Cheney cops to being a war criminal

Why does anyone care what former Vice-President Dick Cheney has to say about terrorism?

He was on ABC News this weekend accusing the Obama Administration of being soft on terrorism. Someone needs to remind him that the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, at least on U.S. soil, occurred on his watch.

What’s more, he admitted he was a war criminal by saying he condoned and was “a big supporter” of water boarding, and there is no doubt its torture.

Why is he not in jail?

Republicans continue to push lies about the underwear bomber case

Republicans continue to disrespect the U.S. Justice system, and it took a comedian and the host of a fake TV news show to put them in their place.

Since last fall Republicans have been whining about holding the trial for the accused mastermind of the September 11 attacks in New York City where the crime occurred, and recently they have been trying to paint the Obama Administration as soft on terrorism in its handing of the Underpants bomber, who tried to blow up a trans-Atlantic flight from Amsterdam to Detroit Metro Airport on Christmas Day.

Like the Bush Administration who tried more than 300 suspected terrorists in federal court, according to the Bush Justice Department, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria will also be tried in federal court. His case is almost exactly like that of the Shoe Bomber, Richard Reed.

On December 22, 2001 he tried to blow up a U.S. airline flight with a bomb hidden in his shoe, and he was also subdued by passengers, just like the underwear bomber. Three days later he was charged in U.S. federal court at Boston in a criminal complaint. Reid pled guilty to all eight criminal counts on October 4, 2002, and on January 31, 2003, he was sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole with three life sentences to be served consecutively. During the sentencing hearing Reid stated that he was an enemy of the United States and in league with Al-Qaeda. He is serving his sentences at a Supermax prison in Colorado.

Now, Republicans are complaining because Abdulmutallab was read his Miranda rights like the law requires of all criminal suspects and just like Reid was. On Tuesday, perennial Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich appeared on the Daily Show with John Stewart to push his latest book where he called the Obama Administration “radical” for reading Abdulmutallab his Miranda rights. When Stewart pointed out that the same thing happened with Reid, Gingrich told an outright lie, saying it was OK because Reid was an American citizen.

That’s simply not true; he’s a British citizen.

When Gingrich asked Stewart what he thought of holding the 9/11 terror trials in New York, Stewart - who lives just blocks from the Twin Towers and did so on September 11, 2001- hit it out of the park.

“I would be happy and I would be proud of New Yorker’s ability to handle whatever inconvenience to show off our resilience and our lack of fear in the face of these idiots,” he said. “I would be delighted.”

No one could have said it better. Stewart has said many times that these guys are simply idiots from the bottom of the barrel, yet we treat them like X-Men with supernatural powers. The fact is they are nothing but common criminals and thugs who should be treated just like muggers, rapists and murderers are. They should not be given any special status as “enemy combatants” or holy warriors. They are criminals and should be given every protection under the law and thrown in prison when convicted.

We have the best, the most just and most humane criminal justice system in the world, and I have no idea why Republicans think so little of it. If we give in to the fear and treat them differently, then the terrorists have won. Hell, that’s their very mission.

Republicans have claimed Abdulmutallab stopped talking when he was read his rights, but that’s another rightwing lie. He has spilled his guts, with the help of his family, and he has given up plenty of intelligence. It’s sad that people like “Twitter” Pete Hoekstra and U.S. Rep. Candice Miller, R-Macomb County, want to torture him. Not only is it against the law and morally wrong, you get unreliable information.

Reasons for holding terrorist trial in secret continue to be debunked

It continues to amaze me that Republicans are making a political issue of holding the 9/11 terrorist attack trial in the federal justice system in New York City where the crime and the most loss of life occurred.

It simply makes no sense. The racist tea baggers are even getting involved. A couple of groups calling themselves the “Tea Party 365” and the “9/11 Never Forget Coalition” recently held a protest against it. The tea baggers are a group that hates and mistrusts the government, yet it wants the trial to be held behind closed doors and conducted by the government. That simply makes no sense.

One group that suffered a tremendous, personal loss in the 9/11 attacks wants the trial held in the U.S. courts because they want answers and want to attend the trial. The group is known as the “Jersey Girls,” a group of New Jersey widows who lost their husbands in 9/11. This group wants answers, and they want it held in open court. These women were instrumental in pushing for the creation of the September 11 commission, a bipartisan body that produced a comprehensive report on the attacks, their planning and geopolitical context. Former President Bush fought that tooth and nail.

Every issue raised by Republicans for not doing the right thing has been debunked, but they still cling to this issue. It makes you wonder what they are afraid of coming out. Perhaps they don’t want the extent that Bush authorized the torture of suspects to come out.

That simply will not happen. Of course some may come out from the suspects themselves, but the judge in the case, Judge Kaplan, issued an order that said information about "enhanced interrogation techniques that were applied" to Mr. Ghailani, "including descriptions of the techniques as applied, the duration, frequency, sequencing, and limitations of those techniques” would not he admissible.

In fact, he was very careful to ensure no classified material would be released. The Southern District of New York where the trial will be held has held such trials in the past, and officials know what they are doing.

The trial will be governed by the “Classified Information Procedures Act,” The 1980 law is simple and clear, and it not only permits, but requires, federal courts to undertake extreme measures to ensure the concealment of classified information, even including concealment from the defendant himself. Section 3 provides: "Upon motion of the United States, the court shall issue an order to protect against the disclosure of any classified information disclosed by the United States to any defendant in any criminal case in a district court of the United States." Section 9 required the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to consult with the Attorney General and Defense Secretary to develop rules to carry out the Act's requirements,

To meet that requirement, Judge Kaplan has imposed a protective order on all classified information, which may be reviewed by the defense lawyers only in a special "secure area," a room whose location has not been disclosed. It goes without saying that all attorneys in the case have security clearances.

One of the most important aspects is how the defendants in the trial are viewed. In a criminal trial they are treated like the common criminals they are, and they do not like that. In a military trial they can call themselves soldiers in a fight for freedom who were martyred.

In a trial in the U.S. system, they are given a fair trial in the most open society in the world that stand for justice and fairness, and when they are convicted, they will be treated like the convicted murders they are, not as military heroes or freedom fighters.

The law enforcement officer responsible for the county jail condones torture

It’s a little scary when the second ranking law enforcement officer in Livingston County - who also runs the county jail - defends and makes excuses for torture, but that is exactly what Livingston County Undersheriff Mike Murphy is trying to do in a disgusting letter to the editor in the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus on Sunday.

Not surprisingly, Murphy is the chair of the Livingston County Republican Party. In his disgusting letter he never points that fact out, and the editor had to do that for him. The letter is filled with misinformation, lies and exaggerations from the very first sentence.

He claims, “It has been a little over 100 days since President Barack Obama has taken office, and if it's any indication of what lies ahead for the next four years, America could be in dire straits.” Apparently, Sheriff Murphy has been asleep for the last eight years, and he is not aware of the recession former President Bush plunged the country into and the budget surplus he turned into a deficit. President Obama’s first 100 days have been spent cleaning up the mess left him.

He then launched into his standard rightwing talking points: “I could care less what a person's issue is, whether it's moving the economy toward socialism, placing limits on First Amendment rights by regulating free speech on the airwaves and on the Internet, or if it's trampling states' rights by trumping all their laws on abortion restrictions.” The socialism crack is the hottest GOP talking point, the First Amendment talking point must - I guess - be about the rightwing paranoia about the Fairness Doctrine, but I have no idea what he is talking about on abortion rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has been pretty clear on abortion.

But his real misguided wrath is reserved for national security and defending torture.

“According to The Weekly Standard, Obama has released classified intelligence to our enemies regarding the amount of coercive interrogation tactics the United States is willing to use. Such information in the hands of terrorists allows them to train for the watered-down tactics should any of their operatives be apprehended by American forces, thus making intelligence-gathering much less effective.”

There’s a great unbiased source. Coercive interrogation tactics is a nice, clean name for torture, and it has never made us safe and puts our troops in danger. The President has the right to classify and declassify information. Bush used the process to hide information. Nothing in the documents was new information that wasn’t already public knowledge.

Right-wingers claim that if you don’t condone torture you are a traitor and you are smearing the military. Nothing could be farther from the truth. After 20 years in the military, I learned hat crap rolls down hill, and the results of Abu Ghraib proved that.

Nine soldiers were convicted of abusing prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Former Cpl. Charles Graner Jr. received the longest sentence — 10 years in prison. Lynndie England, a 23-year-old reservist photographed giving a thumbs-up in front of naked prisoners, is served three years behind bars. You don’t do 10 years in prison for making prisoners uncomfortable. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is not much different from a civilian court. The people who really should be behind bars are the ones who ordered the torture. Torture not only went on at Abu Ghraib, but in Guantanamo Bay as well. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was water boarded 183 times at Gitmo. That’s just what we know about. If it worked so well, they why did we do it 183 times?

Guys like Sheriff Murphy will claim that water boarding is not torture. Not true. We prosecuted Japanese soldiers for war crimes for doing it after World War II, as well as U.S. soldiers who did it in Vietnam.

“He just doesn't understand that our enemies laugh and support such actions as banning enhanced interrogation techniques. Of course, why wouldn't they? Terrorists see this as weakness, not as a means to be liked by the world. Besides, this is not a popularity contest; it is about keeping people safe. Obama is dangerous, and he's wagering your safety and the safety of your family in an effort to make America nicer toward our enemies. My question is simple: Traitor, treason or just plain stupid?”

I would ask the same of Sheriff Murphy, “Traitor, treason or just plain stupid?” I would say the latter.

The U.S. once had - before Bush - a worldwide reputation for promoting human rights. It’s kind of hard to take the high road when you torture the most vulnerable. It’s even worse when you consider most people in Gitmo are not guilty of anything.

George Washington set the tone for our stance on how we treat prisoners, and people like Bush and Sheriff Murphy should not trash that. Despite atrocities committed by the British, General Washington refused to stoop to their level.

“Not only your Officers, and Soldiers have been treated with a Tenderness due to Fellow Citizens, & Brethren; but even those execrable Parricides [traitors] whose Counsels & Aid have deluged their Country with Blood, have been protected from the Fury of a justly enraged People,” he said.

The Geneva Convention is not quaint or outdated, it keeps our troops safe. I don’t care what terrorists or the enemy does to our prisoners, it does not justify torture on our part. Two wrongs do not make a right. Our greatest source of information in the Cold War that was fought for almost 50 years - primarily with intelligence - was from defectors, not torture. We want people coming to our side, and I don’t see how we can do that if they are afraid of being tortured.

The simple fact is you do not get reliable information from torture, and you will get what you want to hear to make it stop.