Welcome to Law and Disorder Radio

Law and Disorder is a weekly independent civil liberties radio program airing on more than 150 stations and on Apple podcast. Law and Disorder provides timely legal perspectives on issues concerning civil liberties, privacy, right to dissent and practices of torture exercised by the US government and private corporations.

Law and Disorder April 8, 2013

Updates:

  • Please Sign the Lynne Stewart Compassionate Release Petition
  • Please Also Write to: Charles E Samuels Jr. / Federal Bureau of Prisons /
  • 320 1st Street Northwest / Washington DC 20534
  • Anniversary of Collateral Damage Video Release
  • University Stadium Victory – GeoCorp Prisons

closegtmo

Guantanamo Hunger Strike Update

Attorney Omar Farah speaks with Michael Ratner about a hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay Prison with more than half of prisoners from Camp 5 and 6f participating. Farah says the hunger strike was triggered by an arbitrary crackdown by the prison administration including cell searches and a search of the prisoner’s Qurans. This is viewed as out right desecration. More than half of the entire prison population has been cleared for release by every prominent national security and law enforcement agency in the US government, that includes the DOD, DHS.

Guest – Omar Farah joined the Center for Constitutional Rights in 2012 as a staff attorney in the Guantanamo Global Justice Initiative. Omar was previously in private practice, working mostly in the area of international commercial arbitration. Since 2008, he has represented several prisoners detained at Guantanamo Bay in habeas corpus litigation in federal court.
———

brokersofdeceit Palestine_Map_2007_(Settlements) rashidkhalidi11

Brokers of Deceit: How the U.S. Has Undermined Peace in the Middle East

While adviser to the Madrid and Washington Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, author and historian Rashid Khalidi collected documents, memos and meeting minutes as a research foundation for his recently published book Brokers of Deceit: How the U.S. Has Undermined Peace in the Middle East. The book focuses on 3 periods of opportunity for the United States to broker peace, one in the late seventies, the early nineties and 2010. This critical analysis addresses the basic distortions in language that has corrupted the peace processes. Rashid Khalidi is an American historian of the Middle East, the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University, and director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs, he joins us today to talk about his book and also the ongoing destabilizing hostility in Syria.

Professor Rashid Khalidi:

  • Let me read to you what Orwell says, “the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. Bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even by people who should and do know better.”
  • The argument I’m making in this book is much of the language used by pundits and politicians about the Middle East and the so called peace process, between the Palestinians and the Israelis is really corrupt language.
  • One of the chapters in the book is devoted to the period when I was an adviser to the Palestinian delegation and negotiations from 1991-1993 starting in Madrid and continuing to Washington.
  • If you go back to Madrid in October 1991, there were under 200 thousand Israelis living in the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem. Today, there are nearly 600 thousand of them.
  • United States has been responsible for exacerbating the problem in effect by saying the only way to deal with this issue of occupation and settlement is through negotiations mediated by us.
  • The United States in the meantime has put its big thumb on the scale in favor of the Israelis preventing a resolution of the problems.
  • The first episode I talk about in the book has to do with the follow on to Camp David in the wake of the Lebanon War in 1982 when Israel invaded and 50 thousand Palestinians and Lebanese were killed and wounded.
  • I site at great length a now declassified document by a CIA analyst which one of my students actually found.
  • The idea of Palestinian self determination doesn’t exist anywhere in the Oslo Accords signed by the PLO and Israel in 1993 and afterward.
  • Autonomy and self determination are used by people in American political parlance and Israeli political parlance in ways that do violence to the real meanings of these words.
  • Obama fits the pattern of every president since President Carter, with the sole exception of George W. Bush.
  • Obama has adopted wholesale and entire Israeli narrative as to the idea that Israel is the victim.
  • There is a people in existential danger that’s the Palestinians, the people faced with elimination, extermination, not physically but as a collective.
  • Oslo was a terrible deal for the Palestinians. As a result of Palestinian failures since the 90s, a situation has emerged where we have one state and one sovereign body between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River.

Guest – Professor Rashid Khalidi, is the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University. He received his B.A. from Yale University in 1970, and his D.Phil. from Oxford in 1974.  He is editor of the Journal of Palestine Studies, and was President of the Middle East Studies Association, and an advisor to the Palestinian delegation to the Madrid and Washington Arab-Israeli peace negotiations from October 1991 until June 1993.
—–

john20toweryaa portresist2

 Judge Oks Civilians Right to Sue Military For Spying On Peace Activists

In a recent ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a lawyer’s challenge to military spying on peace activists can proceed. This ruling is the first time a court allowed civilians to sue the military for violating their First and Fourth Amendment rights. National Lawyers Guild attorney Larry Hildes brought the lawsuit Panagacos v Towery in 2009 on behalf of a group of Washington state antiwar activists who discovered they were infiltrated for 2 years by John Towery, an employee at a fusion center inside a local Army base. The antiwar activists group Port Militarization Resistance sought to oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through civil disobedience. The lawsuit also names, the Army, Navy, Air Force, FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security and other law enforcement agencies.

Attorney Larry Hildes:

  • Brendan Dunn was activist in Olympia, he was arrested in Seattle basically for sitting while anarchist.
  • The Olympia Police Department cracked down on the Wobblies and the IWW for having newspaper boxes for which they paid for and took all the papers.
  • We got them back, but Brendan got curious about what was going on, did a state public records act request for all emails and all intelligence to the city of Olympia concerning anarchists or the IWW.
  • What he got back instead was hundreds and hundreds of pages of what are called “force protection memos” and “threat assessments” from Ft. Lewis about Port Militarization Resistance, a group that he was involved with that did protest against the use of public ports for shipment of Striker Brigade equipment to the occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  • He started looking at them and every police department and every military agency from north of Seattle to Portland was on this list. The FBI was on this list, Homeland Security, every branch of the military.
  • It was detailed discussions of what PMR was planning, what they were going to do, how to fight it. The author of a lot of this was John Towery.
  • PMR looked Towery up on Facebook and there’s a picture on Towery’s FB page of John Jacob who had been coming to PMR meetings for several years. Very closely involved with PMR in fact he ran their list serve on Rise Up.
  • So they did some more checking. They looked up his voter registration, they got an address and the address matched John Jacobs.
  • He was 20 years older than everyone else. I don’t know how but he blended in. He went to events, he brought his kids. He was very very good at what he did.
  • Brendan considered him a close friend. Brendan and another member confronted him at a cafe in Tacoma and he said “yes, I’ve been spying on you. I’m doing it for your own good, there are other spies watching you that mean you much more harm than I do.”
  • We do know that the Army at least one more spy. We caught the Coast Guard spy. There were 2 officers from the Tacoma Police Department’s Homeland Security Committee.
  • The police would show up at unannounced demonstrations. The MP’s, local police and state patrols would already be there and everyone would be arrested as they were getting out of their cars.
  • The Portland Militarization Resistance was a few dozen people. They were very creative, they had figured out a choke point for the military.
  • The equipment would go out 3 weeks before the troops. If they couldn’t get the equipment there. They couldn’t send the troops.
  • If they couldn’t send the equipment and the troops then no war.
  • The succeeded in scaring the heck out of the military by these very peaceful acts of civil disobediance.
  • They can’t arrest them before they get to the demonstration or before they even do anything.
  • They think dissent against their wars is the enemy which scares me a great deal.
  • Where else are they doing this, how much are they doing this?

Guest – Attorney Larry Hildes, an NLG member and one of the attorneys involved in bringing the case Panagacos v Towery.

————————————————————————–

 

Law and Disorder April 1, 2013

Updates:

  • MOMA Suggested Donation Lawsuit

—-

el-igloo1 che-havana

Michael Smith and Dennis James Discuss Cuba Trip

Co-host Michael Smith and attorney Dennis James recently returned from Cuba on a trip led by the Center for Cuban Studies. Dennis is a civil rights lawyer formerly of Detroit and former Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild.  The trip was undertaken to appreciate the fundamental changes now going on in Cuban law with respect to travel, home, car and business ownership. The discussion leads into the possibilities of an economic rejuvenation in Cuba.

Attorney Dennis James:

  • The people of Cuba had a strong identification with the revolution they made.
  • Cuba is theirs and nobody else is going to tell them how to run it.
  • They have a lot of complaints about shortages, but they’re very appreciative of the basic needs of life that are provided for.
  • The Cuban government did a thorough and multi-level canvassing of the population through its national assembly and committees for the defense of the revolution.
  • Talking to the people on the street, they remember this process that went on.
  • The government watches which enterprises make sense, which ones are succeeding.
  • The ones that are succeeding and paying taxes, employing people are encouraged.
  • Book: The Man Who Loved Dogs
  • Book: Cuba, What Everyone Needs To Know – Julia Sweig
  • There’s a colony of people in Melia Cuba that practice what they call naive art.
  • I think its naive in the sense that it’s self taught.
  • They do wonderful paintings, these are doctors, lawyers, bakers, bus driver, cops, sugar mill workers.
  • Their work is encouraged, given exhibits in Havana.
  • Sandy Levinson – The Center for Cuban Studies.
  • We’re not talking about the flag waving, hammer and sickle brandishing socialist realism of China and Russia, we’re talking about wonderful expressions of culture.

Guest – Dennis James, a civil rights lawyer formerly of Detroit and former Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild.
——–

gaymarriageline SupremeCourtJustices

Supreme Court On Gay Marriage

Last week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on two historic cases that could establish the constitutional right for gay marriage. The first case, Hollingsworth v. Perry is a challenge to California’s voter-approved ban of same-sex unions in 2008. Six months after the California Supreme Court endorsed gay marriage, voters passed Proposition 8 which amended the state’s constitution to only recognize marriages between a man and a woman. Lower courts had declared the gay marriage ban to be unconstitutional.  The second case the Supreme Court heard was a challenge to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. This act bars married gay couples from receiving federal marriage benefits such as Social Security and family medical leave.

Professor Katherine Franke:

  • On the Prop 8 case, I would certainly question the issue of standing which the court is from their argument also taking quite seriously.
  • It’s actually an incredibly important issue in civil rights law where groups of people want to assert an interest in an overarching public issue like the right to marry.
  • I’m of the view that this should never have been brought.
  • The movement lawyers really argued for Boise and Olsen not to bring the case. Boise and Olsen lobbied quite hard to keep the movement lawyers out of the case.
  • When the law gets out ahead, and the lawyers get out ahead of the movement that support them, often we do more damage than good when we get to the Supreme Court too soon.
  • We have movement lawyers in the lesbian and gay community and of course they don’t all agree with each other, its a complicated movement. But there was a sense that they were going to go state by state, and build legal consensus around the issue of marriage rights and around a set of arguments that weren’t going to hurt gay and lesbian people who didn’t marry.
  • Boise and Olsen thought they would do a better job raising the issue of marriage than the movement lawyers have. They’re carrying a brief for marriage, not a community who have a diverse set of interests, marriage being only one of them.
  • DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act is a law that unfortunately President Clinton signed in 1996. It was basically a homophobic cry from the Congress to limit on the federal level any definition of a marriage to between a man and a woman.
  • If you’re a federal employee, if you’re married you can put your spouse and dependent children on you health insurance.
  • If you’re not married, you can’t.
  • Edie Windsor is the plaintiff in the DOMA case but when her partner of many many years past away, Edie inherited under the will, her partner’s property they jointly owned together. Under federal tax law it says if they were strangers to one another, so Edie had to pay about 360 thousand dollars in inheritance taxes for the property she had owned with her partner.
  • There was a coalition of large corporations that filed a brief and said actually
  • The political alignment on this issue has really shifted at a rapid pace in the last year.
  • I direct our center on gender and sexuality law.
  • I’m actually now teaching for the first time a class on the law of occupation so we’re looking at Iraq and Palestine and the United States, Puerto Rico and Hawaii. To understand whether the law can be a force for good when military force is like the Israelis or like the Americans occupying other sovereign states.
  • We’ve got a really great new project engaging tradition and thinking about arguments based in tradition, that have been used traditionally to undermine sexually based justice claims.
  • Those issues come up in the marriage context all over the place.

Guest – Professor Katherine Franke,  the Isidor and Seville Sulzbacher Professor of Law; Director, Center for Gender and Sexuality Law at Columbia Law School.

—————————————————————–

 

Law and Disorder March 25, 2013

Updates:

  • New York Times Continues To Deceive About Iraq War

ccrfloyd1

New York City Stop and Frisk Trial Begins

Here on Law and Disorder, we’ve been covering the stop and frisk case known as Floyd v City of New York and the New York Police Department. This is a federal class action lawsuit challenging New York City Police Departments’ practice of stopping and frisking hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers each year. Some five million within the last few years. The high majority of which are Latino and African American. It’s taken the Center for Constitutional Rights along with its allies united with a group called Communities United for Police Reform many years to bring this case to trial.  It’s an historic moment for challenging these practices in New York and a precedent that will hopefully lead to ending this practice, not only here in New York but throughout the country.  The trial began last week in federal court in Manhattan. It will last some 4 to 6 weeks.

Annette Dickerson:

  • In order to be legal the stops need to be based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and we’re challenging the city’s use of these illegal stops.
  • They violate the 14 Amendment guarantee of equal protection because they are racially discriminatory.
  • 87 percent of those stopped are black and Latino.
  • The NYPD commissioner seemed to have dug in his heels deeper, as has the mayor in defending the program.
  • There is no empirical data that “stop and frisk” has a role in reducing crime.
  • It severely damages relationships between the police and the community.
  • This is an historic moment in the lifelong struggle of members of the community and organizations like CCR. Our first case against the police department was Daniels which was filed in 1999 in the aftermath of the shooting of Amadou Diallo.
  • David Floyd was actually helping someone who was locked out of their apartment, he had an extra set of keys.
  • In 2011 685 thousand people stopped.
  • There are many other people in the community who are stopped including members of the LGBT community, the immigrant community, people who are homeless, women.
  • There is a presumption of criminality.
  • On the first day of trial, the courtroom was packed, as was the overflow room.

Guest – Annette Warren-Dickerson,  the Director of Education and Outreach at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), is responsible for overseeing the development of CCR’s political and public education strategies as a companion to CCR’s litigation. Annette served as the Statewide Coordinator of the New York Campaign for Telephone Justice, which successfully ended the high collect call rates for the families of those incarcerated in New York State prisons.

—-

5nycpride0603 021603cuban5

Cuban Five Case Update: Free The Cuban Five – Columbia University 2013

Fourteen years ago, the Cuban Five were convicted on conspiracy to commit espionage at some time in the future.  Recently, prominent First Amendment attorney Martin Garbus joined the case of the Cuban Five. He’s help expose how US government paid journalists in Miami who received hundreds and thousands of dollars of payments from the office of Cuba broadcasting. A fact unknown to the defense at the time of the trial. As listeners may know, those paid reporters covered the case in an almost hysterical and prejudicial fashion. This month, Martin Garbus and many others will be discussing the case of the Cuban Five during an event held at Columbia University March 29.

Attorney Martin Garbus:

  • During the time the jury was deliberating, the television media bombarded the Miami area with pictures of the jurors. The judge barred any pictures of the jurors going out because she didn’t want the jurors intimidated by a public awareness of who they were.
  • Because she was concerned pressure would be put on them.
  • Unknown to the judge and defense lawyers at the time, the channels each day repeatedly showed the faces of the jurors, sometimes identifying them so that the entire community knew who they were.
  • And they presented very slanted interpretations of the case.
  • Television misuse: we found it not only for the time the jurors were deliberating but we’ve now traced it throughout the entire trial.
  • Where are now is we’ve submitted our papers and the judge is sitting on it.
  • Radio Marti was made to beam into Havana, it can most anything it wants. What happened hear is that Radio Marti beamed into the entire Miami area. You have a 38 million dollar budget beaming into Miami endless stories. Then you have the US government through Radio Marti and various democracy projects also paying the print media to write propaganda. Each one of these articles are a violation of the law.
  • On March 29, at the Roone Arledge Auditorium, Lerner Hall, Columbia University, 116th Street and Broadway in Manhattan.
  • Martin Garbus, Lead Attorney for the Cuban Five
    Ambassador Rodolfo Reyes, Cuban Ambassador to the United Nations
    Ambassador Julio Escalona, Venezuelan Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations
    Luis Rosa, Puerto Rican independence fighter, political prisoner for 19 years
    Imani Brown, Columbia University Caribbean Students Association

Guest – Attorney Martin Garbus, one of the country’s leading trial lawyers. He has appeared before the United States Supreme Court and the highest state and federal courts in the nation. Time Magazine has named him “legendary . . . one of the best trial lawyers in the country.” He’s also known as the most prominent First Amendment lawyer.

Four-clients-after-Burge-indictment emanuel_police_ap_img

Racism, Torture, and Impunity in Chicago

Here on Law and Disorder, we continue to follow up on the Chicago torture cases and since the conviction and sentencing of former Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge in 2011, the Chicago criminal courts have become a model in seeking justice for crimes of torture. Last year we discussed with our guest attorney Flint Taylor how the city’s new administration will handle the hundreds of ongoing torture cases of African American men. The question is answered in Flint Taylor’s recently published article in the The Nation titled Racism, Torture and Impunity in Chicago.

In the article, Flint writes “Chicago City Council and Mayor Rahm Emanuel signed off on a settlement for another torture survivor, Michael Tillman, who was exonerated in 2010. It was the perfect chance for the mayor to apologize on behalf of the city to the African-American community that helped elect him. He chose not to do so. Instead, picking up where the Daley administration left off, the mayor has continued to fund Burge’s defense, paying private lawyers a total of $3.8 million to date in the Cannon and Kitchen cases alone.”

Attorney Flint Taylor:

  • In the civil rights cases we are seeking the testimony of Richard Daley, the former mayor and former states attorney to question him in detail of his long standing and central role of the police torture scandal here in Chicago.
  • Evidence was brought directly to Daley through the Chicago Police Superintendent of the torture of a specific man by the use of electric shock, bagging, beating and burning to get a confession.
  • Daley decided not to investigate Jon Burge, not to prosecute Jon Burge and as a result of that over 75 African American men were tortured, gave confessions, many of them went to death row.
  • At this point we’ve tried to negotiate with his lawyers (Daley) they are paid for by the tax payer. We moved in court to compel him to testify.
  • It took a long time, very hard struggle by community groups, lawyers activists and of course the families of the victims themselves.
  • The media (local) is interested when the name Daley comes up.
  • The called the box that they electrocuted them with the “n*****” box.
  • We see the attacks on the genitals again and again.
  • It’s a remarkable racist conspiracy. We’re using the Civil Rights Act that was used during Reconstruction, right after the Civil War, which is called the Anti Klu Klux Klan Act.
  • We’re trying to get a statute passed in Congress to make torture a Federal crime.

Guest – G. Flint Taylor, a graduate of Brown University and Northwestern Law School, is a  founding partner of the People’s Law Office in Chicago, an office which has been dedicated to litigating civil rights, police violence, government misconduct, and death penalty cases for more than 40 years.

—-

Maliw2 map_africa_mali

French-led Invasion of Mali, Africa

The Obama Administration has recently stepped up US military deployment within the French led military offensive to force out Islamist rebels in Mali, Africa. The U.S. Reaper drones are helping to provide targeting information for French aerial attacks. Those countries publicly supporting France include Canada, Belgium, Denmark and Germany. Meanwhile, human rights groups call for independent investigations into civilian deaths in Mali.

Ernie Harsch:

  • The stakes are not so much Mali. Some of the insurgent forces, some have local grievances, like the Tuareg in Northern Mali.
  • Others consider themselves Jihadists. They also target, US, French and other European in the region and elsewhere in the world.
  • Whatever happens in Mali, could have wider implications. The situation in Mali is quite serious. There are lots of risks.
  • Mali, Africa is a former French colony and after decolonization the French were active in intervening into the former colonies of Africa.
  • There was a popular upsurge in the 90s, (in Mali) that regime was ousted by a military coup. That leader of the coup quickly transitioned to an elected leader of a civilian government.
  • In Mali in particular you also had a series of rebellions in the North by an ethnic group called the Tuareg.
  • The basic issues never got resolved. You didn’t have development up in the North, you didn’t have autonomy which is what they were pressing for.
  • What happened in 2011, we had the Arab Spring, in like many periods of revolution or popular upsurge, old coercive states may collapse and you have opportunities for popular action but you also have other people who come in because states are fragmented.
  • Some of the fighters that had been with Gaddafi, they were from Mali, and they had been Tuareg.
  • Now its sort of dragging down into a protracted guerrilla phase.
  • To be clear, the French intervention has gotten political backing from the African Union and from the economic community group, the Economic Community of West African States or ECOWAS.
  • The French PR justification has worked fairly well.
  • This is open terrain, this is semi-desert area. With air power and heavy equipment you can push far and very quickly. You can take cities and towns. The Islamists, there’s a few thousand. They’ve pulled back up into the mountains. They know the terrain better than the French actually.
  • The chance of French mounting losses is there.
  • Since 2005, the US has spent 1 billion dollars for counter-terror operations in the region.
  • This isn’t all military by any means. A lot of it has to do with training local African military forces in counter-terrorism operations and coordinate and logistics support.
  • Also, basically propaganda.
  • They do humanitarian actions to curry favor with local populations.
  • This isn’t well known, but the US has air bases all across Africa.
  • Sometimes they’re simply a hangar operated in secret at some African military or civilian air base.
  • They’re (U.S. Government) setting up an airbase in Niger, that’s openly acknowledged.
  • They started out with surveillance drones in Somalia but then they used a few strikes against Islamists leaders there in Somalia.
  • Everything is going to be framed in the language of the war on terror. That’s the justification. That’s a real concern for the US authorities.
  • Also material resource interests. Not so much gold, but Mali does have gold in the northwest.
  • Things that are very vital to the Western dominated global economy.
  • There is a rivalry that’s developed with China, it’s not been terribly direct at the moment.
  • It’s blowback.

Guest – Ernie Harsch, a 40 year journalist who has made numerous trips to Africa. He’s a former editor of the magazine Africa Renewal. He joins us today to discuss the conflicts in Mali and the big picture regarding the seizure of natural resources in Africa.

————————————————————————-

Show Archives

Articles