Sunday, September 2, 2012
Prefering Order to Justice
"In the decade since 9/11, much has been written about the “War on Terror” and the lack of justice for people detained at Guantanamo or subjected to rendition and torture in CIA black sites. A central focus of the critique is the unreviewability of Executive branch action toward those detained and tried in military commissions. In those critiques, the federal courts are regularly celebrated for their due process and other rights protections. Yet in the past ten years, there has been little scrutiny of the hundreds of terrorism cases tried in the Article III courts and the state of the rights of people accused of terrrorism-related offenses in the federal system. The deference to assertions of national security that degraded protections for detainees at Guantanamo has similarly degraded the protections for Muslims facing terrorism charges in the federal courts. This [American University Law Review] Essay provides a close examination of one of those cases—that of Syed Fahad Hashmi—and reveals rights abridgement throughout the legal process (intrusive surveillance, vague material support charges, the use of prolonged pre-trial solitary confinement, classified evidence, the use of political activities to demonstrate mindset and intent). The federal courts have permitted such rights abridgements, largely abdicating their role as a check on Executive power and imperiling the rights of those being tried in the Article III courts." See http://www.aulawreview.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1919%3Aprefering-order-to-justice&catid=266%3Avolume-61-issue-5&Itemid=144
Saturday, April 28, 2012
39 Ways to Limit Free Speech
Google “39 Ways to Serve and Participate in Jihad” and you’ll get over 590,000 hits. You’ll find full-text English language translations of this Arabic document on the Internet Archive, an Internet library; on 4Shared Desktop, a file-sharing site; and on numerous Islamic sites. You will find it cited and discussed in a US Senate Committee staff report and Congressional testimony. Feel free to read it. Just don’t try to make your own translation from the original, which was written in Arabic in Saudi Arabia in 2003. Because if you look a little further on Google you will find multiple news accounts reporting that on April 12, a 29-year old citizen from Sudbury, Massachusetts named Tarek Mehanna was sentenced to seventeen and a half years in prison for translating “39 Ways” and helping to distribute it online. Read More: http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/apr/19/39-ways-limit-free-speech/
New York Review of Books article by David Cole, April 19, 2012
Saturday, March 10, 2012
ACLU Alert: Urge Congress to fix National Defense Authorization Act
In this action alert, the ACLU urges citizens to take action to fix the National Defense Authorization Act
Will Congress Finally Start to Clean Up the Mess It Made With the NDAA?
Posted by Chris Anders, Washington Legislative Office at 12:16pm
Excerpt:
On Wednesday at 10:00 a.m. EST, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold the first hearing ever on the indefinite military detention provisions in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which Congress passed in December. This hearing will be Congress' first opportunity to own up to its mistakes and start to fix them. But the only way the NDAA will be fixed is if senators and House members hear from you and your family and friends that indefinite military detention authority is wrong, dangerous, and needs to be repealed.
As we've said before, the NDAA is dangerous because it authorizes this president and all future presidents to order the military to lock away civilians picked up far from any battlefield, in indefinite detention without charge or trial based on suspicion alone. It could permit any president to send the American military to imprison people anywhere in the world, even where there is no armed conflict and no threat to Americans.
Unbelievably, some members of Congress even rejected amendments clarifying that the NDAA military detention provisions do not apply inside the U.S.
Take action to notify your members of Congress.
Will Congress Finally Start to Clean Up the Mess It Made With the NDAA?
Posted by Chris Anders, Washington Legislative Office at 12:16pm
Excerpt:
On Wednesday at 10:00 a.m. EST, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold the first hearing ever on the indefinite military detention provisions in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which Congress passed in December. This hearing will be Congress' first opportunity to own up to its mistakes and start to fix them. But the only way the NDAA will be fixed is if senators and House members hear from you and your family and friends that indefinite military detention authority is wrong, dangerous, and needs to be repealed.
As we've said before, the NDAA is dangerous because it authorizes this president and all future presidents to order the military to lock away civilians picked up far from any battlefield, in indefinite detention without charge or trial based on suspicion alone. It could permit any president to send the American military to imprison people anywhere in the world, even where there is no armed conflict and no threat to Americans.
Unbelievably, some members of Congress even rejected amendments clarifying that the NDAA military detention provisions do not apply inside the U.S.
Take action to notify your members of Congress.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
For Abu-Ali Family, Only One Legal Avenue Left for Son’s Freedom
I became aware of this case through activists with whom I worked on Fahad Hashmi case. To donate to the Ahmed Abu Ali Defense Fund and for more information, see http://freeahmed.com/.
For Abu-Ali Family, Only One Legal Avenue Left for Son’s Freedom
Written by Contributing Writers
Thursday, February 23, 2012
(Reprinted from The Muslim Link)
We are all familiar with this tale: a young man gets arrested by surprise, held for years without charges, shackled for days at a time, whipped past the point of burning, interrogated through the nights, threatened with death, forced into confession, and ultimately incarcerated for life. Perhaps we have read George Orwell’s 1984, heard about Adolf Hitler’s Germany, or seen the horrors of Bashar Al-Assad’s current Syria on our television screens. But in fact, this nightmare is neither fiction nor history nor foreign. It is right here, right now, in our backyards.
It is the life story of an American: Ahmed Abu-Ali. Born in Texas, Ahmed completed high school in Northern Virginia where he graduated as valedictorian and spent his free time working with disabled adults, teaching children how to read, and building bridges in interfaith activities. He served as a summer counselor and youth group leader at Dar Al Hijrah, and donated blood regularly to the American Red Cross. He is a Muslim American, a brother, a son, and most of all your Muslim brother.
Ahmed dreamed of becoming a teacher full-time one day. Just before graduating college, when Ahmed was set to fulfill his lifelong dream in his Northern Virginia hometown, his life took an unexpected turn.
On June 8, 2003, at the age of 22, Ahmed was suddenly arrested while studying Islamic Studies in Saudi Arabia, amidst a final exam. He was detained and held in jail for 20 months without charges or access to attorney. After his family sued the U.S government, he was unexpectedly sent back to the U.S., where he was convicted for terrorism-related conspiracy charges on the basis of a false confession that was elicited by torture. Many details in Ahmed’s case illustrate the extent to which it was fabricated. For instance, Ahmed is the first person in all of U.S. history who was arrested based entirely on secret evidence. Also, his case set a precedent on evidence obtained by a foreign government by torture. Furthermore, the judge at his trial refused to allow evidence of possible torture to be presented.
Today, at age 30, Ahmed spends 23 hours a day everyday in solitary confinement at ADX Supermax Prison in Florence, Colorado. If he would like to take his one-hour of “recreation,” into a 5x5 metal cage where he gets a small view of the sky, he must get strip-searched. His cell measures 8×12 feet, located 20 meters beneath the ground. The last time Ahmed got a hug, he was also 22. Special Administrative Measures prohibit Ahmed from any outside contact, except sparse, limited, and monitored correspondences with his immediate family and attorney. When his family visits, they communicate with him via telephone and take turns watching him through the glass, with his feet still shackled.
For the past eight years and eight months, Ahmed has been fighting for justice, and repeatedly denied his basic rights as an American citizen—the right for a Miranda statement, the right to an attorney, the right to a speedy trial, the right to know your accuser, the right to know the evidence against you, , and the protection from cruel and unusual punishments. In our U.S. courts, under the banner of liberty and justice for all, Ahmed has been stripped of his 4th, 5th and 6th amendment rights.
Now it is our turn to demand justice. Ahmed’s family has exhausted their legal options. The last leg of this legal battle is the writ of habeas corpus, a procedure for release from unlawful detention. To ensure success, Ahmed needs your support. Please Follow Ahmed on Twitter @BringAhmedHome, Like Ahmed on the Facebook page “Free Ahmed,” and join us at the upcoming Freedom Dinner on March 3rd at Dewan-E-Khaas in Ahmed’s hometown, Northern Virginia. For students who donate, an anonymous donor will not only match but double their donations up to 1k. If you have an upcoming special occasion, consider purchasing a Freedom Cake or other desserts. For other ways to help, please visit http://freeahmed.com/take-action/. If we don’t speak up for Ahmed, who will? Let us not turn our back on a brother in need. Help free Ahmed by visiting www.freeahmed.com
As Ahmed waits, silenced in his cell, it is up to us to spread the word. We are the voice of the voiceless. We are not afraid to broadcast the truth. We are not afraid to stand up for the innocent. We will free Ahmed, and set a precedent that never again will we allow another Ahmed to be unjustly persecuted on our soil.
For Abu-Ali Family, Only One Legal Avenue Left for Son’s Freedom
Written by Contributing Writers
Thursday, February 23, 2012
(Reprinted from The Muslim Link)
We are all familiar with this tale: a young man gets arrested by surprise, held for years without charges, shackled for days at a time, whipped past the point of burning, interrogated through the nights, threatened with death, forced into confession, and ultimately incarcerated for life. Perhaps we have read George Orwell’s 1984, heard about Adolf Hitler’s Germany, or seen the horrors of Bashar Al-Assad’s current Syria on our television screens. But in fact, this nightmare is neither fiction nor history nor foreign. It is right here, right now, in our backyards.
It is the life story of an American: Ahmed Abu-Ali. Born in Texas, Ahmed completed high school in Northern Virginia where he graduated as valedictorian and spent his free time working with disabled adults, teaching children how to read, and building bridges in interfaith activities. He served as a summer counselor and youth group leader at Dar Al Hijrah, and donated blood regularly to the American Red Cross. He is a Muslim American, a brother, a son, and most of all your Muslim brother.
Ahmed dreamed of becoming a teacher full-time one day. Just before graduating college, when Ahmed was set to fulfill his lifelong dream in his Northern Virginia hometown, his life took an unexpected turn.
On June 8, 2003, at the age of 22, Ahmed was suddenly arrested while studying Islamic Studies in Saudi Arabia, amidst a final exam. He was detained and held in jail for 20 months without charges or access to attorney. After his family sued the U.S government, he was unexpectedly sent back to the U.S., where he was convicted for terrorism-related conspiracy charges on the basis of a false confession that was elicited by torture. Many details in Ahmed’s case illustrate the extent to which it was fabricated. For instance, Ahmed is the first person in all of U.S. history who was arrested based entirely on secret evidence. Also, his case set a precedent on evidence obtained by a foreign government by torture. Furthermore, the judge at his trial refused to allow evidence of possible torture to be presented.
Today, at age 30, Ahmed spends 23 hours a day everyday in solitary confinement at ADX Supermax Prison in Florence, Colorado. If he would like to take his one-hour of “recreation,” into a 5x5 metal cage where he gets a small view of the sky, he must get strip-searched. His cell measures 8×12 feet, located 20 meters beneath the ground. The last time Ahmed got a hug, he was also 22. Special Administrative Measures prohibit Ahmed from any outside contact, except sparse, limited, and monitored correspondences with his immediate family and attorney. When his family visits, they communicate with him via telephone and take turns watching him through the glass, with his feet still shackled.
For the past eight years and eight months, Ahmed has been fighting for justice, and repeatedly denied his basic rights as an American citizen—the right for a Miranda statement, the right to an attorney, the right to a speedy trial, the right to know your accuser, the right to know the evidence against you, , and the protection from cruel and unusual punishments. In our U.S. courts, under the banner of liberty and justice for all, Ahmed has been stripped of his 4th, 5th and 6th amendment rights.
Now it is our turn to demand justice. Ahmed’s family has exhausted their legal options. The last leg of this legal battle is the writ of habeas corpus, a procedure for release from unlawful detention. To ensure success, Ahmed needs your support. Please Follow Ahmed on Twitter @BringAhmedHome, Like Ahmed on the Facebook page “Free Ahmed,” and join us at the upcoming Freedom Dinner on March 3rd at Dewan-E-Khaas in Ahmed’s hometown, Northern Virginia. For students who donate, an anonymous donor will not only match but double their donations up to 1k. If you have an upcoming special occasion, consider purchasing a Freedom Cake or other desserts. For other ways to help, please visit http://freeahmed.com/take-action/. If we don’t speak up for Ahmed, who will? Let us not turn our back on a brother in need. Help free Ahmed by visiting www.freeahmed.com
As Ahmed waits, silenced in his cell, it is up to us to spread the word. We are the voice of the voiceless. We are not afraid to broadcast the truth. We are not afraid to stand up for the innocent. We will free Ahmed, and set a precedent that never again will we allow another Ahmed to be unjustly persecuted on our soil.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Selecting the Next City Council Speaker
Next to the mayoral election, the most important election in NYC is one in which most voters will be locked out of the process: The selection of City Council Speaker is decided by Council members, not the public, and usually only after deals with the leaders of each borough's Democratic Party.
This is not a democratic process, and it shouldn't be allowed to play out when the next Speaker is selected after next year's municipal elections.
The Speaker of the City Council is the second-most powerful public official in New York City,and is the single individual with the institutional authority to stand up to the mayor, whoever that happens to be. Voters should insist that we have input into the selection of the next Speaker.
According to a recent story in The New York Observer, the early race for Speaker is shaping up as a battle between Council Members Mellissa Mark Viverto and Inez Dickens, who represent neighboring districts in Harlem. One unidentified council member described the differences between the two contenders this way: "It's rabble-rouser, change-the-whole-place left-wing Melissa, and old-school, old world, status quo Inez."
I urge voters and political activists to pose this question to City Council candidates: If you are elected, who will you support to become the next Speaker of the City Council? This decision is too important to be left to five Democratic Party leaders, or even to the 51 members of the City Council. The rest of us have a right to be heard on this momentous decision.
This is not a democratic process, and it shouldn't be allowed to play out when the next Speaker is selected after next year's municipal elections.
The Speaker of the City Council is the second-most powerful public official in New York City,and is the single individual with the institutional authority to stand up to the mayor, whoever that happens to be. Voters should insist that we have input into the selection of the next Speaker.
According to a recent story in The New York Observer, the early race for Speaker is shaping up as a battle between Council Members Mellissa Mark Viverto and Inez Dickens, who represent neighboring districts in Harlem. One unidentified council member described the differences between the two contenders this way: "It's rabble-rouser, change-the-whole-place left-wing Melissa, and old-school, old world, status quo Inez."
I urge voters and political activists to pose this question to City Council candidates: If you are elected, who will you support to become the next Speaker of the City Council? This decision is too important to be left to five Democratic Party leaders, or even to the 51 members of the City Council. The rest of us have a right to be heard on this momentous decision.
Mayor Dinkins' Silence on Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly
I recently attended a judicial induction during which two speakers briefly noted the discriminary practices of the New York City Police Department.
Unfortunately, one speaker, former Mayor David N. Dinkins, had nothing to say about the NYPD or about the commissioner he empowered, Raymond W. Kelly. As the mayor who first appointed Kelly to head the NYPD, Dinkins is in a unique position to call Kelly to task for his department's systemic violations of civil liberties in New York City under Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Dinkins' continuing public silence about Commissioner Kelly's transgressions is troubling, to say the least.
Unfortunately, one speaker, former Mayor David N. Dinkins, had nothing to say about the NYPD or about the commissioner he empowered, Raymond W. Kelly. As the mayor who first appointed Kelly to head the NYPD, Dinkins is in a unique position to call Kelly to task for his department's systemic violations of civil liberties in New York City under Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Dinkins' continuing public silence about Commissioner Kelly's transgressions is troubling, to say the least.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Racist Facebook Rants by NYPD Officers
"I say have the parade one more year and when they gather drop a bomb and wipe them all out." - NYC Police Officer Dan Rodney, who confirmed to The New York Times that he is a police officer and uses Facebook but denied posting the comment on Facebook under his name. His explanation: "That wasn't me. I leave my phone around sometimes. Other than that I have no comment."
"'Let them kill each... other,' wrote one of the Facebook members who posted comments under a name that matched that of a police officer."
In a front-page story on 12/6/11, The New York Times reported on the racist rants in September of a Facebook group entitled "No More West Indian Day Detail." The Times did a comparison of the names "of some of the more than 150 people who posted comments on the page with city employee listings and found that more than 60 percent matched the names of police officers..." This Facebook group, which had 1,200 members, was exposed by defense attorneys who now check to see if arresting officers are on Facebook, has since vanished.
The Times notes that some of the posted comments "appeared to have broken Police Department rules barring officers from 'discourteous or disrepectful remarks' about race or ethnicity." The chief spokesperson for the NYPD did not deny that the names posted in the Facebook group were police officers and said he would refer the issue to Internal Affairs.
Police may insist that the Facebook rants on "No More West Indian Day Detail" are not representative of the thinking of most officers. But the racist public posts by this group are a shocking revelation, with names attached, of the attitudes of too many.
Scott
"'Let them kill each... other,' wrote one of the Facebook members who posted comments under a name that matched that of a police officer."
In a front-page story on 12/6/11, The New York Times reported on the racist rants in September of a Facebook group entitled "No More West Indian Day Detail." The Times did a comparison of the names "of some of the more than 150 people who posted comments on the page with city employee listings and found that more than 60 percent matched the names of police officers..." This Facebook group, which had 1,200 members, was exposed by defense attorneys who now check to see if arresting officers are on Facebook, has since vanished.
The Times notes that some of the posted comments "appeared to have broken Police Department rules barring officers from 'discourteous or disrepectful remarks' about race or ethnicity." The chief spokesperson for the NYPD did not deny that the names posted in the Facebook group were police officers and said he would refer the issue to Internal Affairs.
Police may insist that the Facebook rants on "No More West Indian Day Detail" are not representative of the thinking of most officers. But the racist public posts by this group are a shocking revelation, with names attached, of the attitudes of too many.
Scott
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)