Up Creek With Padilla
A terrorism conviction by a jury of his peers should shut up the Padillista cheering section. Don’t you think?
Carpetbagger apparently can’t read: Dirty bomb plot “false. There was no such plan.”
Cat’s got Firedoglake’s tongue, after visions of sweet release for Padilla expected from a quick jury turn-around at the end of a “Kafkaesque trial” prove premature. Later, special correspondent Lewis Z. Koch, who’s been covering this thing five years, chimes in with a rant about how Padilla was psychologically tortured. Firedog cat has his tongue on the central issues of the case, too. Koch by the way, is a fan of this site. Or he was. Don’t know if his FDL pals have filled him in yet.
Newhog indignation here. Should have been terrorist Bush on trial instead of peace-loving American Padilla. Bush torture to blame. This seems to be emerging as the main thread. Padilla was driven so crazy he couldn’t refute his fingerprints on the document and his voice on the tape.
OK, a couple more. Left Field: fear wins out. Yeah, Americans are stupid. LF adds remark about what a failure Bush’s anti-terrorism policies are. There must be a successful terrorist attack on the mainland U.S. in the last six years less one month that I’ve forgotten. Shakespeare’s Sister (really, that might actually be more insulting to Shakespeare than ”Newshogger” is to pigs) sniffs that to wingnuts this will justify everything that was done to Padilla over the last 3 1/2 years. Well … no, not really, that was already OK.
About that torture-nullification theory, by the way, judge didn’t agree.
The AP, to its credit, includes here something missing in earlier reports, that none of the above seem much interested in noting:
U.S. officials said Padilla, while incarcerated in a military brig in South Carolina, admitted exploring the dirty bomb plot. But that evidence could not be used at trial because he was not read his rights and did not immediately have access to an attorney.
Padilla confessed to the dirty bomb plot. No doubt because they were making the prisoner wear black goggles on the way to his dental appointment.
It turns out, when the United States made the mistake of treating a turncoat enemy combatant as such, rather than treating him as a garden-variety domestic criminal, they screwed their primary case due to Miranda issues. This would not have been a problem had Padilla been subjected to a military tribunal and summary execution. You know, like George Washington used to do. The kind of thing you would expect for a traitor who has taken up arms against his country.
But it is fascinating that there are Americans who hate their president so much, they are willing to believe anything that terrorists, their legal representatives and their sympathizers say, to the point of ignoring reports in their own Bush-bashing press.
One question. If the last big jury verdict was a vindication of Bush hatred, what does that make this one?
Captain’s Quarters: NYT grants Bush a victory, but the captain thinks pursuing Padilla as an enemy combatant was a mistake. Only because our judges are jealous of their power. An enemy combatant who shows up here to attack us, even if he is an American citizen, is still an enemy combatant. In this case, an illegal enemy combatant. Military tribunal, execution. Much like this illegal enemy combatant got.
Welcome Powerline, Memeorandum, LGF, etal. Always good to see you. Come on in. You’ll be fascinated to learn what CNN is doing its best to conceal: Americans want to win. In light reading, there’s the Fall of Rome and what it has to do with us. Question for the ages: Why can’t we all just get along? Meanwhile, in religion news … oh yeah, I almost forgot: Go to hell.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 12:37 am on Friday, August 17, 2007
29 Responses to “Up Creek With Padilla”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
August 17th, 2007 at 8:28 am
It is amazing that at a time when the West is facing such implacable opposition from the most savage and candidly ruthless of enemies, some people are so blinded by their own political prejudices that they will actually lend a helping hand to homicidal fanatics who share none of their values and want them beheaded on camera. It’s also sobering to realise that, as if the external threat is not great enough, we also need to confront a vociferous fifth column determined to do whatever it takes to thwart our efforts. I think this phenomenon is quite unprecedented in human history and if it’s not, I suppose the civilisations that were plagued by it did not last very long.
In my blog, in which I debate a leftie, I wrote a piece on David Hicks, an Aussie who was captured in Afghanistan fighting with the Taliban. I believe we need to take a completely different approach to the likes of David Hicks. I urge you to have a look.
Cheers
Liron
August 17th, 2007 at 8:40 am
I neglected to post the actual link… it’s http://blogger-heads.blogspot.com/
August 17th, 2007 at 9:21 am
They can huff and puff all they like, but Padilla is still going to jail, and I hope he never sees the light of day again. He’s a traitor and a wannabe murderer.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:37 am
The outrage at Padilla being convicted as a non-combatant, using the American civil legal system, is the result of people bering personally investment in both BDS and Anti-Americanism. Whether they can admit it to themselves or not, they support Al Quaeda in almost all aspects.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:37 am
Moral Bankruptsy of the Left Chronicles - Version 1.0
Of course we knew that as now convicted (by a jury of his peers) terrorist, Jose Padilla, was marched away to await his coming life sentence, the left would begin the whinning about his plight.
Jules Crittenden takes us down the list of usual whiners w…
August 17th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Jeffy,
Most of the outrage over the Padilla case was over the fact that, although an American citizen, he was denied access to the American civil legal system, and was tortured. All Americans should be alarmed about that.
Jules cites longingly to G. Washington for precedent for summary execution, overlooking the fact that the case he cites is about a soldier, and that the citizens were kept for trial later. Plus, it was done before there was a Constitution which guarantees American citizens the right to trial and protection from torture.
August 17th, 2007 at 11:19 am
I don’t think he was tortured, but if he was it comes down to whether you are going to let your children die in the next terrorist attack or are you going to get the information you need to prevent it?
Imagine you have captured a kidnapper who has buried his hostage and she will suffocate in the next hour unless he tells you where she is buried. Are you going to let her die or are you going to get the scumbag to tell you where she is, by whatever means necessary.
August 17th, 2007 at 11:33 am
Flesh,
Your fairy tale has nothing to do with the facts of this case. It is sad to hear you are so opposed to the Constitution of the United States. Maybe you should find a country that doesn’t have those guarantees. I’m sure you’ll find it much safer.
August 17th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Way to dodge the question, corndog. Flash’s hypothetical is quite in keeping with the moral issue being discussed.
August 17th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
No, Sarah. The subject is Padilla and his constitutional rights.
August 17th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
[...] Shorter Jules Crittenden: [...]
August 17th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Abdullah al-Muhajir (aka Jose Padilla)
Habeas corpus
Because Padilla was being detained without any criminal charges being formally made against him, he, through his lawyer, made a petition for a writ of habeas corpus to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, naming Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as the respondent to this petition. The government filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the grounds that:
Padilla’s lawyer was not a proper “Next Friend” to sign and file the petition on Padilla’s behalf;
Commander Marr of the South Carolina brig, and not U.S. Secretary Rumsfeld, should have been named as the respondent to the petition; and
the New York court lacked personal jurisdiction over the named respondent Secretary Rumsfeld who resides in Virginia.
The New York District Court disagreed with the government’s arguments and dismissed its motion. However, the court further declared that President Bush had constitutional and statutory authority to designate and detain American citizens as “enemy combatants” and that Padilla was entitled to challenge his “enemy combatant” designation and detention in the course of his habeas corpus petition. Since the New York District Court had in some way disappointed all sides of this legal battle, both Padilla and the government made an interlocutory appeal to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
On December 18, 2003, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals declared that:
Padilla’s lawyer is a proper “Next Friend” to sign and file the habeas corpus petition on Padilla’s behalf because she, as a member of the bar, had a professional duty to defend her client’s interests. Further, she had a significant attorney-client relationship with Padilla and was far from being some zealous “intruder” or “uninvited meddler”;
Secretary Rumsfeld can be named as the respondent to Padilla’s habeas corpus petition, even though it is South Carolina’s Commander Marr who had immediate physical custody of Padilla, because there have been past cases where national-level officials have been named as respondents to such petitions;
the New York District Court had personal jurisdiction over Secretary Rumsfeld even though Rumsfeld resides in Virginia and not New York because New York’s “long arm statute” is applicable to Secretary Rumsfeld, who was responsible for Padilla’s physical transfer from New York to South Carolina; and
despite the legal precedent set by ex parte Quirin, “the President lacked inherent constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief to detain American citizens on American soil outside a zone of combat”. The 2nd Circuit Court relied on the case of Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (343 U.S. 579), where the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that President Truman, during the Korean War years, could not use his position and power as Commander-in-Chief, created under Article 2, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, to seize the nation’s steel mills on the eve of a nation-wide steelworkers’ strike. The extraordinary government power to curb civil rights and liberties during crisis periods, such as times of war, lies with Congress and not the President. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, and not the President, with the power to suspend the right of habeas corpus during a period of rebellion or invasion.
Declaring without clear Congressional approval (per 18 U.S.C. § 4001(a)), President Bush cannot detain an American citizen as an “illegal enemy combatant” the court ordered that Padilla be released from the military brig within 30 days[14]. However, the court had stayed the release order pending the government’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. Supreme Court
On February 20, 2004, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the government’s appeal. The Supreme Court heard the case, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, in April 2004, but on June 28, 2004, the court dismissed the petition on technical grounds because:
It was improperly filed in federal court in New York instead of South Carolina, where Padilla was actually being detained; and
the Court held that the petition was incorrect in naming the Secretary of Defense as the respondent instead of the Commanding Officer of the naval brig who was Padilla’s actual custodian for habeas corpus purposes.
The case was refiled and a decision in Padilla’s favor was issued in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. On June 13, 2005, the Supreme Court denied the government’s petition to have his case heard directly by the court, instead of the appeal being first heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia.
On September 9, 2005, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that President Bush does indeed have the authority to detain Padilla without charges, in an opinion written by judge J. Michael Luttig. In the ruling, Luttig cited the joint resolution by Congress authorizing military action following the September 11, 2001 attacks, as well as the June 2004 ruling concerning Yaser Hamdi. Attorneys for Padilla, plus a host of civil liberties organizations, argued that the detention was illegal. They said it could lead to the military holding anyone, from protesters to people who check out what the government considers the wrong books from the library. The Bush Administration denied the allegations.
But as the Congressional military authorization (the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists) pertained only to nations, organizations or persons whom the President “determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the September 11, 2001 attacks, or harbored such organizations or persons”, others argue that this kind of Congressional limitation to the military power would assure an appropriately narrow range of detainees and the power to detain would last only so long as the Congressional authorization was not revoked or remained in effect by its terms. Also the Yaser Hamdi Supreme Court case (Hamdi v. Rumsfeld) upon which the court relied requires a habeas corpus hearing for any alleged enemy combatant who demands one, claiming not to be such a combatant, which would also place additional judicial or perhaps military tribunal oversight over each such detention.
However, one of the provisions of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 enacted on October 17, 2006 states:
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, and notwithstanding any other law [emphasis added] (including section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, or any other habeas corpus provision), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever, including any action pending on or filed after the date of enactment of this chapter, relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission convened under this section, including challenges to the lawfulness of the procedures of military commissions under this chapter.
The Military Commission Act of 2006 does not apply by its terms to José Padilla, since he is a U.S. citizen held in the United States, but does not rule out similar enemy combatant designations of U.S. citizens either. Other provisions of the Military Commission Act of 2006 may provide civil and criminal amnesty to those involved in his case, who might otherwise face civil right lawsuits or criminal liability for unlawfully detaining someone.
Indictment
On November 22, 2005, CNN’s front page broke the news that Padilla had been indicted on charges he “conspired to murder, kidnap and maim people overseas.”[15] Padillia’s lawyer correlated the indictment’s timing as avoidance of an impending Supreme Court hearing on the Padilla case: “the administration is seeking to avoid a Supreme Court showdown over the issue”.[16] None of the original allegations put forward by the U.S. government three years prior, the claims that held Padilla in the majority in solitary confinement throughout that period, were part of the indictment: “Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced Padilla is being removed from military custody and charged with a series of crimes” and “There is no mention in the indictment of Padilla’s alleged plot to use a dirty bomb in the United States. There is also no mention that Padilla ever planned to stage any attacks inside the country. And there is no direct mention of Al-Qaeda. Instead the indictment lays out a case involving five men who helped raise money and recruit volunteers in the 1990s to go overseas to countries including Chechnya, Bosnia, Somalia and Kosovo. Padilla, in fact, appears to play a minor role in the conspiracy. He is accused of going to a jihad training camp in Afghanistan but his lawyers said the indictment offers no evidence he ever engaged in terrorist activity.”[17] Considering Padilla was held for years in military custody with no formal charges brought, many were shocked by this move by the George W. Bush presidential administration[18], and some reasoned that a repeat of such a process would allow the U.S. government to detain citizens indefinitely without presenting the cause that would eventually be tried. A transfer to civilian court was denied the U.S. Administration by a federal appeals court in December 2005. The court recognized “shifting tactics in the case threatens [the government's] credibility with the courts”.[19] This was countered by Solicitor General Paul Clement: the federal appeals court decision “defies both law and logic,” he stated in a request to the Supreme Court for immediate transfer on December 30, 2005,[20] one day after Padilla’s lawyers filed a petition of their own charging the U.S. President of overstepping his authority.
On January 3, 2006, the United States Supreme Court granted a Bush administration request to transfer Padilla from military to civilian custody. Padilla was transferred to a federal prison in Miami from the Navy brig in Charleston while the Supreme Court decided whether to accept his appeal of the government’s authority to keep citizens it designates “enemy combatants” in open-ended military confinement without benefit of trial.[22]
On April 3, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court declined, with three justices dissenting from denial of certiorari, to hear Padilla’s appeal from the 4th Circuit Court’s decision that the President had the power to designate him and detain him as an “enemy combatant” without charges and with disregard to habeas corpus.
Criminal proceedings
Padilla was indicted on three criminal counts in the Miami, Florida criminal proceeding to which he was transferred from military custody. He pled not guilty to all charges. The trial commenced on May 15, 2007[1] and lasted for 3 months.
On August 16, 2007 - after only a day and a half of deliberations - the jury found Padilla guilty on all counts.
Partial dismissal of counts against Padilla
Two weeks after the presiding judge claimed prosecutors were “light on facts” in its conspiracy allegations,[23] one of the three charges against Padilla was dismissed and another was dismissed in part.
The first of the three counts Padilla was charged with, conspiracy to murder (punishable by life imprisonment), was dismissed on August 16, 2006, on the grounds that it was duplicative of the other two counts pending against him. The second count was conspiracy to materially aid terrorists under 18 U.S.C. § 371 (punishable by five years in prison) and the third was 18 U.S.C. § 2339A (punishable by 15 years in prison). The trial court ordered that the government elect only a single criminal statute in its second count of the indictment.
However, on January 30, 2007, the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit reversed the ruling and reinstated a charge of conspiracy to “murder, kidnap, and maim.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_(alleged_terrorist)
Ummmm, one can change the “alleged_terrorist” to convicted_terrorist.
August 17th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_(alleged_terrorist)
August 17th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Allegation of torture during imprisonment
In the criminal case, legal brief filed on behalf of Padilla alleges that during his imprisonment he has been subjected to torture, including sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, and enforced stress positions.[25]
An editorial written by George Monbiot in The Guardian, claims that Padilla’s mental faculties have been so impaired by the conditions of incarceration and interrogation that:[26]
…he appears to have lost his mind. I don’t mean this metaphorically. I mean that his mind is no longer there.
The forensic psychiatrist who examined him says that he “does not appreciate the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him, is unable to render assistance to counsel, and has impairments in reasoning as the result of a mental illness, ie, post-traumatic stress disorder, complicated by the neuropsychiatric effects of prolonged isolation”.
Two additional motions also filed in October of 2006, argued that the case should be dismissed because the government took too much time between arresting Padilla and charging him.[2] In essence, the argument is that for constitutional speedy trial purposes, the arrest took place prior to his detention as an enemy combatant, and not simply when he was transferred to civilian custody.
Mental competency hearing
In January 2007 a mental competency hearing was scheduled for February 22, 2007 over allegations of torture by the military[27], after two mental health experts hired by the defense concluded Padilla is not mentally fit for trial and a third evaluation submitted by the Bureau of Prisons found him mentally competent. The judge also ordered that Sandy Seymour, technical director of the Charleston brig, Craig Noble, brig psychologist, Andrew Cruz, brig social worker, four employees of the Miami federal detention center, and a Defense Department lawyer appear at the hearing.[28]
On February 22, 2007 at the competency hearing Angela Hegarty, a psychiatrist hired by Padilla’s defense, said that after 22 hours of examining Padilla it was her opinion that he was mentally unfit to stand trial. She said that he exhibited “a facial tic, problems with social contact, lack of concentration and a form of Stockholm syndrome”. She diagnosed his condition as post-traumatic stress disorder.[29][30] She told the court “It’s my opinion that he lacks the capacity to assist counsel. He has a great deal of difficulty talking about the current case before him.”[30] In cross examination Federal prosecutor John Shipley pointed out that Padilla had a score of zero on Hegarty’s post-traumatic stress disorder test and pointed out that this information was omitted in her final report. Hegarty responded that this omission was an error on her part.[30] Another psychiatrist hired by the defense testified along the same lines. The Miami Herald reported that a “U.S. Bureau of Prisons psychiatrist who believes Padilla is fit to face trial and Defense Department officials — are expected to testify at the ongoing hearing before U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke.”[30]
Timeline
March 2002: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, purported mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks and Al-Qaida’s operational planner and organizer, allegedly suggests José Padilla target up to three high-rise buildings that use natural gas with a radiological “dirty bomb.”
May 8, 2002: Padilla arrives at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport after an overseas trip, carrying $10,526, a cell phone and e-mail addresses for al-Qaida operatives. He is arrested on a material witness warrant.
June 9, 2002: Padilla is listed as an “enemy combatant” and transferred to the Defense Department.
Dec. 18, 2003: The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals orders Padilla to be released from military custody within 30 days and if the government chooses, tried in civilian courts.
Jan. 22, 2004: The 2nd Circuit suspends its ruling after the Bush administration appeals the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
March 3, 2004: Lawyers for Padilla meet with him for the first time since his incarceration at a naval brig in June 2002.
June 28, 2004: In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court rules that Padilla should have filed his appeal in federal court in Charleston, S.C., because he is being held at a Navy brig there, rather than in New York.
Sept. 9, 2005: A panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules that the government can continue to hold Padilla indefinitely.
Oct. 25, 2005: Padilla appeals the appeals court decision to the Supreme Court. The Bush administration’s deadline for filing arguments is Nov. 28.
Nov. 22, 2005: Padilla is indicted by a federal grand jury in Miami on charges that he conspired to “murder, kidnap and maim” people overseas. The charges do not include any allegations of a “dirty bomb” plot or other plans for U.S. attacks.
Dec. 21, 2005: 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig chastises the administration for using one set of facts to justify holding Padilla without charges and another set to persuade a grand jury in Florida to indict him. Luttig said the administration has risked its “credibility before the courts.”
Jan. 4, 2006: Supreme Court agrees to let the military transfer Padilla to Miami to face criminal charges, overruling the 4th Circuit.
Jan. 12, 2006: Padilla pleads not guilty to charges alleging he was part of a secret network that supported Muslim terrorists. The charges could bring a life in prison sentence.
April 3, 2006: Supreme Court rejects Padilla’s appeal, although Chief Justice John Roberts and other key justices said that they would be watching to ensure Padilla receives the protections “guaranteed to all federal criminal defendants.”
Aug. 16, 2006: Federal trial court in Miami, Florida dismisses conspiracy to murder charges against Padilla, leaving the most serious charge still pending a charge that could bring a 15 year prison sentence.
Oct., 2006: Padilla moves to dismiss the federal criminal case against him alleging that he had been tortured and that proceedings had been delayed too long from his arrest in May of 2002.
Jan. 30, 2007: The U.S. Court of Appeals reverses the August 2006 decision and reinstates the conspiracy to murder charge with a potential life sentence.
May 15, 2007: Trial commences in federal trial court.
July 13, 2007: Prosecution rests case in federal criminal trial.
August 16, 2007: Jury reaches verdict in federal criminal trial. Padilla is found guilty on all charges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_(alleged_terrorist)#Allegation_of_torture_during_imprisonment
August 17th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
“… he was denied access to the American civil legal system…”
That certainly explains how Padilla was convicted by the American civil legal system.
/sarcasm
More to the point, corndog, Bush attempted to treat Padilla as an enemy combatant. He failed. So your whine about “denied access” is just that — a whine. And immaterial to the fact that even though Padilla was convicted by American civil legal system, selected members of the left are outraged that Padilla was convicted by the American civil legal system.
And torture? Please! By some definitions, being fed gourmet meals by Americans is “torture”. Padilla is not exactly a reliable witness in this regard, especially when you read the claims of “torture” by other members of Al Quaeda enjoying the hospitality of the US military.
But, hey, spin it away from Anti-American Americans all you want. Enjoy yourself in that little fantasy world; I just wish the magic portal that provides you with an INTERNET connection had a better spam filter.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Jeffy,
As I said before, the troubling issue was not that Padilla was finally granted the right to trial. It was that the Bush went to great pains to deny it, tortured him, and people like you thought it was just great and think anyone who is disturbed by it is just “whining.”
My comment, if you actually read it, had nothing to do with his actual trial, which came about, finally, due to the efforts of people you label “anti-American.”
As to those you say are outraged that he was convicted by the civil system, I don’t want to go read the comments. My hunch is that they’re being misconstrued here, though.
As to torture, see el Cid’s paste above. The definition of torture, 18 USC 2340A, is an act “specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” Padilla had zero human contact, absolutely nothing but an empty cell, for two years, as a result of which he has lost his mind. I don’t see how you can call that anything other than severe mental suffering.
The government did this, Jeffy. And what benefit did we get out of this?
August 17th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
We’ll just have to disagree on the “torture” aspect, corndog. Personally, I suspect that you would sue a restaurant for mental anguish if they served coffee at room temperature. Padilla is likely of the same character.
And, as I said, Bush attempted to treat Padilla as a enemy combatant….but the system intervened. Kindly point out to me where I thought it was “just great”.
[crickets chirping]
About what I thought.
Again, my point was that Bush failed, and the civil legal system succeeded. Yet everyone focuses on Bush’s attempt, with emphasis on “attempt”. He lost. The system won. This perpetual outrage about what Bush attempted to do made sense way back when.
Now? It’s just a whine…..because those “outraged Americans” were proven right a long time ago. Clearly, some of those “outraged Americans” just can’t let go of their hate of Bush.
But many of those “outraged Americans” (and I’ve read some of the comments, BTW, so I’m a notch up there on you) are concerned that Padilla was convicted at all. Never mind that his Miranda rights were left intact, never mind that there was significant evidence against Padilla, ignore all of the evidence, forget that a jury of his peers convicted him, they prefer to support the terrorist, either because they either hate America, or support our enemies.
Those “outraged Americans” did this, corndog. And what benefit did we get out of it?
PS: Which part of the government “did this”, corndog? The Executive branch? Legislative? Judicial? A sooooper secret star chamber? Bah! The government made the system work. Your ignorance is astounding.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
Hey, as a US citizen, I got waterboarded in Navy flight training. (I guess the caring and sharing liberal politicians who were supposed to protect me from the Constitution-shredding Carter administration were apparently engaged elsewhere.) Can I submit a grievance, cuz I would love to get a huge government settlement and not have to get up for this stupid job every day!
August 17th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
John McCain: Torture Worked on Me
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/29/100012.shtml
Snippet…
During Johnson’s second tour, he flew F-4 Phantom combat missions with the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing in Thailand.During his second tour of duty, Johnson flew his 25th combat mission on April 16, 1966. Shot down at dusk over North Vietnam, Johnson suffered a broken right arm, dislocated left shoulder and a broken back.It was these injuries that the enemy captors would use in their constant efforts to glean information from Johnson.
Johnson spent nearly seven years as a prisoner of war, 42 months in solitary confinement.Forced into solitary when his captives labeled him a “die-hard,” Johnson committed 374 names to memory from tapping a special code on the prison wall. “We were all trying to memorize names in case anybody got out,” Johnson remembers.
While held in the infamous Hanoi Hilton, Johnson spent 72 days in leg stocks.A day after that torture ended, his captives forced him into leg irons for 2 ½ years.Weighing
200 lbs when shot down, an emaciated Johnson got down to an estimated 120 lbs while barely surviving on the occasional “meal” of weeds from the river, pig fat, white rice, or pumpkin soup.
Fellow POW Capt. James Mulligan, USN (Ret.) recalled the day Johnson was allowed to return to a joint cell. He walked into the room with the two other detained American officers, “stood at attention with tears in his eyes, and said simply, ‘Lieutenant Colonel Sam Johnson reporting for duty, sir’…after he had not talked to or directly been with an American for three and a half years.”
Johnson chronicles his POW experience in solitary confinement in his autobiography, Captive Warriors.The book details the stories of eleven of the self-named “Alcatraz Gang,” including great American patriots, such as Jeremiah Denton, Jim Stockdale and Jim Mulligan.
http://www.sondrak.com/archive/Nick%20Berg%20Beheading%20Pic%209%20-%20WARNING%20GRAPHIC!!.jpg
http://mensnewsdaily.com/images/breaking/murder.jpg
http://www.caerdroia.org/oldblog/archives/pauljohnsonbeheading3.jpg
Well, at least the last three aren’t torture victims, they just had the heads sliced from their bodies, AFTER the torture.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Well, you are, indeed, one up on me, Jeffy. If the comments are saying that the VERDICT was an outrage, then that’s just wrong. He may not have been competent at it, but he got a fair trial. But if the comments are about Padilla’s treatment at the hands of the government*, then they have every right to be outraged and see my comments above. Otherwise, I guess I’ll have to agree with you.
* The executive branch, Jeffy. It was the judicial branch that finally “worked”.
August 17th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
* The executive branch, Jeffy. It was the judicial branch that finally “worked”.
I agree, except with the “finally”. For the record, you sounded like one of those conspiracy freaks who blame everything on “the government”, or even “THEM!”
August 17th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Jeffy,
As to the torture, though, here is what the forensic psychiatrist in the case had to say:
“as a clinician, I have worked with torture victims and, of course, abuse victims for a few decades now, actually. I think, from a clinical point of view, he was tortured…This was the first time I ever met anybody who had been isolated for such an extraordinarily long period of time. I mean, the sensory deprivation studies, for example, tell us that without sleep, especially, people will develop psychotic symptoms, hallucinations, panic attacks, depression, suicidality within days. ..What happened at the brig was essentially the destruction of a human being’s mind. That’s what happened at the brig. His personality was deconstructed and reformed.”
It may be looking back, but I don’t think it’s whining that people are still outraged about this treatment of an American citizen.
August 17th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
[...] Okay, I thought I was in the big time when Conservative blogger Jules Crittendon had taken to swiping at us on a regular basis. [...]
August 17th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
I too wonder at your use of the adverb “finally.” From the time this would-be murderer was caught, the courts, were actively engaged, from his own lawyer(s), including friends of the court, right up to the Supreme Court (more than once).
As for his “loosing his mind:” Not to put to fine a point on it, but I have to wonder just how much of a mind the man had to begin with. Many people have existed in solitary, even solitary combined with unspeakable torture, without loosing their minds. Cid supplied a few names that attest to this. Of course, these men had the character to do so. We know something about Pedilla’s character, and I suggest it was that which failed him. In fact, it was that which failed him in the first place.
What is disturbing is the fact that there are far too many in this country who consistently place themselves against the country no matter what. In their eyes, America is damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. They are only concerned that they be on the opposite side of whatever position taken in any and all areas of government action. It isn’t that they offer an argument with which one can either agree with or refute. Instead, they merely spew their hate and make assertions.
I am not putting you in this category, because you do sometimes offer an argument, and you can act like a gentleman when you want to. You do allow yourself a rather unattractive knee-jerk cynicism, however.
August 17th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
Please excuse the too vigorous use of commas in that first paragraph. PIMF.
August 17th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
To keep referring to Padilla as an “American Citizen” is a deliberate attempt to cast him as an innocent citizen who has been caught up in the Bush Junta Machine. As if…either you or I could suddenly find ourselves in the same situation.
Since Padilla is most certainly guilty of that which he has been charged…(citizen or not), the fact remains that you or I could NOT be suddenly find ourselves held as an enemy combatant. Unless there’s something about you (e.g. corndong) that I don’t know.
I have yet to read or hear of a U.S. citizen yanked out of their job at Fred’s Widgets (or whatever you like) and summarily stripped of their Constitutional Rights (at least…under Bush. Clinton/Reno is another matter). Go ahead, corndog. Give the name(s) of innocent people (you know…like you or I) who’s rights have been trampled. Cherry picking people like Padilla and noting that someone didn’t dot an ‘i’ or cross a ‘t’ might fly at the Bush-is-Hitler rally…but it’ll get you the smack down it deserves anywhere else.
August 18th, 2007 at 3:30 am
[...] righty Jules Crittenden has taken to calling us names, he shows he knows better than step to the plate a debate us on the substance on the Padilla [...]
August 19th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Ya know, Padilla, he got an Egyptian wife whilst he was over there traveling back and forth between Egypt and Pakistan.
That girl and Jose reportedly made 2 boy children together.
I feel sorry for them.
Jose (reportedly) had a wife in Florida when he undertook all those new ventures in the middle east.
August 19th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
Liberals in power (judges and what not) have no problem with holding totally INNOCENT people without trial (executive order 9066) as long as one of their heroes (Roosevelt) is the one ordering it.
But, if Bush is the man in charge, then holding (obviously) guilty people is the crime of the century.
Same old crap, different day.