Today it was International Human Rights Day and I decided to spend the day with a group of friends to call for accountability for those who participated in acts of torture. It was a cold Minnesota winter day with temperatures in the single digits, but despite the chilly weather much of our group decided to take off our winter coats and put on orange jumpsuits with black hoods. We stood in front of the Federal Courthouse in Minneapolis and held our banners and signs to let the people inside know that we wanted to see accountability for those who violated the most basic laws protecting human rights.
Before the protest we had been informed by law enforcement that if we wore the black hoods outside the courthouse we could be subject to arrest under an obscure 1859 law that prohibited the wearing of masks for anything other than amusement, religion, medical reasons or weather related purposes. It was a law that appeared unconstitutional on its face, if people are legally able to wear a mask for amusement but it suddenly becomes a crime when a person wears a mask to criticize government policy it would seem the law was in clear violation of the first amendment. We could try to claim we wore the hoods for amusement and slip through the loophole, but we were not wearing these hoods for our amusement we were wearing them to make a very serious statement against torture. Because this law appeared so blatantly unconstitutional on its face several of us in the group decided we were not going to abide by it and if they tried to arrest us we would fight their unconstitutional law in court. The police wisely chose not to enforce the obscure law they threatened to use against us however and we stood in front of the courthouse for over an hour with the hoods over our heads.
There are some who will say that we didn't need to be out there in the cold today, they will tell us that we should look forwards and not backwards. Well we are looking forward. We are looking forward to the day in which our government officials know that if they engage in acts of torture they will be prosecuted. We are looking forward to the day in which our government truly follows the Constitution and ensures that no human being is subject to cruel and unusual punishment. We are looking forward to a time in which our world lives in peace and war is no longer used as an excuse to violate basic human rights. If our government officials really wanted to look forward they would prosecute those who violated the law to ensure that our government officials know that if they engage in torture at any future time they too will be held accountable.
One of the people from our group brought a letter inside the courthouse to be delivered to the US District Attorney. It read as follows:
To whom it may concern:
On Nov. 6, 2009, we tried to alert you to a serious violation of the law perpetrated by the above-named Ms. Condoleezza Rice (see letter below). Ms. Rice is still at large.
We had been under the impression that 18 U.S.C. Secs. 2340 and 2340A (
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002340----000-.html<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002340----000-.html> and
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002340---A000-.html<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002340---A000-.html>), which deal with the crime of torture, had been lawfully passed and signed into law by the President of the United States. To our knowledge, this particular statute has not been repealed. Were we mistaken?
We further gave you information about statements Ms. Rice made, which seemed to be an admission of conspiring to commit torture as defined in the aforementioned statute. If it was not deemed to be an admission, it seemed to us that at least it would prompt some questioning of Ms. Rice about what her statements meant. Were we mistaken?
We also indicated a location where we thought you could apprehend Ms. Rice with minimal danger on your part. As far as we know, Ms. Rice was at said location at the time we indicated she would be there. Was an attempt made to find her at that location? Or were we mistaken?
It has also come to our attention that Robert J. Delahunty, who co-authored the memo available at this site
http://www.texscience.org/reform/torture/yoo-delahunty-9jan02.pdf<http://www.texscience.org/reform/torture/yoo-delahunty-9jan02.pdf>, may have violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2441, which describes what constitutes a war crime under United States law. According to subsection (c), "the term 'war crime' means any conduct --
"(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
....
"(3) which constitutes a grave breach of common Article 3 (as defined in subsection (d)) when committed in the context of and in association with an armed conflict not of an international character."
Subsection (d) reads in part as follows: "(d) Common Article 3 Violations.—
"(1) Prohibited conduct.— In subsection (c)(3), the term 'grave breach of common Article 3' means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
"(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.
"(B) Cruel or inhuman treatment.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions), including serious physical abuse, upon another within his custody or control."
The entire War Crimes statute is available here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002441----000-.html<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002441----000-.html>.As you no doubt know, our country, at the Nuremberg Trials, found lawyers and judges liable for their "legal" advice and decisions.
Mr. Delahunty can be found most weekdays at the University of St. Thomas Law School, 1000 LaSalle Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota. His office number at that location is MSL 427.
If we can be of further assistance, please let us know.
Very truly yours,
Deborah K. Andresen, Roger Cuthbertson, Patricia Guerrero,
Robert A. Heberle, Sonja Johnson, Coleen Rowley,
Lois Swenson and Chuck Turchick,
Members of Tackling Torture at the Top
cc U.S. Attorney, District of Minnesota
Condoleeza Rice may still be at large, but until she is brought to justice along with those she worked with we will continue to stand against torture.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
