Germany shows why we are alone.... - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

pan6467 · 12-22-2005, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maximusveritas

Germany has the right to do what it thinks is in its best interest and we have the right to discuss and even criticize those actions.
I don't know the details of this case, but I find it hard to believe that this guy is no longer a threat. Personally, I'm not a fan of parole except in exceptional cases.
Even if the release of this prisoner is not related to the hostage release, it's very likely that Germany made some other form of concession or ransom payment in order to reach a deal. I'm not sure such deals are in the best interest of anyone other than the hostage and the terrorists.

Discussing is one thing, condemning, like many on here are doing is another.

It maybe a deal, a prisoner exchange, and it wouldn't be the first time in history one has been done. And no it probably sets a precedent that Germany will be sorry for. But it was Germany's call and they did what they believed to be in their best interest. And it simply is not my job to judge their action..... sorry. I'm sure they can point to many things our government has done to piss them off.... that individually the citizens of the US didn't approve of.

I am far more concerned, as pointed out above, by HIghthief, with the rapists, molesters, murderers we release on a daily basis in our own country. And are free to roam about to do it again.

Hell, if we could release convicted murderers and rapists and ship them off to another country, I'd say do it baby.

I am far more concerned about a supposed "war on terror" that allows 1000's of illegals (where any individual or group could be the planners and executors of the next 9/11) to flood over our border with Mexico on a daily basis. But the Right and their president don't say shit about that now do they?

My belief is that we have far, far more to fear and that the next attack will come from people jumping the border, than the guy Germany released.

host · 12-22-2005, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

There is something I don't understand here.

Some of you complain bitterly when Clinton's blow job and subsequent lie is brought up in relationship to the current administration.

Yet here we are talking about what the US has or has not done in the past as if it somehow has bearing on this.

All I'm saying is that everyone (myself included) ought to try to be consistent.

As to this issue, I am also stunned that somehow this is being seen as anything other than a crime by anyone. Yes, I know that political realities make things not black and white, but maybe that's my own miopic vision.

I personally am willing to cut Bush *some* slack because I think that our anti-terrorist efforts require it........

.....Is Germany engaged in what we are doing here? Using someone to further their political interests?

Are our left leaning members supporting that while they decry when Bush does it?

Are our right leaning members decrying it while they support Bush in it?
Interesting.......

1.) The U.S. could have had Hamadi in it's custody, from 1987, and into the future, if not for it's unwillingness to join the community of civilized nations that has banned the death penalty. John Kerry was attacked in GOP campaign ads last year for making the same argument in a 1996 campaign debate.

It is quite possible that the Bush administration has negated through the destruction of it's own integrity and reputation, the new "climate" that Kerry described, He told the Boston Globe on Dec. 18, 2002 that anti-death penalty countries would be more willing to turn over terrorists after the 9/11 attacks: “I think 9/11 has changed the capacity for extradition.”

Since a strong argument can now be made that Bush has squandered most potential foreign responses of good will and co-operation in the fight against "terr-urrr", that it might be time to shelve the "all or nothing" death penalty policy that, instead of serving as a societal revenge and prosecutorial intimidation tool in the failed U.S. extradition of Hamadi, allowed him to "walk free" at age 40, while Robert Stethem never got to live his adult life?

2.) I had tears in my eyes when I read the WaPo editorial describing the last heroic moments of 23 year old Navy diver Robert Stethem's life. What does Hamadi's release say about a country that put it's all or nothing policy of execution as a sentencing option, ahead of it's obligation and priority to see to it that Hamadi never experienced life as a free man again?

3.) It appears that Hamadi was tried in a German juvenile court, because he was just under age 21 when the air piracy and murder crimes were committed. The Bush administration's own, Oct. 11, 2001 PR, stated,
"Mohammed Ali Hamadi, confessed to his role while on trial in West Germany in 1988, and named Izz-al-Din as one of Stethem's killers."

Izz-Al-Din is apparently still at large. From a German perspective, Hamadi was a minor, tried in a juvenile court and he co-operated by naming a conspirator who he claimed was Robert Stehem's actual killer.

4.) Germany has endured threats and kidnappings over the years for it's prosecution and confinement of Hamadi. Maybe German officials were worn down by nineteen years of dealing with U.S. policies that left Germany with no choice but to prosecute and imprison Hamadi for crimes he committed against U.S. citizens and U.S. assets. U.S. death penalty policy has closed the door to extraditions from western European countries.

There was a growing animosity between Bush and Germans reported in May, 2002. It is not hard to imagine, in view of Bush's approval among Americans today, what it must be like from a German perspective, now:

Quote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story...719888,00.html
Bush comes face to face with Europe's distrust

President's tour appears unlikely to lift relations from historic low

Julian Borger in Washington, Ian Black in Brussels and Patrick Wintour
Wednesday May 22, 2002
The Guardian

George Bush flies into Berlin tonight to face an array of European allies who have grown increasingly irritated and apprehensive about his leadership.

The last time he crossed the Atlantic, he was jeered as the "toxic Texan" for his withdrawal from the Kyoto global warming accord. This time, the stakes are much higher and the chanting crowds of European demonstrators are unlikely to be so polite............

Quote:

One Hamadi arrives in Lebanon
The Washington Times
August 7, 1993
Author: Rima Salameh; ASSOCIATED PRESS
Estimated printed pages: 1

BEIRUT - Abbas Hamadi arrived here yesterday after being granted early release from the German prison where he had served more than five years for kidnapping two Germans in an attempt to free his terrorist brother.
There had been wide speculation that Abbas Hamadi , who belongs to the Iranian-backed Hezbollah, or Party of God, was freed as part of a deal with the Bonn government that led to the release of two German hostages in Lebanon in June.

But federal Justice Minister Sabine Leutheuser-Schnarrenberger repeated the government's longstanding denial on German national television yesterday, insisting "there was no deal."

Hamadi had an emotional reunion at Beirut airport with his older brother, Abdul Hadi Hamadi, who heads Hezbollah's security apparatus. The brothers burst into tears as they hugged each other. One of the Hamadi sisters, her husband and a handful of relatives were also at the airport.

The Lebanese government issued an amnesty in 1991 for crimes committed during the country's 1975-1990 civil war and is expected to decide shortly whether Abbas Hamadi is covered by it.

A Duesseldorf court sentenced Abbas Hamadi to 13 years in prison for the kidnapping of German businessman Rudolf Cordes and electrical engineer Alfred Schmidt in January 1987. Both kidnap victims were released months later.

The abduction was designed to barter the two German hostages for the freedom of another Hamadi brother, Mohammed Ali, who was sentenced in May 1987 to life imprisonment for the 1985 hijacking of a TWA airliner and the killing of U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem.

The United States had demanded Mohammed Hamadi's extradition. However, the Bonn government refused, saying the country's laws ban handing over defendants to countries where they could face the death penalty.

Quote:

http://www.factcheck.org/article226.html#
Anti-Kerry Ad Highlights Changes On Welfare, Death Penalty

Club for Growth PAC ad also recycles some misleading tax claims we've de-bunked before.

July 29, 2004

The ad also gets it right when it says Kerry still opposed the policy seven years later in 1996. During a Sept. 16, 1996 Senate campaign debate between Kerry and then-Massachusetts Governor William Weld, Kerry said anti-death penalty countries wouldn’t allow the U.S. to extradite suspected terrorists who could be put to death. As quoted by the Boston Globe:

Kerry: Your policy (the death penalty) would amount to a terrorist protection policy. Mine would put them in jail.

That, of course, was long before September 11, 2001. Kerry now supports the death penalty for terrorists:

Kerry: We are talking about people who have declared war on our nation, and just as I was prepared to kill people personally and collectively in Vietnam…I support killing people who declare war on our country .

So Kerry’s position did change -- though he still opposes the death penalty in other cases. Was Kerry simply "blowing in the wind" of public outrage? His explanation is that he responded to changed facts, not changed public opinion. He told the Boston Globe on Dec. 18, 2002 that anti-death penalty countries would be more willing to turn over terrorists after the 9/11 attacks: “I think 9/11 has changed the capacity for extradition.”

Quote:

TRUTH FROM A TRIAL
Washington Post
January 27, 1989
Estimated printed pages: 2

THERE WAS a news report this week from Europe that was both interesting and moving, and since the press didn't make much of it, we'd like to relate it here, because it shouldn't pass unnoticed. It concerned Robert Dean Stethem, the young Navy diver from Waldorf, Md., who was cruelly beaten and then shot to death during the hijacking of a TWA flight in June 1985. One of the hijackers, Mohammed Ali Hamadi, is currently on trial in Frankfurt, West Germany; the main question before the court is whether he personally killed Mr. Stethem. The witness on Tuesday, an Australian woman named Ruth Henderson -- who at the time of the hijacking was 16 years old -- couldn't shed much light on that question, but her testimony was valuable all the same
She was sitting with Mr. Stethem on the plane after he had been beaten and shortly before he was killed. ''His injuries included a bleeding head and back," she told the court. "His wrists had been tied very tightly and he had no feeling in his hands. His knees and ribs were very sore.

''We talked about unimportant things, about his diving, about Greece. By talking about normal things, he seemed to relax and forget the pain. It helped keep both our minds off the ordeal. . . .

''He said how it may be better that he died. He believed that someone would die on the plane, someone from the Navy men {there were six U.S. Navy divers on the plane}, and he said that because he was the only one who wasn't married, that he should be the one to die. He spoke with a clear mind. . . . He didn't believe that all of us could get out alive. He felt it was fair that he dies so that the rest of us could live.''

There's reason sometimes to be cynical about criminal trials as a place where justice loses out to lawyers' tricks and prosecutorial overzealousness. But they can still be one way for civilized people to get at the truth, and no matter what becomes of Mr. Hamadi, his trial will have done that at least to some degree. Mr. Stethem has been posthumously decorated, but Ruth Henderson's testimony speaks far more eloquently of him than any military citation could.

The truth that emerges from the Frankfurt courtroom is an instructive one: it is a picture of one young man attempting each day to dissociate himself from acts that grow more shameful with every retelling and of another who offered his country as pure an example of courage as it could want....

Quote:

Most-Wanted Terrorists'
Bush Releases List of 22 Individuals, Headed by Bin Laden and Top Aides in Al Qaeda
Washington Post
October 11, 2001

TWA FLIGHT 847

Beirut, June 14, 1985

Gunmen tied to the Lebanon-based Shiite Muslim terrorist organization Hezbollah hijacked TWA's Athens-to-Rome Flight 847 with 145 passengers and nine crew members. The pro-Iranian hijackers demanded the release of 700 Lebanese held in prisons in Israel and Lebanon. The plane ended up in Beirut, where most of the hostages were released. But U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem was executed, his body dumped on the tarmac, and 39 Americans were held at various locations in Beirut as the 17-day hostage standoff continued.

The hijackers were ultimately allowed to fly the airplane to Algiers, where they freed their remaining hostages and were able to escape arrest.

Hasan Izz-Al-Din, late thirties, 5 feet 9 inches to 5 feet 11 inches tall, 145 to 150 pounds, Lebanese

A Shiite Muslim, he stands indicted for the murder of Stethem. Another of the hijackers, Mohammed Ali Hamadi, confessed to his role while on trial in West Germany in 1988, and named Izz-al-Din as one of Stethem's killers.

Quote:

TWA HIJACKING TRIAL SET
Washington Post
May 21, 1988
Author: From News Services and Staff Reports
Estimated printed pages: 1

The trial of Mohammad Hamadi, a Lebanese Moslem accused of taking part in the 1985 hijacking of a TWA airliner and the murder of U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem, will begin July 5 in juvenile court, authorities here announced
Hamadi will be tried in juvenile court because he was under 21 when the airliner was hijacked in 1984.

PARENTS TESTIFY
Washington Post
November 9, 1988
Author: From News Services and Staff Reports
Estimated printed pages: 1

The parents of Mohammed Ali Hammadi testified at his trial, with his father saying the confessed hijacker was a minor at the time of the incident and his mother saying he was innocent.
Hammadi, a Lebanese Shiite Moslem, is charged with murder and air piracy in the June 1985 hijacking of a Trans World Airways jetliner to Beirut. U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem, 23, was killed and 39 Americans were held hostage for 17 days. Hamadi has admitted taking part in the hijacking but denied killing Stethem.

Hammadi's mother, Fatima, testified, "I know that my son is innocent. I know that he's very young and that we live under terrible conditions" in Beirut
Caption:
Najad Hammadi, wife of confessed hijacker Mohammed Ali

Hammmadi, enters Frankfurt court, where she and Hammadi's parents...

Quote:

BONN CONDEMNS THREAT BY SHIITES
FACTION DEMANDS ASSURANCES ON TERRORISTS JAILED IN GERMANY
Washington Post
July 26, 1991
Author: Marc Fisher; Washington Post Foreign Service
Estimated printed pages: 2

Germany tonight condemned a threat by Shiite Muslim militants to take "extremely negative action" against two German hostages if Bonn does not provide details by Friday on the condition of two Lebanese terrorists serving sentences in German jails
The German Foreign Ministry called the kidnappers' threat a "cynical game" and said Bonn "will not be blackmailed." But after an emergency meeting of its task force on hostages, the ministry reported that Mohammad and Abbas Hamadi "are in good health" and have been treated correctly and legally.

Mohammad Hamadi, 26, is serving a life sentence for murder in the 1985 killing of U.S. Navy sailor Robert Stethem, of Waldorf, Md., after the hijacking of a TWA jet to Beirut. Abbas Hamadi, 31, is serving 13 years for kidnapping two German businessmen in an abortive 1987 attempt to trade hostages for his brother's freedom.

A Lebanese Shiite group called Freedom Strugglers released a statement in Beirut Wednesday threatening violence against Heinrich Streubig and Thomas Kemptner, German charity workers who were kidnapped in southern Lebanon the day before Mohammad Hamadi was convicted in Germany in May 1989. It was the first time any group has taken responsibility for holding the two Germans, and the statement was accompanied by the first picture of Streubig since he was taken captive.

"We chose to exhaust all positive means to win the release of our brothers until the late attempts to murder them occurred, for which there will be a dire reckoning," the statement said. "But alas, they understand only the language of blood and violence . . . and we shall not hesitate to use them because we shall not permit any wrong done to our two strugglers."

Last week, Abbas Hamadi was stabbed with a knitting needle when he fought with another inmate at a prison in the German city of Saarbruecken. The incident sparked allegations by Shiite groups that the Hamadis are in danger of being assassinated in German jails.

German officials said there is no evidence of any plot against the brothers. Local officials said today they are in good health. Mohammad Hamadi "takes part in all sports and work activities," the Hessian state Justice Ministry said. Abbas Hamadi is living in "completely normal prison conditions," according to a statement by the Saarland state government.

The Hamadi brothers, and their older brother Abdul Hadi Hamadi, belong to the pro-Iranian Hezbollah faction, which is believed to hold many of the Western hostages in Lebanon. Reuter in Beirut quoted Lebanese security sources as saying that Abdul Hadi Hamadi is holding the two Germans and generated the latest threats against them.

dksuddeth · 12-22-2005, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

1.) The U.S. could have had Hamadi in it's custody, from 1987, and into the future, if not for it's unwillingness to join the community of civilized nations that has banned the death penalty. John Kerry was attacked in GOP campaign ads last year for making the same argument in a 1996 campaign debate.

This is an issue that you'll have to take up with over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support capital punishment. The government does this because we tell it to.

Willravel · 12-22-2005, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

This is an issue that you'll have to take up with over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support capital punishment. The government does this because we tell it to.

Then it's 60% of America's fault. We know Germany's rules about extradition (if we don't then we should read the news more often). We know that they're not going to extradite anyone who we are going to fry. So of course we're not getting him. As long as 60% of the country wants vegence, we will be avoiding justice like this. I think it's funny that Germany, once the nazi dominated tyrants trying to dominate Europe, and eventually the world, and killing millions of the Jewish people, are now so adement about the death penalty that they are unwilling to extradite criminals to the US. That's quite a wonderful 180.

ratbastid · 12-22-2005, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

This is an issue that you'll have to take up with over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support capital punishment.

... "over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support"... I'm sorry--and I have no evidence to support this whatsoever--but based solely on the syntax and wording you used in that sentence, I have to conclude that you pulled that straight out of your ass. I actually doubt that figure very much from a common sense standpoint, as well. Can you quote a source on that?

ratbastid · 12-22-2005, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

I think it's funny that Germany, once the nazi dominated tyrants trying to dominate Europe, and eventually the world, and killing millions of the Jewish people, are now so adement about the death penalty that they are unwilling to extradite criminals to the US. That's quite a wonderful 180.

Nothing coincidental about it, of course. Germany takes a strongly anti-nationalistic and non-violent posture on most things as a reaction to the atrocities of their past. "Never Again" is the watchword of German international policy, and will be for a long time to come.

pan6467 · 12-22-2005, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

... "over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support"... I'm sorry--and I have no evidence to support this whatsoever--but based solely on the syntax and wording you used in that sentence, I have to conclude that you pulled that straight out of your ass. I actually doubt that figure very much from a common sense standpoint, as well. Can you quote a source on that?

I am not a capital punishment pundit, I am actually pretty neutral on it....

I say that because I wanted to find the true percentage myself..... according to the best and most legitimate polls (IMHO) here are the results:

Quote:

The latest Gallup Poll found support for the death penalty at 74%, a figure equal to the level in 2003 and less than the 80% support registered in 1994. The poll found that support for capital punishment dropped to 56% when respondents were given the alternative sentencing option of life without parole, less than the 61% support in 1997 with the same question. The percentage of respondents who believe an innocent person has been executed in recent years has dropped from 73% in 2003 to 59% this year. (The Gallup Organization Press Release, May 19, 2005).

A recent CBS News Poll (April 17, 2005) found the public more evenly split on the death penalty. In response to the question "What do you think should be the penalty for persons convicted of murder--the death penalty, life in prison with no chance of parole, or a long prison sentence with a chance of parole?", only 39% chose the death penalty, 39% chose life with no parole, 6% said a long sentence with parole, and 13% volunteered the answer "depnds."

taken from this site: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/arti...d=1452&scid=64

host · 12-22-2005, 10:38 AM

Is this a "rational" view? How does this sentiment help the U.S. seem credible, or even humane....to observers in western Europe, when it comes to the administration of the death penalty? A majority of Texans seem to have a penchant for revenge via state sponsored execution that eclipses the issue of whether those who are guilty are actually the ones who are executed!

Would a German be irrational to form an opinion that America elected a stupid man who was governor of a state filled with stupid people as it's president? What kind of an example do we export when citizens of the state that performs the most executions, set a higher priority on continuing exections, than on insuring that first and foremost.....no one is executed in error in the future?

Quote:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2898454
Nov. 12, 2004, 10:52PM
Support for the death penalty remains high
But more Texans think the state has executed innocent people

By ANDREW TILGHMAN
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle

........Executing the innocent
The number of Texans who believe the state has executed innocent people reached 70 percent this year, compared with 65 percent in 2001. Meanwhile, those who say the state has never wrongly executed someone fell to 15 percent this year, from 21 percent in 2001, according to the poll.

The growing belief in wrongful executions, however, has not affected public support for a moratorium on the death penalty, which some states, including Illinois and Maryland, have imposed to review the fairness of the system.

Fifty-two percent of Texans oppose such a temporary halt to executions while 44 percent support the idea. Those figures are similar to results of a poll in 2002, when 50 percent opposed a moratorium and 41 percent favored it, the Texas Poll said.

Several public officials from Harris County have urged a moratorium on death sentences here because of problems at the Houston Police Department crime lab.

The lab's DNA division was shut down in December 2002 after an independent audit revealed shoddy scientific technique, poorly trained analysts and possible contamination of evidence. Also, police this year discovered 240 mislabeled boxes of evidence affecting some 8,000 investigations.............

Bush's own reputation as the governor who set a record for the number of death warrants that he signed while in that office, along with the track record of he and his attorney general, Gonzales, for secrecy and shoddy review of death penalty cases, further detracts from the image of the U.S. in the eyes of Americans who bother to look into their past performance, as well as to the eyes of those watching in the rest of the world:

Quote:

http://www.bestofaustin.com/issues/d...s_feature.html
HOME: NOVEMBER 7, 2003: POLITICS: CLOSING OPEN RECORDS
What George Bush and Rick Perry don't want you to know
Closing Open Records.......

....In the latest dispute over the Bush papers, however, the president is winning on points. This round began in August, following the publication of an article tracking Gov. Bush's decision-making process that had led to the execution of 151 men and two women during his six-year tenure in Austin. Specifically, reporter Alan Berlow ("The Texas Clemency Memos," The Atlantic Monthly, July/August 2003) attacked as sloppy and inadequate the work of Bush's briefing attorney and general counsel, Alberto Gonzales, who now holds that same job in the White House. Gonzales is a hot property in D.C., widely considered to be the president's first choice should a vacancy open on the U.S. Supreme Court. (Following Gonzales' stint as general counsel, Bush appointed him to the Texas Supreme Court.) The Atlantic piece was the unofficial beginning of the Gonzales confirmation process, which could be nasty (some conservatives also oppose his nomination because they consider him too liberal). In retrospect, the Atlantic article is also turning out to be a test case on the strength of open records law in Texas........

....... Gov. Bush's daily calendars, also part of the archives -- and still, so far, open to public review -- reflect that Al Gonzales was one of the first faces George W. Bush saw most working mornings in Austin. Gonzales brought with him official documents to be signed, and as general counsel, of course, kept track of executions, including drafting many of the summary memos upon which Bush based his decisions on clemency. (Of 153 requests to Bush for clemency, 152 were denied.) While there haven't been any bombshells out of these files yet, a slow fuse may be burning, in memory of Karla Faye Tucker, executed in 1998. The governor's prolonged public and private deliberations over the fate of Tucker, who became the first woman executed in Texas in a century, brought widespread media attention to Texas and to the governor.

Berlow recounts Gonzales' official memos in the Tucker case, but according to references in the Bush gubernatorial papers, in the course of his research for preparation of his "execution summary" Gonzales also made an unpublicized personal visit to Tucker, in prison at Huntsville. No other documentary evidence of the prison cell visit can apparently be found in the Bush files -- no notes, for example, nor a memorandum of the interview. (In Gov. Bush's file on Tucker, there is, however, a photograph of one of Karla Faye's victims, lying dead with a pickaxe stuck in his chest.) The processing of the papers is not complete, but if the general counsel failed to take notes on a personal interview in a death penalty case, that would lend support to Alan Berlow's argument that the review process -- leading to the execution of 153 people -- was inadequate. ......

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true
http://archives.lists.indymedia.org/...ly/007205.html
Justice Executed, Texas-Style
Washington Post
July 29, 2003
Author: Peter Carlson; Washington Post Staff Writer

Just for the sake of argument, let's say that killing somebody is a pretty serious matter. And while we're at it, let's go way out on a limb and suggest that killing even a convicted murderer is an act that shouldn't be done without careful consideration of the facts of the case.
George W. Bush believes that. "I take every death penalty case seriously and review each case carefully," he said while governor of Texas.

That sounds reassuring. But a disturbing article in the July-August issue of the Atlantic Monthly suggests that Bush and his legal counsel, Alberto R. Gonzales, exhibited a shocking lack of interest in the facts of the execution cases that came before them.

"During Bush's six years as governor 150 men and two women were executed in Texas -- a record unmatched by any other governor in modern American history," Alan Berlow writes in the article, titled "The Texas Clemency Memos."

During that period, Bush interceded with his Board of Pardons and Paroles to stop just one execution -- that of a serial killer who had been sentenced to die for a murder that two successive state attorneys general concluded he did not commit.

Before each execution -- usually on the very day of the execution -- Gov. Bush received a memo and a half-hour briefing on the case. The first 57 of those memos were prepared by Gonzales, now the White House counsel and a man frequently mentioned as Bush's choice for a seat on the Supreme Court.

Using Texas's Public Information Act, Berlow -- a former NPR correspondent and author of the 1996 book "Dead Season: A Story of Murder and Revenge on the Philippine Island of Negros" -- obtained copies of Gonzales' 57 execution memos. He was, to put it mildly, not impressed.

Using Texas's Public Information Act, Berlow -- a former NPR correspondent and author of the 1996 book "Dead Season: A Story of Murder and Revenge on the Philippine Island of Negros" -- obtained copies of Gonzales' 57 execution memos. He was, to put it mildly, not impressed.

"A close examination of the Gonzales memoranda suggests that Governor Bush frequently approved executions based on only the most cursory briefings on the issues in dispute," Berlow writes. "In fact, in these documents Gonzales repeatedly failed to apprise the governor of crucial issues in the cases at hand: ineffective counsel, conflict of interest, mitigating evidence, even actual evidence of innocence."

Berlow focuses primarily on three cases covered in Gonzales' memos: the controversial executions of Terry Washington, David Wayne Stoker and Billy Conn Gardner.

Washington was convicted of the stabbing murder of a restaurant manager, and apparently there's no doubt about his guilt. But there is also no doubt that he was severely mentally retarded. Gonzales informed Bush of that fact, Berlow writes, "but he didn't mention that Washington's trial lawyer had failed to enlist a mental-health expert to testify on Washington's behalf . . . which in a death penalty case clearly suggests ineffective counsel."

In the Stoker case, Berlow writes, "profound doubts about [his] guilt were raised by the defense but virtually ignored by Gonzales." Among the issues Gonzales didn't bother to mention to Bush: One prosecution witness recanted his testimony; another witness had drug and weapons charges dropped the very day of his testimony; a third had previously been convicted of falsifying evidence.

"All this information was in the public record," Berlow writes, "yet Gonzales mentioned none of it in his memorandum to Bush."

In the Gardner case, Berlow charges, Gonzales did not inform Bush that two witnesses to the shooting had testified that the killer had reddish-blond hair, while Gardner's hair was black. Gonzales also failed to inform Bush that Gardner's lawyer had failed to interview a key witness and had met with the defendant only once -- for 15 minutes -- before jury selection began.

"What Gonzales should have made clear to Bush during the clemency review is that the case involved many unanswered and troubling questions," Berlow writes. "Gardner was put to death on February 16, 1995."

Berlow concentrates on those three cases, but he mentions others in passing: "In his summary of the case of Carl Johnson," Berlow writes, "Gonzales failed to mention that Johnson's trial lawyer had literally slept through major portions of the jury selection."

Gonzales' apparent lack of zeal for delving into the details of these life-and-death cases is doubly distressing because Bush didn't show much interest in them either. Typically, Berlow writes, Gonzales would present his memo on the day of the scheduled execution, then discuss it with Bush for a half-hour later that day.

"Bush's appointment calendar for the morning of Washington's execution," Berlow writes, "shows a half-hour slot marked 'Al G -- Execution.' "

Gonzales seldom made a recommendation in his memos, but in 152 out of 153 cases Bush decided to deny the request for clemency and let the execution proceed.

Gonzales declined to talk to Berlow for the Atlantic article, although the two had previously discussed the clemency process in a 2000 interview. Gonzales also declined to discuss Berlow's article with me. But a White House spokesman referred me to Pete Wassdorf, Gonzales' former deputy counsel, who has written a letter to the editor of the Atlantic, attacking the article as "inaccurate and incomplete" and Berlow as a liberal anti-death-penalty zealot.

"Mr. Berlow's advocacy piece is more at home in his usual places of publication," Wassdorf wrote, such as "Salon.com, which is mostly regarded as a cartoon solely dedicated to Bush Bashing."

Gonzales' memos and half-hour briefings were not the entire clemency process, merely the end of it, Wassdorf says. "Governor Bush's office was fairly informal," Wassdorf wrote in his letter, and "it was not at all unusual after a meeting on a different subject or during an ad hoc meeting to discuss upcoming executions."

Perhaps that's true. But is an informal bull session the best way to delve into the complex details of a murder case?

After reading Berlow's article, and Wassdorf's letter, it's hard not to conclude that both Gonzales and Bush were rather callous, even cavalier, about the most profound decision any government official can make -- the decision to kill another human being.

The Bush administration seems more willing to compromise to "get their man".
Maybe the "all or nothing", unsuccessful attempts to extradite Hamadi from Germany during the Reagan and Bush '41 eras, provided a lesson learned in regard to the political realities concerning attitudes about the death penalty in much of the rest of the world.

Quote:

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/07/20/einhorn.trial/
Einhorn behind bars in Pennsylvania

July 20, 2001 Posted: 2:38 PM EDT (1838 GMT)

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- American fugitive Ira Einhorn was processed at a state prison near Philadelphia Friday morning, just hours after he arrived from France to face retrial in the death of his girlfriend more than 20 years ago....

...The 61-year-old former anti-war activist was tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison in absentia in 1993 for the 1977 beating death of his girlfriend, Helen "Holly" Maddux, whose corpse was found stuffed in a trunk inside a closet of Einhorn's Philadelphia home.

Einhorn can file for a new trial under Pennsylvania law because he was tried in absentia and fled to a country that would not extradite him because of that trial. France would not extradite Einhorn unless Pennsylvania guaranteed his right to a new trial.............

....Einhorn was released to U.S. authorities after the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, was given sufficient guarantees by Pennsylvania authorities that he would get a new trial and not face the death penalty.

Maddux's sister, Buffy Hall, said she was "delighted" Einhorn was back in the United States. She said the family was frustrated and aggravated at Einhorn's behavior while living as a fugitive in France.....

Quote:

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2001/June/253ag.htm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AG

THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001

STATEMENT BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ON JAMES CHARLES KOPP EXTRADITION

"On March 29, James Charles Kopp was arrested in France on federal and state charges in connection with the murder of Dr. Barnett Slepian in 1998. Those charges include using deadly force to prevent Dr. Slepian from providing legally available health services and murder.

"Kopp committed a heinous crime that deserves severe punishment. We need to send a strong message that no matter what our differences are, violence is not the solution. The FACE laws were created to ensure that violence against individuals providing legally available health services is not tolerated and will carry a stiff penalty, and I intend to enforce those laws.

"Shortly after the arrest, the French government, pursuant to its law and practice, asked the United States to assure it that the death penalty will not be imposed or carried out. Nevertheless, I have been working to ensure the United States' ability to pursue strong punishment for this terrible crime. I wanted to make sure that our nation would not be constrained by limits placed on Kopp's extradition by France, preventing us from seeking punishment outlined by our laws and our Constitution, such as the death penalty.

"Unfortunately, in order to ensure that Kopp is not released from custody and is brought to justice in America, we have had to agree not to seek the death penalty.

"I share the sentiments of Dr. Slepian's widow, Lynne Slepian, that if the choice is between extraditing Kopp to face these serious charges in a United States court or risking his release by France, the priority must be Kopp's return."

dksuddeth · 12-22-2005, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

... "over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support"... I'm sorry--and I have no evidence to support this whatsoever--but based solely on the syntax and wording you used in that sentence, I have to conclude that you pulled that straight out of your ass. I actually doubt that figure very much from a common sense standpoint, as well. Can you quote a source on that?

As Pan has pointed out from the deathpenalty sight it seems that I didn't pull that figure straight out of my ass. I'd very much like to go on with a string of hostile comments at this point but I don't feel like being reprimanded by a mod. Not sure what prompted you to jump on my 'straight out of my ass' percentage, seeing how I can't ever remember jumping on anything you've posted but I can certainly consider seeing my way in to starting to in the future.

Marvelous Marv · 12-23-2005, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

Gee, wonder if the rest of the world gets tired of us dictating to them how to govern their countries.

Maybe we should ask the family of Stethem. Or Vicente Fox, who thinks the US should have no right to control its borders.

Quote:

Wonder how soon someone on the Right will attack me because I defended another nation's right to do what they want.

Attack you, or attack your position that other countries are sovereign, but we're not?

Marvelous Marv · 12-23-2005, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

... "over 60% of american citizens since most likely more than that percentage support"... I'm sorry--and I have no evidence to support this whatsoever--but based solely on the syntax and wording you used in that sentence, I have to conclude that you pulled that straight out of your ass. I actually doubt that figure very much from a common sense standpoint, as well. Can you quote a source on that?

I can.

Link

Quote:

May 27, 2003, 9:00 a.m.
Capital Popularity
Americans increasingly support the death penalty.

t's happened quietly, mostly unnoticed by the press, but in the past two years something important has been going on in the debate over the death penalty in America. Support for capital punishment, which had been falling, has turned around and is now rising.

In a new Gallup poll, 74 percent of those surveyed say they favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder. Just two years ago, in May 2001, support stood at 65 percent, its lowest point in more than two decades.

The latest increase has been slow but steady. In October 2001, 68 percent favored capital punishment. That rose to 72 percent by May 2002, and dipped slightly to 70 percent in October 2002 before rising to 74 percent.

The climb has reversed a trend that began in the late 1990s, when support for the death penalty fell as a result of the "innocence" movement. Opponents of the death penalty argued that the capital-punishment system was so flawed, and the chance of an innocent person's being executed so great, that the whole system should be abolished.

Now, whatever success the abolitionists once had seems to have been erased. In addition to generally rising support for capital punishment, the new Gallup poll also shows an increase in the number of Americans who believe the death penalty is fairly applied. That figure is now 60 percent, up from 51 percent in June 2000.

The poll also shows that most people accept the idea that an innocent person might be executed — many believe it has happened at some point in the last five years — but still support capital punishment.

Why the new support for the death penalty?

It's possible that Americans have assessed the "innocence" argument and found it wanting. More important, they've seen it in action.

For example, could anyone say that former Illinois Gov. George Ryan's (R.) blanket commutation of death sentences in his state helped the abolitionist cause? Ryan spared the lives of some brutal and indisputably guilty killers and in so doing created so much publicity that the victims' families felt compelled to speak out in the press. The result was no help for the abolitionists.

Ryan's blunder surely played a part in the death-penalty turnaround, but by far the most important event has been the arrival of terrorism in America. If you chart the nation's support for capital punishment, you'll see it falling in the period before Sept. 11, 2001, and rising afterward.

As capital-punishment opponent Richard Dieter, head of the Death Penalty Information Center sees it, the terrorist attacks took attention away from the "innocence" movement, which had been gaining momentum before Sept. 11.

"I think what was creating concern about the death penalty was that people were hearing so much about the errors, wrongful convictions and unfairness in the process, and to some extent that's been muted now with coverage of other issues," says Dieter. "The problems that plague the death penalty system are still out there, but they're not on the front page."

Perhaps. But it seems more likely that the terrorist attacks had a far more profound effect. "After 9-11, the country has come to grips with something that lies behind a good deal of support for the death penalty," says death-penalty supporter Bill Otis, a former federal prosecutor who is an adjunct professor of law at George Mason University. "And that is that there is actually evil in this world, that there are people out there who will blow you to bits because they hate you, or for amusement, or to advance some bizarre view of the world, and that the only thing that represents proportionate justice in those cases is the death penalty."

If Otis is right, the new Gallup poll numbers reflect not a temporary setback for the anti-death-penalty movement but a more lasting public realization that the death penalty is the only appropriate response to some crimes.

Still, the abolitionists will keep at it; Dieter says opponents of capital punishment might turn to "fresh stories or new angles" to regain momentum. But that might not help. Yes, Americans want the death penalty to be applied with fairness and care, but they want it to exist — because they know that in this world, justice requires it.

— Byron York also writes a weekly column for The Hill, from which this is reprinted.

Is there a reason you couldn't use Google before making your accusation?