Leaked emails claim Guantanamo trials rigged

[righthand]

ABC News OnLine http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...8/s1426797.htm

Leaked emails from two former prosecutors claim the military commissions set up to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay are rigged, fraudulent, and thin on evidence against the accused. Two emails, which have been obtained by the ABC, were sent to supervisors in the Office of Military Commissions in March of last year - three months before Australian detainee David Hicks was charged and five months before his trial began. The first email is from prosecutor Major Robert Preston to his supervisor. Maj Preston writes that the process is perpetrating a fraud on the American people, and that the cases being pursued are marginal... "Surely they don't expect that this fairly half-arsed effort is all that we have been able to put together after all this time."Maj Preston says he cannot continue to work on a process he considers morally, ethically and professionally intolerable. "I lie awake worrying about this every night," he wrote."I find it almost impossible to focus on my part of mission. By North America correspondent Leigh Sales Monday, August 1, 2005. 8:16am

Something rotten in the States of America

The second email is written by another prosecutor, Captain John Carr, who also ended up leaving the department. Capt Carr says the commissions appear to be rigged.

Anything not rotten in the States. Maybe China did this too. (ref Newsweek)

.

[oranged]

It just get's worse doesn't it? It's good to here that morals are catching up with some military personell. That does slightly shrink the vast conspiracy.

[RickSp]

Quote by: oranged It just get's worse doesn't it? It's good to here that morals are catching up with some military personell. That does slightly shrink the vast conspiracy.

Regrettably, the difference between Gitmo and the Gulag is primarily one of scale. Glad at least a few courageous souls inside have dared to speak out.

[PatrickHenry]

Are rigged show trials characteristic of a Police/Security State?
Characteristics of a Police/Security State

[RickSp]

A third prosecutor has walked off in disgust, refusing to participate in the "show trials".

A third US military prosecutor has walked out of the commissions process set up to try Guantanamo Bay detainees because of concerns it was unfair, the ABC has learned.

Third prosecutor critical of Guantanamo trials

[righthand]

PatrickHenry draws our attention to [CENTER] Characteristic of a Police/Security State[/CENTER]

In the Blame Game inside the prisons one particular thing strikes me. In reminds me of an extraordinary incident decades ago called the 'Birmingham 6'. After a very bad pub bombing six Irishmen were charged with the crime. Photos in newspaper clearly showed they each had received particularly bad beatings. They claimed both the police and the prison were responsible. The courts determined that each of the two must be sued separately. You've guessed - the police blamed the prison guards while the guards blamed the police. Both got off despite all accepting in court that the men were beaten. The men were all convicted and would have been hung if the death penalty was in vogue in the UK. Subsequent evidence, decades later, proved their innocence.

So connect the 'Blame Game' to court cases and torture and deaths in US run prisons. Simple really. Only lower ranks get done. Officers are blameless. So, that's how it always has been. Is it. Is that how it always has been. It certainly not how the image of officers and GENTLEMEN of the US forces have themselves in films that they bankroll. So they are prepared for a bit of bad press for now in order to preserve clean hands for it's officer class.

Lets examine what we are being asked to accept. Non-officers were without any direction from officers, throughout the whole US prison system, engaging in practices that maimed and in some cases, killed. If we accept this as true, unlikely as it my be, what them.

Well at the very least, the officers should be charged with DERELECTION Of DUTY for NOT knowing what there men were doing or not, as the case may be. So, either they knew and so are more guilt than their men, OR else they are guilt for not knowing and are not fit officers. There is no third option.

If officers are now not standing up and being responsible for the actions of their men in their control, maybe its time to drop the 'gentlemen' tag. Actually they besmirch the tag 'office' to all officers. Being the forces into disrepute is also viable.

If officers are not leading their men, what are they doing in an army. Career officer and officer are being shown to be two different creatures in war situation. Most of your higher officers strike me as better PR and TV loving than fighting men. Gulf One spoiled them as to what it takes to lead men. They cannot all be lobbyists or can they.

[CENTER] Abuse Cases Open Command Issues at Army Prisons New York Times ...Aug 8 2005 ...By TIM GOLDEN[/center] Along with other information that has emerged, trial testimony has underscored a question long at the core of this case: what is the responsibility of more senior military personnel for the abuses that took place? Many former Bagram officers have denied knowing about any serious mistreatment of detainees before the two deaths. But others said some of the methods that prosecutors have cited as a basis for criminal charges, including chaining prisoners to the ceilings of isolation cells for long periods, were either standard practice at the prison or well-known to those who oversaw it. None of the nine soldiers prosecuted thus far are officers. The 18 others against whom Army investigators have recommended criminal charges include two captains, the military intelligence officer in charge of the interrogation group and the reservist commander of the military police guards

This NYT article is very lengthy. Yet it does not ask the really hard question. These 'officers' are obviously being well trained for US business.

Again So, either they knew and so are more guilt than their men, OR else they are guilt for not knowing and are not fit officers. There is no third option.

[righthand]

{searched for an existing thread, not to open fresh thread. Not exact but...}

New claims of Iraq prisoner abuse
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4154700.stm
Tuesday, 16 August 2005, 02:00 GMT

Fresh allegations of abuse of Iraqi prisoners by UK soldiers have been uncovered by BBC Two's Newsnight. Two brothers claim they were beaten and denied water and sleep after they were arrested in Basra and taken to a camp, weeks after military action began. Marhab and As'ad Zaaj-al-Saghir have not made an official complaint, but have asked to be compensated for the car and cash they say UK troops seized. The Ministry of Defence said it only investigated claims reported to it. Marhab Zaaj-al-Saghir told the programme: "They lowered me down... while I was tied up, threw me on the floor and hit me with a stick. You couldn't draw breath afterwards and I lost consciousness." He said he had then been urinated on. His brother As'ad also claimed he was tied up and abused. Another man, Hani Jahoush, said he was held for more than two months without charge. He told Newsnight he was punched and chased with a whip as he moved around his cell. He also claimed he was forced to make monkey noises and threatened with an electric shock machine. Newsnight says the men's accounts are similar to many others recounted in a confidential report by the International Committee of the Red Cross.

It would seem to me that the British forces are very rigorous in investigating reported 'crimes'. First they are bound by the International Criminal court for war crimes. Second they learnt from the North of Ireland that repressive measures are counter-productive.

They may be losing sight of the later point in how they intend dealing with anti-terror measures against their Muslim community. The best source of all intelligence is a willing cooperating community. Could other states learn from the experiences of the UK.

.