ida leadership; Ali
Abd al-Aziz Ali, a nephew of Mohammed's suspected of acting as his chief
lieutenant; Waleed bin Attash, believed to have trained the hijackers;
and Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi.
But contrary to General Hartmann's assurances, it is far from clear what
rights any of these men will have. The Supreme Court, which struck down an
earlier version of the military tribunal system, is expected to rule
before July on whether the protections of the US Constitution apply to
them.
Several commentators noted yesterday that the Bush administration is
taking a risk by trying to press ahead with the trials. Its previous
efforts to pursue justice against suspected terrorists have been patchy,
if not downright disastrous.
Zacarias Moussaoui, the French national previously labelled the 20th
hijacker, escaped the death penalty at his civilian trial and emerged as a
deeply disturbed individual scarcely capable of participating in a
sophisticated guerrilla operation - much to the embarrassment of the
federal prosecutors who tried him in civilian court in Virginia.
Jose Padilla, the US citizen accused of wanting to detonate a radioactive
"dirty bomb", won the argument that he could not be held indefinitely in
military custody without trial and went on trial in civilian court. He
received a far lighter sentence than his prosecutors were seeking - 17
years instead of 30 to life.
The Bush administration appears to believe that, politically at least, it
can win the argument by stirring up the country's emotions about the worst
peacetime attack on its own soil.
Facing execution
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
The Pakistani, educated in the US, claims responsibility for 31 attacks
and plots including the 9/11 attacks and the beheading of Wall Street
Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Accused of being military commander for
al-Qa'ida's foreign operations. Captured in Pakistan in 2003 and taken to
Guantanamo Bay from secret CIA prison. During interrogation, was subjected
to simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding.
ALI ADB AL-AZIZ ALI
A nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and cousin of jailed 9/11
bomber Ramzi Yousef. Accused of facilitating the attacks by transferring
$120,000 to US-based operatives and assisting nine hijackers on their way
from Pakistan.
RAMZI BIN AL-SHIBH
The former room-mate of Mohamed Atta is accused of being a link
between al-Qa'ida and the hijackers. The Pentagon says he helped find
flight schools for the al-Qa'ida pilots.
WALID BIN ATTASH
The Yemeni, who was raised in Saudi Arabia, is accused of running
al-Qa'ida camp in Afghanistan where he trained two 9/11 hijackers. Has
admitted planning the attack on the USS Cole, and has also claimed
involvement in the bombing of the US embassy in Kenya.
MUSTAFA AHMAD AL-HAWSAWI
The Saudi national is accused of being a money-man for the 9/11
attackers. The Pentagon says he provided them with cash, Western
clothing, credit cards traveller's cheques.
MOHAMMED AL-QAHTANI
Officials say he was meant to be one of the hijackers but was
barred from the US by immigration officials at Orlando Airport. Captured
at Tora Bora caves in Afghanistan.
End of forwarded message from MichaelP <papadop@peak.org>
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.