It seems like just yesterday that I was talking about Andy Worthington’s "Guantánamo Habeas Week." Well, as of today he can update his Guantánamo Habeas Scorecard, because the same judge who denied the habeas petition for Yasin Ismail last week, Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr. of the U.S. District Court, Washington, DC, approved the petition for a different prisoner, Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman, primarily because the evidence against him had been produced by torture. (See quote from the decision below.) The two tortured "witnesses" against Uthman were presumed al-Qaida members, also held at Guantanamo, Sharqwi Abdu Ali Al-Hajj and Sanad Yislam Ali Al Kazimi.
This brings the scorecard to 35 of 48 habeas cases from Guantanamo decided against the government. I don’t know how many of them were due to tortured evidence. One would be too many, but it is far, far more than one. The U.S. released a cascade of evil when it decided it would torture whomever they could get their hands on, all to create a false narrative of fear, of a "homeland" under increasing attack by waves and waves of jihadists, armed with fictional "dirty bombs" and visions of heavenly virgins.
That a nation would fall, hook-line-and-sinker, for the lies of the son of a man who himself pardoned government officials who traded with a supposed national enemy so they could send guns to terrorists in Central America, would be laughable, if the lost blood and treasure were not so great. It took a gigantic terrorist attack in America, and a host of smaller but frightening anthrax attacks to push the nation into apoplexy. But rather than calm the nation, the leaders of America fanned the flames and built a serious but isolated group of terrorists into a phantasmic army for never-ending war. They used torture to extort with violence the evidence they needed, and Boeing, Raytheon, Mitre, and a host of defense and tech companies, and a generation of academia, were thrown billions of dollars to staff and plan and arm this never-ending war.
But the war drive had one flaw: it was built on lies, on tortured lies, and its legitimacy is defeated by a statistic. 35 out of 48, lies, tortured and/or flimsy evidence, years spent in isolation, beaten, sleep deprived, and worse, some who didn’t come out alive, all to feed a war machine whose economy dwarfs those of most countries in the world.
When will it end? How many op-eds by soldiers apologizing for atrocities will we have to bear? How vast the vengeance awaiting this nation from the sons and daughters and other relatives of those slaughtered for no reason, or tortured so some could be rich with defense company profits?
Read the latest story of another innocent granted petition for release from a government that held him for near a decade in a tropical hell because they had no evidence but what they could manufacture by coercion, and, then reflect. Consider that this decision will not allow Mr. Uthman to finally walk out of prison, because the U.S. government doesn’t know what to do with him and prisoners like him. Reflect, then act.
The latest habeas decision was reported by Andy Jones at Blog of Legal Times:
A federal trial judge in Washington today granted a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from a detainee who has been held at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility since 2002. The judge found the government had failed to demonstrate that the detainee was a member of al-Qaida.
The Obama administration contends that Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman, a Yemeni citizen, traveled to Afghanistan to join al-Qaida and became a fighter and bodyguard for Osama bin Laden. Uthman, who contends he is not an al-Qaida member, argues that he went to Afghanistan to teach the Quran to children….
In a 20-page opinion [PDF], Judge Henry Kennedy Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia concluded that evidence was not credible because both men had been recently tortured when they made their statements.
From Judge Kennedy’s unclassified decision:
The Court will not rely on the statements of Hajj or Kazimi because there is unrebutted evidence in the record that, at the time of the interrogations at which they [Al-Hajj and Kazimi] made the statements, both men had recently been tortured.
a. Evidence of torture
Uthman has submitted to the Court a declaration of Kristin B. Wilhelm, an attorney who represents Hajj, summarizing Hajj’s description to her of his treatment while in custody. The declaration states that while held in Jordan, Hajj "was regularly beaten and threatened with electrocution and molestation," and he eventually "manufactured facts" and confessed to his interrogators’ allegations "in order to make the torture stop." JE 142 at 2. After transfer to a secret CIA-run prison in Kabul, Afghanistan, Hajj was reportedly "kept in complete darkness and was subject to continuous loud music." Id. at 3.
Uthman has also submitted a declaration of Martha Rayner, a Professor at Fordham University Law School who represents Kazimi, regarding Kazimi’s description of his treatment in detention. Rayner reports that while Kazimi was detained outside the United States, his interrogators beat him; held him naked and shackled in a dark, cold cell; dropped him into cold water while his hands and legs were bound; and sexually abused him. Kazimi told Rayner that eventually "[h]e made up his mind to say’ Yes’ to anything the interrogators said to avoid further torture." JE 145 ~ 13. According to Rayner’s declaration, Kazimi was relocated to a prison run by the CIA where he was always in darkness and where he was hooded, given injections, beaten, hit with electric cables, suspended from above, made to be naked, and subjected to continuous loud music. Kazimi reported trying to kill himself on three occasions. He told Rayner that he realized "he could mitigate the torture by telling the interrogators what they wanted to hear." Id. ~ 34. Next, Kazimi was moved to a U.S. detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan, where, he told Rayner, he was isolated, shackled, "psychologically tortured and traumatized by guards’desecration of the Koran" and interrogated "day and night, and very frequently." Id. ~ 37. Kazimi told Rayner that he "tried very hard" to tell his interrogators at Bagram the same information he had told his previous interrogators "so they would not hurt him." Id. ~ 42.
b. Failure to rebut
Respondents replied to these declarations by presenting as a witness a criminal investigator for CITF [Criminal Investigation Task Force] , but the testimony of the investigator fails to effectively rebut the evidence of abuse of Hajj and Kazimi. The investigator conducted interviews of Hajj and Kazimi in June 2004 at the Air Force Base in Bagram, Afghanistan at which both men were then held, as well as later that year in Guantanamo Bay. The FM40s [intelligence reports] that report each man’s identification of a photograph of Uthman as Hudaifa, an Usama bin Laden bodyguard, are the investigator’s summaries of the Bagram interviews. See JE 28 at 1; JE 29 at 1.5 The investigator’s testimony added to the record persuasive evidence that the investigator herself did not mistreat Hajj or Kazimi and that the investigator did not observe any torture, or even any signs of abuse in the demeanor or physical state of either man, while the investigator was with them. But the investigator has no knowledge of the circumstances of either detainee’s confinement before his arrival at Bagram and quite limited knowledge of his treatment there. The investigator testified to meeting with each man in an interrogation room on several days for approximately four hours at a time. The investigator did not see Hajj or Kazimi other than during those four-hour sessions and did not inquire of them, or anyone else, about their treatment in the various prisons in which they were held.



43 Comments

It’s so reassuring that not only is our intelligence service filled with sadomasochistic sociopaths they are also incompetent.
USA USA USA
I was really hoping, that if these assholes were going to torture someone, that the bad guys at least be friggin guilty. Is that too much to ask?
Even the guilty should not receive inhumane treatment. But what this government has engaged in is beyond the pale. Without accountability, I shudder to think where we are headed.
Perhaps someone should give Obama “The Tell-Tale Heart” for summer reading.
None of this -the “no one leaves innocent” or the torture – none of it will ever get a millionth of the press that “worst of the worst” and “al-qaeda terrorists” received.
Thank you for this piece.
Very important piece – thanks Jeff
I agree Jeff, I should have indicated with a /s
and thank you for all the effort Jeff !
Jeff, thanks for writing this up and for writing it in such a way so as to get the reader to respond emotionally. It worked.
Oh, I knew you were only being rhetorical, but I felt I had to make the point for the record.
And to Jason @6, thanks. I wrote it in an emotional state.
I remain concerned that detainees such as Fayiz Al-Kandari who, although tortured..like the others, never confessed to being involved in terrorism. I can only imagine what he has been put through. How will a judge, if he ever has one, see him? The judge ruled “no case” due to his confession under torture. We must keep the heat up for others, like Fayiz, to also be given the benefit of a real trial and not indefinite detention. Thank You Jeff, for your hard work and dedication to justice.
Clarification with my above blog… The judge ruled “no case” due to a confession..meaning the detainee today, not Fayiz Al-Kandari.
You can join Fayiz Al-Kandari’s military attorney, Lt. Col. Barry Wingard and Lt. Cmdr. Kevin Bogucki, a Judge Advocate General (JAG) in the Navy in an online discussion next week at Virtually Speaking with Jay Ackroyd. LC Bogucki previously represented former Kuwaiti detainee Fouad Al Rabiah, an innocent man who was released from Guantanamo Bay in December 2009.
Time: April 26, 2010 from 6pm to 7pm
Location: http://slurl.com/secondlife/Virtually%20Speaking/158/138/32
I believe they mean to mainly discuss the Al-Kandari case. You can read the write-up on this, also, at my blog. GottaLaff at The Political Carnival has been publicizing Fayiz’s case, too, for what seems forever.
Thank You Jeff, I will get involved and listen to the interview. What is your blog web site again? Thank You in advance.
Interested readers should check out bmaz’s article on this ruling, just up over at Emptywheel. He spells out far better than I ever could the legal aspects of the case, which only deepen the shadows gathering around the sense of injustice that surrounds this and so many of these Guantanamo cases.
From his article:
I linked it, but here it is again: Invictus. Three years of coverage of the torture issue over there, with lots of material on the role of psychologists and the American Psychological Association. This isn’t my vendetta, and truly a sad chapter in my profession’s history, but it turned out military and CIA psychologists, and certain leading members of the APA, were to play a big role in the establishment of torture as a policy and practice in this country.
I posted this comment at the post bmaz has up at Emptywheel, referenced by Jeff Kaye @ 12.
It concerns ‘evidence’ that the judge found unconvincing in the case being discussed here.
Your post cites the descriptions of the torture of accusers Hajj and Kazimi, and the reasons that the ‘accusations’ made by them were discounted by the court.
I’ll point out that on page 17 of the pdf is found:
The treatment of Richard Dean Belmar seems to match that of Hajj and Kazimi.
Note the incident with the pistol described.
See this story titled: “Beatings, sex abuse and torture: how MI5 left me to rot in US jail”. Subtitle: “In the first eyewitness account to come out of the infamous Bagram prison, Londoner Richard Belmar talks exclusively to David Rose” BY David Rose The Observer, Sunday 27 February 2005 LINK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/feb/27/guantanamo.usa
EXCERPT:
After his release to British custody a story in The Independent dated January 26, 2005 Title: “Police chief rules out prosecutions that rely on Guantanamo evidence”By Jason Bennetto, Robert Verkaik and Nigel Morri. LINK: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-chief-rules-out-prosecutions-that-rely-on-guantanamo-evidence-488287.html
EXCERPT:
thanks, jeff. it’s heartbreaking what this nation has become.
Jeff – I was going to respond again last night but decided to think a bit more.
Torture has now been institutionalized into different arms of our Military/Intelligence groups. Years ago it was not uncommon to hear that someone had ‘fallen’ out of a helicopter while taking a ride with the intel boys but it was clearly against the regs.
My fear is that this brutality will reach into the regular army and become common behavior (and we may already be seeing that result).
Once discipline is lost, it may be very difficult to find it again. (as our politicians continue to demonstrate daily)
Lawyers and Psychologists working together.
Are there not enough divorces in this county to keep these assholes working? Or are they unemployable in the general population.
Emotional or righteous indignation?
Emotional carries with it a notion of flailing about whereas righteous indignation carries with it a need to educate an ever widening audience and in the end to right the wrong, nothing less is acceptable.
and while the CIA and their contractors are beating and killing, the Navy prosecutes 3 Seals for giving a guy a fat lip. The world is upside down.
The first of the Seals was found not guilty at Court Martial:here
Great job, Jeff. It’s so sad that at this point emotion is one of the few tools left to fight these outrages.
Jeff Kaye, 4/21/2010
John Donne, Easter Sermon; Spring 1672
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/JohnDonne&CISOPTR=3215&REC=5
Thanks for the post Jeff.
Just want to make sure you know I mean that comment as a compliment.
Your posts are great. But I remain quite confused. The government spies can legally kill a US citizen. They can also indefinitely detain citizens. And they can torture citizens. But which one can they do first?
It may or may not be sad, but our emotions give us information about the world. As a psychologist, as I tell many of my clients, emotion is a primitive but effective information processing system. How would we know something is sad, for instance, if not for our tears?
I’d also like to say the diary needs minor correction. Andy Worthington wrote me to say that Kennedy’s decision in this case was actually made a month ago. The decision was released, then pulled back quickly for some reason, and then released again yesterday, which is when I saw it. So the “scorecard” is actually still 34 out of 47. A very minor statistical change, but the substantive issues, and the evidence of torture still remains.
As a commenter noted at bmaz’s blog piece on this story, the judge clearly states that torture was going on at CIA prisons, and that torture was used to coerce “evidence” about Uthman’s identity.
Who will prosecuted for this war crime? Is anyone from DoJ reading this, or rather, Judge Kennedy’s decision? Or are they too busy circling the wagons?
Frank, that is a rank ordering problem — with the intended play on words intended. The rankness stems from the fetid cesspool of a government that engendered it.
This is snarkable. Law students, who knew they were so wild and crazy.
In Canada, a parliamentary committee is investigating allegations that Canadian Forces in Afghanistan were transferring prisoners to Afghan authorities, despite the fact reports were coming back that they were being tortured. Here’s the latest on that from the Toronto Sun:
Well it’s nice to know someone learning law has heard of it.
Sometimes I wonder if anyone knows anything in this stupid country. I despair. (hey kids let’s write a memo saying we are at war and we get to kill anyone who has a name that starts with R!)
Toilet paper is all that the basic rights of man are to any of them in power now, including Obama.
That we should never forget. It has to be said again and again.
LOL!
I’ve been wanting to do that with Bill of Rights toilet paper for years.
It’s not as much the flushing away of rights that chaps my hide…it’s that the powerful have been wiping their sh*tty a$$es on the Nation’s defining document.
FunnyDiva
I am so glad you spoke to clarify emotions that are not always “flailing about”. As you write, emotions inform us and also give conviction. Thanks.
The Inquisitioners of the Spanish Catholic Church have to be rolling over in their graves with envy. How vile is a human to inflicts excruciating punishment on another of their own species. This is punishing people before the sentence or the trial. Our USA government! How low can you go America?
Granting 35 out of 48 habeas petitions is a HUGE ratio. I’ve not done much habeas work but that is truly astounding when compared to the typical rate — especially considering the bent of most federal judges and the lather of fear worked up by our political/media class and most of our populace. Can some criminal defense attorney, prosecutor, or anyone else reading this post put that ratio into perspective?
Thanks for the post.
The overall success rate of habeas petitions in Federal courts is around 2%. There are specific categories, such as death penalty cases, where within that category, the success rate is as high as 25%-30%. Death penalty cases of course, will have mandated lawyers, whether retained of court appointed, which along with the stakes involved makes them much more scrutinized by the judiciary. But overall, it is very, very low. In some regards, I think you could maybe analogize the Gitmo cases with death penalty cases in that they also have lawyers and a high level of scrutiny. even at that, the 73% success rate on the Gitmo petitions is simply astounding. Also should be noted that most of the common death penalty cases are only remanded for new trials, resentencing etc, very very few are successful in full release because there was no basis like is happening in the Gitmo detainee cases. So when you take that into account, it is really beyond belief.
Thanks for that info, bmaz. Yes, it does make the Gitmo cases stand out like a sore thumb. A very sore thumb for this country. Just astounding! It demonstrates how terribly, terribly off the rails this country has gone, and the inanity of Obama’s “don’t look back”, no accountability stance is… and how dangerous.
>> “How would we know something is sad, for instance, if not for our tears?”
Who let the Cannon/Bard fan in the house? /s
Well, since you brought it up, I’m really more of a “two-factor” fellow. But my experience is heavily weighted by clinical experience, and practically, all sorts of different things can happen. Some people can only sense emotion after they have experienced some physical bodily change. Some people feel no emotion, but only experience the bodily changes (the famous alexythymics). And the majority, I feel, perceive something, which is then processed in some meaningful way (and not necessarily cognitively, it can be, gasp, instinctual, as when a young child is torn from their mother) and the result is some affective response and accompanying behavior. Behaviors, of course, can also be conditioned, and such conditioning can conflict with instinctual or cognitive modes of processing. Learned helplessness is something like the latter, where the aversive conditioning overwhelms other mechanisms, and the consequent result is a sort of paralysis.
Then, there’s all those neuropsychological explanations.
Human beings are far more complex than all our theories.
Jeff, I would present the supposition that “don’t look back” indicates his agreement with the policy, procedures and outcomes. and it provides great cover. (at least for a little bit)
I am also a two-factor sort. Cognitive processes determine the valence; physiological processes determine the strength.
Favorite example (from teaching Intro Psych): I was scared because I knew [cognition] I could be killed. How scared was I? I was scared sh*tless [physiological].
Hi, Jeff ~
No time for links but I’m here in Ottawa watching all this intensely. The Government (conservative) is stonewalling taking the extraordinary step of shutting down Parliament at Christmas to buy time for the public to lose interest … they didn’t. All efforts to slime the initial whistleblower have come to naught: Colvin refused to be cowed. Now there are additional whistleblowers coming out of the woodwork. Tales of ovesight meeting scribes putting down their pens when the topic of torture comes up! Government lawyer got testy the other day: we will release documents when they and we are “good and ready.” Oops. Redactions galore. Talk of a Parliamentary contempt order on the government for delays.
And now … my original reason for posting: out of Britain there is word that the torture of Afghanis by Afghani security forces is an open secret in NATO. Pretty much makes the whole Canadian *drama* moot!!!!!! That has been reported here online but not on tv altho’ we have generally have good reporting of this issue as it plays out in Canadian jurisdictions.
And all this ~ even transferring to groups known to torture ~ is war crimes territory.
Thanks for all you do. Keep up the great work.
Thanks, reader. I’ll check into that NATO story. If true, it would be quite explosive.
Actually, now that I think about it, revelations of NATO troops, Canadian, turning prisoners over to the NDS for torture go back at least to 2007. See this Amnesty report.