home

Another Guantanamo Detainee Released

We know that in a recent speech Attorney General Mukasey "demanded that Congress swiftly pass measures that would sharply reduce the possibility that any Guantánamo prisoner could have a fair hearing." Could it be that Mukasey is worried that a full and fair hearing would expose the administration's detention of individuals on flimsy -- or perhaps nonexistent -- evidence?

That might explain why the administration quietly released Jaralla Saleh Kahla al-Marri, a Quatari citizen who had been detained without charges or trial since 2001. If the Guantanamo detainees are really "the worst of the worst," as the administration has assured us, why was Jaralla al-Marri detained for seven years only to be released with no showing of wrongdoing whatsoever?

< Labor Violations at Iowa Meatpacking Plant | Sunday Night Open Thread: IPhones >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    al-Marri's brother is (none / 0) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 08:17:10 PM EST
    the Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri of the recent, outrageous Fourth Circuit opinion, Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli (PDF).

    I am not an attorney and (none / 0) (#3)
    by Blowback on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 08:40:10 PM EST
    I am a typical American, short attention span. Can you please summarize, briefly brief the root of this case? thx

    Parent
    I'm not Big Tent, but quick summary (none / 0) (#4)
    by wurman on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 09:36:00 PM EST
    [Not a lawyer either]
    Ali...al Marri was arrested in Peoria IL.  There is some evidence he is a bad guy, mainly on his computer & in some credit card behaviors.

    He was arrested, hauled to New York City, & after a while was arraigned--NYC court refused trial on the basis of not having any jurisdiction.

    He's hauled back to Peoria IL & about to be charged (after about 18 months) when El Jefe, Jorge Arbusto de la Bu$h, de la Crawford, declared in a writ that al Marri was an "enemy combatant."  The sorry fellow was hauled to a naval brig in South Carolina & held incommunicado for 16 months.  [He's been held, now for about 7 years.]

    After some legal stuff, the appeals court held that he cannot possibly be an "enemy combatant" because he's from Qatar, a friendly nation, has never been on a battlefield or anywhere near Afghanistan, has legally entered the USA, & has all the rights of a "person" under the Constitution.

    BUT . . . the 5-4 decision also held that he may be a member of al Qaeda & an "enemy combatant" under the AUMF [yes, contrary to the above], & the USA can keep al Marri in the brig while they develop their case against him!!!!!!

    Outrageous.

    Parent

    lol (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 09:53:05 PM EST
    El Jefe, Jorge Arbusto de la Bu$h, de la Crawford


    Parent
    Deacon Colonel George Sanders Bush (none / 0) (#6)
    by Salo on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:05:20 PM EST
    more likley.

    Howvere this always seems to happen when terrorism happens.

    The Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six, arrested and held even while Labour were in office. All innocent.  It appears to be a feature of counter terror operations.

    The Dems will be little different.

    Parent

    I recently heard an attorney from Chicago (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 08:34:31 PM EST
    [Tom Sullivan] talk about his experiences practicing law for over 50 years and his 20 trips to Gitmo to try and assist the uncharged persons there.  He sd. some of his clients were suddenly released w/o any explanation of why they were held and, of course, no apology.

    coerced evidence (none / 0) (#7)
    by diogenes on Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 10:44:29 PM EST
    If people are known to be bad guys but the evidence is coerced, it can't be used in trial.  Thus some may be released at this late date; it wasn't until now that it was clear that coerced evidence wouldn't be allowed.  
    I wonder how many GITMO releases are returning to combat?

    From what I've read (none / 0) (#8)
    by weltec2 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:03:26 AM EST
    most have been pretty mentally broken and fried out from their treatment at Gitmo. According to Naomi Klein their goal is to completely break down and then remake the minds of their prisoners.

    Parent
    if they weren't before (none / 0) (#9)
    by cpinva on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:40:02 AM EST
    they were incarcerated, my guess is a lot of them are raring to go now!

    I wonder how many GITMO releases are returning to combat?

    of course, you make the rash assumption they were in combat to begin with, which apparently quite a hefty % weren't.

    If the Guantanamo detainees are really "the worst of the worst," as the administration has assured us, why was Jaralla al-Marri detained for seven years only to be released with no showing of wrongdoing whatsoever?

    um, to show that they can? it lets us know this administration, with the complacency/complicity of both the legislative and judicial branches, can do anything it damn well pleases. if you don't like it, off to gitmo with you!

    On condition of silence? (none / 0) (#10)
    by denise k on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 09:29:04 AM EST
    What do you want to bet that one of the conditions of his release was that he refuse to talk to the media or lawyers about his confinement?  That is my cynical reaction to this or pretty much anything this administration does.  

    denise, (none / 0) (#11)
    by cpinva on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 09:59:33 AM EST
    That is my cynical reaction to this or pretty much anything this administration does.

    to paraphrase a quote, from lily tomlin:

    "no matter how cynical you become, about this administration, it is impossible to keep up."