|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Torture charged in US case alleging plot against Bush
By Bill Van Auken
26 February 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The US government made headlines this week by announcing its
indictment of an American citizen for allegedly plotting with
Al Qaeda to assassinate President Bush. The man who is accused
in this document, however, has been the subject of a lengthythough
less publicizedlegal battle in which the government is itself
accused of having him arrested, detained without charges and tortured
abroad, out of the reach of the American courts.
The 16-page indictment unveiled earlier this week against Ahmed
Abu Ali, a 23-year-old student who was born in Houston and grew
up in northern Virginia, accused him of conspiracy and providing
aid to Al Qaeda. Abu Ali was suddenly brought back to the US after
being imprisoned without charges for nearly two years in Saudi
Arabia, apparently at the behest of the Bush administration.
It appears that the US governments interest in Abu Ali
stemmed from a supposed connection with a case against a group
of 11 Virginia mennine US citizens and two immigrantswho
were accused of training with paintball guns to aid
a Kashmiri separatist group that had only recently been placed
on the US list of foreign terrorist organizations.
The defendants family and his attorneys have charged
that he was tortured while jailed in Saudi Arabia as part of a
system of brutal interrogation that was supervised by American
FBI agents.
There is scar tissue all over his back, Abu Alis
defense attorney Edward MacMahon told Newsweek magazine,
adding that the scars corroborated his clients charges that
he was whipped and beaten during the 20 months he was detained
in Saudi Arabia. MacMahon charged that the governments case
is founded upon confessions extracted through torture.
According to family members, Abu Ali told them his Saudi interrogators
subjected him to protracted whippings, months of solitary confinement,
prolonged blindfolding and denial of food.
Federal prosecutors presented the indictment in the US District
Court in Alexandria, Virginia, only after their position had become
untenable in a lawsuit filed by Abu Alis family accusing
the US government of having the youth detained in Saudi Arabia.
The lawsuit, initiated last July, represented a direct challenge
to the increasingly common practice of the Bush administration
and the CIA known as extraordinary rendition, in which
suspects are turned over to the secret police of dictatorial regimes
to be tortured.
The government fought the lawsuit, insisting that it had the
right to utilize secret evidence and even a secret legal theory
for throwing out the suit, and that to publicly present either
would cause irreparable harm to national security.
The government has employed a similar legal argument in its
attempt to scuttle a lawsuit on behalf of Maher Arar. A 34-year-old
technology consultant and Canadian citizen, Arar was detained
by US immigration authorities while changing planes at New Yorks
John F. Kennedy International Airport in September 2002. He was
rendered to Syria, where he was imprisoned in a tomb-like
cell and subjected to repeated torture for nearly a year without
ever being charged.
Last month, the Justice Department invoked the state
secrets privilege, insisting that allowing Arars case
to go forward could seriously damage the United States
national security interests.
US District Judge John Bates had rejected the governments
argument in the Abu Ali case, ruling last December that his parents
could demand government documents to substantiate US responsibility
for his imprisonment and torture in Saudi Arabia. The ruling likewise
rejected the Bush administrations claims that US courts
have no jurisdiction over cases involving the detention of US
citizens overseas.
Bates, who was a Bush appointee, described the governments
claim as sweeping, declaring that it would allow the
US president to deliver a United States citizen to a foreign
country to avoid constitutional scrutiny. The judge pointed
out that Abu Ali was not arrested on any battlefield, but rather
detained by Saudi security agents who seized him in June 2003
in a university classroom where he was taking an exam.
According to the evidence presented in the case, Saudi officials
privately acknowledged they had no interest in detaining Abu Ali,
but had done so under pressure from the US. They said that there
were no charges against him and they were prepared to send him
back to the US, but that Washington insisted that he be held in
Saudi Arabia.
There is at least some circumstantial evidence that Abu
Ali has been tortured during interrogations with the knowledge
of the United States, Judge Bates wrote in his decision.
He added, FBI agents have despaired at his continued detention
and more than one United States official has stated that Abu Ali
is no longer a threat to the United States and there is no active
interrogation. Nonetheless, he has been held indefinitely without
charge, explanation for his detention, or access to consul since
the time of his arrest in June 2003.
Earlier this month, Bates expressed deep skepticism toward
a government motion to dismiss the familys lawsuit based
on evidence to be presented in secret, without any opportunity
for the familys attorneys to challenge either the evidence
or even the governments legal arguments.
This is about as close to a state-secrets shutdown as
you can get, the judge said.
Within barely one week of this hearing, the government unsealed
its indictment alleging an assassination plot and flew Abu Ali
back to the US. The timing suggests that these charges are being
used as a preemptive strike aimed at derailing a direct challenge
to the governments practice of contracting out illegal detention
and torture.
In attempt to quash further public exposure of Abu Alis
ordeal, the government has imposed a gag order on his family,
insisting that they agree not to tell the news media anything
that he tells them as a condition for being allowed to visit him
in jail. The pretext for this conditionwhich the family
has rejectedis that information provided by the defendant
could be a coded message to accomplices. The government has not
attempted to explain what secrets Abu Ali would have to relay
after nearly two years of being held largely in solitary confinement
in Saudi Arabia.
Whatever the governments intention, the case will inevitably
focus attention on the collaboration of US authorities with the
Saudi regime.
The contents of the indictment against Abu Ali strongly suggest
that much of the purported evidence is based on confessions extracted
either from him or others, named only as numbered co-conspirators,
while they were under detention by Saudi authorities. Supposedly,
Abu Ali talked to these unnamed individuals about killing Bush.
Saudi security forces have already killed at least one of these
alleged co-conspirators.
Other evidence against him consists of published
material seized from his home during an FBI raid conducted just
days after his detention in Saudi Arabia. This includes both material
of an Islamist nature, as well as a subscription to the magazine
Handguns. Abu Alis attorney has pointed out that
a recent issue of this publication included a statement hailing
Bushs reelection as a sportsmens victory
ensuring that the shooting community will have a friend
in the White House for four more years.
The question of whether Abu Ali or his alleged co-conspirators
were tortured will prove central to their defense. Testimony coerced
by methods that would shock the conscience of the
court must by law be thrown out.
Even the US State Department acknowledges that Saudi authorities
routinely torture prisoners. Its latest human rights report on
Saudi Arabia cites reports that torture and abuse were used
to obtain confessions from prisoners, including from detained
Canadian and British citizens who said they had been tortured.
The report says methods used by Saudi interrogators included whippings,
beating with sticks, suspension from bars by handcuffs, and keeping
detainees isolated and blindfolded for weeks at a time.
Cases like those of Ahmed Abu Ali and Maher Arar, in which
the US has either ordered the arrest of its own citizens by a
foreign government or shipped people abroad so they could be held
incommunicado and tortured, constitute a blatant violation of
international law and US constitutional rights.
They expose the fraud of the Bush administrations claims
to champion freedom and democracy in the Middle East. These methods
are an essential part of a policy of aggression that US imperialism
is pursuing with the aid of the most despotic regimes in the region.
See Also:
New evidence of US torture in Iraq and
Afghanistan
[23 February 2005]
More evidence of US governments
torture by proxy
[12 February 2005]
Britons release devastating
account of torture and abuse by US forces at Guantanamo
[6 August 2004]
US army officially
whitewashes Abu Ghraib torture
[2 August 2004]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |