Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

In Our Names

Joseph Margulies has a hard-hitting article, U.S. can’t tell a combatant from a cook in the Chicago Tribune.

We’ve known that there were a lot of innocent people at Guantanamo, but this many?

The Pentagon’s data show that only 8 percent of the prisoners at the base are even alleged to have been Al Qaeda fighters–assuming the allegations against them are true.

Even slave laborers are classified as “enemy combatants”:

Officers told [Abdul] Aliza that having been kidnapped by the Taliban and forced to serve as a cook or a waiter was irrelevant to whether Aliza was an enemy combatant. Aliza found this impossible to comprehend.

“You mentioned that being forced and not being forced are the same,” Aliza told his interrogator. “How can a person that is forced or not forced to do something be equal? . . . [I]f I was taken by force by the Taliban, how can I be a member? If I’m not willing to do something, but forced by a soldier to do it, how can the two have the same meaning. . . . If you don’t agree with them they will beat and torture you and then throw you in prison.”

No one answered Aliza’s questions, and authorities decided he was an enemy combatant. As of late 2006, Aliza was still at the base. He may be there still; the Pentagon refuses to say.

So, correct me if I’m wrong, but under this logic, Jewish inmates in Nazi concentration camps could today be considered “enemy combatants”?

Kafka. It’s pure Kafka:

In summer 2005, the Bush administration announced that 70 percent of the base’s prisoners had been slated for release because they were not a threat. It never happened.

Though some were released, most of the prisoners continue to languish at Guantanamo and, the administration says, may be held there for the rest of their lives, with no evidence presented against them and no opportunity to plead their case in court.

Much of the problem has to do with the words and definitions the administration uses.

Being an enemy combatant does not mean a prisoner did anything wrong, the administration said in documents written by the Department of Defense in 2004.

My tax dollar at work. And yours, if you’re a US taxpayer too.

Surely there must be something we can do about this besides carp and bear witness?

Posted in Guantanamo | 3 Comments

UK-France Merger Discussed in 1956

Stranger than fiction.

Guardian, France and UK considered 1950s ‘merger’,

Britain and France talked about a “union” in the 1950s, even discussing the possibility of the Queen becoming the French head of state, it was reported today.

On September 10 1956, Guy Mollet, the then French prime minister, came to London to discuss the possibility of a merger between the two countries with his British counterpart, Sir Anthony Eden, according to declassified papers from the National Archives, uncovered by the BBC.

Not, it seems, a joke, as it’s also at the Times, Were we nearly les franglais?

Traumatised by Suez and the fighting in Algeria, a desperate French Prime Minister floated the idea of merging with Britain in 1956 and installing the Queen as head of state of the two countries, the BBC will report tonight.

Records of conversations between Anthony Eden, the British Prime Minister, and his Cabinet Secretary, Sir Norman Brook, show that the idea was swiftly dismissed but that serious thought was given to a secondary proposal to make France a member of the Commonwealth.

Posted in UK | 2 Comments

It’s All About Metrics

archy asks,

Remember the days when we used to kill the number three guy in al Qayda very few weeks? It seems like months since we last killed him. Does this mean we’re losing our edge?

Posted in Iraq | 1 Comment

Statement by Law Deans on Stimson Remarks

The following statement, dated January 14, 2007, has been signed by more than 57 U.S. law deans, with more joining by the hour:

We, the law deans undersigned below are appalled by the January 11, 2007 statement of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles “Cully” Stimson, criticizing law firms for their pro bono representation of suspected terrorist detainees and encouraging corporate executives to force these law firms to choose between their pro bono and paying clients.

As law deans and professors, we find Secretary Stimson’s statement to be contrary to basic tenets of American law. We teach our students that lawyers have a professional obligation to ensure that even the most despised and unpopular individuals and groups receive zealous and effective legal representation. Our American legal tradition has honored lawyers who, despite their personal beliefs, have zealously represented mass murderers, suspected terrorists, and Nazi marchers. At this moment in time, when our courts have endorsed the right of the Guantanamo detainees to be heard in courts of law, it is critical that qualified lawyers provide effective representation to these individuals. By doing so, these lawyers protect not only the rights of the detainees, but also our shared constitutional principles. In a free and democratic society, government officials should not encourage intimidation of or retaliation against lawyers who are fulfilling their pro bono obligations.

We urge the Administration promptly and unequivocally to repudiate Secretary Stimson’s remarks.

Sincerely,

[first 57 signatories below]

Continue reading →

Posted in Law School | 5 Comments

OLC Head Blogs at ‘Opinio Juris’

Kevin Jon Heller writes,

John Bellinger, the head of the Office of the Legal Adviser at the State Department, will be guest-blogging at Opinio Juris the week of January 15th (Monday to Friday). To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first time that anyone at the State Department — particularly someone in such a critical position — will have blogged in their official capacity.

Should be interesting! The OJ crowd have also invited some academic guests to participate in the conversation.

Posted in Law: International Law | 2 Comments

‘This has to be called escalation

The Left Coaster's new military affairs contributor USAF Col. Sam Gardiner (ret.) starts off his blogging with a disturbing account of the US actions aimed at Iran, Pieces in Place for Escalation

The pieces are moving. They'll be in place by the end of February. The United States will be able to escalate military operations against Iran.

The second carrier strike group leaves the U.S. west coast on Tuesday. It will be joined by naval mine clearing assets from both the United States and the UK. Patriot missile defense systems have also been ordered to deploy to the Gulf.

Maybe as a guard against North Korea seeing operations focused on Iran as a chance to be aggressive, a squadron of F-117 stealth fighters has just been deployed to Korea.

This has to be called escalation.

There's lots more, including this:

As one of the last steps before a strike, we’ll see USAF tankers moved to unusual places, like Bulgaria. These will be used to refuel the US-based B-2 bombers on their strike missions into Iran. When that happens, we’ll only be days away from a strike.

The White House could be telling the truth. Maybe there are no plans to take Iran to the next level. The fuel for a fire is in place, however. All we need is a spark. The danger is that we have created conditions that could lead to a Greater Middle East War.

Is there no one in the GOP who can shake some sense into the madmen in the White House?

Posted in Iran | 6 Comments