Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 





Why is Habeas Corpus Such a Threat to those in Power?
Monday, 18 August 2008 10:12
by Maher Osseiran

Why is the Supreme Court's decision to uphold habeas corpus rights for the Guantanamo detainees so scary that Senator Lindsey Graham, with the support of McCain, will "explore the possibility, if necessary, of a constitutional amendment to blunt the effect of this decision"?

What is so fundamentally wrong with the Supreme Court's decision, whose members are conservative or Bush appointees, to warrant amending our constitution? Have Senators Graham and McCain lost their minds?

I just finished reading a lengthy "friend-of-the-court" brief to the Supreme Court in support of petitioner Boumediene v. responder Bush, et al., a case resulting in a decision that reinstate habeas corpus rights, not just for the detainees, but for all Americans.

As a brief to the Supreme Court, the argument and the conclusion were primarily based in constitutional law and precedent.

A similar brief to a habeas corpus court that would review the legality of detaining the Guantanamo prisoners would undoubtedly take a different form or approach.
...what the writ of habeas corpus has always ensured: that an independent court can inquire into the legal and factual bases for the Executive's assertion of its power to imprison. This guarantee has always included a meaningful judicial evaluation of the law and facts that underlie the Executive's asserted basis to detain.

Known and very popular cialis coupon which gives all the chance to receive a discount for a preparation which has to be available and exactly cialis coupons has been found in the distant room of this big house about which wood-grouses in the houses tell.

Other than the meaningful judicial evaluation of the law and facts, a non-military tribunal would make it easier for a detainee to produce exculpatory evidence, evidence that would exonerate him or her; actually, anyone can produce such evidence and anyone can inject it into the court proceedings simply by providing it to any party.

Such exculpatory evidence is abundant and has been in the hands of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, governors, members of congress such as Conyers and Graham, the judiciary committees to the House and Senate, and a variety of law authorities that have jurisdiction as early as 2005; I know that for fact since I placed it there but no investigations resulted.

In February of 2007, Dr. James Zogby of the Arab American Institute, after familiarizing himself with my work, found it imperative to contact Conyers directly and received assurances, conveyed to me by email, that an investigation would proceed in due course; Conyers is still missing in inaction.

The evidence was uncovered when I decided to authenticate the videotape released by the Pentagon on Dec. 13, 2001, a videotape in which bin Laden was confessing to 9/11. My suspicions about the tape quickly materialized but it took close to a year to distill the information in to a format that would stand in a court of law.

The authentication work, the only work of its kind put forth in the public domain, unveiled the most heinous crime ever committed by a sitting president whose victims not only include the detainees in Guantanamo except for a handful, but the untold number of dead and maimed Afghanis, Iraqis, American citizens and soldiers who have died in this fake "war on terror".

The authentication work revealed that the taping of the bin Laden confession was the result of a sophisticated sting operation run by U.S. intelligence with the help of Saudi intelligence and was taped on September 26, 2001, barely two weeks after 9/11 and ten days before the invasion of Afghanistan.

According to the UN charter, "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered."

Even though the Bush administration had the evidence that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks as early as September 26, 2001, such evidence was only shared with those who were important for the execution of their war, such as NATO and Pakistan, and kept away from those sane entities who were looking for a just and peaceful outcome as the UN Charter dictates.

The Bush administration, with premeditation, ignored its international obligations in deference to war. If the Bush administration had supplied the evidence to the world and specifically the Taliban who were requesting such evidence in exchange for bin Laden, the war might not have taken place and bin Laden would very likely be in custody.

Not pursuing that route makes the Afghanistan war an illegal war under the UN Charter and The Geneva Convention; thereby, the majority of the Guantanamo detainees can no longer be classified as enemy combatants but victims of war crimes.

These findings, which were shared with various authorities, were summarized in the "The Crime Behind the Criminal Wars!".

The authentication work also shows that the Bush administration, with premeditation, aided and abetted bin Laden after 9/11 far beyond any aid your average Guantanamo detainee could have ever provided to Al-Qaeda or bin Laden. There are also very strong indications, worthy of serious investigation, that the Bush administration was very aware of the 9/11 operations beforehand and allowed them to happen or even helped in making them happen. This argument was summarized in "Is Bin Laden Responsible for the 9/11 attacks?"

As a consequence of these findings, those handful of detainees who are charged with the more serious crimes, after review and a proper fact finding by a habeas corpus court, would have those charges against them dismissed only to be re-arrested and appropriately charged with less serious offenses; the rest of the detainees would have to be released.

The same court, and the public at large, will reserve the more serious offenses to high-ranking officials in the Bush administration, including the president.

By not acting in 2005 on the information received, Conyers and congress dug themselves a hole that kept getting deeper as time went by. The implications of the findings are very serious and the remedies go beyond those implemented after Water Gate and might prove to be the remedies that would help us reclaim our democracy.

The fundamental and positive change in how our democracy functions is what Senator Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and others in power are afraid of; a fear worthy of a constitutional amendment.

Their fear is genuine because, unlike other evidence in the public discourse of the Bush administration's abuse of power, which the administration and its supporters have been able to duck, this evidence is solid, all in the public domain, the majority of which the administration mistakenly placed there, it cannot be taken back, it cannot be spun, it is intact and most importantly, will remain so.

I am told that proper investigations would start after Bush leaves office. I do think though that no one should be above the law and no criminal should be given special consideration, especially those who hold public office, otherwise we are simply a nation of outlaws.
More from this author:
“S” is for Surge and Synergy - Between Democrats, Republicans, and Israel… (4292 Hits)
by Maher Osseiran Surge as a word has become synonymous with Bush and Baghdad but that does not mean the democrats are against it. If we...
The Crime Behind the Criminal Wars! (5070 Hits)
by Maher Osseiran If your first guess is the attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, guess again.  ...
Obama – America’s “Second Chance” or is it its Last? (3386 Hits)
by Maher Osseiran I was asked to write a follow up analysis to “The Clintons’ Contributions to the Iraq War”, which showed the...
Obama and the endorsement of Powell and Alderman (2801 Hits)
by Maher Osseiran Why accept the endorsement of a liar? Because he has no choice. Obama is not his own man, he is a persona, the creation of...
Related Articles:
A Packet of Fear for Christmas: Channel Tunnel Threat "Far Graver" Than WWII (6290 Hits)
Jason Burke, writing for The Observer, has all the scary details. The Channel tunnel has been targeted by a group of Islamic militant terrorists...
Agape: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (10993 Hits)
by Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. The word “agape” literally means “love.” More specifically, in the New Testament it referred to the fatherly...
A Message to Washington State Legislators (and to those in VT, NM and elsewhere) (8133 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff This is my testimony, submitted to the Government Operations and Elections Committtee of the Washington State Senate, ...
Why Civilization Has Developed in Such a Tormented and Destructive Way: THE PARABLE OF THE TRIBES (7497 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler In the various discussions here on NSB, I have referred frequently to my book THE PARABLE OF THE TRIBES: THE...
Pelosi's Toothless Threat to Sue Bush Imperils the Constitution (5657 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff The bankruptcy of the Democratic Party leadership’s position in Congress on impeachment was revealed in stark terms...

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Comments (3)add comment

Lee said:

Bob Conley ( http://AimHighWithBob.com ) a conservative Democrat, has a really good chance of beating Lindsey Graham this fall if folks will step up to the plate to support him.

We've got to start getting rid of these enemies of the Constitution if we're ever going to get our country and our government back into the hands of the people!

Please go to his website and give what you can!
August 19, 2008
Votes: +0

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org said:

Alice lost in wonderland?
This is comment for the article: Why is Habeas Corpus Such a Threat to those in Power? http://www.atlanticfreepress.c...w/4846/81/

Hello - this highly intelligent article (and thank you for that) suffers from a surfeit of unwitting wonderland syndrome on its prime argument. Its point on Habeas Corpus of course is right on, and thank you for that. However, I do not know, very humbly speaking, what to make of this paragraph:

Even though the Bush administration had the evidence that bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks as early as September 26, 2001, such evidence was only shared with those who were important for the execution of their war, such as NATO and Pakistan, and kept away from those sane entities who were looking for a just and peaceful outcome as the UN Charter dictates.

Did Bin Laden bring those tall buildings down into their own fine footprints which looks awefully like controlled demolition? How about exploding building into powdered dust? The evidence of the eyes before us suggests that the planes couldn't alone have downed those buildings. That there was something else. What was that something else? I don't know first hand. Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan seem to think it was some sort of thermite or other high-tech explosives planted ahead of time. I only know for a fact, as an MIT trained engineer, and having built rational systems that have powered America's data centers throughout the 1990s (with about two dozen US patents which one may glean in my tagline on my website, so I am not exactly a moron spouting conspiracy theories but performing science in which I am trained), that rational scientific thinking suggests that the explanation for the empirical evidence before the eyes is at least, partially, "controlled demolition", where the quotation mark is meant to indicate anything with empirical and existential proven capablilty to collapse tall buildings into their own footprints at almost free-fall speed! Since I know of only controlled demolition which can do that - and I watched several controlled demolition videos which one can find on the web and on youtube - I put controlled demolition as the place holder in quotes as my best scientific observation.

1) Therefore, how did OBL do this "controlled demolition" sitting in a cave in Afghanistan? Something like that requires a) careful planning to know where to cut the internal structure of three tall buildings, b) plant the explosives floor by floor in all the three tall buildings, or as the new chemical analysis report by Kevin Ryan suggests, spray on some fine high-tech nano-tech based compound but lets just stay hypothetical on how such a building could be demolished with cutter charges; and one can visibly see that at least two different modalites of demolition were employed, one that explodes stuff into fine powder on the top floors, and one that initiates the collapse on the bottom keepin the top structure intact - evidence of the eyes! c) then execute the precision timing of triggering these charges to result in the flawless execution that was witnessed, especially of WTC-7 on which no plane hit! I am sure the steps required in actual implementation are far more complex than this abc abstraction because a crew has to go floor by floor, pretending to do maintainence, and carry all this weight of explosives around. That would take at least several months, perhaps a few weeks in high-speed full-crew mode! How did OBL get access to these highly secured buildings and none of the thousands and thousands of tenants noticed any turbenless clean-shaven "arabs" running amok with explosives around their waist?

2) Since the entire world also empirically observed airplanes flying into tall buildings, let's just grant, temporarily, for this author's sake, that OBL did that part (let's assume he had Yoda mind-melding powers to overwhelm operation Able Dangers/Warriors/Norad/FAA/ etc.).

Let's assume that the sting operation with which the video was made, as the author so very Sherlock Holmesly uncovered (and that is a genuine compliment):

The authentication work revealed that the taping of the bin Laden confession was the result of a sophisticated sting operation run by U.S. intelligence with the help of Saudi intelligence and was taped on September 26, 2001, barely two weeks after 9/11 and ten days before the invasion of Afghanistan.

is genuinely OBL. Okay - bomb the bastard and his mother to smithereens. We don't care for any international laws/treaties/constitution and "crap" like that - those are just "a goddamed piece of paper", remember?

But just to be consistent, bomb the other bastards and their mothers to smithereens too who planted and executed the controlled demolition of WTC-7, imploded the WTC-1 and WTC-2 into their own darn fine foot-prints. And also those who sophisticatedly masterminded, planned, and executed the planes hijacking/hitting the towers with their controlled demolition. Since evidence suggests that the prime-mover of the destruction was controlled demolition, any jury will agree that the OBL plane hijacking was a contrived secondary diversion to mask the actual event. In that case, OBL was a patsy. Hence bombing OBL, his mother, and the poor nation that had housed him, to stoneage was monumentally criminal (for the lack of a more descriptive word, in private, I can use my very colorful native language amids buckets of tears). So apart from bombing to smithereens those who did the prime-moving event, and expertly coordinated it, pay full restitution to Afghanistan. And because that enabling event led to invasion of Iraq, again on contrived pretexts, also pay the same to the Iraqi peoples!

Oh - let's just use the same yardstick as employed for Libya supposedly downing that airplane. What was that amount? I vaguely recall $10 million per dead paid to their survivors. I see no particular advantage of a white man over a brown or dark one. Pay that amount!

Seven years later, I just can't believe how some very highly intelligent peoples keep regurgitating the same old mantras! What is it? Is it indoctrination, Huxelyan mindlessness, Orwellian wickedness, or something other?

Why would anyone, in 2008, especially one so astute as to do such fine criminalaysis of a tape, almost on the seventh anniversary of 911, choose to completely ignore the evidence of their own eyes right in front of them, and instead, run with the Pentagon's version of it?

I asked this question of Noam Chomsky several times. See my letter to him on my website if there is interest. Still waiting for his response!

Perhaps the estemed author of this article can provide one!

I further hope the smart reader can spot rancourous use of facetiousness and irony in the call for equivalent bombing of the controlled demolitioners and their mothers - lest someone think I advocate collective punishement. I do not! I advocate finding all the guilty murderous bastards one by one, and then individually bombing them "eye for an eye" - for we surely do not wish to exceed the punishment specified in their own books! Between turning the other cheek and "eye for an eye" - well, we shall let the millions of dead victims rightfully make the call - just as those who victims and their survivors who hanged Eichman in Jerusalem!

And I apologise in advance for using the word "bastard" in this polite company to refer to those who took (and continue to take) the lives of millions and are laughing their way to the bank! I can't think of a stronger yet more polite adjective in English at the moment. I am sorry. But I can certainly use the more eloquent diction of Elie Wiesel - for he captures it so well emotionally, for all victims, for all times:

“I still curse the killers, their accomplices, the indifferent spectators who knew and kept silent, and Creation itself, Creation and those who perverted and distorted it. I feel like screaming, howling like a madman so that that world, the world of the murderers, might know it will never be forgiven.”

With regrets,

Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
August 20, 2008
Votes: +0

Maher Osseiran said:

Maher Osseiran
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org: Alice lost in wonderland?
You post was lengthy and it seems to me that you did not read the articles that were linked within the above piece.

Kindly read those articles and if you have more comments, please make them specific to the material.

I do understand that what is being said contradicts many belief systems within the 9/11 truth community. Unfortunately, It is what it is and that is where the research leads.

Maher Osseiran
August 20, 2008
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger



Top 123