Ran across this in the Villiage Voice today. Basically, the Adminstration
got some token pushback from Judge Doumar, pointing out that the 2 PAGE
document issued by Bush & Co doesn't even specify what is meant by "enemy
combatant", and doesn't ever actually claim Hamdi was even in the Taliban.
In addtion, he doesn't actually seem to have been grabbed as the result of
battle.
But then again, I guess that shouldn't be a suprise. Our boys know they have
to take drastic measures to protect us, even if that means protecting us
poor stupid proles from our own legal system.
Anyway, here's the link,
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0302/hentoff.php
and here's an excerpt.
(-TD)
A fuller account of what Judge Doumar said is in an extraordinarily valuable
report by the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights: A Year of Loss:
Reexamining Civil Liberties Since September 11. Released last September 5,
the report quotes more of what Judge Doumar indignantly said to the
government prosecutor who had handed him the Mobbs document:
"I'm challenging everything in the Mobbs declaration. If you think I don't
understand the utilization of words, you are sadly mistaken."
Mr. Mobbs had declared that Hamdi was "affiliated with a Taliban unit and
received weapons training." Bolstering the government's case—or so it
seemed—were photographs in some of the media of Hamdi carrying a weapon. So
what was Judge Doumar's beef?
The Mobbs document, Judge Doumar said bluntly, "makes no effort to explain
what 'affiliated' means nor under what criteria this 'affiliation' justified
Hamdi's classification as an enemy combatant. The declaration is silent as
to what level of 'affiliation' is necessary to warrant enemy combatant
status. . . .
"It does not say where or by whom he received weapons training or the nature
and content thereof. Indeed, a close inspection of the declaration reveals
that [it] never claims that Hamdi was fighting for the Taliban, nor that he
was a member of the Taliban. Without access to the screening criteria
actually used by the government in its classification decision, this Court
is unable to determine whether the government has paid adequate
consideration to due process rights to which Hamdi is entitled under his
present detention."
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
