Bush League U.S.A.

There'll be fires on the road
and the white man dancing
You'll see a woman
hanging upside down
her features covered by her fallen gown
--The Future, Leonard Cohen
________________

More on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, though not the last word.

The beginning of the KSM trial marks the start of a new era in United States jurisprudence, the certification that we have truly become a banana republic -- full-on Bush League. Since we have more people incarcerated than did the Stalin era Soviet system, an organic growth issuing from that is we would have fantasy trials lacking legal precedent that abandon the concept of the right to be proven guilty, which would imply the right to defend oneself against charges.

One cannot defend oneself when hamstrung. KSM may not challenge the validity of evidence collected during his torture. He will not confront a presumption of innocence and a standard of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Ergo, he is guilty before presumed innocent.

These bedrock defining elements of the U.S. trial system will be missing from the KSM trial because both of the U.S.'s warlord presidents have indicated that some men are too dangerous to ever be freed from Guantanamo Bay. As KSM is one of those men, the initial presumption of his guilty status makes a mockery of the entire judicial process.

Worldwide and historically-speaking, military tribunals seldom if ever meet the standards of civilized concepts of justice. When KSM is convicted by his tribunal it is we, the American people, who will bear the guilt of this sad chapter in the tale of misguided American actions.

Takedown

Well, a question ain't really a question
If you know the answer too
--Far From Me, JohnPrine
_____________________

"Al-Qaida Fighter Possible Witness at NYC Trial"

--AP Headline

Ranger Question of the Day:

When did al-Qaida become fighters

and not terrorists?

_____________________

A recent book on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is titled, "The Hunt for KSM: Inside the Pursuit and Takedown of the Real 9-11 Mastermind". Why Takedown, and not "arrest" or "apprehension" -- isn't that what the U.S. does to criminals, even masterminds?

The term "capture" is also used to apply to U.S. law enforcement's efforts, but even that is incorrect. We capture enemies on a battlefield, which also implies they are legitimate Prisoners of War. After all, the U.S. did declare the entire world as the battlefield in this war.

The mistaken use of the terms reflects a confused policy. With KSM, there was no justification to waterboard the man 183 times, even if he were the devil's spawn. Additionally weakening our vaunted values is the policy of holding anyone for 9+ years sans benefit of legal process. While it was recently announced that KSM will soon face military tribunal, this does not imply an endpoint to his story.

Why do we insist KSM be tried by a closed and opaque military tribunal? The idea of achieving fairness is futile when the topic is so emotive. What is being kept from public view? What does he know that makes him so dangerous? How can we say we are a nation of laws when we operate like frontier vigilantes?

What is the point in a trial in which the verdict is a foregone conclusion? He cannot achieve justice when he will not be allowed to testify publicly about his detention conditions. In fact, this trial will be merely an outward manifestation of our lust for vengeance. KSM is not facing a trial, but rather, a kangaroo court. Even if he were to be found not guilty, President Obama would not release him.

This trial is not about KSM but a phony war that has designated the world its battlefield. KSM's actions may represent mindless violence, but our insane reactivity exceeds his. If the U.S. is not different, than what is the war about? KSM's story will not end until the U.S. authorities responsible for his torture are delivered to a Federal courthouse to answer for their torture policy and disregard for the core values of our society.

As an aside, KSM was educated in the States; 41% of current Massachusetts Institute of Technology students on foreigner on visas in information technology, lasers and aeronautics. This is good news for KSM's replacement.

KSM's efforts were miniscule compared to the self-inflicted injury we have committed upon our body politic.

Whither Thou Goest

--Peray (Thailand)

Where will you go my faithful fair one?
What will you do when ye are on your own?
Whither, oh tell me, shall you wander?
December's hard winds are blowin' cruel and cold
--Where Will You Go?, Enter the Haggis
________________

So Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is soon to be tried in a New York Federal District Court. And before we proceed, let us remember that KSM is less than pond scum, but that is not a legal concept, but rather a moral and ethical one. And that he was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003, and that his unfortunate visage resembles porn king Ron Jeremy.

After seven years, the U.S. government is finally Doing the Right Thing and bringing KSM to trial. Except it is no longer the Right Thing. Contrary to constitutional law, there are those that are found guilty before the trial. Major Nidal Malik Hasan comes to mind. The legal trick is to pretend -- nod, nod, wink, wink -- that everybody is presumed innocent until convicted in a court of law.

Ask John Walker Lindh or Jose Padilla how this concept worked for them. The KSM trial will not deliver satisfaction to the victims of the 9-11 attacks or the American people. We know he is guilty because he was tortured and held in an inhumane manner. Ad hoc, ergo propter hoc, only, Americans don't seem too troubled by logical fallacies these days. In fact, it is doubtful that he was ever even legally arrested before being spirited away from Pakistan.

The trial of KSM will simply be theater, and the dénouement understood beforehand. The court will provide proof to the world that the U.S. does not follow the rule of its law, not even in our federal court system.

Questions abound in the KSM scenario. We know he is guilty, but the following are questions for which we deserve the answers:

• Does KSM have previous Inter-Services Intelligence [ISI] or Central Intelligence Agency linkage? Has he ever received funding from either source?

• What was the source of KSM's operational funds? Who funded the al-Qaeda operation on 9-11?

• If found guilty, will the jurors then be able to find a job, get financing, have a secure future or even have health care?

KSM's trial will be a useless exercise in self-abuse if the preceding questions remain unanswered. And it is a sure bet that they will not be raised or answered. Without this knowledge there will be no closure for the victims of 9-11, a group which now includes all of us.

This trial is 6 1/2 years too late for justice or truth to be served. Why even pretend?

The Next Step

How do you solve a problem like Maria?
How do you catch a cloud and pin it down?
--Maria, Rogers and Hammerstein
______________

It is all fine and well that we close the Gitmo detainee facility, but what do you do with truly dangerous men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM)?

KSM can never be prosecuted in Federal court because his treatment following capture would outrage the court and the world. Therefore, he will never be legally convicted.

To boot, he is not a prisoner of war, so what to with him?

Option I: Send him back to Pakistan for legal resolution.

Option II: Release him. And do it right the next time.

Option III: Shoot him when he is trying to escape.

Option IV: Drown him for real.

Option V: Hire him as a Central Intelligence Agency consultant (assuming he is not already on the books.)

These are just options, but it is not in our democratic tradition to keep him locked up indefinitely without charges or a fair and transparent trial. Ranger sees no option but to release him or turn him over to Pakistan. Even the Pakistan card is a weak one.

And since there was no conviction, let's get the reward money back, too.

Hucksters and Rubes

Sister Aimee
in action versus the forces of evil

__________

Closing Gitmo is a useless, phony public relations ploy aimed to give the impression that the rule of law has become important to GWB in the Phony War on Terror.

"Senior administration officials said Thursday that a consensus is building to shut the center and transfer detainees to one or more Defense Department facilities, including the maximum-security military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. . . The Guantanamo facility houses about 380 detainees.

"Cheney's office and the Justice Department have been dead set against the step, arguing that moving "unlawful" enemy combatant suspects to the U.S. would give them undeserved legal rights" (Plan Afoot to Shut Guantanamo.)

Of course, the real struggle with terrorism will only be achieved with real actions that address the actual threat posed by terrorism.

Gitmo and secret prisons must be closed because they violate U.S. and international laws. Contrary to GWB and Cheney claims, these prisoners are lawful enemy combatants--soldiers, like ours-- captured on the field of battle, and their detention can only be justified under the auspices of the Geneva Convention.

The G.C. does not authorize the use of prisons or solitary confinements when dealing with combatants.

Several prisoner, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (he of long-term CIA affiliation), are hard core al Qaida operatives, and were not captured on the field of battle. Therefore, their incarceration should appropriately be as prisoners within the criminal justice system. That sort is a criminal, since they conspired to kill American civilians in the civilian sector.

This is the terrorism that U.S. policy should address. That is the threat posed to America. A Taliban rifleman in Afghanistan or Iraq is totally inconsequential to the safety of Americans.

The problem with Gitmo is that both groups of prisoners were treated inhumanely, some actually shanghied and bought for bounties; all were degraded and tortured.

Most importantly, many may have long-term CIA ties that are most embarrassing to the U.S., and we'll never know unless there are open, non-secret trials. What is the administration trying to conceal from the taxpayers? It would seem this fact must be kept secret at all costs.

What is the administration trying to conceal from the taxpayers? What could be worse than the torture that we already know about?

Secrecy is a policy which should not be utilized merely to hide embarrassing facts. Like the fact that the State Department gave $245 million to the Taliban in 2002. It seems that U.S. policy buys the best enemies we can afford.

Closing Gitmo and the secret prisons is a must-do action which is meaningless unless accompanied by a return to the rule of law by the U.S. administration.

"Human Rights Watch said the continued detention of hundreds of men without charge undermined U.S. efforts to end terrorism. (U.S. Struggles With Shutting Down Guantanamo.)

"'Guantanamo has hurt the United States far more than it has hurt its enemies," said Jennifer Daskal, senior counterterrorism counsel at Human Rights Watch. 'Its closure would help restore the moral authority America needs to effectively fight terrorism and promote the rule of law.'"

The American people, including Congress, must realize that this entire Phony War on Terror is the worst stain on American jurisprudence, leadership and credibility since, well, since GWB became President. I can think of no precedent in the annals of damaging and outrageous national behavior.

Are we so gulled by a flourish, like the demolition of a building? I thought the grand gesture over the Abu Ghraib destruction was affected to appeal to a simpler mindset, for people who saw the thing as inseparable from the behavior.

We have not come far from the days of Aimee Semple McPherson's preaching. We are still the same hucksters and rubes.

The American people are responsible for this grave miscarriage of justice. I see the term in the literal, for the Republicans have aborted the Constitution from the way it conducts business.