Monthly Archives: April 2005

It’s Official: Grounds for Iraq War Were Imaginary

Posted on April 26, 2005 by Michael Froomkin

The CIA has at last admitted the obvious: there never were WMDs in Iraq:

In his final word, the CIA’s top weapons inspector in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction has “gone as far as feasible” and has found nothing, closing an investigation into the purported programs of Saddam Hussein that were used to justify the 2003 invasion

Contrast to this in June 2003:

Bush confident of finding banned Iraqi weapons: President hits back at critics on WMD question. President Bush dismissed what he called “revisionist history” about the war in Iraq on Tuesday, and his spokesman said the president is still confident a Pentagon-led search will find Iraq's suspected weapons of mass destruction.

How many soldiers and civilians died in pursuit of this mirage?

Update: Here's a fuller account of the Iraq Survey Group's final report and a link to the GPO's official edition of the Comprehensive Revised Report with Addendums on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (Duelfer Report).

Posted in Iraq | 22 Comments

Happy Memories of Hitler Youth

Posted on April 26, 2005 by Michael Froomkin

Eric Muller translates a Das Bild article with elderly Germans' reminiscences about their happy days in the Hitler Youth. It's stunning stuff, and none more than this piece of work:

I didn't know anybody back then who was against it. Whoever was against it, like an uncle of mine, was immediately arrested.

But this one comes close:

There was absolutely no discrimination among the young people who were members of the Hitler Youth and the anti-aircraft helpers.

Posted in Politics: International | 1 Comment

Of Victors and Spoils

Posted on April 25, 2005 by Michael Froomkin

For some reason, I've been thinking a lot about this story I noted yesterday that the Bush Administration is removing U.S. delegates from the Inter-American Telephone Commission (IATC) because they gave money to John Kerry in last year's election.

Let's presume that the only way the Bush administration figured out who the Kerry donors were is by looking at the public records of the Federal Election Commission. And let's recall that the Bush administration has systematically worked to remove unions and other job protections from the federal civil service. Are we moving to a system in which administrations will be able to police loyalty with heightened efficiency? Was this effect contemplated by campaign finance reform? Should we start allowing anonymous contributions, at least up to a point?

Note also that it's only a short step from firing Kerry supporters to only allowing Bush donors.

There are many Supreme Court decisions suggesting that this sort of extortion would not be legal in the civil service. (Perhaps, arguably, diplomatic jobs are slightly different in that although extortion is out, rewarding paying friends has long been traditional.) There is also a law that makes it a serious crime to promise anyone a government job in exchange for a campaign contribution. But the workaround is obvious: just let it be known in a general but visible and effective manner that we reward our friends and punish our enemies. Don't make any specific promises or threats, just act in accordance after the election.

So that's all pretty bad, another drip in the erosion of half-decent government as we knew it.

Or is it? There reasons after all why we would want an elected official to appoint like-minded assistants. At least when the official actually got a majority of the votes actually cast, promotion of the like-minded promotes democratic control of the bureaucracy. And that, political theory tells us, should be a good thing.

What bugs me is that the IATC is a technical standards body. We'd probably like our delegates there to be the engineers and business people who best understand the technologies. Reality-based, if you'll excuse the term.

Three years, 38 weeks, 3 days and a bit more, to go.

Posted in Politics: US | 2 Comments

Link-o-Rama

Posted on April 24, 2005 by Michael Froomkin

The “K Street Project” spreads to technical standard-making: Any Kerry Supporters On The Line? The Bush Administration punishes some Democrat backers. I guess electrons have party affiliations now.

All Bolton, All The Time

And, just for fun, an amazing Oops! (via Ann Bartow).

Posted in Politics: US | 2 Comments

YATA: US Taking Hostages!?!

Posted on April 24, 2005 by Michael Froomkin

YATA: Allegedly, the US takes hostages, which is a no-brainer violation of the Geneva convention, and basic decency. (Via Jim Henley.)

I should note, however, that while I think highly of Henley, I’m unfamiliar with the news organization that he linked to and which propagated this report.

Posted in Torture | 3 Comments

YATA (Omar Deghayes)

Posted on April 24, 2005 by Michael Froomkin

Yet Another Torture Allegation: US guards at Guantanamo tortured me, says UK man:

A British resident has claimed he was tortured by US guards at Guantanamo Bay, suffering violent sexual assaults, near drowning and an attack in which he was blinded.

The Independent on Sunday has been given a detailed account from Omar Deghayes of repeated abuse by American and Pakistani interrogators over the past three years including electric shocks and sodomy by US guards.

The allegations, made by human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, have persuaded British ministers to take up Mr Deghayes's case.

In some of the most disturbing allegations to emerge from Guantanamo, Mr Deghayes also accuses US and Pakistani interrogators of beating him repeatedly since his arrest three years ago, smearing his face with human excrement, starving him of food, and withdrawing light and clothing.

I've left out the gory details, but they're there in the Independent if you want them.

Mr Deghayes's testimony was recorded during more than 20 hours of interviews by his US attorney, Clive Stafford Smith, in a Guantanamo Bay cell in January and March this year, and has only recently been cleared by US Department of Justice censors.

Mr Stafford Smith said he found Mr Deghayes's testimony “totally credible”. He added: “He has been treated worse in Guantanamo than any other person I have come across. He is legally trained and tries to help other people there, so the Americans think he's a trouble-maker. Consequently, he's suffered for it.”

The claims are understood to have shocked the Foreign Office minister Baroness Symons, and played a major part in the Government's decision to directly intervene in the cases of five British residents still held at Guantanamo Bay. Until now, the UK has refused to intervene.

…

Mr Deghayes's case has alarmed human rights lawyers because the US has allowed Libyan intelligence officers to interrogate him in Cuba – even though he is a refugee from Col Gaddafi's regime.

Mr Stafford Smith said they could now “conclusively prove” that Mr Deghayes was the victim of mistaken identity. They had established that video footage allegedly showing him in Chechnya was of another man, who is now dead. Mr Deghayes had never been to Chechnya, the lawyer insisted.

Mr Deghayes was seized in the Pakistani city of Lahore in April 2002 by armed local intelligence officers, and alleges he was immediately subjected to repeated torture, threats against his wife and children, and violent assaults by his captors.

He claims the Pakistani interrogators told him they were holding him at US request, and insisted they had no interest in him. He claimed: “I underwent systematic beatings every night for three days. Each time, when I was nearly unconscious, I would be thrown back into the cell to await more.”

Oh, and there's lots more after that.

Posted in Torture | Comments Off on YATA (Omar Deghayes)