Article

2006-07-02 Home Front: WoT

The one good man who brought down Guantanamo

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by ryuge 2006-07-02 01:23|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 next step. Politricks, er, politics.

Posted by Xenophon 2006-07-02 01:48|| 2006-07-02 01:48|| Front Page Top

#2 And hundreds of "bad" men, women, and children are going to die because of it.

Posted by gromgoru 2006-07-02 02:23|| 2006-07-02 02:23|| Front Page Top

#3 One good man? Good grief, who wrote the title at the Telegraph? Did they bother to read the story?

Although I'm damned displeased by the hodge-podge of presumptuous bullshit pumped out of the SCOTUS rectum (can you tell?) this week, this is our system. These are our people. They do their jobs with dedication and resolve. The result may be surprising to the Telegraph, but not really to us. Within the system, when it works as it should, all do their level best.

The SCOTUS's Dipshit Five is where any ire should be directed. I would be dishonest if I didn't say that I hope at least two of them die soon. In the next 2 years, in fact. I offer them my most sincere negative vibes to that end.

History will not be kind to Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsberg, Souter, and Breyer...

Assuming there will be a history written in something other than Arabic.

Posted by Glaitch Groting9149 2006-07-02 04:31|| 2006-07-02 04:31|| Front Page Top

#4 >>>?The Court ruled Thursday that the President did not have the authority to set up the tribunals at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and that military commissions are illegal under both military justice law and the Geneva Convention. It also ruled that Congress did not take away the Court's authority to rule on the validity of military commissions. The Defense Departments Office of Military Commissions assigned Lt. Commander Swift as Mr. Hamdans military defense lawyer. He argued Mr. Hamdans case in the lower courts, but was only present for the Supreme Court oral arguments in March.

My take:
I watched a bit of Lieutenant Commander Swift talk about the Supreme Court ruling in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case. C-SPAN

Swift is thoroughly trained in Military history, Military law, and the Geneva protocols. BUT OF NOTE even Before he was chosen to be Hamdan's attorney, Swift along with a large group of other lawyers in and out of the military had rejected the legality of tribunals/military commissions and had a overarching agenda to ban them!

Tactically the the Hamdan case just provided them the vehicle to effect their Strategic goal.

Swift claims that the tribunals/military commission that were set up during WWII are antiquated and out of date law now.

He personally wants all prisoners, even illegal combatants and terrorists to be guaranteed the rights of any legal defendant within the rules of a regular Courts Marshall and/or to be tried in the Federal Courts.

Lieutenant Commander Swift is a true believer an acolyte of the ACLU and quite possibly their next Emperor.
*

Lads and Lassies much work ahead...

Posted by RD 2006-07-02 04:45|| 2006-07-02 04:45|| Front Page Top

#5 RD - I'll only add that Swift being a fool didn't have any effect on the ruling. SCOTUS is the issue, they decided the outcome.
:)

Posted by Glaitch Groting9149 2006-07-02 05:20|| 2006-07-02 05:20|| Front Page Top

#6 as i recall: verify iow

Interesting 2 presidents Swift talked about.

Washington WWII: [office locations have changed since]
A military attorney walked right across the street from his office to one of the Supreme Court Justices house and submitted a brief directly to the justice challenging some aspect of military commissions. [I got the impression there was already an informal discussion between the two on the issue at hand.]

the second case i can't recall enough detail to even allude to fairly..

But as this story developes lets watch and see how much "coordination" took place with some of the last "deciders" this time!! [sic Supreme Court]

Posted by RD 2006-07-02 06:05|| 2006-07-02 06:05|| Front Page Top

#7 Interesting 2 precedents Swift talked about.

Posted by RD 2006-07-02 06:09|| 2006-07-02 06:09|| Front Page Top

#8 Granted, if you can identify the justice and make the case a SCOTUS justice acted in collusion with a lawyer with a case before the court, then that justice is certainly impeachable.

If you come across more detail, please post - that is very unsettling information. They're usually not so transparent, but we are talking about the Dipshit Five, so...

Kelo alone was more than enough for me. :-/

Posted by Glaitch Groting9149 2006-07-02 06:48|| 2006-07-02 06:48|| Front Page Top

#9 Oops, sorry - I just realized you're referring to a WWII incident. Doesn't change my opinion of the Dipshit Five, but it makes my #8 wasted bandwidth. Apologies.

Posted by Glaitch Groting9149 2006-07-02 06:50|| 2006-07-02 06:50|| Front Page Top

#10 Fortunately, the older justices needn't die in office; they can simply choose to retire.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-07-02 08:44|| 2006-07-02 08:44|| Front Page Top

#11 HOw did he help them exactly? Now they are trapped in an eternal legal limbo.

Posted by Thiper Uneling3933 2006-07-02 08:54|| 2006-07-02 08:54|| Front Page Top

#12 SCOTUS, circa 1946, took a different view of military tribunals, lets repeat SCOTUS own words on Yamashita vs. Styer -

The military commission appointed to try the petitioner was lawfully created. P. 9. (a) Nature of the authority to create military commissions for the trial of enemy combatants for offenses against the law of war, and principles governing the exercise of jurisdiction by such commissions, considered. Citing Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, and other cases. Pp. 7-9. (b) A military commission may be appointed by any field commander, or by any commander competent to appoint a general court martial, as was respondent by order of the President. P. 10. (c) The order creating the military commission was in conformity with the Act of Congress (10 U. S. C. @@ 1471-1593) sanctioning the creation of such tribunals for the trial of offenses against the law of war committed by enemy combatants. P. 11.

Posted by Glock Elmans1649 2006-07-02 09:15|| 2006-07-02 09:15|| Front Page Top

#13 Glock (much cooler than my Glaitch handle) check out the SCOTUSblog, if you haven't already. Should be plenty there to raise your blood pressure. They talk a bit about the decision you cite in a place or two, IIRC.

Posted by Glaitch Groting9149 2006-07-02 09:22|| 2006-07-02 09:22|| Front Page Top

#14 Unfortunately, Telegraph, Gitmo isn't closed and the assholes there are not going free....bummed?

Five supreme Court justices left President George W Bush's policy on Guantanamo Bay in chaos last week but it was a diligent career navy officer who plotted the legal downfall of his commander-in-chief.

Lt Cdr Charles Swift, 44, an experienced military defence attorney, was expected to draft a simple plea bargain after prosecutors requested the appointment of a lawyer to represent Osama bin -Laden's driver in 2003.

Instead, he launched a series of ground-breaking legal challenges that ended with the ruling by America's highest court that the military commissions backed by Mr Bush for international terrorism suspects were unlawful.

"As an officer, I have the deepest respect for the President," he told The Sunday Telegraph after the hearing. "But as an officer, it is also my duty to point out when an order is wrong. What protects our democracy is that we do not just follow orders blindly.

"There was often a real Alice in Wonderland quality to this case," he said. "They had already decided that the detainees were terrorists so didn't have normal rights, but then they wanted to hold a commission to determine that they were terrorists."

Lt Cdr Swift, a 19-year US Navy veteran, could not hide his elation as he walked down the marble steps of the Supreme Court in full uniform on Thursday after the ruling, although he acknowledged that his role had not endeared him to everyone.

"I'm really not worrying whether I'm the most popular man in the US military today," he declared cheerfully. "You don't win any popularity contests by conducting a defence but I can't do my job by opinion poll."

Lt Cdr Swift has received few direct criticisms for standing up for the legal rights of men seen by many of his comrades - not to mention much of the American public - as terrorists. But his military career is likely to come to an obligatory end next year if, as he expects, he fails for the second time to win promotion.

When he finally got home on Thursday, his wife, an airline pilot, told him how surprised she was that he had won. Next day he received a hero's reception from fellow military defence lawyers in northern Virginia, including a hug and kiss from a female colleague "that probably breached military protocol".

Just as rewarding, he said, was that a senior military prosecutor and government legal officer also congratulated him on a job well done, even though they did not like the conclusion.

By a five-to-three majority, the justices ruled that the US military could not continue to try detainees using special military panels - the method that the White House devised to start emptying a prison that has become an international embarrassment.

The Supreme Court concluded that the commissions denied defendants basic legal rights and that if detainees were to be tried for war crimes, the proceedings should be held either by court martial or in a civil court.

The justices also found that conspiracy - the single charge laid against Lt Cdr Swift's client, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a 36-year-old Yemeni - did not qualify as a war crime. "This case is not about my client avoiding justice," Lt Cdr Swift said. "It's about what form of justice he should face."

His delight was nothing to do with a defeat for the White House or Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary and plaintiff in the case; rather, he said: "This vindicates the military justice system and I'm very proud of that. This ruling reinforces a huge difference between us and our opponents. We believe in common decency, fairness and the rule of law. Our opponents don't."

On Thursday afternoon he telephoned Hamdan at the camp 1,300 miles away and told him of the ruling through an interpreter. "I think he was awe-struck that the court would rule for him and give a little man like him an equal chance," he said. "Where he's from, that's not the case."
Britain urged to take back detainees

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-07-02 10:59|| 2006-07-02 10:59|| Front Page Top

#15 A blatant power grab by liberal wing of SCOTUS. I hope Bush goes to Congress and neuters SCOTUS.

Posted by JohnQC 2006-07-02 11:42|| 2006-07-02 11:42|| Front Page Top

#16 Lt Cmdr Swift can at least look forward to joining Karpinski on the speaking tour.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2006-07-02 13:25|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2006-07-02 13:25|| Front Page Top

#17 is that a joke JohnQC or are you just uninformed as to how the system works? Forgive me if it's a joke I didn't get. These days it's hard to tell cause some people really are that stupid.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-02 17:32|| 2006-07-02 17:32|| Front Page Top

#18 ok ... it's a joke. never mind.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-02 17:39|| 2006-07-02 17:39|| Front Page Top

#19 You can always choose a name of your own, Glaitch Groting9149. Just type the handle of your choosing into the "Your Name" box, and allow the Rantburg cookie to remember it. It would be easier for the rest of us to recognize you at first if you append (formerly known as Glaitch Groting9149) for a few days, like dear Swamp Blondie did.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-07-02 17:57|| 2006-07-02 17:57|| Front Page Top

00:08 twobyfour
23:58 ed
23:53 Lone Ranger
23:42 CrazyFool
23:40 Steve White
23:35 Barbara Skolaut
23:27 ed
23:12 ed
23:04 Brett
22:56 Theath Sheretle2555
22:52 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:41 as
22:23 Iblis
22:21 Old Patriot
22:18 twobyfour
22:14 SteveS
22:07 anonymous2u
21:48 Swamp Blondie
21:44 Swamp Blondie
21:44 john
21:38 Swamp Blondie
21:33 11A5S
21:30 Swamp Blondie
21:29 Pappy