US government accused of spying on 9/11 attorneys

Published time: February 14, 2013 19:14
Edited time: May 15, 2013 14:23
A detainee stands at an interior fence inside the U.S. military prison for "enemy combatants" on October 27, 2009 in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. (John Moore/Getty Images/AFP)

Detainees being held at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and their defense attorneys are accusing both the United States government and Gitmo guards alike this week of infringing on the inmates’ rights by conducting illegal surveillance.

Only days after lawyers representing alleged terrorists accused the government of spying on confidential inmate-attorney conversations by using hidden microphones placed in meeting rooms within the facility, the counsel for Yemen national Walid bin Attash said on Thursday that her client’s private legal papers were improperly removed from his Gitmo prison cell when he attended a recent court hearing.

Bin Attash was appearing before the military court on Tuesday, attorney Cheryln Bormann claimed early Thursday, when his Gitmo cell was allegedly ransacked and legal documents were removed.

“The guard force was in fact seizing privileged communications,” Bormann said, according to Bloomberg News.

During a heated moment amid Thursday morning’s hearing, an unshackled bin Attash stood up in the court and spontaneously addressed Army Col. James Pohl, the military judge presiding over the case.

"In the name of God, there is an important thing for you," bin Attash said before being silenced by the judge.

According to an Associated Press report, Col. Pohl told bin Attash that he had to remain quiet unless testifying from the witness stand, to which the inmate fired back, "I'm not here to testify.” In fact, his attorney explained to Col. Pohl that bin Attash is concerned about attending any further pretrial hearings because he is fearful his belongings will be removed from his cell each and every time.

"We need to stop this now," Bormann said. "This affects our ability to do our jobs."

Stanley Cohen, a human rights attorney based out of New York, told RT during a phone conversation Thursday afternoon that he thinks the entire legal proceedings regarding the high-profile Gitmo inmates “has been a circus since day one,” and that the Obama White House’s claim of being the most transparent administration in American history has been directly challenged by the snafus that have occurred during the lengthy legal proceedings. Sarcastically, Cohen said he is “shocked” over the recent wiretapping revelations, ordered under the watch of an administration that has not just kept defense attorneys from viewing important Guantanamo Bay legal documents in the past, but has now, apparently, has also spied on the conversations between attorneys and clients.

“There is not a modicum of due process or justice taking place at Guantanamo,” Cohen said. “It is another in a never-ending series of examples of this administration saying one thing and doing another.”

Thursday morning’s revelation came just days after it was made known that meeting cells thought to be private venues for attorney-client conversations had been bugged with microphones installed by the FBI. Navy Captain Thomas Welsh, who served as Gitmo staff judge advocate since May 2011, testified on Monday that although he had been aware of the devices, officials never used them under his watch to listen in on conversations and that monitoring ability is no longer possible. He did suggest, however, that the clandestine microphones disguised as smoke detectors could easily be considered by some to be a covert form of surveillance.

"I agree with your point that it was not recognizable, it was not readily identifiable," Welsh said this week, adding that he himself had not discovered the devices until last January.

On Wednesday, the warden for the prison told the court that he was not aware of the microphones until just days earlier, but knows that monitoring private legal conversations are against the rules.

“We understood that any listening to an attorney-client meeting is prohibited,” testified Army Col. John V. Bogdan, who assumed control of the facility in June 2012 but admits to authorizing repairs to the system six months later without knowing what exactly the upgrades entailed. Those fixes, he says, were ordered by J-2, the on-base intelligence agency that maintains conspicuous surveillance cameras in the cells.

"J-2 only said they needed to do upgrade and repair of the video system in December," Bogdan testified. Later in the hearing, however, it was revealed that the December 2012 repairs to the system involved reconnecting microphones that had previously been cut off.

In light of Thursday’s discovery regarding the bin Attash papers, attorneys are likely to demand a more intensive probe into the facility. According to Mr. Cohen, though, that investigation is likely to be a whole other charade.

“The real issue will be, ‘what will the military court do now?’” Cohen says. A motion to dismiss with prejudice is a possibility, he suggests, yet personally he believes that the current state of affairs in the White House means that option would be all too unlikely.

“When you have the commander-in-chief authorizing extrajudicial activity throughout the world,” he said, “…then I have little doubt that the military court will blink over this.”

Bin Attash is accused of providing logistical aid to the hijackers responsible for crashing four passenger jets on US soil on September 11, 2001. Gitmo detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the lead defendant in the case, is accused of masterminding the 9/11 terrorist attacks that left nearly 3,000 Americans dead.

Comments (15)

kb (unregistered) 15.02.2013 17:17

My comment complaining about discrimination in the US seems to have been yanked, ironically probably on the grounds of discrimination. :)

0

Undo

Frederick C. Blackburn, NC USA (unregistered) 15.02.2013 15:54

(part 2 of 2)

One wonders what would happen if these so-called "DEFENSE Attorneys" actually did their job? . .  .

What would be the reaction of these "DEFENSE Attorneys" then went on to show that their clients were the "patsies" in a Zionist plan to take out 7 Middle East Countries in 5 Years in a series of wars manipulated by Israel but carried out, financed and endured  by the People of the United States as described in the strategy papers of Zionists like Oded Yinon, Benjamin Netanyahu, Richard Perle, and the Project For The New American Century (PNAC) Think Tank?  All to make Israel the sole Super Power in a Post-Soviet Middle East?

What would happen if these "DEFENSE Attorneys" tried to introduce the September 11, 2001   Arrest Records for the "Dancing Israeli" Mossad Operatives Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Schmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari  . . who were arrested in vans from Israeli Mossad front company Urban Moving Systems that were packed with the same explosives that were used in the WTC controlled demolitions as discovered by University Professor Dr. Steven E. Jones?

I'm sure these "DEFENSE Attorneys" would quickly find themselves facing the same fate as Ernst Zundel's attorney Sylvia Stolz who spent years in prison for her "Un-Kosher" Blasphemy of  daring to defend TRUTH.

After all, "Truth Is No Defense" when it comes to the Global Zio-Agenda.

p eace.

+389

Undo

Frederick C. Blackburn, NC USA (unregistered) 15.02.2013 15:52

(part 1 of 2)

More "tricks" from the Zionist Kangaroo Court "Show Trials", I see . . .

I guess the Zionists in charge of this aspect of the "Greater Israel" operation want to insure that their appointed "Defense Attorneys" stay loyal to the "Official 9-11 Script" . . .

. . . and don't dare venture into the area of "TRUTH". . .

Unless there is enough World-wide outrage at this farce of Justice, this  Zionist Kangaroo Court and Show Trial will be as big of a mockery of the Rule of Law as the Ernst Zundel trials where he was flat out told by the Zionist Judge that "TRUTH Is No Defense" when it comes to Zionist "Big Lie" scripts concerning  the Greater Israel agenda.

One wonders what would happen if these so-called "DEFENSE Attorneys" actually did their job and tried to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that their clients were innocent because the Official 9-11 Report is physically impossible?

W hat would be the reaction if these "DEFENSE Attorneys" went on to show to the Judge and Jury how these 3 WTC building could not have been brought down by the planes, but were instead brought down by controlled demolition and then brought in the testimony of the over 1700+ Licensed Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth to prove this point?


pe ace.

+369

Undo

View all comments (15)
Add comment

By posting your comment, you agree to abide by our Posting rules

Log in to comment in full, or comment anonymously under character-limit restriction.

100 Text

– required fields

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

Follow us