U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman shakes hands with Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra— with Senator Kelly Ayotte, Sheldon Whitehouse, Joseph Lieberman, John McCain and Yingluck Shinawatra.
 |
| Photo from US Embassy/BKK/FB |
3 days ago
Showing posts with label People. Show all posts
Showing posts with label People. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
US Embassy Thailand: CODEL McCain - Jan 20, 2012
Monday, January 23, 2012
US Embassy Vietnam: CODEL McCain - Jan 18-20, 2012
U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam David B. Shear with U.S. Senators John McCain, Joe Lieberman, Sheldon Whitehouse and Kelly Ayotte, as well as
representatives of Hoa Lo Prison in Hanoi during the congressional delegation's visit to Vietnam.
 |
| Photo from US Embassy Vietnam |
 |
| Touring the Hanoi Hilton which has been converted into a museum, Senator McCain points at a photo taken after he was captured in 1967. Photo from Senator McCain/FB |
 |
| The Senators visiting
Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi - where Senator McCain landed after being shot down in 1967 . They are standing in front of the monument to his capture. Photo from Senator McCain/FB |
 |
Senator McCain with Ambassador Shear at Truc Bach Lake.— in Vietnam.
Photo from Senator McCain/FB |
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Ambassador Aponte's Nomination "DeMinted" Over Old Boyfriend, LGBT Op-Ed, and [Fill in the Blank]
The Senate rejected on a 49-37 vote late Monday the cloture on the nomination of Mari Carmen Aponte, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of El Salvador. Ambassador Aponte is the first Puerto Rican appointed as U.S. ambassador.
 |
| Ambassador Aponte Photo from US Embassy San Salvador/FB |
Nevada Sen. Harry Reid issued the following statement after Republicans blocked her confirmation:
“Senate Republicans once again put politics above policy by blocking the confirmation of a dedicated public servant. In the fifteen months Mari Carmen Aponte has served as our ambassador to El Salvador, she finalized an important international, anti-crime agreement and forged a strong partnership between our nations. The Puerto Rican community and all Americans are right to be proud of Ms. Aponte’s accomplishments as a diplomat representing our nation, as I am.
“I am disappointed Republicans continued a long-running trend of obstructing qualified nominees just to score political points. Unfortunately, defeating President Obama is more important to Senate Republicans than confirming qualified nominees to represent our country in Latin America.”
Ambassador Aponte's chief opponent in the Senate is no other than Jim Demint, the junior senator from South Carolina and chief defender of creatures big and small except gay people. According to CNN, Senator DeMint, writing last month in Human Events, assailed Ambassador Aponte for the op-ed and revived the old speculation about her personal life.
"Our relationship with the Salvadoran people has been one of trust and friendship for decades," DeMint said. "We should not risk that by appointing an ambassador who shows such a blatant disregard for their culture and refuses to clear unsettled doubts about her previous relationships. It's time to bring Ms. Aponte home."NYT's Gail Collins writes a warning about The Ghosts of Boyfriends Past which should be required reading for all women with ambassadorial aspirations.
New unnerving development in Congress: Some senators are claiming that a woman nominated to be ambassador to El Salvador can’t have the job because they don’t like a boyfriend she lived with almost 20 years ago.
[...]
Whenever these things happen, the Democrats race off to try to placate the aggrieved Republican. They gave DeMint access to Aponte’s F.B.I. file, even though instances of DeMint’s being placated by anything are about as frequent as confirmed sightings of space aliens.
DeMint then complained that the file was out of date. But, by then, he seemed to be losing interest in the boyfriend issue and had moved on to fuming that while she was in El Salvador, Aponte had written an op-ed essay in a Salvadoran newspaper “lecturing their people on the need to accept and support the gay lifestyle.”
So basically, Ambassador Aponte's nomination is derailed by the ghost of an old boyfriend, and for writing an op-ed on a policy championed by the administration she serves. But even if she did not write that op-ed, who's to say that her nomination would not be "deminted" ... after all there are other blahs to complain about .... her shoes or something...
I suppose there is still hope while Congress is in session. But time is against her. With only a few days to go before Congress breaks for the holidays, it seems like this nomination may now be seriously dead.
Update:
It looks like this nomination is not quite dead yet but not sure how long this will stay in life support. Ambassador Aponte's nomination is currently listed for reconsideration in the senate's executive calendar dated December 17. A few days ago, the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (USHCC) announced its disappointment in the Senate's recent failure to confirm her as U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador. According to its press release, "the USHCC, America's premier Hispanic business organization and the primary advocate for the interests of nearly three million Hispanic-owned businesses in the United States that combined generate in excess of $420 billion annually, has been impressed with Aponte's achievements regarding economic development in El Salvador."
The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce is not the only one disappointed. Apparently, the Puerto Ricans in Florida are similarly disappointed. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) must have heard their disappointment. WaPo's Al Kamen writes that "if it turns out that Rubio gets sufficient votes to break the filibuster, a Senate vote would be rescheduled on Aponte’s nomination."
Karzai's Kabul Bank Scam Excuse --"Created by Foreign Hands"
Image via WikipediaAs NATO foreign ministers gathered in Bonn last week to discuss the way forward in Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai gave an interview to SPIEGEL about how much international involvement will be required following the 2014 withdrawal and about his rocky partnership with the United States. The interview was conducted by Matthias Gebauer and Christoph Reuter and touched on corruption in Afghanistan, specifically on the Bank of Kabul. Excerpts:
SPIEGEL: In the largest financial scandal of Afghanistan, surrounding the virtually bankrupt Bank of Kabul, your family too would seem to be involved. We have seen a protocol from former central bank head Abdul Qadir Fitrat who, in the presence of your brother, made clear that the bank was little more than a criminal organization and was close to collapse. It provided loans to fictitious companies and straw men. The bank managers invested in huge villas in Dubai. Why did nothing happen for a full year?
Karzai: We called in Fitrat and asked him and said we are hearing that there is something going wrong, but he said no. The Americans never told us about this. The bank didn't tell us.
SPIEGEL: But once the problems became apparent, why did your government prevent an audit of the bank by foreign experts?
Karzai: We believed a certain embassy was trying to create financial trouble for us. We felt the whole bank scam was created by foreign hands.
SPIEGEL: Which embassy?
Karzai: I will not go into details.
This is the same guy who wants $5 billion a year from the United States until 2024. He must think that's a nice round bargain considering that we are going to spend $6.5 billion a year for the US Mission in Iraq after the military pulls out.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Goodbye Foggy Bottom, Hello Oxford!
On Saturday, November 19, 2011, the American Rhodes Scholar Class of 2012 was announced. From a pool of 830 candidates who had been nominated by their colleges and universities, 32 students were selected to commence their studies at Oxford in October 2012.
One familiar name from Foggy Bottom:
Ronan S. Farrow | Washington, DC, graduated with double majors in philosophy and biology from Bard College in 2004. He was the college’s youngest graduate ever, at age 15. He is now its first Rhodes Scholar. He graduated from Yale Law School in 2009, where he edited the Yale Journal of International Affairs. He is currently Special Advisor to the Secretary of State for Global Youth Issues, and before that was Special Advisor for Humanitarian and NGO Affairs. He has been a political commentator on three networks and in many national publications, and is a songwriter and guitarist. He grew up with fourteen adopted siblings from seven countries speaking six languages. At Oxford, Ronan plans to do a D.Phil. in international development.
Read the bios of the American Rhodes Scholars for 2012 | 11/20/2011 here.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Nixon's 1975 Grand Jury Testimony: No selling of ambassadorships, but gave a price tag of $250K in 1971
Last year, Public Citizen asked the District Court on behalf of historian Stanley Kutler and four associations of historians and archivists to unseal the transcript of President Nixon's grand jury testimony of June 23-24, 1975, and certain associated materials of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.
The Court granted the petition in July this year. On November 10, the National Archives released the Nixon testimony.
Below is from Folder 9/16 - Part 1: Transcripts of President Nixon's grand jury testimony taken on June 23, 1975. One of the subjects the grand jury was looking into, in addition to the 18 1/2 minute gap is the relationship between campaign contributions and the consideration of ambassadorships for five persons: Ruth Farkas, J. Fife Symington, Jr., Vincent deRoulet, Cornelius V. Whitney and Kingdon Gould, Jr.,
Some Nixon quotable quotes:
It was not because "she had big bosoms:"
I would say, looking at the smaller countries like Luxembourg, that Pearl Mesta wasn't sent to Luxembourg because she had big bosoms. Pearl Mesta went to Luxembourg because she made a good contribution. But may I say she was a very good ambassador in Luxembourg. And when you talk about selling ambassadorships, I don't want the record of this Grand Jury 11 even to indicate that people of wealth, because they do make contributions, therefore should be barred from being ambassadors. The record should clearly indicate that certainly no commitment, no sale of ambassadorships should be made, but, on the other hand, the fact that an individual has proved himself on the American scene, has proved himself by legitimately building a great fortune, rather than being a disqualifier is a factor that can be considered and should be considered in determining whether he should get a position.Croissants are expensive in Paris, Tricky Dick says "some posts require wealthy people..."
My recollection is not refreshed by looking at this piece of paper. I did, however , make the appointment and the fact that Hr . Stans' name appeared on there meant to me that Mr . deRoulet had been, obviously, a contributor to the campaign and, as has been the case in every presidency from the time this Republic was founded two hundred years ago, contributors to campaigns are not barred from being ambassadors. They aren't guaranteed, and it should never be, that they will be ambassadors, but in many instances some posts require wealthy people and in every presidency that I know of contributors have been appointed to non-career posts in considerable numbers.
Below Nixon disses career ambassadors, which should not come as a surprise to you if you already know that in 1972, President Nixon had asserted that his “one legacy is to ruin the foreign service. I mean ruin it—the old foreign service—and to build a new one."
As far as career ambassadors, most of them are a bunch of eunuchs, and I don't mean that in a physical sense, but I meant it in an emotional sense, in a mental sense. They aren't for the American free enterprise system. I point out that, and this is in defense not only of my presidency, but of President Kennedy, President Johnson, President Eisenhower, President Truman, all of the others who are my predecessors, that some of the best ambassadors we have have been non-career ambassadors who have made sub-stantial contributions. Bill Bullitt, for example, was probably the best ambassador to Russia and the best ambassador to France we have had in a generation. Now he didn't get his job because he happened to shave the top of his head. He got his job because he contributed a half million dollars to the Roosevelt's campaign.Remember this grandy jury testimony was done in 1975. Nixon says he has "no recollection of ever authorizing the selling of ambassadorships..."
I respond to that question by saying that I have no recollection of ever authorizing the selling of ambassadorships, the making of an absolute commitment for ambassadorships. As I have indicated earlier, my recollection of the entire ambassadorial decision process , which is already in the record, is that those who made contributions would receive consideration, but as far as the specific commitment, etcetera - quote - end quote - is concerned, or the sale of ambassadorships, I have no recollection of using that term or intending that term.In 1997, after newly transcribed Nixon tapes were released, WaPo reported that while presidents have long bestowed U.S. ambassadorships on big campaign contributors, Richard M. Nixon put a specific price tag on the practice in 1971.
"My point is, my point is that anybody who wants to be an ambassador must at least give $250,000," the president told White House Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman on June 23, 1971, according to a newly transcribed tape.Read in full here. Also read, Checkbook Diplomacy, the Buying of Ambassadorships by the Center for Public Integrity.
"Yeah," Haldeman agreed, and then proposed a minimal donation threshold. "I think any contributor under $100,000 we shouldn't consider for any kind of thing."
Nixon pointed out that "we helped" Fred J. Russell, a millionaire California real estate baron and Republican donor who would soon be named ambassador to Denmark. "But from now on," the president continued, "the contributors have got to be, I mean, a big thing and I'm not gonna do it for political friends and all that crap."
And if you still have the stomach for this, read the whole thing below:
GPO Nara Part 1: Nixon's grand jury testimony taken on June 23, 1975.
Monday, November 7, 2011
General Fuller, Didn't You Know That Keeping It Real in Afghanistan Can Get You Sacked?
Maj. Gen. Peter Fuller, deputy commander of the American-led NATO effort to train and equip Afghan security forces gave an interview to POLITICO last week. He said lots of things in that interview that you and I already know, and that U.S. officials already think but won't admit publicly for obvious reasons.
This is not the first time that President Karzai and "erratic" had been used in the same sentence. Apparently, frustrated diplomats and foreign statesmen have called the president of Afghanistan "as erratic, emotional and prone to believing paranoid conspiracy theories." But no one gets fired for writing that in a cable. Read this account here from the Guardian (WL coverage from the Guardian, you may go blind if read from a work computer).
I am pleased to see that a two-star general went on the record to say the things he said. I'm sorry he got sacked and may be forced to retire. But you don't get to become a general by accident or by political connections, unlike some of our ambassadors. He must know that what he said in the interview will be reported widely. I don't think he is naive enough to think that there will not be any career repercussions. It's not like they're just kicking cans and this came up. So, that leaves me thinking -- either his frustrations with his Afghan counterparts have become crazy bad, or he knew what's coming, but may have thought the flap is worth it if this gets some airing.
I particularly like the "poke me in the eye with a needle," (ouchy!) and the "cod's on the menu today." There is a poem in there somewhere.
Via Politico:
The two-star general flashed irritation when he brought up Karzai’s recent remarks that Afghanistan would side with Pakistan in a war against the U.S., blasting the president’s comments as “erratic,” and adding, “Why don’t you just poke me in the eye with a needle! You’ve got to be kidding me … I’m sorry, we just gave you $11.6 billion and now you’re telling me, ‘I don’t really care’?”Read in full here.
[...]
Fuller recently involved Afghan generals in a strategic review of the U.S. mission and said that they didn’t understand the extent to which America is in economic distress.
“I said, ‘You guys are isolated from reality.’ The reality is, the world economy is having some significant hiccups. The U.S. is in this [too],” Fuller told POLITICO. “If you’re in a very poor country like Afghanistan, you think that America has roads paved in gold, everybody lives in Hollywood. They don’t understand the sacrifices that America is making to provide for their security. And I think that’s part of my job to educate ’em.”
[...]
In fact, the Afghan government made requests for F-16 fighter jets and tanks, even without the budget to use or maintain them, said Fuller. “I actually had someone senior tell me, ‘All I want to do is put them [tanks] on a flat bed and drive them around in a parade,” he said.
[...]
“You can teach a man how to fish, or you can give them a fish,” said Fuller. “We’re giving them fish while they’re learning, and they want more fish! [They say,] ‘I like swordfish, how come you’re giving me cod?’ Guess what? Cod’s on the menu today.”
Below is a brief bio:
As the Deputy Commander for Programs Maj. Gen. Peter Fuller is responsible for planning and executing resources in order to generate and sustain an Afghan Army of 195,000 and an Afghan Police Force of 157,000 by November 2012.Danger Room's Spencer Ackerman writes that "Getting fired from Afghanistan doesn’t necessarily end Fuller’s Army career. But that career will be in need of serious rehab if Fuller doesn’t opt to retire. All for saying something that a lot of people in the military quietly agree with — even if they know better than to tell it to a journalist."
Fuller joined the NTM-A / CSTC-A team from the Program Executive Officer- Soldier. A native of Andover, Md., Major General Fuller was commissioned a second lieutenant in 1980 after graduating from the University of Vermont with a Bachelor of Arts in History and Political Science. He also holds: a Master of Science in Public Administration, Shippensburg University, Shippensburg, Pa.; a Master of Science in Military Arts and Sciences, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan; and a Master of Science in Resourcing of the National Security Strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, Fort McNair, Washington, District of Columbia.
His awards include the Distinguished Service Medal, Legion of Merit (with two oak leaf clusters); Defense Meritorious Service Medal; Army Meritorious Service Medal (with two oak leaf clusters); Army Commendation Medal (with oak leaf cluster); Southwest Asia Liberation Medal; Army Achievement Medal (with oak leaf cluster); National Defense Service Ribbon; Army Service Ribbon; Army Parachutist Badge; Office of the Secretary of Defense Identification Badge; Army Staff Identification Badge; and the Overseas Ribbon.
Whether he gets his career rehabilitated or he gets retirement, I don't know. But it seems a certainty that his successor, too will need to educate the Afghans on the sacrifices that America is making to provide for their security. But he must do it gently and carefully so as not to offend their feelings, see? It doesn't matter that they, too, offend our feelings. I'm sure General Fuller's successor will get a couple of advice like, 1) stay away from loaded words like, "needle", "poke", "eye", "cod", "erratic", and a host of other words that are seen as inappropriate. Even if they're true. And 2) stay away from journalists, because they write stuff down.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
US Files Complaint Against Obiang Jr., Alleged Kleptocrat and Son of Equatorial Guinea Dictator
WASHINGTON – The U.S. government has filed civil forfeiture complaints against approximately $70.8 million in real and personal property, which the government alleges is the proceeds of foreign corruption offenses and was laundered in the United States, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director John Morton.Read in full here.
An amended civil forfeiture complaint has been unsealed in U.S. District Court in the Central District of California and a separate civil forfeiture complaint was filed today in the District of Columbia. According to the complaints, Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue (Nguema) used his position and influence as a government minister for Equatorial Guinea to acquire criminal proceeds through corruption and money laundering, in violation of both Equatoguinean and U.S. law. According to the complaints, Nguema is the son of Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mbasogo (Obiang), the president of Equatorial Guinea.
“The complaints announced today allege that, on a modest government salary, Minister Nguema amassed wealth of over $100 million,” said Assistant Attorney General Breuer. “While his people struggled, he lived the high life – purchasing a Gulfstream jet, a Malibu mansion and nearly $2 million in Michael Jackson memorabilia. Alleging that these extravagant items are the proceeds of foreign official corruption, the Department of Justice is seeking to seize them through coordinated forfeiture actions. Through our Kleptocracy Initiative, we are sending the message loud and clear: the United States will not be a hiding place for the ill-gotten riches of the world’s corrupt leaders.”
“This investigation was initiated by ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) in an effort to identify Teodoro Nguema Obiang’s assets in the United States after he was suspected of obtaining his wealth from alleged illicit activities such as the misappropriation of public funds, theft, extortion and embezzlement of the nation’s natural resources,” said ICE Director Morton. “ICE HSI will continue to work with our law enforcement partners both here and abroad to hold these individuals accountable by denying them the enjoyment of their ill-gotten gains.”
According to the complaints, despite an official government salary of less than $100,000 per year, Nguema amassed more than $100 million during a period in which he and an inner circle of individuals who hold critical positions of political and economic power in Equatorial Guinea were the near-exclusive beneficiaries of the extraction and sale of that country’s natural resources . Under Equatoguinean law, the natural resources belong to the people of Equatorial Guinea. The complaints allege that Nguema used intermediaries and corporate entities to acquire numerous assets in the United States, including more than $1.8 million worth of Michael Jackson memorabilia, a $38.5 million Gulfstream G-V jet, a $30 million house in Malibu, Calif., and a 2011 Ferrari automobile valued at more than $530,000.
Related posts:
Friday, March 26, 2010 | The Problem with Alleged Kleptocrats and Visas …
Sunday, February 27, 2011 | Global Witness: Son of Equatorial Guinea's dictator plans $380M superyacht
Monday, October 24, 2011
Hamid Karzai, Our Man in Kabul -- Misinterpreted Once Again!
And it's a good thing! Because if this was not a "misinterpretation" that would make us real dummies with pet snakes in that neighborhood.
Via HuffPo:
"If fighting starts between Pakistan and the U.S., we are beside Pakistan," Karzai said is an interview with private Pakistani television station GEO that aired Saturday. "If Pakistan is attacked and the people of Pakistan need Afghanistan's help, Afghanistan will be there with you."
Here is also a snippet of a video complete with finger wagging:
The LA Times has more:
As long as we continue willfully misinterpreting the smoke signals being sent from over there, we're good, right?
President Hamid Karzai’s office on Monday sought to distance him from controversial remarks in a television interview aired over the weekend in which he asserted that Afghanistan would side with Pakistan in a hypothetical war against the United States. The presidential palace said the Afghan leader’s comments, made in an interview with the Pakistani television station Geo, had been “misinterpreted.”Read in full here.
[...]
A spokesman for Karzai, Siamak Herawi, said the president had not intended any slight to the Western governments that have spent billions of dollars shoring up the Afghan administration during the 10-year war that has claimed the lives of at least 1,817 American troops.
“The media misinterpreted [Karzai’s] speech,” he said, adding that the president had been trying to express solidarity with Pakistan for having taken in millions of Afghan refugees during decades of war and the subsequent rule of the Taliban movement.
Western military officials and diplomats publicly played down the significance of Karzai’s comments, even while privately expressing varying degrees of bafflement and dismay.
As long as we continue willfully misinterpreting the smoke signals being sent from over there, we're good, right?
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Ronan Farrow, New Clinton Special Adviser for Global Youth Issues Now in a Committed Relationship
Image via WikipediaRonan Farrow who was officially appointed Special Adviser to the Secretary of State for Global Youth Issues last June is apparently "in a committed relationship with Chef Boyardee" as he "ate microwaved StateDept convenience store food at desk after 10pm at least twice" last week.
Well, sure, I wanted to know what you ate for lunch at your desk every day of the week since you came back to Foggy Bottom but you never said/tweeted anything about having a committed relationship with Chef B or about the State Dept cafeteria food. And he did. And not just about any food either but our top US banker's food, too!
Ronan Farrow
Pretty sure if #China found out what the @StateDept cafeteria's passing off as Chinese food it'd cause a diplomatic incident.
19 Aug
Ronan Farrow whose real name according to the ever reliable Wikipedia is Satchel Ronan O'Sullivan Farrow is the son of film director Woody Allen and actress Mia Farrow. He is also the grandson of director John Farrow and actress Maureen O'Sullivan.
But that's not why you should know him. Prior to this appointment, he worked in the late SRAP Richard Holbrooke's Af/Pak shop. For those who might exclaim, "He's so young!" or "But that's Mia Farrow's son!" -- Mr. Farrow apparently has the chops. He graduated from college at age 15 and was accepted at Yale Law at 16 but deferred his admission to work for Ambassador Holbrooke. He is a graduate of Yale Law School and a member of the New York bar. He has a long list of accomplishments for one who is not even 25 years old. He will feel right at home in an organization full of high achievers. It's a good thing he has his own office; the oldies not always goldies at State would not know what to do with him had he started in A100.
Below is his official bio at state.gov:
Ronan FarrowHere he is at the UN during a meeting on youth at the General Assembly last month:
Special Adviser to the Secretary of State
Global Youth Issues
Term of Appointment: 06/30/2011 to present
Ronan Farrow is Special Adviser to the Secretary of State for Global Youth Issues and director of the State Department’s Global Youth Issues office. With youth populations swelling and young people driving global events to an unprecedented extent, Special Adviser Farrow is responsible for implementing and amplifying youth policy and programming throughout the Department. The Office of Global Youth Issues, created by Secretary Clinton as a result of a Department-wide review of youth policy, oversees an historic effort to empower young people as economic and civic actors through US programs, encourage governments to respond to youth through US diplomacy, and directly engage young people around the world.
A lawyer and former human rights advocate and journalist, Special Adviser Farrow assumed his current role following two years as the State Department’s Special Adviser for Humanitarian and NGO Affairs in the Office of the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, overseeing the U.S. Government’s relationships with civil society and non-governmental actors.
Prior to joining the State Department, he served as Spokesperson for Youth at UNICEF, working with youth groups on the AIDS epidemic in Nigeria, on post-war reconstruction efforts in Angola, and in the Darfur region of Sudan. His writings on humanitarian and human rights issues have appeared in publications including the Los Angeles Times, the International Herald Tribune and the Wall Street Journal, and he has appeared on MSNBC, ABC and CNN, among others, advocating for children associated with armed conflicts. He has heavily emphasized youth engagement in his advocacy efforts, working at the forefront of the student movement on Darfur and touring the country speaking at universities as a Representative for the Genocide Intervention Network.
In 2008, he was awarded Refugees International’s McCall-Pierpaoli Humanitarian Award for “extraordinary service to refugees and displaced people.” In 2009, he was named by New York Magazine as their “New Activist” of the year and included on their list of individuals “on the verge of changing their worlds.” In 2010, Harper’s Bazaar named him their “up-and-coming politician of the year.”
He is a graduate of Yale Law School and a member of the New York bar. During his time at Yale Law School, he practiced at New York-based law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell. He has also served on the legal counsel team for the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, working on international human rights law issues.
Full text of the speech is here.
Monday, August 22, 2011
On to 2024: Our Pretend 51st State of Afghanistan -- Not/Not a Laughing Matter
The Telegraph's Ben Farmer in Kabul is reporting that the United States and Afghanistan are close to signing a strategic pact which would allow thousands of U.S. troops to remain in that country until at least 2024.
The agreement would allow not only military trainers to stay to build up the Afghan army and police, but also American special forces soldiers and air power to remain.
The prospect of such a deal has already been met with anger among Afghanistan’s neighbours including, publicly, Iran and, privately, Pakistan.
It also risks being rejected by the Taliban and derailing any attempt to coax them to the negotiating table, according to one senior member of Hamid Karzai’s peace council.
A withdrawal of American troops has already begun following an agreement to hand over security for the country to Kabul by the end of 2014.
But Afghans wary of being abandoned are keen to lock America into a longer partnership after the deadline. Many analysts also believe the American military would like to retain a presence close to Pakistan, Iran and China.
Wait, WAIT a minute ... the same government who calls U.S. personnel in Afghanistan "occupiers" actually wants us to stay? Folks, this is not/not a healthy relationship. The somebodies need some serious therapy. Call meee! I got names to recommend.
Anyway, when I wrote this post, I did a screen grab of how much we've spent on the war in Afghanistan (see below from http://costofwar.com/en/). By the time you read this, the amount is higher, of course, because the cost just drips on like a leaky faucet. Where are the plumbers when you really need them, huh? .... drip ....drip...drip....drip....
I was thinking of soldiers for 2023 entering kindergarten this fall; miss by 12 months! Youngest members bore the heaviest cost in Iraq, and no doubt, in Afghanistan, too. More here.
So if true that the United State and Afghanistan are kinda keen on continuing this dysfunctional marriage of inconvenience, at least until 2024, we may have to call Afghanistan our pretend 51st state until then.
I don't think this is an unfair description since Afghanistan is the destination of so much pork from the US Treasury. It is a surprise that its economy has not been dolarized yet. And to think that the Afghans can't even vote! Just imagine how much more money is allocated over there if even half of its 29 million inhabitants can vote!
Meanwhile, the taxpayers of Detroit, Michigan which has the highest poverty rate (36.4%) among American cities with populations greater than 250,000 will pay $205.1 million for its share of the Afghanistan war spending for FY2011. For the same amount of money, the following could be provided:
154,202 Children Receiving Low-Income Healthcare for One Year OR
2,869 Elementary School Teachers for One Year OR
3,905 Firefighters for One Year OR
28,881 Head Start Slots for Children for One Year OR
64,154 Households with Renewable Electricity - Solar Photovoltaic for One Year OR
171,078 Households with Renewable Electricity-Wind Power for One Year OR
26,764 Military Veterans Receiving VA Medical Care for One Year OR
49,682 People Receiving Low-Income Healthcare for One Year OR
3,200 Police or Sheriff's Patrol Officers for One Year OR
17,590 Scholarships for University Students for One Year OR
36,952 Students receiving Pell Grants of $5550
Now if we calculate the cost of war share based on FY2011 numbers, it looks like Detroit, Michigan will be in the hook for some $2.6663 billion for Afghanistan in the next 13 years.
A pretend 51st state is not/not a laughing matter. I think its time we get out of the pretend 51st state business and start rebuilding our real states.
Monday, August 15, 2011
US ConGen Chennai: "Dirty and Dark" Tamil Remark Lands US Diplomat in Very Hot Water
The Times of India recently reported that a US diplomat was caught in a very public row over her insensitive and thoughtless remark about Tamils during a speech at a local university in Chennai, India.
"I was on a 24-hour train trip from Delhi to Orissa. But after 72 hours, the train still did not reach the destination... and my skin became dirty and dark like the Tamilians," US vice-consul Maureen Chao said in a speech at the SRM University on Friday. Chao also said, "Some 20 years ago, I was a student and had an opportunity to do a semester abroad. I chose India, fascinated by its culture and religion. I was amazed at the graciousness of the people."
Oh dear. I wish she did a rehearsal before she went to that talk. She could have started with "Some years ago ....." and we won't be talking about this today.
There is seldom a Take 2 in diplomatic life.
The "dark and dirty" remark was first reported on Friday, August 12. On Saturday, August 13, the U.S. Consulate General in Chennai issued its quick reaction statement:
Yesterday at a Study Abroad Orientation Program at SRM University, Vice Consul Maureen Chao gave a speech describing positive memories from her own study abroad experiences in India 23 years ago. During the speech Ms. Chao made an inappropriate comment. Ms. Chao deeply regrets if her unfortunate remarks offended anyone, as that was certainly not her intent.
As Secretary Clinton recently noted, the U.S.-India partnership is based on our shared values of democracy, liberty, and respect for religious and cultural diversity. The U.S. Consulate in Chennai and the U.S. Mission in India are committed to upholding these shared values.
I should note that this incident has overshadowed the arrival of the new Consul General Jennifer McIntyre who assumed her duties in Chennai on August 3, 2011. I expect that the new CG will make the rounds of introducing herself to the officials in her consular district. But instead of more substantial conversations and building new relationships, she now has to start her tour with a round of apologies.
Also on August 13, Reddiff carried the news that the Tamil Nadu government on Saturday condemned the 'dark and dirty' remark, alleging that it smacked of racism and was an affront to all Tamilians.
On August 14, the Times of India reported that PMK founder S Ramadoss demanded that the Union government expel the US diplomat for her controversial comments on Tamils.
"Its highly condemnable. While Tamils have been excelling in many fields, including Information Technology and surprise many including Americans, a US official saying this cannot be tolerated," Ramadoss said in a statement.
"People like her should not be allowed to stay in Tamil Nadu. The ministry of foreign affairs should call her in person to express its opposition and expel her immediately from the country," he said.
According to ConGen Chennai's website, Maureen Chao is a Vice Consul with the U.S. Consulate General Chennai. She earned a Bachelor degree in International Studies, a Master degree in Education, and a Ph.D. in Higher Education Administration. She was a Fulbright Fellow in Vietnam, conducting research in education. Prior to joining the State Department she worked with international education programs for fifteen years, as well as in the social services field with foster children, refugees and immigrants and low-income/homeless populations.
Presumably, she is on her first tour assignment in Chennai.
U.S. diplomats are on 24/7, 365 days a year. Even the lowest ranked, most junior U.S. diplomat is a representative of the United States Government.The press, and host country nationals in fact, will have high expectations even on the newest vice-consul. If there is a lesson to this, it is that no matter how junior a diplomat the individual might be, what he/she says and does reflect on the United States. The press, local or otherwise, will not make allowances that this is a diplomat's first assignment or whether or not he/she had lessons in public affairs and public diplomacy.
In a very competitive service, entry level officers often try to set themselves apart from the pack. Most volunteer for additional assignments, others use their portfolio assignments to stand out; in a pack of highly educated, talented newbies, they mostly want to be memorable to their bosses. But it can sometimes backfire.
In the last several years, there has also been a pushed for new officers to be out there. Even "newbies" on their first tours in consular sections are being asked to conduct consular public diplomacy outreach with radio, television and the print media. The State Department culture often presumes that a Foreign Service Officer, a generalist can do just about anything, whether they are trained for it or not. Some officers are indeed talented in dealing with the general public and the media; but others are not so.
In another life -- in at least one consular section, I have seen a Consul General tasked entry level officers with extremely limited press training to go out and deal with the media in the section's public outreach. And it was not optional. The result was a group of new officers who desperately wanted to excel on something they were set to fail. For those naturally talented or PD-coned, the task was manageable; if you have the knack for it, you can get by by the skin of your teeth. For those who are non-PD coned, or those with no substantial experience dealing with foreign publics--some not always friendly to the United States, it was often like amateur hour. Why would a senior manager do something like this? Rumor had it that the Consul General was trying to impress somebody from his/her home bureau with an "innovative" program for new officers which carry no training cost. It was a shitty program but the junior officers were too afraid to complain or demand appropriate training.
I am not saying this was the case with Ms. Chao. But entry level officers who are on overseas assignment for the first time ought not deal with the foreign public/media without specific guidance/training from post's Public Affairs Officer. Some sections where bosses are not too addled with the illness known as promotiontitis, the officers get to do murder boards before they show up for public engagements. Despite what the name implies, a murder board does not involve actual murder and gets its origin from the U.S. Army's extensive training system; it simulates the actual presentation where the audience (usually colleagues) engaged in a role play including asking difficult and gotcha questions that the target group is likely to ask. It is a practice session that not only allows newbies to make mistakes in a learning environment; if handled effectively with appropriate feedback, it also help the new officers improve their persuasion, presentation and public speaking skills.
More importantly, it minimizes very public undiplomatic gaffes. See link below on murder boards.
On Friday, there were about three articles on this incident. By late Sunday there were over a hundred articles on the same incident. Ms. Chao, as far as I can tell, may be the only entry level diplomat in memory to appear in the same news montage as former President Richard Nixon, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, current Vice President Joe Biden and SC Gov Nikki Haley. See below a video by NewsX, a 24-hour rolling news television show rated as one of India's most watched English news channel.
Related item:
The Murder Board: The Ultimate Practice Presentation | by Larry Tracy (PDF)
Peace Corps Volunteer Jesse Osmun Charged with Sexually Abusing Children in South Africa
WASHINGTON - A Peace Corps volunteer was arrested today and charged in a federal criminal complaint with traveling from the United States to South Africa to engage in illicit sexual conduct with multiple children who were all younger than six years of age.
The arrest and charge were announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney David B. Fein for the District of Connecticut; Kathy A. Buller, Peace Corps Inspector General; and Bruce M. Foucart, Special Agent in Charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) office in Boston.
The criminal complaint alleges that Jesse Osmun, 31, of Milford, Conn., traveled to South Africa on Jan. 29, 2010. On March 25, 2010, Osmun was sworn in as a Peace Corps volunteer and began service as a volunteer at the Umvoti Aids Center (UAC) in Greytown, South Africa. The UAC is a non-governmental organization that provides support to the residents of the Greytown area affected by the AIDS virus. UAC also provides education, food and other child development services to children between the ages of three and 15. The UAC also has a center for the younger children often referred to as the preschool.
According to the complaint, Osmun, while volunteering at the UAC preschool, sexually molested at least five minor girls, all of whom were under the age of six, for approximately one year. The complaint also alleges that Osmun engaged in illicit sexual conduct with one of the girls, who is approximately five-years-old, twice a week over the course of five months.
“Mr. Osmun is charged with a shocking breach of the power entrusted to him as a Peace Corps volunteer,” said Assistant Attorney General Breuer. “Allegedly, he repeatedly sexually abused five minor girls under the age of six -- horrific crimes. Along with the international operation we announced yesterday -- Operation Delego -- this case is another example that the Justice Department will do everything in its power to bring to justice those who would exploit children, whether at home or abroad.”
“This defendant is alleged to have sexually abused very young girls, sometimes in exchange for candy, while he served as a Peace Corps volunteer at an AIDS center in South Africa,” said U.S. Attorney Fein. “We are committed to prosecuting those who sexually exploit children, the most vulnerable in society, in this country and abroad. I want to commend the diligent, swift and coordinated efforts of the Peace Corps’ Office of Inspector General and ICE Homeland Security Investigations in investigating this matter and arresting this individual.”
“We are committed to vigorous investigation and prosecution of those who exploit the mission of the Peace Corps to prey on innocent victims,” said Peace Corps Inspector General Buller.
“This arrest represents the very essence of the determination of federal, state and local law enforcement authorities to capture an individual whose primary objective, allegedly, was to sexually abuse vulnerable children,” said ICE HSI Special Agent in Charge Foucart. “I hope that this arrest sends a clear message that we will continue to aggressively pursue individuals who engage in this behavior to ensure that there is no place to hide here in the United States or anywhere in the world.”
After being confronted by the UAC program manager in May 2011, Osmun resigned from the Peace Corps. Osmun returned to the United States on June 2, 2011.
Following Osmun’s arrest today at his Milford residence, he appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Holly B. Fitzsimmons in Bridgeport, Conn., and has been ordered detained.
If convicted of the charge of traveling outside of the United States to engage in sexual conduct with a minor, Osmun faces a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.
A complaint is an allegation, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
This case is being investigated by the Peace Corps Office of Inspector General and ICE HSI. Investigative assistance has been provided by members of the South African Police Service (SAPS); ICE’s attaché office in Pretoria, South Africa; the ICE Cybercrimes Center in Fairfax, Va., and the U.S. Department of State’s regional security office in Durban, South Africa. The case is being prosecuted by U.S. Attorney Fein, Assistant U.S. Attorney Krishna R. Patel and Trial Attorney Bonnie Kane of the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section.
The USDOJ press statement says that Osmun returned to the United States on June 2, 2011. It looks like he was active on Twitter - http://twitter.com/#!/jesseosmun and LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/jesseosmun; and also has a blog at http://jesseosmun.tk/; blogposts and tweets were current until August 4, the day of his arrest.
The day after his arrest, the US Embassy in South Africa released the following statement:
Statement on Arrest of Former Peace Corps Volunteer | August 05, 2011
The statement below should be attributed to Elizabeth Kennedy Trudeau, Spokesperson of the United States Embassy.
The United States Embassy is aware that a former Peace Corps volunteer has been arrested in connection with allegations regarding sexual abuse during an assignment in South Africa.
The Peace Corps was made aware of these allegations after the individual resigned from the Peace Corps, and departed from South Africa.
We take these allegations with the utmost seriousness. We are committed to working with South African and American authorities to investigate, and if these allegations are true, to hold the individual accountable.
As this is an ongoing criminal matter, we cannot comment on the specifics of this case. However, we are engaging with both United States and South African authorities to determine the next steps.
For more information U.S. Embassy: Elizabeth Kennedy Trudeau | trudeauek@state.gov | 012-431-4217 | 079-111-8280
A graduate of Southern Connecticut State University with a BA in English (2004) and Colby Sawyer College where he studied Psychology from 1998-2000, this is how he describes himself in his blog:
I am a 31 year old former Peace Corps volunteer, blogger, nonprofit worker, grant writer and self-professed Africa Lover. I’m extremely passionate about helping nonprofits and new NGO’s connect with African communities and organizations in a way that is mutually beneficial. I recently spent over a year in South Africa working with a small NGO to build capacity around HIV/AIDS programming and develop as an organization. Prior to that I worked in Kenya for 10 months with orphans as well as older school children. I am currently looking for my next adventure in the world of development.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Court Allows US Army Vet to Sue Rumsfeld Over Claims on Confinement Conditions That "Shock the Conscience" at Camp Cropper
Image via WikipediaVia the Government Accountability Project:
(Washington, D.C.) -- Yesterday, a federal court in Washington, DC upheld the validity of a constitutional rights claim against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for his role in the torturing and illegal imprisonment of a U.S. citizen who was working as a translator in Iraq.
The decision was released publicly this morning by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The case, John Doe v. Donald Rumsfeld, et al, (No. 08-cv-1902 CKK), is available here.
Out of many suits brought against Rumsfeld over the torture of detainees in Iraq, this is only the second case that has been allowed to proceed. The Government Accountability Project (GAP) is co-counsel in this suit, along with the Chicago-based civil rights law firm Loevy & Loevy (The other case that is proceeding is Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel v. Donald Rumsfeld, et al (06 C 6964), which is also being handled by Loevy & Loevy).
GAP notes that in John Doe v. Rumsfeld, the plaintiff was granted anonymity by the court due to fears that his relatives could be subject to retaliation. Read more here.
I supposed granting anonymity to protect his loved ones is the least you can do to somebody thrown in jail without due process and never charged with any crime? U.S. District Court Judge James Gwin writes:
Rumsfeld says that courts should refrain from “judicial reexamination of wartime judgments allegedly made” during a “foreign military engagement that Congress authorized the President to prosecute.”
[...]
Avoiding the “risk of assuming a role that is almost always best suited for Congress,” [Doc. 11 at 17], however, does not recommend that courts be entirely powerless to review legislative or executive action during a time of war. Rather, “a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the Nation’s citizens.”
[...]
Doe’s complaint does not ask this Court to assume the authority to make or manage war, or to allow foreign citizens access to courts to obstruct foreign policy. Nor does it require this Court to intrude upon the political branches’ authority over military service. Instead, the complaint alleges “constitutional trespass on a detained individual citizen’s liberties where the detention was not a necessary removal from the battlefield,” Padilla, 633 F. Supp. 2d at 1028, and calls upon judicial expertise in safeguarding the citizen’s individual liberties and enforcing already-established procedural rights. See Hamdi, 542 U.S. 507
[...]
The Court thus finds, under the circumstances alleged, that a reasonable federal official would have understood conscience-shocking physical and psychological mistreatment—including temperature, sleep, food, and light manipulation—of a United States citizen detainee to violate the detainee’s constitutional right to substantive due process. Accordingly, Rumsfeld is not entitled to qualified immunity from Doe’s substantive due process claim.
Excerpt from John Doe v. Rumsfeld:
For the purposes of the pending motions to dismiss, the Court accepts as true the following factual allegations made in Plaintiff John Doe’s complaint:Read in full here.
In December 2004, Doe, an American citizen and United States Army veteran, traveled to Iraq as a civilian employee of an American-owned defense contracting firm. Doe went to work as an Arabic translator and was detailed to a United States Marine Corps Human Exploitation Team operating in the United States military bases along the Iraq-Syria border. The Human Exploitation Team, a Marine Corps intelligence unit, gathered and developed military intelligence through local Iraqi contacts. [Doc. 4 at 12.] Doe’s assigned team comprised Doe, two sergeants, and one lieutenant. The Team operated in Iraq’s Anbar Province, a highly volatile region along the western border of Iraq. [Id].
During his tenure in Iraq, Doe worked with the Human Exploitation Team to establish contact with Iraqi Sheikh Abd Al-Sattar Abu Risha. [Doc. 4 at 2.] Doe maintains that, as the Human Exploitation Team’s translator and as the first American to open direct talks with Al-Sattar, he served as the main point of contact for all communications between the Sheikh and the Team. Doe also contends that through a series of highly secretive meetings with Al-Sattar, the Sheikh pledged to support the United States and ultimately became “one of America’s staunchest allies” by providing the United States military with information to help control insurgencies in Anbar. [Doc. 4 at 2, 13.]
On October 20, 2005, Doe was transported to “Camp Korean Village,” a Marine Corps support base, to prepare for his scheduled November 5, 2005 departure from Iraq to the United States for annual leave. [Doc. 4 at 14.] When Doe arrived at Camp Korean Village, a Navy Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) agent questioned him about his work with the Human Exploitation Team. In response to the NCIS agent’s questions, Doe says he provided a general description of his work with the Team.
On or about November 4, 2005, Doe was transported to Al Asad, a military airbase in Anbar and Doe’s scheduled point of departure from Iraq. Soon after his arrival at Al Asad, Doe was taken to an interrogation room where three NCIS agents and one other official questioned him for approximately four hours. [Doc. 4 at 14-15.] The agents denied Doe’s requests to have a representative from his military company or the Human Exploitation Team present during the interrogation. They also denied his requests for an attorney. Doe says he refused to answer questions, citing a concern for the confidentiality of sensitive information he had learned during his work on the Team. The agents searched and confiscated Doe’s luggage. They also handcuffed and blindfolded Doe, and, he says, kicked him repeatedly in the back. One agent threatened to shoot Doe if he tried to escape. [Doc. 4 at 15.]
Doe was then transported to the airport at Al Asad, where he was helicoptered to a point approximately thirty minutes away and deposited into the custody of the United States Marine Corps.
The Marines strip-searched Doe and placed him in complete isolation in a small cell. After seventy-two hours of solitary confinement, Doe says he was flown, blindfolded and hooded, to Camp Cropper, a United States military facility near Baghdad International Airport dedicated to holding “high-value” detainees. [Doc. 4 at 16.]
Government officials detained Doe in a military jail at Camp Cropper for more than nine months. During the first three months of his detention, Doe was held incommunicado in solitary confinement. On infrequent occasions, Doe was briefly allowed outdoors for short periods after midnight.
When prison officials took Doe out of isolation, they moved him into a cell housing suspected Al Qaeda and Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party members hostile to the United States. Prior to moving Doe, the officials publicized Doe’s affiliation with the Department of Defense and his work for the Human Exploitation Team, thereby encouraging the Al Qaeda and Ba’ath Party detainees to physically attack Doe. Later, prison guards moved Doe into a cell with seven suspected Al Qaeda members, encouraging additional attacks. Doe says he lived in constant fear for his life. [Doc. 4 at 18-19.]
Doe further alleges that the Camp Cropper prison guards tortured him using “psychologically-disruptive tactics designed to induce compliance.” [Doc. 4 at 8.] Among other things, Doe says they exposed him to extreme cold and continuous artificial light, blindfolded and hooded him, woke him by banging on a door or slamming a window whenever they observed Doe trying to sleep, and blasted heavy metal or country music into his cell at what Doe calls “intolerably loud volumes.” [Doc. 4 at 8, 17.] One guard repeatedly choked Doe. [Doc. 4 at 18.]
Government officials also repeatedly interrogated Doe, though they never permitted Doe the assistance of counsel or any other representative. Doe says he consistently denied any wrongdoing and responded truthfully to the questioning but his interrogators continued to threaten him and accuse him of lying. [Doc. 4 at 19.]
During Doe’s detention at Camp Cropper, government officials held two Detainee Status Board hearings to evaluate whether Doe should keep his preliminary designation as a “security internee” or instead be designated an “innocent civilian” or an “enemy combatant.” [Doc. 4 at 19-20 .] A letter from the Detainee Status Board President informed Doe that his first status hearing would be held on or after November 30, 2005. Prior to this first hearing, the Board told Doe that he did not have the right to an attorney and could only present witnesses and evidence “reasonably available” to him at Camp Cropper. [Id.] Doe claims that the Detainee Status Board denied his requests for a Judge Advocate General’s Corps attorney or to call his Human Exploitation Team members as witnesses.
The Status Board held Doe’s first hearing on or about December 22, 2005. [Id.] During this short hearing, Doe was not permitted to view evidence against him, to hear testimony against him, or to cross-examine witnesses. After the hearing, the Board ultimately deemed Doe a threat to the Multi-National Forces in Iraq and authorized his continued detention. [Doc. 4 at 20-21.]
In July 2006 and after detaining Doe for more than an additional six months, the Detainee Status Board held a second hearing regarding Doe’s status as an enemy combatant, security internee, or civilian. The Board once again denied Doe an attorney and stopped him from presenting evidence not “reasonably available” to him at Camp Cropper. Doe was not permitted to present evidence from his military company or the Human Exploitation Team with which he had worked. This second hearing lasted much longer than the first, and Doe faced more extensive questioning about his work with Al-Sattar. In addition, Doe was questioned about his treatment at Camp Cropper and about what he might do if released from the camp. [Doc. 4 at 22.]
The next month, on or about August 10, 2006, Doe was transported, shackled and blindfolded, to Baghdad International Airport, where officials gave him a new United States passport and put him on a military flight to Jordan. [Doc. 4 at 25.] Doe ultimately returned to the United States.
Doe has never been formally charged with a crime. He claims that his personal property has not been returned to him and that he has been placed on a “blacklist” that prevents American military contracting firms from hiring him. Doe also alleges that he has been put on a terrorist “watch” list, leading United States Customs officers to interrogate him and search his belongings when he returns from international travel.
On November 3, 2008, Doe filed the instant suit, challenging the conditions of and procedures used during his confinement, his placement on various blacklists, and the failure to return his seized property. Doe brings this action against Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of the United States Department of Defense, in his individual capacity, alleging substantive and procedural due process violations, as well as denial of access to courts and counsel. Doe argues that Rumsfeld personally approved the use of torturous interrogation techniques on a case-by-case basis and that Rumsfeld maintained control over the release or continued detention of United States detainees. [Doc. 4 at 40.] Ultimately, Doe says, Rumsfeld authorized the policies and actions that resulted in violations of Doe’s substantive and procedural due process rights, as well as the denial of Doe’s access to courts to challenge his detention. [Doc. 4 at 36.] Doe asks this Court to hold Rumsfeld personally liable by allowing a money damages remedy under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), for these alleged constitutional violations.
Doe also sues Defendants Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security, Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Alan Bersin, Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, and John Morton, Assistant Secretary of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in their official capacities, to secure the return of the property seized upon his detention and for alleged violations of his right to travel.1/
Finally, Doe brings claims against unidentified officers or agents of the United States, alleging: (1) false arrest, (2) unlawful detention and conditions of confinement, (3) torturous and unlawful interrogation, (4) denial of the right to counsel and the right to confront adverse witnesses, (5) denial of the right to present witnesses and to have exculpatory evidence disclosed, (6) denial of access to courts and to petition, (7) blacklisting, and (8) conspiracy.2/
[...]
[T]he Court DENIES Rumsfeld’s motion to dismiss Doe’s substantive due process claim. The Court GRANTS Defendant Rumsfeld’s motion to dismiss Doe’s procedural due process and access to courts claims.
The Court further GRANTS the government’s motion to dismiss Doe’s return of seized property claim; the Court permits Doe leave to amend his complaint if he can plead, in good faith, factual allegations supporting a reasonable inference that the government’s refusal to return his property was a “final agency action.” Finally, the Court DENIES the government’s motion for a more definite statement of Doe’s right to travel claim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)