BCT Editorial – 10/12/08

This page was last updated on January 17, 2009.

American Gulag; Editorial; Beaver County Times; October 12, 2008.

The editorial subtitle is “Bush White House has been waging war on the Constitution.”

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“As you read the following, remember one thing: It could be you.”

[RWC] Not exactly. You’ll see what I mean below.

“The Associated Press has reported details of the treatment of two American citizens and a legal U.S. resident who were held for years in military jails inside the United States without having charges brought against them.

“The Bush administration ordered the men to be held in military jails as ‘illegal enemy combatants,’ denying them basic civil liberties — habeas corpus, the right to an attorney, the right to a speedy trial, protection against cruel and unusual punishment, etc. — that would have been allowed in civilian jails.

“The news service reported the men were interrogated by the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency, repeatedly denied access to attorneys and mail from home and contact with anyone other than guards and their interrogators. They were deprived of natural light for months and for years were forbidden even minor distractions such as a soccer ball or a dictionary.”

[RWC] Seriously, the Times considers not providing illegal enemy combatants with “a soccer ball or a dictionary” to be a violation of the Constitution?

“The U.S. military was ordered to treat the American prisoners the same way terrorists at Guantanamo were treated, according to the documents obtained by the news service.

“The treatment was so horrific that one U.S. military officer warned Pentagon officials that one detainee was being driven nearly insane by months of punishing isolation and sensory deprivation in a U.S. military brig.”

[RWC] “The treatment was so horrific?” Learn what Sen. John McCain and other American prisoners endured in North Vietnam and then we can discuss “horrific treatment.”

“It was Guantanamo Bay and secret torture prisons abroad brought home.”

[RWC] If the “torture prisons” are “secret,” how does the Times know they exist?

“This report should terrify every American who has some understanding of the importance of our constitutional rights. The Bush administration claims it has the power to declare any American citizen an ‘illegal enemy combatant’ and subject them to this kind of treatment. In doing so, it has set itself up as judge, jury and executioner.

“Yaser Esam Hamdi, Jose Padilla and Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri might not be Boy Scouts. However, Hadi [sic] and Padilla were American citizens, and al-Marri was a legal resident. Your constitutional rights are no different from those of Hamdi and Padilla, and what happened to them could happen to you. Don’t ever forget that.”

[RWC] These guys “might not be Boy Scouts?” Given the regular use of hyperbole by the Times, this is a gross understatement. I’m too lazy to reprint all the charges against these guys, but do your own due diligence and you’ll see what I mean.

Surprise! The editorial failed to note Hamdi was captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2001 fighting with the Taliban against the U.S. FYI, Hamdi was released to Saudi Arabia in 2004 after he agreed to renounce his U.S. citizenship and other restrictions. Hamdi was a U.S. citizen because he was born in the U.S. while his Saudi parents were visiting or working here. The family returned to Saudi Arabia when Hamdi was still a child (I don’t know the age.).

The editorial failed to note Jose Padilla (aka Abdullah al-Muhajir) was convicted of criminal conspiracy charges in August 2007 and was sentenced to 17+ years in prison. Of the three men, Mr. Padilla was the only one with which I had concerns about his detention.

Once again we get the “what happened to them could happen to you” BS. Perhaps I’m naïve, but I suspect very few of us will be captured on a battlefield in a foreign country fighting against the U.S. or will perform actions that would get us charged with criminal conspiracy charges.

“The Bush administration hasn’t just been fighting a war on terrorism over the last seven years. It’s also been waging a war on the Constitution. Unfortunately, it’s been more successful at the latter than the former.”

[RWC] Nowhere does the editorial mention the Bush administration has adhered to all court rulings.

Finally, I find it interesting the Times is more than willing to give U.S. enemies the benefit of the doubt, but to date had treated President Bush as the real threat.