Marsupial Proceedings

6 August 2008



Google
WWW Kensington Review

Guantanamo Detainee Found Guilty

A military tribunal in Guantanamo, Cuba, has found Salim Hamdan Usama Bin Laden's former driver, guilty of five counts of material support to a terror organization in the September 11, 2001, attacks. The trial was conducted under the Military Commissions Act, a stop-gap measure that allows for Guantanamo detainees to be tried without giving them the civilian protections of the US Constitution nor the privileges of proper prisoners of war. It was, in short, a kangaroo court.

Mr. Hamdan claimed to have been a simple driver for Mr. bin Laden, a low-level functionary who knew little or nothing of Al Qaeda’s operations. He was motivated, the defense claimed, by the need to earn a living and not by ideology nor a fanatical interpretation of Islam. Perhaps, that is true. The world will never know because of the pitifully low standards of evidence required under the law by which he was tried.

The prosecution maintains that he was a confidant of Mr. bin Laden. The prosecuting attorneys said he had overheard conversations about 9/11 and had other information that showed he was part of Usama bin Laden's inner circle and aided and abetted the attacks. Oddly, he was acquitted on the charge of conspiracy to aid a terror organization. Was this a bone thrown by the jury to make the affair look impartial, or was the case really that weak?

One example of the questionable nature of the case comes from CNN. The cable TV network reported, “During the trial, a US soldier who was present when Hamdan was captured originally said Hamdan was driving a car that had SA-7 surface-to-air missiles intended for al Qaeda. But on cross-examination, the soldier, identified only as Maj. Smith, said he could not be sure Hamdan was the driver of one of the three vehicles carrying the missiles.” Really, a Major Smith? No doubt his commander was named "Jones."

A sentencing hearing will begin this afternoon, and Mr. Hamdan is certain to receive a life sentence. Anything less would make the US military look soft on terrorism, and the five guilty verdicts give ample justification for such a sentence. The trouble is that it doesn’t look like justice. It looks like vengeance, like a vendetta. If he did, indeed, drive Mr. bin Laden around after the September 11 murders, then he is guilty of harboring a fugitive and is a mass murderer after the fact. He should have been tried as a civilian in the Southern District of New York under the Constitution of the US, and 12 New Yorkers could have composed the jury. Actually, knowing how New Yorkers feel, he’s probably safer in Cuba.

© Copyright 2008 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Kensington Review Home