Even though 35 year-old Abdul Aziz Naji said he’d rather stay at Guantanamo than be deported to his home country of Algeria, the Obama administration forcibly deported him anyway, despite Mr. Naji’s fears that "he would be targeted by violent groups who would kill him if he refused to join their battle against the country’s government." The U.S. Supreme Court refused to block the deportation in a ruling last week. Now Naji takes on the notoriety and the tragic fate to be the first involuntary transfer from Guantanamo.
In the past, the Obama administration was loathe to repatriate prisoners to countries where they feared persecution, as in the case of the Chinese Uighurs. But the administration has refused to do this in the case of the Algerians, despite ample evidence that both the Algerian government and violent opponents of the Algerian government have engaged in torture and killings in an on-again, off-again civil war going back 20 years now.
The Supreme Court also refused to block the involuntary transfer of Farhi Saeed Bin Mohammed, age 49, who was won his habeas suit in a decision last year. Lyle Denniston at ScotusBlog has been covering the clash of decisions between the D.C. Circuit Court and lower Federal judges over the right of the latter to block transfers or releases of Guantanamo prisoners (h/t powwow). Mohammed could also be involuntarily deported back to Algeria at any time. Note that the text of the Circuit Court’s order overruling the Senior Judge Gladys Kessler’s halt of the transfer of the Mr. Mohammed has been kept secret.
The Talking Dog interviewed Naji’s attorney, Ellen Lubell, last March:
Our client, Abdul Aziz Naji, is from Algeria. His family is there and we’ve spoken with them a number of times. Aziz is 34 and he has been imprisoned at Guantanamo for nearly eight years. He’s very likeable. He is an observant Muslim. Despite having attended school only through the sixth grade, he is bright, insightful, and has an excellent memory. He readily expresses his feelings and views on issues. He is extremely appreciative of our efforts on his case and lets us know this frequently. He loves children and very much wants go get married and have his own.
When Aziz was living in Algeria, around the time he was 17 or 18, he and his brother were attacked by a group of terrorists. After that, his brother left the country and so did Aziz, after completing his required military service. He went first to Mecca on a pilgrimage, and then traveled to Pakistan to perform "zakat"- charitable work – as is required of observant Muslims. Aziz worked for a charitable organization in the mountains of Kashmir for only a few months when he accidently stepped on one of the many landmines still buried left in this war-torn region. The explosion blew off the lower half of his right leg. He was taken to a hospital in Lahore, where he was treated, and over the course of a year received rehabilitation and a prosthetic leg. He decided then that he would try to find a wife. He was directed by friends to another Algerian man living in Peshawar, who was known to be helpful in arranging marriages. Aziz visited the man and while he was there, the man’s house was raided by the Pakistani police. The raid may have been the result of the bounties that were offered by the US at the time to local people if they identified possible “terrorists” among them. The Pakistanis interrogated Aziz, concluded that he had done nothing wrong, and told him they would release him. Instead, they turned him over to the Americans. Aziz was taken to the US prison at Bagram, Afghanistan, where he was tortured, and then on to Guantanamo.
When we took Aziz’s case, we were provided a file from the U.S. Department of Defense that included a list of allegations against him, with alleged “confessions.” None of the allegations or confessions was backed by any credible evidence. Ultimately, our view that the U.S. had no case against Aziz was validated by the Obama Administration, which cleared him in June 2009.
The court’s decision and the actions of the Obama administration are an outrage and another blow against the international position of non-refoulement, or non-return of refugees and the persecuted, as described in the UN Convention Against Torture and other international treaties and protocols. This action marks the U.S. as an uncivilized nation, a nation busily disassembling the rule of law in the name of empire building.
Algeria is a holy mess, with a slow-burning civil war continuing, and massive violence. The 2006 U.S. State Department Country Report on Algeria (released March 6, 2007) states:
Terrorists targeted civilians, security forces, and infrastructure. Press reports estimated that 135 civilians and 174 members of the security forces were killed in terrorist attacks, most of which were attributed to the [Islamic fundamentalist] Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC)…. The total number of disappeared during the 1990s continued to be debated. During the year, the government estimated that 6,546 persons were missing or disappeared as a result of government actions between 1992 and 1999, with some 10,000 additional persons missing or disappeared from terrorist kidnappings and murders….
The country’s 1992-2002 civil conflict pitted self-proclaimed radical Muslims belonging to the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) and its later offshoot, the GSPC, against moderate Muslims. During the year [2005] radical Islamic extremists issued public threats against all “infidels” in the country, both foreigners and citizens. The country’s terrorist groups generally did not differentiate between religious and political killings.
Looklex Encyclopedia notes that after the some of the Islamist parties signed a peace accord with the government in 1999, at least 1,000 or more individuals were killed in related clashes in 2002.
From Carol Rosenberg’s article on the SCOTUS decision paving the way for the Naji deportation:
In Naji’s case, his Boston lawyer, Ellen Lubell, said by e-mail Saturday that “he fears extremists will try to recruit him — associating him with Guantánamo — and will torture or kill him if he resists.”
“He has nothing against the Algerian government,” Lubell added, “but he fears that the government will be unable to protect him from Algerian extremists.”
What follows is a press release on the involuntary deportation of Mr. Naji by the Center for Constitutional Rights.
CCR Statement on U.S. Announcement that it Forcibly Repatriated a Guantánamo Detainee to Algeria
July 19, 2010, New York – Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) issued the following statement in response to the announcement by the U.S. government that it forcibly repatriated a Guantánamo detainee to Algeria:
“We condemn the forcible repatriation of Abdul Aziz Naji to Algeria. Although Mr. Naji has long been cleared of any connection with terrorism, we are deeply concerned that he will disappear into secret detention and face the threat of persecution by terrorist groups in Algeria. He bears no ill will toward the Algerian government, but fears that it will be unable to protect him from extremists in Algeria.
“Mr. Naji fled various forms of persecution in Algeria many years ago, including having been attacked by an extremist. His attempt to avoid forced repatriation and remain at Guantánamo Bay, after nearly a decade of detention without charge or trial, rather than return to Algeria underscores the depth of his fears. Regrettably, our government repatriated him against his will and despite credible fears of future persecution, in violation of the U.N. Convention Against Torture and other international law.
“CCR supports the ongoing efforts of the U.S. State Department to close Guantánamo Bay, particularly in the face of unyielding resistance from Congress and the seemingly detached indifference of the White House to the continuing plight of the men held in our notorious prison. However, the solution to Guantánamo Bay does not rest on forcing detainees to return to countries where they fear torture and persecution. It is not only illegal, but also bad policy. It is another unnecessary stain on our country’s human rights record, and certain to upset our friends and allies around the world. Forced repatriations make the United States appear complicit with repressive regimes and are certain to outrage Arabs and Muslims around the world at a time when our government needs their support.
“Attorneys for Mr. Naji have fought tirelessly for their client over the course of many years. Unfortunately, their efforts to prevent the forced repatriation of their client ended late Friday night with the Supreme Court’s denial of an application to stay his transfer. We admire their selfless dedication, and our thoughts are with their client in Algeria.”



65 Comments







Lost, most likely, in all the breaking news… but know that tonight, today, one man, tortured and imprisoned unjustly by the U.S. for eight years, will now live as a fugitive in his own country, doomed to live in fear for his safety and his life.
“Oh say can you see…?”
i am so ashamed this was done in our name
I have rarely felt this low.
It is amazing that a landmark such as Gitmo’s first involuntary, i.e., forced, transfer from the prison, to a country where the prisoner feared, that he in fact had not called home for over 15 years, has taken place, and most Americans will not hear of it.
FWIW, I had an Algerian client who pressed his claim for asylum for similar reasons, and had to fight the government to win his case. I know that my psych assessment was helpful in that cause. But the government was quite obstreperous in his case as well. I think the U.S. government will sacrifice the individual to prop up the image of foreign governments it supports. What does it matter to Obama — yes, President Obama — if this one man be sacrificed so that the Algerian government won’t be shamed by granting his request?
How many must be sacrificed in the name of U.S. foreign policy? How long before Americans wake up and demand — yes, demand — more from their government? Or is this our government at all, or a parasitic caste (as the Dana Priest series seems to argue), that uses fears over our own safety to create a security state outside anyone’s control, aimed at erasing the individual in the name of keeping the maw of government-funded secret agents and Pentagon campaigns alive?
War is Peace. Work is Freedom.
Deep investigations into lies under oath about blowjobs considered critical by congress = impeachment
Lies about WMD’s in Iraq = hundreds of thousands, dead, injured, millions displaced. And absolutely no one held accountable.
Obama and team going along with this only brings his claims about “change” and “hope” all the more hollow and cheap
I’ll raise you one Politics and the English Language for your 1984 (paragraph breaks added):
That was written in 1946. All that’s required to update the language in that last imaginary quote is to substitute Iraqi, Afghan, Iranian or American for “Russian”.
In the U.S., it began when they renamed the War Department the Department of Defense. Here’s a part of Obama’s brief statement last month on the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture
“a system of advice and tools” — he means, he’ll ship off prisoners to be tortured, if the courts allow
I thought this was a nice piece of Orwellian “language.”
and I have simultaneously had my Solicitor General, about to be Sup Ct Justice, to simultaneously come up with ways to send to jail any lawyers who help such victims of torture, if the torture is committed by “us good’uns”
It’s occurred to me for some time that there should be a campaign to rename the Department of “Defense” the Department of War — truth in labeling and all that. I’ve even got a slogan to meet the predictable right-wing objections: “Afraid of a little war, weenies?”
obama is president exactly because of his moral turpitude.
Not much hope for the future, I would expect Mr Naji be offed before anyone can document his history in obama’s Camp Gitmo.
Land of the free…not so much.
Thanks for the post Jeff.
Where would you put him Jeff? Honestly? It sucks ass but it would be political suicide to release him in the United States. What other nation has stepped up to take him? Everybody here knows I’m no defender of Obama. Out of all of the presidential candidates, he was second to dead last on my list and his record hasn’t improved my opinion of him. You can’t lay more than the tiniest fraction of guilt on him for this though. BUSH was the one who went around capturing innocent people, holding them without trial and even torturing them. BUSH was the one who turned so many people radically against the United States. Like the economy, all we can hold Obama accountable for is his response to a very bad situation he inherited. UNLIKE the economy, this situation left him with no good options. Like I said, it sucks ass but it’s not like the economy where he chose the obviously wrong path. In this case, there isn’t any good choice.
True, that. It’s not as if Canada wanted him.
For all that Bush did — and Bush was certainly responsible for Guantanamo — of all the hundreds of releases from that prison that finally did occur, Bush never involuntarily deported anyone back to a country where they feared persecution and torture.
What should a country do that wrongly took a man and tortured him, imprisoned him for eight years, who even preferred to stay in prison rather than return to his home country (as the other Algerians still held at Guantanamo also do)? Tell him sorry, but political considerations mean we have to violate international treaties and human rights protocols to return him anyway? That we are indifferent to his fate and his suffering, to the fact that he was attacked by the same variety of Islamic fundamentalist radicals that the U.S. claims it is fighting around the world?
What we could have done is offer him political asylum in the United States. Oh! Oh! people will say! What political suicide that would be. — Yet that would have been the honorable and just thing.
Well, they could have waited, as with the Uighurs, until they found a safe refuge.
Yes, Bush created the fiasco, but Obama’s management, in this case, has compounded the error by applying another layer of human rights abuse.
Guantanamo is the totem for what Dana Priest is calling Top Secret America. Its prisoners are human sacrifices. I, for one, will not join in with that religion.
He’s not claiming that the government of Algeria is going to persecute him. That would really be the only argument for asylum. Hes claiming that his guantanmo celebrity makes him useful to the revolutionaries in Algeria, and he fears they will “draft” him and the government cant protect him. That argument dosent even get you anything HERE, in the US. Just ask the famillies of anyone killed by an EX under a restraining order.
I never said he feared persecution from the Algerian government. You are correct that he fears the government cannot protect him against the “extremists”. By the way, that argument can win out, and does from time to time, in the asylum courts run by Homeland Security. I even have personal experience of such an argument being accepted in an Algerian case. I cannot speak to domestic violence disputes and the courts, having no real experience there, but I’m not sure that’s a good analogy anyway.
To hcgorman @41 – yes, what insanity! Thanks for all your great work for your clients and on the Guantanamo issue in general.
The situation with Naji becomes even more egregious, if you read in the link provided the Lubell interview, and realize that Naji had a case for asylum in Switzerland on appeal. I guess Obama and the Pentagon couldn’t wait for that case to be decided.
Then it’s political suicide. If he’s too much of a pussy to do what needs to be done to right the wrongs of the Bush era, then he shouldn’t have fucking run for the office of the President in the first place.
Obama’s political career is a lot less valuable than you’re suggesting.
You’re deliberately ignoring my entire commenting history here. I’m not suggesting Obama’s political career is valuable to anybody but him. I’m saying it ain’t gonna happen.
Nathan, you have this exactly right: “he shouldn’t have fucking run for the office of the President in the first place”.
When Margaret says:
> I’m going to assign the blame to Bush in this case.
She has it exactly wrong. Bush has no power at all to prevent this unjust deportation, whereas Obama does.
Then maybe we should just kill him?
I mean, what’s the difference between us killing him and us releasing him into a situation where he will be killed?
I know that the issue is tough, but well intended people using some kind of imagination should be able to come up with something better than turning folks loose from Guantanamo into a lion pen. Given that choice, no wonder he said he’d rather stay at Guantanamo.
I don’t have any answers, but goddammit we can do better than this. Yes we can ….
oh wait.
Maybe not.
My bad.
Torture, ending habeas corpus, assassinating Americans, arresting innocents and holding them forever, killing hundreds of thousands if not millions of civilicans in the name of a war against a tactic at worse or a groupd of a few men at best, trashing the U.S. Constitution,…..
Guess we can’t do any better.
Fuck that.
I love you Margaret, but disagree here. We should be able to do better.
That’s a hateful and disgusting thing to say and even worse to suggest that I would be for such a thing. Shame on you! You love me you say? Funny, nobody that loves me has ever before suggested that I would support murdering people out of hand for convenience sake. I’m shocked and astonished at your over the top, deliberate misrepresentation of what I said. How does “I think we should blame Bush and not Obama so much” equal I’m for murder? OUT!
Sorry.
Well, I’ve never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, and this is another excellent example.
I honestly didn’t think it through properly to think this would be your reaction. Believe it or not, that WAS NOT my intention. But, as I said, I didn’t think it through properly.
FWIW, my sincere apologies. I most certainly DO NOT think you’re some kind of monster. Quite the contrary.
But, what’s done is done and it’s my bad. I’ll take a well deserved leave of absence for that one.
Best to you Margaret, and all other pups as well.
Apology accepted. Don’t leave due to a disagreement though, debate is what this forum is about. I’ve been known to react wrongly without thinking it through on several occasions. I was just stunned that anybody would suggest that I would think like that. I forgive you.
While the infelicitous way of making your point was offensive to Margaret, your point that the deportation is a possible death sentence for Mr. Naji is all too true. It is a point I make in the very headline of the story. I’m sure you didn’t intend to imply that Margaret wished for Mr. Naji’s death, and she’s spoken to that. But I’d hate to see you disappear from commenting for that reason. Hopefully, Margaret will accept your apology.
Decisions like this are made every day in the asylum courts of this country, formerly run by the INS, and now by Homeland Security. I have testified in these courts, including for Algerians. Whether the applicant is from China, Algeria, Guatemala, Russia, the Philippines, Ethiopia, Yemen, Turkey, India, etc. (all countries from whom I’ve worked with clients trying to escape a return to political or gender persecution), these people have suffered immensely. All got their day in court to present their case (even if that date was all too often intolerably delayed by a clogged and inefficient asylum system).
The D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court stopped any such process for the Guantanamo prisoner. Not that he was applying for asylum, but I’m referring to due process, wherein a person can have an advocate in court, present his or her evidence, confront and challenge the evidence of the government, and fight for their very lives.
What kind of a country do we have left if this very right is stripped from certain people held in U.S. custody? We don’t have a country anymore. We have only a tyranny.
Adding to what Jeff said: What’s wrong with Cape Verde? Where, during the same weekend – perhaps even on the same plane – when the Obama administration shipped Naji to Algeria despite his fears of torture, a Syrian citizen was shipped to Cape Verde (an island nation off the west coast of Africa, where they speak Portuguese, which had not taken any previous detainees) to avoid returning him to the possibility of torture in Syria.
Or with Bermuda? Or with Palau? Both places where Chinese Uighurs were sent, including on Obama’s watch, to avoid returning them to China, where they almost certainly would be persecuted.
And how did, quoting Human Rights Watch, the Bush and Obama administrations manage to resettle detainees who are citizens of “Egypt, Libya, the Occupied Palestinian territories…and Tunisia” (in addition to China and Syria) somewhere other than those countries – if no other nation was willing to step up (even with generous financial sweeteners from the U.S. to do so) to resettle Guantanamo-tainted citizens of countries to which the Convention Against Torture forbids deportation?
Nothing at all. I didn’t know that was among the options. Why wouldn’t those be good options? Why weren’t they considered in this case? I don’t know the answers to those which is why I asked Jeff. Because like I pointed out, I haven’t seen any nations step up and offer to take him on. Maybe we could bribe or blackmail one into taking him but that wouldn’t be exactly right either. At least then he would own it more though.
Neither do the rest of us, because of the suffocating secrecy, in the name of National Security, in which all of these proceedings are shrouded. And because our Members of Congress are either hiding under their desks or leading the Guillotine Knitters Guild portion of humanity’s cheers for more blood-letting.
Because of that secrecy and abdication of Congressional oversight, how would any of us know if other nations had stepped up to take the Algerians, until after the detainee(s) had been released? I certainly had no idea – nor did anyone in the press, to my knowledge – that a Syrian detainee was about to be shipped to Cape Verde, no doubt after negotiations had taken place for some time.
It took real detective work by Lyle Denniston and Josh Gerstein to uncover as much as we do know about the recent proceedings in federal court impacting on the fate of these two Algerians. [By the way, Jeff, the one public document of substance in bin Mohammed's case is the final order of the Circuit panel (with a partial dissent by Tatel) that was unclassified after a short delay.] As Lyle Denniston elaborated:
Oh yes… ! that make my day. Anytime I get some real good… passive aggressive.
So very… Nurse Ratchet. ” I don’t see how we can do anything, it is out of our hands, and we understand… ‘we feel your pain’.” Great line that, from the Slick, so new age.
? Passive indifference? what ever, it shows a secret delight in the suffering, of helpless pawns, that have become proxies, for human sacrifice. This brings out the devil any many, who tacitly understand how the game is played.
The game is that when we get a chance, we can do what… sorry to say, comes only too naturally. Kill and torture, torture and kill. This is deeply wired into the human psyche, it comes out, only too easily, just move a few restrictions, and see them line up to take a wack. or get their vicarious fix.
Couldn’t just get the poor bastard an upgraded cell… with a cot, and turn off the electodes, or stop the constant dripping water, or the like?
This isn’t really much different than all the other carnage this nation condones and commits.
His suffering will serve as a lesson to american citizens….you could be next, now shut up!
I’m just not ready to condemn somebody for having to make a choice between nothing but really crappy options. After all, that’s what almost all of us are faced with every election day. All I can do is work to change things but I can’t do much of that right now as most of my time is taken up just trying to survive and keep my crappy third floor apartment.
Thank you so much, Jeff, for keeping this visible.
Something I didn’t point out in my diary on this issue is that Congress is notified 15 days before anyone is released from Guantanamo, in accordance with a recently-passed law.
So our Members of Congress know – two weeks before the public does, and before the transfer actually happens unlike the public or media – when Guantanamo wartime-”protected” non-POW POWs – like Naji – are being prepared for release by the U.S. military.
Yes, I meant to put more emphasis on the complicity of Congress, which is manifest in a number of ways, from the writing of the Military Commissions Act, to the refusal to demand the closure of Guantanamo.
Andy Worthington has recently published an updated, definitive list of who is at Guantanamo right now, and their situation, as can best be determined. In his article introducing the list, he notes the following:
I’m sorry, powwow. I should have cited your excellent diary. You have been out front on this, along w/ Denniston & Gerstein.
No apology needed, Jeff (cbl2 has you covered anyway – thanks, cbl2). This important and timely follow-up diary is ‘citation’ enough.
I’ve been waiting for the other shoe to drop, since we learned, via DOD press release Monday, that Naji was flown to Algeria over the weekend. By this time yesterday, we had that news. But no word yet today about the fate of Farhi Saeed bin Mohammed (the main subject of my weekend diary)…
I agree with that! 100 percent! It would be the right thing to do! Like I said, it sucks ass. Personally I would have moved them into the United States long ago to begin their compensation, rehabilitation and eventual assimilation and damn the consequences but it would have had to have been done is some very creative ways since Congress has made it clear they won’t write the check to do it. You can’t lay that on Obama either, except in the context in that he is so often eager to accept defeat and doesn’t do enough leaning on his own party, much less the opposition. Like I said, I hate it and I wish I wouldn’t have done what Obama did about it but I’m going to assign the blame to Bush in this case.
I disagree with you, Margaret. G. W. Bush and Cheney aren’t in office any longer, so we can’t keep blaming them forever. The ball is now in Obama’s court. He owns it!
According to the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees:
In the UN Convention Against Torture, the treaty Yoo, Bybee and Bradbury shredded:
Link
Just sayin’.
thank you Jeff, rec.
pow wow’s diary – systemic problems that got us here
Thanks Jeff for riding the torture dragon.
I don’t ask my God to bless and protect from the torture infection many but you’re on my list also, stay strong.
Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness.
Blessed are the merciful;for the shall obtain mercy.
Dear George,
Forgive me for criticising your instituting the occupation of Iraq and your lawless creation of a no man’s (no rights) land for prisoners of invasion. I now see how naive I was. Thanks for showing me that the Constitution is indeed “just a piece of paper.” Like you said, “Presidentin’ is hard work.”
Sincerely,
Barack -maintainin the status quo- Obomba
I have to admit my first reaction to reading the OP was that of a devil’s advocate — you mean we’ve been agitating for years to get people out of there and now we’re confirming the Rumsfeld (or whoever it was) line of Gitmo as a tropical paradise with lemon fish on the menu?
But having read on into the comments, I get it. I’m then tempted to ask — what would be the harm in releasing him here? He could be under observation, have a parole agent, etc.
But then it hit me: the problem would be that it would show the American people that we hoovered up a lot of innocents who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that the entire complex of illegal prisons like Gitmo are not protecting us, but are way stations on the way to fascism. Can’t have that, nuh-uh.
I know that the knee jerk response when obama says no is to argue yes.
I know that most people on here are humane and compassionate people.
That dosent mean we can or should grant asylum to those people who we have spent 10 years making into monstrous super villains with comic book like evil powers. We never should have picked this guy up, but Algeria was fucked up before we did. Maybe France should take him.
Guatanamo needs to be closed, as Obama said it would be. All the other detention camps we operate need to be shut down as well. The prisoners need to be repatriated to their homes.Now are we saying that some prisoners should be alowed to stay if they want to? That was never the point.
Only until a safe third country can be found to take them, after eight years of judicially-determined unlawful detention in bin Mohammed’s case.
As of Monday, there are 178 men still locked up in Guantanamo, a large number of them from Yemen. Further releases to Yemen have been informally ‘frozen’ by the Obama administration, basically for political reasons (having to do with the Christmas Day bombing attempt), even though their own task force has cleared many of those detainees for release.
If we’re going to keep dozens of citizens from Yemen detained for more months, or more years, why in the world can’t we keep a handful of Algerians for a few more weeks or months until a safe haven country can be persuaded to accept them?
It speaks volumes that Naji was released in such haste this weekend, as soon as the Supreme Court refused to force a lower court judge (Reggie Walton) to stay his transfer to Algeria, in order to address his legitimate concerns about torture, after eight years – including more than a year of the Obama administration – of idling in Guantanamo. Naji’s release (unlike bin Mohammed’s) wasn’t ordered by a federal judge – his was one of the hundreds of voluntary, unilateral releases by the U.S. military (most of them during the Bush administration) of Guantanamo captives supposedly being held ‘for the duration’ of the armed conflict in which they are claimed (without lawful basis, in violation of the due process required by the law of armed conflict) to have been combatants.
He wasn’t picked up from Algeria.
So yeah – the consequence of kidnapping someone under the mistaken believe that they were some uber terrorist is pretty much a modified Pottery Barn rule – “You’ve broken (the law to get) them, You’ve bought (responsiblity for) them.”
This guy was basically the same as a human trafficking victim, someone weak and vulnerable who had left their country to go into hiding from criminals and terrorists in that country. We bought him from Pakistan with no understanding that Pakistan would take him back if we decided we didn’t want him and after discovering that we were wrong to ever purchase him for our human interrogation experiments, we are not going to send him back – not to Pakistan where we purchased him, but to terrorists operating openly there.
There are consequences to breakig the law, to kidnap, to human trafficking, to violation of the Geneva Conventions REQUIREMENT that civilians not be transported out of the country of capture. Those consequences are either the right and moral consequences of taking responsiblity for the safe relocation of our government’s human trafficking and experimentation victim or the consequences of reaping longer term and more virulent consequences for being, in the eyes of so many, unrepentant torturers and law breakers.
Boo Hoo Hoo for this poor “victim” of being on the wrong side of this so called “war on terror”.
Fuck ‘em. Send him home pronto. If his country deals with “suspected terrorists” in a less than “christian” manner he should have thought of that consequence before he started messin’ around on the side of these Muslim freaks…
Brilliant comment, such depth of humanity, we overlooked that line of thinking,NOT
Dear Mick,
Whether you’re a troll I don’t know. But you are talking about a human being. He furthermore has treaty rights under the U.S. Constitution that this nation has violated unconscionably.
If we’re talking Christian, BTW, isn’t there something somewhere about “Whatever you do to the least of these….”?
By “troll,” greenharper means, I’m guessing, someone who’s simply pretending to believe the too-easy, popular, demonizing slander you just threw at Abdul Naji solely because our military locked him up and told you he was Bad (not to mention on the wrong “side” of the Christian/”Muslim Freak” divide by virtue of having been born Muslim).
If you’re not a troll, you’ll be happy to defend your views, I assume, and can confirm that you likewise believe that the “poor” Chinese Uighur “victims” of this so-called “war on terror” should all have been sent home to China – where they deal with “suspected terrorists” (especially persecuted Muslim minorities like the Uighurs) in a less than “christian” manner. Something that the Uighurs, like Naji in Algeria, “should have thought about” before they fled their native land to avoid being caught up in the ugly consequences of state-sponsored and criminal gang violence.
Consider, Mesa Mick, how uniformed your comment is. Mr. Naji escaped from attacks from Muslim fundamentalists. He fears their attacks if sent back. Consider, Mesa Mick, that your position strengthens those fundamentalists that would seek to punish Mr. Naji.
Are you spinning around like a top yet?
I just thought I would mention that while the Obama administration has been busy sending this particular Algerian to his possible death, my Algerian client is still sitting at the hell hole and he has no problem going back. I mean WTF are they doing sending a guy back who shouldn’t go back and not sending back a guy that can go back?
Here is the actual talking dog link with the Ellen Lubell interview:
http://www.thetalkingdog.com/archives2/001426.html
(She is one hell of an attorney and was working hard to find another country to take her client.)The talking dog has a lot of great interviews with people connected one way or another with Gitmo.
Second the thumbs up for the Talking Dog interviews – I was stunned when I found them a couple of years ago. So much info there – and so much more informed and in depth than anything we see in the MSM. Thanks for incorporating the reference Jeff.
Speaking of the Guantanamo hell hole, Carol Rosenberg gets a chance to enlighten a few of her Washington Power Corridor-bound colleagues this evening at the National Press Club, at 7 p.m.:
Nick Baumann today, at Mother Jones:
Thank you – this makes for another sad episode. This one, though, can’t be blamed on Bush or the REpublicans. It’s of Obama’s choice and choosing – his gift to our nation and its children.
But that would be looking backward, wouldn’t it ;-)
For the record:
Obama and US Courts Repatriate Algerian from Guantánamo Against His Will; May Be Complicit in Torture; Andy Worthington; 7/21/10
A glimmer?
powwow @29 of his/her most recent diary [emphasis added]:
[PS: IA[obviously]NAL, so here goes: Is the “DC Circuit Court of Appeals” the court that Bybee sits on? I get so confused with the terminology for the different courts and locations and functions. Is there a diagram somewhere that I could look at? Thanks in advance for any help.]
Bybee sits on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Bybee’s own office is in Las Vegas.
Thanks, Jeff.
[harpie, FYI, see here for a good overview and helpful list of the federal District and Circuit Courts. The boundaries of the District (trial court, each case overseen by one judge out of a group of judges) and Circuit (appellate court, usually divided into multiple three-judge panels, one panel per case) Courts are geographically-defined, as you'll note. The Ninth Circuit oversees the District Courts in the western states of the U.S., while the First Circuit oversees the District Courts in the New England region, etc. The Supreme Court, of course, oversees them all (if and when it chooses to do so...).]
The article that harpie highlights and links @ 55 is another superb piece of work by Andy Worthington. He’s done an outstanding job of digging up all the best and original sources he could find, and synthesizing the information into a coherent and comprehensive whole:
Andy also notes that as of Monday, 7/19/10, “a total of 594 Guantanamo prisoners” (only a fraction of whom – less than 37 – were ordered released by federal judges in habeas rulings) “have been released” by the military, during the Bush and Obama administrations “(or, in some cases, transferred to the custody of their home governments, or of other governments), and six men died there, five in mysterious circumstances.”
Thanks to Andy’s reporting, I see that Peter Finn of the Washington Post has also been covering, at least from time to time, the situation of the Algerians at Guantanamo who don’t want to be released to Algeria against their will. Finn is in contact with at least one person in the administration who’s apparently familiar with the thinking driving its actions, but unfortunately has given that person anonymity to speak, so we don’t know what agency is being heard from, or what bias or agenda may be driving that person, and others can’t build on Finn’s reporting by asking further questions of that source or their boss(es). Also, it looks like Peter Finn, for one, was in fact aware of early indications that discussions were under way with Cape Verde about accepting a Guantanamo detainee: “Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton visited Cape Verde during a swing through Africa last August, and the possibility of the former Portuguese colony taking a detainee was first raised then.”
There’s another superb new article by Andy Worthington today that breaks some news, I think, by unearthing the important fact that the D.C. Circuit Court apparently accepted and endorsed discredited evidence about Abu Zubaydah in a recent panel decision rejecting a Guantanamo detainee’s habeas corpus appeal:
Thanks so much for all the added information, powwow, and especially for the link to the very helpful Courts information…just what I needed!
Though a seemingly-minor point, while I was adding some names and other details inside brackets, in Comment 59, to the excerpts of Andy Worthington’s important story about the discredited Abu Zubaydah evidence accepted by three Circuit judges, I somehow used parentheses instead of brackets around the phrase “in Judge Rosemary Collyer’s court” – in the third line of the first paragraph excerpted. Despite the absence of brackets, and contrary to appearances in the excerpt, I’m actually the one who included that phrase – and thus I inadvertently changed the sentence that Andy Worthington actually wrote, which I regret.
~~~Parenthesis replaced with brackets in your original comment~~~
OY!
Naji: The Problem With Involuntary Repatriation; Steve Vladeck; 7/21/10 [Emphasis added]
Reuters link:
Whereabouts of former U.S. detainee unknown: lawyers; Reuters; 7/21/10; 5:57pm
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66K6HS20100721
OY!, indeed.
How I’d miss picking up on that story yesterday evening or earlier today (even as I’ve been watching for further developments concerning bin Mohammed’s fate)… Thanks so much for posting the news here, harpie, so I didn’t miss it altogether. [And, re your 61, I'm glad to hear the court-information link is the sort of road map you were looking for - pleased to be of help.]
Good for Reuters for quickly picking up on this, and good for Steve Vladeck for continuing to publicize and apply critical thinking to these matters. Vladeck recaps at Balkinization late Wednesday re the still-detained bin Mohammed:
Meanwhile, Carol Rosenberg tweeted this about four hours ago:
Here’s the full Center for Constitutional Rights press release yesterday regarding Abdul Naji, which apparently triggered the subsequent Reuters article.
In other new developments regarding Guantanamo, yesterday Judge Reggie Walton issued his first final habeas corpus ruling on the merits, by denying the petition of Abdul-Rahman Sulayman of Yemen. The same day, Walton’s colleague Judge Henry Kennedy, Jr. issued another (his fifth, I believe) habeas corpus ruling on the merits, by granting the petition of Adnan Farhan Abdul Latif, also of Yemen. [Following a wise practice that Judge Kennedy started on his last granted release in May (that detainee is now home, probably as a direct result of Kennedy's oversight), Kennedy has again set a progress report hearing for the government to explain the status of its efforts to achieve the ordered release, for August 20th.]
All as reported Wednesday by Carol Rosenberg in the Miami Herald: