Gitmo ‘Attack Dog’ Turns on His Pentagon Masters
Military lawyer ‘puts career on line’ to question fairness of commission system he had championed
Until four months ago, Col. Moe Davis was the chief prosecutor at Guantanamo Bay and the most colourful champion of the Bush administration’s military commission system. He once said sympathy for detainees was nauseating and compared putting them on trial to dragging “Dracula out into the sunlight.”
Then, in October, he had a dispute with his boss, a general. Ever since, he has been one of those critics who will not go away: a former top insider, with broad shoulders and a well-pressed uniform, willing to turn on the system he helped run.
Still in the military, he has irritated the administration, saying that Pentagon officials interfered with prosecutors, exerted political pressure and approved the use of evidence obtained by torture.
Now, Davis has taken his most provocative step, completing his transformation from Guantanamo’s chief prosecutor to its new chief critic. He has agreed to testify at Guantanamo on behalf of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a driver for Osama bin Laden.
The career military lawyer, nearing retirement at 49, said he would never argue Hamdan was innocent, but Davis is ready to question the fairness of the commission system. Noting “a potential for rigged outcomes,” Davis said he has “significant doubts about whether it will deliver full, fair and open hearings.
“I’m in a unique position where I can raise the flag and aggravate the Pentagon and try to get this fixed,” he said, acknowledging he enjoys some aspects of his new role. He was replaced as chief Guantanamo prosecutor but is still a senior legal official for the air force.
Among detainees’ advocates, there was something of a gasp when it was announced last week that Davis would bear witness in April.
Hamdan’s chief military lawyer, Lt. Cmdr. Brian Mizer, said he would offer Davis to argue that charges against Hamdan should be dismissed because of improper influence by Pentagon officials over the commission process. Prosecutors may object and it is unclear how the military judges will rule.
Whatever happens, some advocates for detainees say officials may have difficulty erasing the image of a uniformed former Guantanamo champion challenging them directly - particularly one known for scorched-earth attacks on adversaries, be they terror suspects or lawyers.
“He was the attack dog for the military commission system,” said Zachary Katznelson, a lawyer for Guantanamo detainees.
Last year as chief prosecutor, Davis publicly suggested a marine defence lawyer for a detainee might be guilty of a crime for using “contemptuous words” about President George W. Bush when the marine questioned the fairness of the Guantanamo system.
At the time, critics ridiculed Davis as an administration apologist. But in recent weeks, some of them have described him in near heroic terms.
Jennifer Daskal, of Human Rights Watch, called Davis the most significant insider to tell what he knew about Guantanamo, saying, “He has put his career on the line.”
Some with Pentagon ties say the unusual story started as a power struggle between Davis and a general with broad powers over the Guantanamo legal system, Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann, who has declined to comment.
Davis, the son of a disabled World War II veteran, is experienced in military prosecution and defence. In interviews this week, he challenged Pentagon officials to take lie-detector tests. He portrayed himself as battling political appointees but said he still believed a military commission system could work. “It’s gotten so tarnished that if we’re going to convince the world that this isn’t some rigged process we have to bend over backwards.”
The Davis solution is giving control to military officials, but he suggested darkly some “people at key points in the process … I just don’t know what their allegiance is.”
When Davis resigned as Guantanamo’s prosecutor last summer, officials disclosed he had filed a formal complaint asserting Hartmann improperly pressed for more war crimes cases and demanded “sexy” ones that would excite the public. An internal report sided with Hartmann but suggested the general should avoid too much influence over military prosecutors.
Reassigned by the air force, Davis found an audience. He told one newspaper he had been pressed to hold hearings in closed courtrooms. He wrote op-ed pieces saying Hartmann had reversed his policy of refusing to use evidence derived through torture. He told The Nation Pentagon general counsel William Haynes informed him “we can’t have (Guantanamo) acquittals.”
In reply, a Pentagon official said, “We disagree with the assertions made by Col. Davis.”
© 2008 The Toronto Star
Star Chamber went out with Elizabeth I. Now back at Gitmo after a five hundred year hiatus. We certainly don’t evolve much, do we?
Chewin’ away on republlican rear-ends, eh? I say, “sick em’!” Looks good on em’!
libertas fugit, this might be the only time when I agree that intelligent design is winning over evolution.
as we lurch toward november and a much hoped-for transition of power in january, it appears that the only ones who will be able to provide us with useful information about the state of the union are such insiders as col. moe davis, who is poised to take a place of honor alongside such true patriots as daniel ellsberg, ralph mcgehee and sibel edmonds.
long live the whistleblowers, and may their tribe increase.
William J. Haynes, Pentagon chief legal officer, overseer of Military Commissions at Gitmo, ‘decided’ to step down, why, just last week! I will be glued to the April testimony unless, of course, for some reason it just doesn’t happen.
This is too late. When you are already a war criminal it won’t help you to start pointing fingers. What’s done is done. He should resign and report to nearest jail.
Sansf: Where does Haynes fit in this picture? Please enlighten me so that I can join in with your excitement!
Somebody needs to get this guy to make a campaign commercial against McCain (the new Manchurian candidate)so that the rest of America knows that even high ranking career military officers are disgusted with the neocons.
Col. Davis finally decided to become a real lawyer! It took a fight with his boss, and the realization his career was finished, to develop a sense of professional ethics. It came late, as it did with Smedley Butler, and the real heroes are Maj. Mori and LCDR Swift. Both are retired 2 ranks below Col. because their ethics and competence kicked in earlier.
The officers of the US military think they are professionals as soldiers, sailors, or aviators. (Marines fit in those categories.) While certainly skilled in these categories, ethically they are professional killers. Not as ethical as the Mafia hit man, who knows killing bystanders is bad for business, nut this is because killing innocents is good for their business.
A true professional will turn down the job rather than intentionally do a bad job that will cause physical or financial harm. In the US military we have doctors and nurses that willingly support mass slaughter and the destruction of an entire nation’s health care system and clean water supply; lawyers who have total contempt for the US Constitution or the concept of jurisdiction; chaplains who provide spiritual support for killing rather than advice to follow the teachings of their religion.
That said, I congratulate the few who are truly professional and welcome Davis’s late conversion. I heartily thank those who thwarted the Minot-Barksdale Broken-Arrow plot, and mourn those who died in the attempt; they are true heroes and professionals.
Sounds like a “Persecuter, Saul of Tarsis converting to the Persecuted Apostol Paul” situation. Just how much he will be persecuted, only time will tell.
Rebel Farmer–
check out http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080310/tuttle2
Mr. Davis had better start taking the bus to work.
the best thing for Col. Moe Davis to do is to waterboard himself and if he survives then finish himself off with the death by a thousand cuts. Moe is a scum bag coward.
An essay entitled “Rigged Trials at Gitmo”appeared about two weeks ago in CommonDreams with 33 comments at my time of reading.Mo Davis’rethink about the fairness of the trials were part of the article.The next day,the article was not to be seen.
In 2006, Mo Davis was interviewed on Australian television about the guilty pleading trial of Australian David Hicks who then had to serve 12 months in an Australian jail.Davis was insisting that Hicks was to be given a fair hearing,but you could tell by the body language that his heart was not in it.
David Hicks is now a free man,in Sydney,looking for work,without any police or security following him about,which I think is a good indication of how dangerous we thought he was,despite the fact that he had to spend 5 years in Gitmo.
How many other”Hicks”are in a similar situation stuck in this place?And how many more “Mo Davis’”are there struggling with their conscience?
Ok, isn’t anyone going to comment on the image accompanying this article, “Camp Justice”? Who says Americans don’t have a sense of humour?
Rebel Farmer - I see that WmC gave link to The Nation article. Haynes is mentioned in this CD piece, second to last paragraph. Synopsis: Davis reported to Haynes, and mentioned that acquittals would show a shread of fairness in Gitmo trials. It was then that Haynes made his ‘we can’t have aquittals’ statement, and it was then that Davis resigned. A few months ago the military refused to allow Davis to testify (Senate invite) and Davis had to follow that order. Davis, now resigned, can speak. Let us hope he does. This would be such a good story in our world where there are few good stories, underlining the absolute necessity of whistleblowers. I hold little hope that much would follow after testimony, but sometimes a very good thing has to stand on its own.
Sounds to me that this “hero” saw the writing on the wall (I do not mean The Geneva Convention), realises that the jig is almost up and is doing a (very poor) job of covering his own arse..
Just an opinion.
He will be ignored except in foreign and underground media.
http://www.ryanhartman.wordpress.com
“Davis publicly suggested a marine defence lawyer for a detainee might be guilty of a crime for using “contemptuous words” about President George W. Bush” Is there such a crime on the books and if so is it expressly written about Bush or a President? If so, whoops!
Being indoctrinated into the military, with break em down and rebuild with brainwash tactics, some never escape and recover. It took him 25-30 yrs, but he is now awake. Good for him, i hope he carries on, and see’s this thing to the end. This takes more courage than some can imagine. Welcome back Moe.
Dubya, Cheney, & Co. have continually run into this rather inconvenient snag as they execute their “Great Lurch Backwards” towards a redux of the Robber Baron era, complete with a “spoils system” government hiring policy: some of the underlings actually believe in a semblance of ethical behavior and actually not engaging in doublespeak when talking on the record.
I hate to burst anyone’s bubble, but this guy will not be able to give any testimony regarding information he learned while representing the prosecution. It’s a clear conflict of interest.
bolwriter, If he has agreed to testify, i am sure he has consulted council, and the conflict of interest point would have already been considered.
If there was a problem in that regard, i doubt if they would have given him the green light.
Is Davis a criminal? A snitch? Or, a hero? Whatever he is, I hpoe he doesn’t have a fatal accident. But to put this in perspective, it,s not often that a member of a gang, such as “Jim Crow,” “KKK,” and the Bush “Military,” leaves and then blow the whistle.
Hats off to Davis! Vaya con Dios.
Well, well, well.
Maybe Davis is an ossifer who’s actually read his “enlistment” oath.
Grunts swear to protect and defend the US Constitution, obey their “commander-as-thief” and ossifers appointed over ‘em.
Ossifers, however, swear only to protect and defend the US Constitution. Period. Full Stop. They don’t swear to obey the President, Unitary Liar-in-Chief or whatever cockamamie title Shrub and Darth cook up for themselves. They don’t swear to obey ossifers appointed over them, either.
Just the Constitution, Ma’am.
Could it be that here’s another case where our poor, tired old Framers of the Constitution (or whomever cooked up these different oaths of office) were trying yet again to keep the balancing act going between a republic, run with the consent and direction of the governed, and a despotic state?
If so, here’s to those who honor their oaths of office.
They’re clearly the few and the very brave. Much braver, by far, that the oath-breakers we have sitting in our Capitol building–those so-called “Members of Congress.” How many of them have stepped up to defend the Constitution, as they swore to do, against the Cheney/Bush attacks against it? Just check out the number of co-sponsors on Dennis Kucinich’s H. Res. 333.
Hey! There are now 26 co-sponsors in the house! Check it out, dudes and dudettes. Maybe there’s some movement here. Last member in list signed on on 3/5/08. (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE00333:@@@N)
Co-sponsors, sorted by date:
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 5/1/2007
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 5/1/2007
Rep Wynn, Albert Russell [MD-4] - 5/10/2007
Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] - 6/6/2007
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 6/7/2007
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 6/7/2007
Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-35] - 6/12/2007
Rep Johnson, Henry C. “Hank,” Jr. [GA-4] - 6/28/2007
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 6/28/2007
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 7/10/2007
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 7/10/2007
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 7/12/2007
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 7/12/2007
Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] - 7/24/2007
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 8/1/2007
Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 8/1/2007
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 8/4/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 8/4/2007
Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] - 9/7/2007
Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 9/27/2007
Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] - 10/16/2007
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 11/5/2007
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 12/5/2007
Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] - 12/19/2007
Rep Boswell, Leonard L. [IA-3] - 2/14/2008
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 3/5/2008
Picket your Congressperson’s office with an “Impeach My Congressman Because He Won’t honor his oath of office to defend our Constitution” sign and otherwise get’m to co-sponsor this measure.