Impunity Watch: North America

Human Rights Violations to be on the Agenda for the Bush-Putin Meeting

President Bush made a stop in the Czech Republic during a tour of speeches in the beginning of June. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune during a conference on democracy, also chaired by former "Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky," Bush stated to the crowd intermixed with state officials that, "In Russia, reforms that were once promised to empower citizens have been derailed, with troubling implications for democratic development" and that "freedom is the only ordering a society that leads to justice. And human freedom is the only way to achieve human rights." Then, last week the Washington Post ran an article detailing the "historic first public session of U.S. and Russian lawmakers" that apparently resulted in disagreement of Kosovo and the ethnic cleansings that occurred there. The most alarming statement of the evening came from history professor Natalia Narochrustskaya who stated "you have to doubt that there were mass cleansings...of course some Serbs shot at Albanians." This comment was in response to House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, Rep. Tom Lantos' statement that "there had been ethnic cleansing in 1990s in Kosovo, a Serbian province of two million people dominated by ethnic Albanians." Disagreements, like this, between the United States and Russia over human rights issues are one of many reasons why relations between these two countries have been so strained lately.

In order to try and promote diplomatic relations between the United States and Russia, President Bush has invited President Putin to Main for July 1st and 2nd. Executive Director of the Europe and Central Asia Division of Human Rights Watch is asking, "As Bush tries to repair relations with Russia, he must make it clear the U.S. is not willing to overlook Putin's worsening human rights record." According to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch since 1999, when Putin came into office, human rights violations of increased along with Russia's effort to conceal its dissenters. Among the many human rights violations detailed by reports from both human rights organizations are; "draconian restrictions imposed on nongovernmental organizations, torture and enforced disappearances in Chechnya, increased racism and xenophobia, and suppression of the freedom of expression and the media." One way HRW says the Russian government is stifling freedom of expression and media, which Bush has previously denounced, is through a process of placing the Kremlin in control of many media outlets. HRW also claims that this meeting is coming at a time when the 2008 proposed budget by the Bush Administration would see great cuts in financial support for "civil society and human rights in Russia." Carter points out that this counterproductive proposal "would generate trivial savings for the U.S., but it would be devastating to Russian civil society struggling for its survival."To see Amnesty International's Report on Russia's Human Rights Violations see:

http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/Regions/Europe-and-Central-Asia/Russian-Federation

Other sources for Information about this topic can be found at:

"

Russia

:  Bush Should Press Putin on Human Rights Abuses" Human Rights Watch:  http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/06/28/russia16283.htm , June 29, 2007.

Susan Cornwell, "

U.S.

, Russian lawmakers feud over status of Kosovo" Washington Post:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101503.html , June 21, 2007.

Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Bush rebukes Putin on human rights:  President assures

Russia

on missile defense plans" The San Diego Union-Tribune:  http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070606/news_1n6bush.html , June 6, 2007

Supreme Court Reverses Course in Detainee Appeals

In an extraordinary move, the United States Supreme Court has changed course and reversed previous decisions yesterday in granting certiorari to two claims by foreign detainees imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. The most recent court order rescinds an April order that rejects the hearing of a federal appeals court decision that ruled against Guantanamo detainees.
The detainees are asserting their right to challenge the grounds of their detention in American courts. Georgetown University law professor Neal K. Katyal, who has participated in arguing a detainee’s case, said, “The Supreme Court is going to decide the simple question: Does the Constitution protect the detainees?”
The Bush administration has put pressure on the Court to refuse to hear the appeals because, “The grant of a petition for rehearing from a denial of certioriari is an extraordinary remedy, warranted only where there have been ‘intervening circumstances of a substantial or controlling effect’ or ‘other substantial grounds not previously presented,” according to Solicitor General Paul D. Clement. Clement went further to say that the petitioners had failed to show either intervening circumstances or other substantial grounds for the rehearing.
The Supreme Court disagreed. But, the Court’s order does not indicate which particular justices accepted the rehearing of the two cases. Furthermore, the Court provided no explanation for its decision. The complete appeal will is expected to take place next term. The Court has consolidated the two appeals (Boumediene v Bush and Al Odah v U.S.).
The Court’s change of pace comes at a crucial juncture concerning the detainment of suspected terrorists at the Guantanamo Bay prison. The White House and Congress are both publicly weighing options for the closure and transfer of some 370 prisoners from the military prison into facilities within the United States. Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated in a recent Pentagon news briefing that, “The biggest challenge is finding a statutory basis for holding prisoners who never be released and who may or may not be able to be put on trial.” He cited the use of evidence against suspected terrorists that includes confidential intelligence. Democrats are now considering the option of cutting Guantanamo’s budget in half, which would allow the prison to function for only a few more months. There is apprehension for all parties concerned that an immediate closure of the facility would jeopardize the secure detention of dangerous terrorism suspects.

For more on this topic, see:

Washington Post – Justices to Weigh Detainee Rights
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/29/AR2007062900743.html?referrer=email

The New York Times – In Shift, Justices Agree to Review Detainee’s Case
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/30/washington/30scotus.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Georgetown University Blog discussion:
http://explore.georgetown.edu/blogs/?id=25463

Read the Supreme Court order here:
Download 062907pzor.pdf

BUSH ADVISORS CONSIDER CLOSING GUANTANAMO SOONER

Recently it was reported by CNN.com that the Bush administration is close to abandoning its detainment of suspected terrorists at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba and shut down the detention facility completely. Guantanamo Bay was selected for the purpose of housing suspected terrorists and unlawful enemy combatants because of its ambiguous US legal status as it is not on American territory. While no timetable or deadline has been set, many of President Bush’s top advisors have again started an internal review to determine how quickly the prison can be closed. A number of deputy Cabinet members share that view that the detention camp distorts the image of the United States abroad and may in fact harm the larger War against Terror.

President Bush has said on a number of occasions that he would like to close the detention camp as soon as possible, but that it was not logistically possible at the time to manage the approximately 400 prisoners outside of Guantanamo. Cabinet members have recommended that this process be quickened and are arguing for an announcement of the closure of the prison within the next few weeks.

The New York Times reported that Gordon Jondroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council, said “The President has long expressed a desire to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and to do so in a responsible way. A number of steps need to take place before that can happen such as setting up military commissions and the repatriation to their home countries of detainees who have been cleared for release. These and other steps have not been completed. No decisions on the future of Guantanamo Bay are imminent…”

The process of transferring prisoners from Guantanamo raises a number of legal and human rights issues concerning whether they would be sent back to their home countries, other countries or the US. As it is, many detainees that have been cleared for release have yet to be moved from the detention camp. In addition, members of the administration reject the notion that the “enemy combatants” should be housed in the US and stand trial here, apparently because the prisoners would be afforded more legal rights than if they were prosecuted at a military tribunal.

For more on this topic, see:

The New York Times – Bush Advisers Weigh Closing Guantanamo Prison Sooner
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/washington/22cnd-gitmo.html?ei=5070&en=65d6ad23f3aea122&ex=1183176000&adxnnl=1&emc=eta1&adxnnlx=1182760305-1AcKsLprWoRhNLvlpzIiqQ

CNN – Bush Administration Close to Shutting Down Guantanamo
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/21/guantanamo.ap/index.html

NPR – White House Denies Talk of Closing Guantanamo
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11271155

Washington Post – Close Guantanamo? (editorial)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101519.html

CNN – Obama: Close Guantanamo
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/25/obama-close-guantanamo/

The Boston Globe: Romney Opposed to Closing Guantanamo
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/06/22/romney_opposed_to_closing_guantanamo_1182541427/

Washington Post – 82 Inmates Cleared but Still Held at Guantanamo
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/28/AR2007042801145_pf.html

Agent Orange issues surround Vietnam President Triet's landmark visit.

Last week marked a monumental moment in U.S.-Vietnamese diplomatic relations. Vietnamese president Nguyen Minh Triet became the first head of state since the end of the Vietnam War in 1975 to visit the United States. Yahoo news reported that at the same time this landmark visit occurred, the U.S. based Ford Foundations announced its support of "humanitarian efforts in cleaning up wartime "agent orange" in Vietnam. The aim of the collaboration is to help build a humanitarian response "where diplomatic discussion alone has proved difficult in resolving a bitter war legacy." BBC News released an article also detailing an appeal in the U.S. courts of a ruling made by a lower court that said there was no proof that agent orange caused the alleged birth defects and disabilities in millions of Vietnamese people. The lower court's ruling coincides with the U.S. government's official position, however, Yahoo News stated Vietnam's position is that "agent orange used during the Vietnam War has affected millions of people over three generations has been holding back the otherwise friendly relationship that has been building over the past twelve years."

The BBC news article stated that the outcome of the appeal may take up many months but in the mean time many Vietnamese victim's groups have rallied to support the appeal. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of over three million Vietnamese who are claiming they deserve compensation from the U.S. manufacturers of the chemical. The lawyer for the plaintiff was quoted as saying, "the companies, [including Dow Chemicals] knew the herbicide contained the harmful dioxin but did nothing about it." In response Seth Waxman, lawyer for the named companies is arguing that the companies were only following the instructions of the U.S. president and government during the Vietnam War. While the world waits for ruling of the appeal organizations like the Ford Foundation continue to help fund humanitarian efforts to clean up former U.S. military bases, support health programs in the communities surrounding "hot spots" where the chemical was dropped, and create treatment and education centers for the victims.

To learn more about these subjects see the following sources:

Grant McCool "New U.S.-Vietnam group tackles toxic legacy of war", Yahoo News:  http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070620/ts_nm/vietnam_usa_dioxin_dc_2, June 20, 2007

"Agent Orange appeal in US Court" BBC News:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6766139.stm, June 19, 2007

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/06/20070622-2.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/06/18/2007-06-18_agent_orange_victims_get_no_support_in_w.html?ref=rss

http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2007&m=June&x=20070622175927esnamfuak0.8349878&chanlid=eap

For more info on the chemical Agent Orange see:

http://www1.va.gov/agentorange/

The CIA's Family Jewels

The CIA has declassified a new set of documents following decades of requests by journalists, historians and conspiracy theorists alike through unsuccessful Freedom of Information Act requests. The collection of secret documents, the so-called “family jewels" of the Central Intelligence Agency, will be made public next week (Monday, June 25).

The documents detail the CIA’s “unflattering” history, according to CIA Director Michael V. Hayden, including: overseas assassination schemes, domestic spying, break-ins, theft, kidnapping, human experimentation and infiltration of antiwar dissident groups over the quarter century of the 1950s to the 1970s. Hayden has also declassified approximately 11,000 pages of the CAESAR, POLO, and ESAU papers that analyze Soviet and Chinese internal politics and the relations between the two countries from 1953-1973, intelligence on Cold War Warsaw Pact military programs, and detailed information on the A-12 spy plane.

The declassified material provides evidence of the CIA violating its charter for up to 25 years before official investigations and the reforms of the 1970s that led to increased oversight of the agency.

In December of 1974, journalist, Seymour Hersh, revealed the CIA’s abuses and illegal operations to the world in a front-page story in the New York Times (“Huge CIA Operation Reported in US Against Antiwar Forces, Other Dissidents in Nixon Years”). Some other specific “skeletons” that were hidden in the CIA’s closet include:

“· The confinement by the CIA of a Russian defector, suspected by the CIA as a possible "fake," in Maryland and Virginia safe houses for two years, beginning in 1964. Colby (former CIA Director) speculated that this might be "a violation of the kidnapping laws."

· The "very productive" 1963 wiretapping of two columnists -- Robert Allen and Paul Scott -- whose conversations included talks with 12 senators and six congressmen.

· Break-ins by the CIA's office of security at the homes of one current and one former CIA official suspected of retaining classified documents.

· CIA-funded testing of American citizens, "including reactions to certain drugs."”

CIA Director Michael Hayden said that the documents “provide a glimpse of a very different time and a very different agency.”

For more on this topic, see:

The Washington Post – CIA to Air Decades of Its Dirty Laundry
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062102434.html?referrer=email

The National Security Archive on CIA:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB222/index.htm

New York Times – CIA to Release Documents on Decades-Old Misdeeds
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/washington/22cia.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&ref=washington&adxnnlx=1182620747-zGiUFvluNvXhvDeyA3wOHA

NPR – CIA Kidnapping, Wiretapping of ‘60s, ‘70s Revealed [radio broadcast]
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11271829

Six-page Summary of CIA illegal activities – Justice Dept. Dec. 1974
Download family_jewels_wilderotter.pdf

ACLU of S. California argues the Government Drugged 2 Immigrants against their Will

The Washington Post ran a story on June 20th announcing that the ACLU was going ahead with a class action lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Division of Immigration Health Services which is an agency of the United States PUblic Health service that works with the ICE to provide medical services to aliens. The main thrust of the complaint filed on behalf of two immigrants was that officials forcefully injected them with sedatives during attempted deportations. The ACLU website also detailed their actions and stated the immigrant's attorney, Ahilan Arulanantham is prepared to argue that his clients both decliend sedatives but were drugged against their will. The Washington Post article also noted that the Division of Immigration Health Services was already facing charges "that it provides inadequate medical care to detained immigrants."

The ACLU article gave details about both men's encounters. Raymond Soeoth, a 38 year old Indonesian Christian minister said he was being held in a a detention center in the Los Angeles area in December of 2004when authorities informed him that he would be deported very soon. Soeoth told his attorney that when he asked to call his wife in order to make arrangements for his arrival home, he was denied this phone call and then injected with the antipsychotic Haldol. Amadou Diouf, age 31, an immigrant from Senegal was on a flight from the Los Angelos Airport when he asked to speak to the captain to say he should not be deported. At this time medical escorts reportedly wrestled him tot he ground and injected him with the anti-psychotic.

The Los Angeles Times reported that a "U.S. Public Health Services official said authorities do sedate immigrants during deportation if they have a psychiatric disorder, are severely agitated during a flight or present a danger to themselves or others." On the other hand the ACLU stated on their website that medical experts they consulted informed them that the drugs Haldol and Cogentin used on the plaintiffs were used to treat patients suffering from psychosis and that they should not be used on those without a history of mental illness. The ACLU argues that the federal policy allowing the use of medication where a medical profession determines the person presents a present danger to themselves or to others is too loose and is open to abuse. While the medical chart says that Soeoth was under suicide watch, Soeoth's attorney was quoted by the Washington Post as saying his client was not a threat to himself or others.

For more information on this subject please see:

Sonya Geis, "ACLU Suit Alleges Deportees Were Drugged" Washington Post: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/19/AR2007061902168.html, June 20, 2007

"ACLU of Southern California Learns Immigrants are Forcibly Drugged for Deportation: Two Men given Powerful Drugs against their Will" www.aclu.org/immigrants/detention/29657prs20070508.html, May 8, 2007.

Anna Gorman & Greg Krikonian, "Immigration Officials allegedly drugged deportees: An ACLU lawyer condemns the incidents in L.A. as 'horrifyng.' Both men remain in U.S. while appealing their cases." LA Times: www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-deport9may9,0,1969594story?coll-la-home-center, May 9, 2007

Rumsfeld and Bush Knew or Should Have Known of Abu Ghraib Abuses

Image Courtesy of:
www.martinfrost.ws/ htmlfiles/abu_graibh8.jpg

Army Major General Antonio M. Taguba reported to The New Yorker magazine that US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield and US President George Bush were, or should have been, aware of the human rights abuses at Abu Ghraib prison. Taguba, a two-star Army General, led the military investigation into allegations of torture at the prison in Iraq used to detain suspected enemy combatants and terrorists. Taguba began his report in January 2004 and circulated it some weeks later. The report included pictures and a video of torture and other human rights abuses.

Taguba stated that from October to December of 2003 a number of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” occurred at Abu Ghraib. In May 2004 at a congressional hearing, Rumsfeld claimed that he had become aware of the abuses only a day earlier. Rumsfeld contended that the images that were leaked to the media had not yet arrived to the Pentagon.

The photos and video footage featured US jailers degrading inmates in ways that violate international legal standards of decency and humane treatment. Inmates were hooded, naked, on leases, or stacked in human pyramids. The images were disseminated around the globe and received worldwide censure. Footage that has yet to be publicly disclosed includes a video exhibiting “a male American soldier in uniform sodomising a female detainee.”

The incriminating photographs were available to Rumsfeld weeks before the Secretary met with Taguba the evening before the congressional hearing.

Maj-Gen Taguba was forced to retire in January of this year after 30 years of service to the US Army. Taguba concludes that he was being punished by the administration for his investigation into the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

For more on this topic, see:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2675733.ece

New Yorker article with Maj-Gen Taguba:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/06/25/070625fa_fact_hersh

Taguba Report:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/

Torture at Abu Ghraib – Seymour Hersh:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/10/040510fa_fact

Human Rights Groups seek Answers about 39 Suspected "Ghost" Detainees

Following the onslaught of various reports detailing "secret prisons" used by the CIA, six human rights organizations are seeking information about the whereabouts of 39 detainees who have disappeared and are believed to be under U.S. control. Amnesty International, one of the six groups along with the Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights Watch, and the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at New York School of Law, reported that a lawsuit has been filed under the Freedom of Information Act in federal court for information concerning the location about "ghost" and unregistered prisoners. The International Herald Tribune (IHT) released an article on June 7, 2007 that stated names on the list of the 39 detainees included Hassan Ghul and Ali Abd al-Rahman al-Faqasi al-Ghamdi, "who were both named in the 9-11 Commission report as al-Qaida operatives" and Mohammed Omar Abdel-Rahman "the Blind Sheik" believed to have been behind the first plot against the World Trade Center in New York City. The names were purportedly "gleaned" from interviews with former prisoners said IHT.

In previous reports we described the evolution in the media of information about CIA secret prisons. In particular, it is noteworthy that President George W. Bush acknowledged in September 2006 that these prisons existed but suggested these prisons were being emptied and in fact some had been moved to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. (See links on the June 10, 2007, "CIA Secret Prisons: Who, What, Where, & Why?") MSNBC reports that the human rights groups seek to show that this may not be entirely true. In particular, "the groups said lack of information about the [missing] prisoners 'prevents scrutiny in the public or the courts, and leaves detainees vulnerable to abuses that include torture." In response CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano issued the statement to the associated press, and MSNBC reported, that "the plain truth is that we act in strict accord with American law, and that our counter terror initiatives - which are subject to careful review and oversight - have been very effective in disrupting plots and saving lives...the U.S. does not conduct or condone torture."

To read the 21 page brief by the human rights groups:

http://hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/ct0607/

For other links about this report see:

"Leading human rights group name 39 CIA 'disappeared' detainees - Three groups file lawsuit seeking information about 'ghost' detention" Amnesty Internation: http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR511012007 , June 7, 2007.

"Rights groups identify 39 detainees they believe secretly held by U.S." International Herald Tribune: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/06/07/europe/EU-GEN-Britain-US-Disappeared-Detainees.php ,June 7, 2007

"Rights groups press U.S. on 'ghost detainees': Report names 39 terrorism suspects believed held" MSNBC Online:

www.msnbc.com/id/19081887

 

Seale Convicted in 1964 Cold Case

Alleged former Klu Klux Klansman, James Ford Seale, 71, was convicted by a jury on Thursday for kidnapping and conspiracy in the 1964 slaying of two black teenagers. Seale could be sentenced on August 24th to life in prison for these crimes that occurred almost 43 years ago.

Prosecutors were able to get the conviction through the testimony of Charles Marcus Edwards who claimed that he was in the same Klan chapter (“klavern”) led by Seale’s father. Edwards was given immunity for his testimony against Seale. Seale denies that he was a Klan member.

Edwards testified that the two black teenagers were crammed into the trunk of Seale’s car while still alive. The teenagers were attached to weights and then dumped alive into the Mississippi River.

The defense asserts that the prosecution has failed to establish key elements of the case including that Seale crossed state lines to commit a crime, which gives jurisdiction to the federal government. The defense also claims that the government has filed this case in an attempt to provide a symbol that it is attempting to remedy wrongs committed in Mississippi during 1964.

The Seale case fits into a line of civil rights era “cold cases” that have recently been reopened by federal prosecutors.

For more on this case, see:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/06/14/kkk.coldcase.convicted.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/06/14/ap3823649.html

Edgar Ray Killen case:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/price&bowers/Killen.htm

Bobby Frank Cherry case:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/terrorists/birmingham_church/12.html

Soldier stands trial in connection with purported Iraqi "massacre"

Iraqi officials seemed to suggest that, despite what military tribunals might declare, the killing of an estimated twenty-four Iraqi civilians in Haditha in 2005 was merely one of many unnecessary killings by American soldiers. Among the dead from Haditha are three women, seven children and several elderly men. Iraqi officials such as Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki have spoken out about the killings and asked for the U.S. government to turn over all of their investigation files into the matter, reported the New York Times almost one year ago. The Prime Minister was quoted by the publication as saying "violence against civilians had become a 'daily phenomenon' by many troops in the American-led coalition who 'do not respect the Iraqi people." While Haditha is one of the most known incident other acts are in fact being investigated. The New York Times stated that at least three or four are being investigated at this time. BBC News Online reported today that Lieutenant-Colonel Jeffrey Chessani, commander of the battalion under investigation for the Haditha killings, is set to stand trial before a military tribunal in California. Among the allegations faced by Lt.-Colonel Chessani is failure to follow an order when he failed to investigate the killings.

The prosecutor in Chessani's case is set to show that some of the men may have been standing still, possibly with their hands in the air, and others shot in the head at close range according to BBC News. Time Magazine online ran an article shortly following the media frenzy over the incident that details in depth what many agree is the way the events of November 19, 2005 unfolded. In the report the events seemed to begin with an explosion near a humvee that killed U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas. After that Time reports one eye witness, Eman Waleed, 9 years old at the time, said that marines entered her home after they had been woken by the blast. The next thing she knew, Eman was quoted to say, she "watched [the uniformed marines] shoot [her] grandfather who was praying, first in the chest and then in the head. Then they killed [her] granny." Time's Tim McGirk reported that human activists are calling the incident in Haditha ' the worst case of deliberate killing of Iraqi civilians by U.S. service members since the war began if the allegations are found to be true."

Investigations of the incident were aided by video footage shot by Associated Press cameras that show the aftermath of the incident in Haditha. Some say that this footage shows that the killings were unprovoked. The defense lawyer for Lieutenant-Colonel Chessani is confident, however, that the trial will show that the account given by the prosecution of how the Iraqis were killed is wrong.

For more information on this topic please see:

Peter Bowers, "Court hears Haditha death details" BBC News, http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/67143.., June 15, 2007

Tim McGirk, "Collaterall Damage or Civilian Massacre in Haditha?"Time:  www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1174649,00.html, March 13, 2006

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,198029,00.html

Richard A. Oppel Jr., "Iraqi Assails U.S. for Strikes on Civilians" The New York Times, www.nytimes.com/2006/06/02/world/middleeast/02iraq.html, June 2, 2006

www.cbc.ca/news/background/iraq/haditha.html