WASHINGTON, Jan. 13, 2007
Feds Disavow Gitmo Lawyer Boycott Remarks
Pentagon Spokesman Renounces Official Who Urged Companies To Boycott Firms Representing Detainees
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Gitmo Bay Lawyers Fight Back
Top legal professionals are firing back this weekend after a Pentagon official attacked lawyers who defend detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Joie Chen has more on the debate.
-
Photo
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs Charles "Cully" Stimson speaks with reporters during a briefing at the Pentagon Sept. 6, 2006 in Washington. (AP/Dept. of Defense, R.D. Ward)
-
Interactive
Gitmo Tribunals
Detainees on trial, photos and a history of the naval base.
-
Interactive
Sept. 11 And Since
Reflecting on the events of Sept. 11, 2001, the day that changed America.
Charles “Cully” Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, said in a radio interview last week that companies might want to consider taking their business to other firms that do not represent suspected terrorists.
Stimson's remarks were viewed by legal experts and advocacy groups as an attempt to intimidate law firms that provide legal help to all people, even unpopular defendants.
A Pentagon spokesman, Lt. Col. Brian Maka, said Stimson was not speaking for the Bush administration.
Stimson's comments “do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the thinking of its leadership,” Maka told The Associated Press on Saturday.
Lawyers were quick to rebuke Stimson for his comments, reports CBS News correspondent Joie Chen.
“Because they're losing they now have no other choice except to attack the lawyers, and that's what they're doing,” says Michael Ratner who coordinates detainee’s legal representation at the Center for Constitutional Rights. “I'm shocked. The lawyers who are doing the representation should be shocked. The American people should be shocked.”
Stimson's “shameful and irresponsible” remarks deserve condemnation, said Neal Sonnett, a Miami lawyer and president of the American Judicature Society, a nonpartisan group of judges, lawyers and others.
Sonnett said in a statement that Stimson had made a “blatant attempt to intimidate lawyers and their firms who are rendering important public service in upholding the rule of law and our democratic ideals.”
And most legal analysts say lawyers are duty-bound to defend even those accused of the most heinous crimes, reports Chen.
For a government attorney to call out these private attorneys and say that somehow they're tied up with terrorists or that somehow they don't have good motives is outrageous,” says CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen.
Stimson on Thursday told Federal News Radio, a local commercial station that covers the government, that he found it “shocking” that lawyers at many of the United States' top law firms represent detainees.
Stimson listed the names of more than a dozen major firms he suggested should be boycotted.
“And I think, quite honestly, when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms,” Stimson said.
Asked who might be paying the law firms to represent Guantanamo detainees, Stimson hinted at wrongdoing for which some explaining should be done.
“It's not clear, is it? Some will maintain that they're doing it out of the goodness of their heart — that they're doing it pro bono, and I suspect they are,” he said. “Others are receiving monies from who knows where and I'd be curious to have them explain that.”
Stimson also described Guantanamo as “certainly, probably the most transparent and open location in the world” because of visits from more than 2,000 journalists since it opened five years ago.
He discounted international outrage over the detention center as “small little protests around the world” that were “drummed up by Amnesty International” and inflated in importance by liberal news media outlets.
FBI agents have documented more than two dozen incidents of possible mistreatment at the Guantanamo. In one, a detainee's head was wrapped in duct tape because he chanted the Quran; in a second, a detainee pulled out his hair after hours in a sweltering room.
In a December court ruling, a federal judge in Washington decried the plight of “some of the unfortunate petitioners who have been detained for many years in the terrible conditions at Guantanamo Bay.”
The judge criticized a system in which dozens have been held without charges and cut off from the world for lack of English or knowledge about the law, leaving them no choice but to turn to a fellow prisoner with outside connections for legal help.
Since the detention center opened, the U.S. military has transferred or released about 380 detainees. Some 395 remain locked up in the prison.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
You are so right. Same tactics used against Valerie Plame and whoever that guy Cheney tried to murder. Oops, didn't know the gun was loaded.
That'll work. If there's anyone people love more than politicians it's lawyers. Lawyers would have no problem working for an acquital of known terrorists if they could make a buck. They have no allegiance to anyone except the all mighty $
This twit wouldn't sneeze without checking with his superiors.
Every time this administration reaches a new low, it seems that even they must have reached the maximum depths to which even they could stoop, but, never to be limited by the constraints of decency, they always manage to sink even further.
I remember when Bush could not name heads of state, he said that is ok, he would just get good people. That must have meant people that would tell him what he wanted to hear and do his dirty work for him.
Posted by RandalDS at 12:39 AM : Jan 14, 2007
Unless, of course, those guilty men have the propensity to fly airplanes into skyscrapers or strap a suicide bomb on and take out American civilians. In these cases I'd skip the beyond a reasonable doubt part and just go with the doubt rather than drop it.
1. I guess you don't know what "pro bono" means.
2. How do you know someone is a "known terrorist"? Did you know that tribespeople in Afghanistan were paid to hand in terrorists to US forces...and the more they handed in, the more they were paid. The fact is that not everybody who ended up in Gitmo turned out to be a terrorist. For example, notice at the bottom of the article how it says that 380 were transferred or released.
"Released" means "set free".
If you ever get busted for something I'm sure that you wont mind waiving your right to a trial, since you obviously trust the government to never be wrong.
Posted by RandalDS at 12:39 AM : Jan 14, 2007
Unless, of course, those guilty men have the propensity to fly airplanes into skyscrapers or strap a suicide bomb on and take out American civilians. In these cases I'd skip the beyond a reasonable doubt part and just go with the doubt rather than drop it.
Posted by cbgb31 at 02:29 AM : Jan 14, 2007
No, in these cases the proof must be even stronger! The greater the crime charged the greater the proof must be. The greater the claim, the greater the evidence. Our justice system must be judged on how fairly we deal with the worst of offenders, to better guarantee how well we deal with the least. Fairness is paramount. It is the single most important thing to show the world that we really are as fair and just as we claim to be. That's the example America must set. A hundred 9-11's are not worth compromising our core principles for.
Posted by shingles1 at 02:32 AM : Jan 14, 2007
If I ever get arrested for something I will have a lifetime of credentials, character witnesses and a long lineage of American heritage to defend myself against any inclination that I work against or am a threat to the American people.
Generally, Randal, I would agree with you. Except right now in our current situation I don't know the threat and am not willing to chance putting Americans at risk. Also starting to rethink think it for child predators.
Posted by RandalDS at 02:41 AM : Jan 14, 2007
I'm sorry this is B.S.
You have strong opinions. Many of the detainees are in GITMO because someone turned them in for the reward money - around $25,000. What bearing does this have on your thinking?
If you say that there have been cases where detainees have gone and joined Al Queda, you are right. After the way they have been treated, they are looking for payback.
Moral - if we think someone belongs in GITMO, give him/her a legitimate fair hearing at the beginning where he/she is allowed fair help; allowed to see and hear the evidence againist him/her and in short do what we can to insure that an innocent person is not being detained unjustly. We have not done that in the past.
Lawyers as victims ???? We should sympathize with lawyers? The very existence of Gitmo is a shameful blotch on American hitory... and I applaud the legal advocates who are trying to champion the principles of American justice on behalf of the detainees.
But wringing your hands over Stimson's trashing of these advocates for doing what they are doing? That's a little like protesting the execution of an aligator by park rangers for swallowing a dog. My daughter's husband is a lawyer, but he doesn't deserve sympathy for being one.
We'll see how you feel about attorneys when you have the need for legal representation.
I can't believe any rational person would not be outraged at this attempt at economic subterfuge aginst firms who are representing the detainees.
Considering 390 have been released with no charges, I suspect the US has several more who should have never been detained either.
Sitting in Gitmo year after year without even being charged is akin to the former USSR's approach of locking people up indefinitely in gulags without having charges brought against them.
I can see him putting this guy in charge of the Federal Public Defenders Office.
The 66% of us that are fed up with the Feds must stop paying taxes until we see real change. These clowns have forgotten who they work for.
You are correct about the invasion of Iraq increasing the numer of militant Muslims. Several respected and independent studies confirm this fact.
I compare Bubba's strategy in Iraq to trying to rid yourself of roaches with a hammer. When you get one, you'll splatter the $#(? out of it, but until you stop the breeding process your just wasting your time.......
I disagree you can blane Americans for Bush and his anti-American revolution. The media industry lied and misled the public every day, just as they are still doing. They propped up his candidacy and his administratino with false reporting every day, and still do.
For example, how many Christian "right" people would have voted for Bush if they knew he was a cocaine user, if some of his disparaging comments about Americans were published, if his insider trading role in Enron was known, if his "politician's conversion" to being against abortion the week before he announced his candidacy for governor was discussed or reported.
The media industry conspired to put Bush in office and to keep him there, just as they conspired to remove Jimmy Carter or to weaken Bill Clinton (after first conspiring to elect him). 60% of the people in America don't pay attention to politics and will vote for whoever the media presents to them.
You may have a point to some degree, but I see two areas that also need to be considered.
1. The press is feed press releases by all the contenders which they print. The media (except for Fox News) tries to portray both sides of an issue. Many poeple are intellectually lazy and easily accept the slant provided by a candidate's press release.
2. The fear factor. Bubba successfully employed the fear factor in 2004 against Kerry. It's easy to scare people into doing what you want of them. Between the religious right who believe that Bubba is God's representative in the White House and those who Bubba managed to scare enough to vote for him, he eeked out a slim majority.
I believe the guilt for Bubba's second term lies not with the media, but rather, with the self-righteous, the intellectually lazy, and the weak at heart.
It was Himmler.
Himmler also said during the Nuremberg war trials:
"Of course the people don't want to go to war. But they can be brought to thier leader's bidding by labeling those who oppose war as being unpatriotic."
Think back to the run-up to the invasion. Dissenter's rallies were labeled "anti-war" by the administration while supporter's rallies were labeled "pro-American".
Himmler would have been proud, I suspect.
"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy. It is always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it is a democracy, a dictatorship or a parliament. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."
Joseph Goebbels also had an infamous quote that applies directly to this administration: (he was Hitler's Minister of Propaganda)
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
I stand corrected, it was Goering. Thanks.
It is really sad that so many Americans are so willing to give away our rights for the sake of..... what... so called security... They do not understand the basic truth that just as it is impossible to stop a determined assassin, it is impossibe to stop a determined terrorist. All it takes is the discipline to not communicate in any venue that can be intercepted, no leaks, and focus on the act. Thay have one great advantage over the common assassin, they are willing to die during their act whereas the assassin would be looking for a way to do his deed and still escape.
What Stimson is doing here is nothing short of extortion, threatening the economic well being of a business because they are performing a service to illegal prisoners. Obviously, the government doesn't want some of the best legal minds defending these "innocent until proven guilty" hostages against their average ability military prosecutors. Stimson should be charged with extortion for his remarks.. Feedom of speech ends where threats begin.
Slander and defamation suits might be more applicable.
Mr.Stimson%u2019s action is reprehensible and should indeed be condemned. But the greatest danger to the freedom and safety of our country come from those who lack the courage to defend themselves.
As Benjamin Franklin famously said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety," This is much more than a clichi, it is an axiom (truism).
Just look at what we have lost or had taken from us since 911. What has happened to the brave Americans who made this a nation respected, even revered, by most of the world.
I love America but I feel shamed by what we have done since abandoning Afghanistan and invaded Iraq.
I wrote a piece titled "Requiem For America The Beautiful" the day before the U.S invaded Iraq lamenting much which you describe here.
On 9/12/01 we had the sympathy and support of virtually then entire world. Bubba has taken that and turned it into disdain.
Posted by exusmcsgt at 11:28 AM : Jan 14, 2007
If everything Stimson said was included in this article, I don't really see anything that could be interpreted as slander or defamation.
There is not doubt, however, he is trying to coerce and strong arm these law firms into not participating by threatening their income..
What is reported is what was said... what we don't know is what is happening behind the scenes.. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if some of these law firm's clients did not receive a friendly letter suggesting that unless they are prepared to have the IRS spend the next 24 months going over every aspect of their business, they may want to reconsider who they do business with.
These NeoCons do not have the slightest idea what the Constitution and this country are all about.. all they know is the almighty buck..
Not being an attorney myself, I can not judge the legals merits of a defamation suit. But I certainly consider his comments to be defamatory.
I believe that Bubba, et. al. know what the constitution is - where they respect it is another matter.
After all, Bubba described it as just a "G o d d a m n e d piece of paper".
This from a man who swore twice in public to uphold it. Says quite a bit, in my opinion.
Are you kidding?! AG Gonzalez will give this guy a promotion! He is real "Bush Doctrine"/Patriot Act material.
Posted by JohnShaft4 at 07:04 PM : Jan 14, 2007
Looks like Bush has found his next Supreme Court nominee.
-
by energyecon
January 16, 2007 7:47 AM PST
- Stimson, like other Bush regime members will be moving back to a cushy private sector position after the 2008 elections if not before... tracking his whereabouts and promoting a netroots boycott of wherever he lands might be a worthy obsession for some latter day Don Quixote.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 45 Comments"Sancho, my armor!"