by TChris

Can the U.S. convince citizens of other nations that our ideals are real, much less worth adopting, if we jettison those ideals whenever they seem inconvenient? Take, for instance, the right to due process and to the presumption of innocence -- rights that protect individuals from the arbitrary actions of government. Or freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, which has long been understood to include torture.

Stuart Taylor Jr. explores the question: Must We Become More Like the Barbarians to Save Ourselves? His answer: the administration's policy of presuming guilt and violating fundamental rights has been a strategic disaster. If Bush intended to persuade the world that our ideals mean nothing, he's done a masterful job.

"The only thing I know for certain is that these are bad people." So said Bush last July, in response to a reporter's question about whether the 660 suspected Qaeda and Taliban members then imprisoned at Guantanamo (aka Gitmo) were "getting justice." The "bad people" included three Afghan boys between 13 and 15 years old who have since been released as harmless, after many months in captivity.

Bush decreed in January 2002 that no Gitmo prisoner would be allowed to go before a tribunal, because it was clear beyond doubt that every single one of them was an unlawful combatant. This was ludicrous on its face. In the fog of war—against enemies without uniforms who hid among civilians, while dishonest bounty hunters collected rewards for all the "terrorists" they could grab—many of those detained will inevitably turn out to be civilian noncombatants. Indeed, anonymous officials have asserted that, despite supposedly careful screening in Afghanistan, dozens, if not hundreds, of men were sent to Gitmo by mistake. And the Pentagon has released more than 130 Gitmo detainees.

Asia news sources are reporting that four people have been arrested in connection with last week's decapitation of Nicholas Berg. No identities have been released, but reportedly, Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi is not among them.

Four people were arrested over the beheading of US businessman Nicholas Berg, an Iraqi source said, as top officials at the funeral of Iraq's slain Governing Council president vowed not to cave in to terrorists. The source said four people were held over Berg's murder in a possible breakthrough in the US-led battle against extremists that have been trying to undermine efforts to transfer sovereignty to Iraqis on June 30.

The U.S. says it has not received any arrest information:

But Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, deputy director of operations, said: "We have no information from the coalition that any arrests were made today."

ABC News is reporting there is a military cover-up going on in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

Dozens of soldiers — other than the seven military police reservists who have been charged — were involved in the abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, and there is an effort under way in the Army to hide it, a key witness in the investigation told ABCNEWS.

by TChris

Recognizing that the U.S. squandered its human rights credibility by abusing prisoners in Iraq and elsewhere, the State Department made the realistic judgment that its report on human rights might not be taken seriously by the rest of the world. It delayed the report's release until today, but -- with good reason -- the rest of the world is entitled to think the U.S. needs to correct its own behavior before it points fingers at others.

Charges in the report against countries who abuse prisoners bear striking similarities to those being leveled against the United States around the world. For example, the report summarized Saudi Arabia's "poor" human rights record with these words: "Security forces continued to torture and abuse detainees and prisoners, arbitrarily arrest and detain persons and detain them incommunicado."

The report also criticizes countries for restricting freedom of the press -- exactly what the U.S. did when it temporarily closed the Iraqi newspaper Al Hawse.

If abuse of prisoners, indefinite detentions, and interference with a free press deserve criticism (and they do), the State Department might want to draft an addendum measuring the U.S. by the yardstick it applies to others. As one observor notes, the U.S. should not "be the policeman for the world" without adhering "to the same human rights standards they hold for others."

Everybody's doing it so we will too. Change our xml feed to Feedburner. Digby at Hullaballoo started it. As See the Forest says, if you don't know what we're talking about, don't worry about it. If you do know, here's our new xml feed.

Or, click where you see to subscribe. The feed should be readable at these readers:

See the Forest quotes UPI analyst Martin Sieff who writes about the dissension over Rumsfeld within the Administration. STF concludes Rumsfeld is toast and will take the fall for the Bush Administration to try and save the election.

From Drug War Rant [via Avedon Carol at Sideshow]:

The recent study comparing marijuana use in San Francisco and Amsterdam is a real blow to the drug warriors. Not only did it show that prohibition does not reduce marijuana use, there were a couple of other very interesting things in the study. The full report is now available online as text and as a pdf with graphs.

....Note that in the city where prohibition is the rule, there is significantly higher rates of experimentation with other drugs. As opposed to the gateway theory, this indicates that prohibition actually increases the likelihood of using other illicit drugs. As the study notes: The “separation of markets,” in which lawfully regulated cannabis distribution reduces the likelihood that people seeking cannabis will be drawn into deviant subcultures where “hard drugs” also are sold is one public health objective of Dutch decriminalization. Looks like their idea works better than ours.

Avedon adds: "And, as even Harry Anslinger admitted, it wasn't a "gateway drug" until it was made illegal."

Received by email:

Read 9th Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski's recent dissent in US v. Navarro-Vargas, No. 02-50663 (9th Cir. May 4, 2004), a case involving the constitutionality, under the Indictment Clause, of a standard grand jury instruction directing the grand jurors not to consider "the wisdom of laws enacted by Congress." Arguing that such local community review of the wisdom and utility of criminal legislation is a core function of the grand jury, Judge Kozinski goes on to assert:

This kind of community judgment strikes me as particularly important in federal prosecutions, and not merely because Washington is usually much farther away geographically than the state capital. State prosecutors are elected locally and must stand for re-election on a regular basis. They will, of necessity, take the local community’s values into account. United States Attorneys, by contrast, are appointed by the President and never have to stand for election. In their daily operations, they are supervised by the Department of Justice, whose prosecutorial policies they implement. Except for the tradition of senatorial courtesy, which gives the state’s senators some say in who will be the United States Attorney in a particular district, there is very little state control, and almost no local control, over federal prosecutors.

Is the tide changing? A new poll shows that 2/3 of North Carolinians favor a moratorium on the death penalty.

Nearly two-thirds of adults surveyed in a recent poll said that North Carolina should put a two-year moratorium on executions to study its fairness. The survey, commissioned by the North Carolina Council of Churches, also found majority support in nearly every demographic group examined, including men (64 percent to 30 percent), Republicans (55 percent to 39 percent) and those who said they favored the death penalty (59 percent to 35 percent).

Matt Taibbi at Media Channel.Org examines the impact of MTV's Rock the Vote, and concludes:

More than ever, the efforts of corporate-funded, youth-oriented media are part of the scenery in the televised road show of American presidential politics. But despite the increasing onslaught of advertising and celebrity events, young people are more than ever refusing to participate in the electoral process.

Matt is covering the Kerry Campaign for Rolling Stone. We really urge young people to particpate. Not only is political involvement fun, it offers an opportunity to have your voice heard, to make an impact (if not a difference) and it provides a sense of community spirit. It's also a great way to meet people. Complaining about the system via on-line forums and blogs is fine to a point, but it's no substitute for the real thing--getting your a** out there and doing something about it. As for exercising your right to vote, we have one piece of advice: Use it or lose it.

The first lawsuit against the U.S. military for damages for torture at Abu Ghraib prison has been filed by an Iraqi (who is also a Swedish citizen) in Michigan, where he is now staying with his mother and relatives:

An Iraqi-born Swedish citizen claiming to have been tortured at Abu Ghraib prison is seeking more than $100,000 from the American military. A Michigan lawyer filed a claim with the Army last Wednesday on behalf of the man, identified in the filing only as Mr. Saleh. "Hopefully we'll reach an amicable settlement, and if not we'll seek relief in federal court," said the lawyer, Shereef H. Akeel.

Mr. Saleh was interviewed over the weekend but is no longer speaking with the media. This article says he is the naked hooded prisoner in the photo with Lynndie England pointing at his genitals. Here's his story:

Saleh said he remembers the names of his tormentors and plans to file lawsuits against them. The Army has already charged two of them, Cpl. Charles A. Graner and Staff Sgt. Ivan Frederick II. Besides Graner and Frederick, Saleh recalls others only by partial names or nicknames: a sergeant named Schneider, another named Pearl, and "Nicolai" - one of the intelligence officers who he says directed the torture in Cellblock I/A, where he spent all but one month of his time in Abu Ghraib. "One of them wore glasses and one urinated on me," Saleh said Saturday at the office of an Iraqi human rights organization.

Saleh said he had been tortured at Abu Ghraib before under Saddam, when he refused to serve in the military, and his treatment by Americans was way worse:

The LA Times reports on the sworn testimony of the prison guards at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. More grisly details have emerged.

First, the latest from SPC Lynndie England:

England told investigators that guards forced detainees to crawl on their hands and knees on broken glass, threw a nerf football at handcuffed prisoners and forced male detainees to wear women's "maxi pads."

She also said Graner, with whom she is now pregnant, applied needle and thread to prisoners after beating them. "Cpl. Graner would personally stitch up detainees if the wound weren't too bad," she said. "He would take pictures of his work. One particular incident Cpl. Graner ran a former Iraqi general into a wall and split his lip. Cpl. Graner stitched up his lip."

Next, remember this photo of a dead Iraqi?

Here's what happened to him: