Apparently, Rummy didn't bone up on Nurnberg...

by: hubiestubert

Wed Feb 16, 2011 at 10:23:54 AM EST


Bookmark and Share

hubiestubert :: Apparently, Rummy didn't bone up on Nurnberg...
Presidential immunity cited regarding 'enemy combatants'Any injuries suffered by Padilla were the result of President Bush's authorization that he be treated as an enemy combatant, Rumsfeld's lawyers say. The president enjoys complete immunity for those actions, they say, so the suit must be thrown out.

"Military detention is a normal and inevitable incident of an enemy combatant designation," Rumsfeld's lawyers argue in their brief. Padilla's assignment to the Charleston brig was "routine and appropriate."

Save, in this case, Rumsfeld did more than just follow orders. He crafted the programs and gave the orders himself. He was center to the legal framework of the justification of stripping the amenities of US citizenship and its rights and responsibilities from Padilla in his holding without charge. While Rumsfeld would like to throw the cloak of Presidential immunity over himself, he seems to forget that "Befehl ist Befehl" worked less well than folks had expected none too long ago.

Let's be clear.  Padilla was pretty much guilty of conspiring to create a dirty bomb. The evidence was fairly damning, and his connections checked out.  He was not a good man, and by and large, if he'd been more competent and law enforcement less on the ball, he might have actually gotten his wish and performed a horrendous act on our soil. The thing is, we have tried terrorists in this country before.  Both foreign and domestic. ADX Florence  holds several convicted terrorists, some more successful than Mr. Padilla.  Mind you, not held, but convicted.  Our justice system can handle trying even difficult cases, and the lawsuit that Rumsfeld is trying to deflect comes because folks wanted shortcuts and work arounds difficult points of law, as opposed to doing the job right the first time.

Ramzi Yousef-Captured in Pakistan, convicted for role in Bojinka plot in 1996, convicted for role in 1993 WTC bombing, sent to ADX Florence.

Wali Khan Amin Shah-Captured in Manila, convicted for role in Bojinka plot, sent to ADX Florence

Abdul Hakim Ali Hashim Murad- Captured in Manila, convicted for role in Bojinka plot, sent to ADX Florence

Eyad Ismoil - Captured in Amman, extradited to US, convicted of role in 1993 WTC bombing, sent to ADX Florence

Khalfan Khamis Mohamed-Captured in Cape Town, convicted of 1998 Embassy bombings, sent to ADX Florence

Mahmud Abouhalima-Captured in Egypt, convicted of 1993 WTC bombings, sent to ADX Florence

Mohamed Rashed Daoud Al-Owhali-Convicted of 1998 Embassy bombings, sent to ADX Florence

Mohammed Odeh-Captured in Karachi, convicted of 1998 Embassy bombings, sent to ADX Florence

Mohammed A. Salameh-Convicted of involvement in 1993 WTC bombing, sent to ADX Florence

Mohammed Ali Hassan Al-Moayad-Captured in Germany, convicted of federal crimes related to funding Hamas, sent to ADX Florence

All convicted of Federal crimes.  All captured and convicted. The difficulty being, that Rumsfeld and the Bush Presidency did not want to rely on law enforcement to do their job. They instead wanted the blunt force operation of the military to make things "easier" for capture.  The problem being, while the military is fantastic at some operations, preserving a chain of evidence is not a particular strong suit.  The matter of capturing and convicting terrorists comes down to a matter of law enforcement, and there come certain restrictions that the military does not have. Which is why it seemed the attractive option.  The problem being, that if you simply want to kill terrorists, then the military is your tool. If you want to try and convict terrorists, it's another thing entirely.  The Bush Presidency, and its staff were of two minds on the matter, wanting to have victories in court, as well as victories on the ground.  Rather than play by the rules, they looked for workarounds on the law, and for shortcuts.  The problem being, if you want to convict folks, then you really can't take those shortcuts.

The issue at hand isn't that Padilla wasn't a bad man.  He was. But, we extend human rights and our system of justice to everyone, and in looking to work around these restrictions, Rumsfeld and his team were personally knowledgeable of their actions, and were cognizant of the legal ramifications enough that they ordered the Justice Department to produce legal memos to justify the actions that were taken. Not to look at precedence and work from a solid legal position, but to lattice a framework to justify actions already taken.  Under orders or not, Rumsfeld and others named in this case, were fully aware of the shakey legal ground, and I hope to the 10,000 Hells that this case goes all the way, because we need to draw a line in the sand against those who use "orders" to throw away our basic values and foundations of our law.  That this asinine legal morass threatens to throw out many cases only compounds the sin, because if we'd handled the mess with attention to detail, and according to law, instead of looking to shoehorn law and justifications for things already done, we would have many more names in ADX Florence, held without being martyrs to a cause, and held with justice being on our side.

In order to take the moral high ground, we must actually occupy that territory first, and damned if this case needs to be taken through, because this mess has sullied our name, our nation, and our system.  It threatens us as much as the dirty bomb that Padilla hoped to build, and just as corrosive and dangerous to our systems of governance.  

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Bookmark and Share

Too true. (2.00 / 3)

In order to take the moral high ground, we must actually occupy that territory first, and damned if this case needs to be taken through, because this mess has sullied our name, our nation, and our system.  It threatens us as much as the dirty bomb that Padilla hoped to build, and just as corrosive and dangerous to our systems of governance.  

These turkeys really did do more to tarnish the glow of Reagan's "Shining City on the Hill" than terrorists could have done on their own.

You can hurt someone and you can kill them but you can't force anyone to give up their ethics. They have to do that themselves.

And we did.

"Conway, whom experience had taught that rudeness was by no means a guarantee of good faith, was even less inclined to regard a well-turned phrase as a proof of insincerity."  James Hilton, Lost Horizon


What bothers me is that we could have had a lot more folks in prison by now had we not handed things over to the military (2.00 / 4)
The military is fantastic for making people dead. Horrible at preserving chains of evidence.

Had we kept the 9/11 search to intelligence and law enforcement, we could have worked with governments, and worked within frameworks that would have left our hands clean, gotten more governments on board with our efforts, and not gotten Al Qaida sympathy.

Then again, if we'd gone into Iraq smarter, we wouldn't have given Jihadists more than a toehold there either, as opposed to handing them huge swaths of country...


[ Parent ]
Yep. (2.00 / 4)
We used a hammer to fix a watch.

"Conway, whom experience had taught that rudeness was by no means a guarantee of good faith, was even less inclined to regard a well-turned phrase as a proof of insincerity."  James Hilton, Lost Horizon

[ Parent ]
Am I dumber than I think I am sometimes? (2.00 / 2)
from the link:

Presidential immunity cited regarding 'enemy combatants'Any injuries suffered by Padilla were the result of President Bush's authorization that he be treated as an enemy combatant, Rumsfeld's lawyers say. The president enjoys complete immunity for those actions, they say, so the suit must be thrown out.

Does "Presidential immunity" apply to the office of the president which includes certain advisors and/or cabinet members?

This seems to suggest that it is only the president who enjoys immunity in civil matters:

The Supreme Court has ruled that the president has absolute Immunity from civil lawsuits seeking damages for presidential actions. However, the Court ruled in Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 117 S.Ct. 1636, 137 L.Ed.2d 945 (1997), that a sitting president does not have presidential immunity from suit over conduct unrelated to his official duties. http://legal-dictionary.thefre...  


He's a vicious f****er. First he kicks The Donald in the nuts, laughs about it, and then orders two bullets to the head of OBL. I voted for him out of hope but the second time will be out of fear. ~ oldskool on the Wonkette

The Bush Administration pushed and pushed for a LOT of privileges, and looked to extend them to everyone in the Administration (2.00 / 2)
Which a lot of civil liberties folks questioned at the time, and still do.

Rummy and crew are looking to double down on this. They were under orders, and thus not liable for their actions. Which is why I cited Nurnberg in the title...


[ Parent ]
So it would seem that power/immunity grab will be (2.00 / 2)
tested with this case.

He's a vicious f****er. First he kicks The Donald in the nuts, laughs about it, and then orders two bullets to the head of OBL. I voted for him out of hope but the second time will be out of fear. ~ oldskool on the Wonkette

[ Parent ]
The thing is, Congress is going to be torn... (2.00 / 2)
On one hand you have the Bush Administration, on the other, you have the Obama Administration that they're loathe to hand anything else to.

Which is sort of why you don't back power grabs even during your own side's watch on the Administration, because at some point, the Oval Office will switch over, and then you have an imbalance in the powers of the three arms of the government.

Someone forgot to remind folks of that, when they were ready to shovel Executive power out the wazoo.  


[ Parent ]
Someone asked me the other day... (2.00 / 4)
why Democrats would extend the Patriot Act. I told 'em that even though it was chock full of powers that Democrats would never fight to obtain....now that they HAVE those powers, though, they certainly aren't gonna give 'em up (especially since the R's got to have them...why should the R's have more power than the D's?).

Power really is a corrupting force.

Photobucket

He who has a why to live can bear almost any how.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

Photobucket


[ Parent ]
So now it's on the 3 little pigs? (2.00 / 2)
Well I think Little Red Riding Hood would of done the same thing if she had her way.

Blaming nursery rhyme heroes counts as hitting below the belt here nerd.

Take a point off judges!

Geez.

What's next? You going to tell me I can't wonder where the twinkling star is?

Don't try to play the Animal Farm card either. Your intentions are crystal clear here.

I'm on to you.

Just because they are posting on a progressive site doesn't make them progressives. - John Allen


[ Parent ]
Nürnberg (2.00 / 4)
Got you, but initially I thought because of his German roots.

[ Parent ]
Rummy's got German roots? (2.00 / 3)
Hey Eich!

They didn't let you come to RSA, eh?

"Conway, whom experience had taught that rudeness was by no means a guarantee of good faith, was even less inclined to regard a well-turned phrase as a proof of insincerity."  James Hilton, Lost Horizon


[ Parent ]
Ja. (2.00 / 3)
Not me, I don't know what this cyber cloud stuff is all about. ;-)  My Cupertino friends are there for sure. You around?

[ Parent ]
Large and in charge, baby! (2.00 / 3)
News that Goes To 11

Off in a few minutes to the last day. Have a Common Event Expression board meeting to make my small effort at getting the world to speak one language then five more hours in the booth (then tear down, chill out, hop a plane to Taipei).  All goodness and light!

"Conway, whom experience had taught that rudeness was by no means a guarantee of good faith, was even less inclined to regard a well-turned phrase as a proof of insincerity."  James Hilton, Lost Horizon


[ Parent ]
I would like to request that (2.00 / 4)
no one ever put "Rummy" in the same sentence as the expression "bone up" ever again.

Maybe a full brain memory wipe will eliminate that visual.

The future is unwritten


Ha! (2.00 / 2)


"Conway, whom experience had taught that rudeness was by no means a guarantee of good faith, was even less inclined to regard a well-turned phrase as a proof of insincerity."  James Hilton, Lost Horizon

[ Parent ]
Just saw at Balloon Juice that the judge has thrown the case out. (2.00 / 3)
sigh

He's a vicious f****er. First he kicks The Donald in the nuts, laughs about it, and then orders two bullets to the head of OBL. I voted for him out of hope but the second time will be out of fear. ~ oldskool on the Wonkette

Search




Advanced Search
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Blog Roll
Andrew Bacevich
Angry Bear
Angry Black Lady
Balloon Juice
Black Kos
Booman Tribune
Charles P. Pierce
Crooks and Liars
Daily Kos
Five Thirty Eight
Huffington Post
Juan Cole
Maddow Blog
MYDD
P.M. Carpenter
Political Wire
RumpRoast
Scholars & Rogues
Talking Points Memo
The Field
Washington Monthly
Wonkette
VetVoice
Moose With Blogs
Atdleft
Barr
BorderJumpers
Brit
BTchakir
Canadian Gal
Charles Lemos
Cheryl Kopec
Curtis Walker
Douglas Watts
Hubie Stubert
Intrepid Liberal
ItStands
Janicket
JoeTrippi
John Allen
LibraryGrape
MichaelEvan
National Gadfly
Senate Guru
Zachary Karabell




Advertisement


Back to Top

Posting Guidelines  |  FAQ  |  Privacy Policy  |  Contact the Moose  |  Contact Congress
Powered by: SoapBlox