War Crimes, Syria, Israel, and Indiscriminate Rocket Fire

Note from Brant:  Rex Brynen has kindly allowed us to repost his excellent summary of 'war crimes' that he originally had up over at Facebook.  He also recommended this link for many of legalisticisms that people may want to dig into.

At the risk of upsetting just about everyone on all sides of every conflict in the Middle East and elsewhere, some clarity on what is--or is not--technically a "war crime":

1) Attacking a military commander or rocket launching site in a way that results in civilian casualties. Usually not a war crime, if the force use was appropriate to the military advantage gained (a very fuzzy/elastic concept) and the civilians were not deliberately targeted. Whether it is a sensible thing to do is another issue.

2) Imposing an embargo on key economic goods for the purposes of collective punishment of a civilian population. Usually yes. An embargo is permissible for other purposes, however.

3) Declaring a naval blockade, and stopping ships in international waters. Perfectly legal. However, the actual policy being supported by the blockade might be illegal (see #2).

4) Firing inaccurate rockets at civilian areas. Definitely a war crime. If they were accurate rockets fired at a military target it would probably not be a war crime, even if civilians were hit too (proportionality/military advantage).

5) Syrian army firing at FSA in a residential building that also contains civilians. Usually not a war crime (see #1).

6) FSA firing at Syrian troops in a residential building that also contains civilians. Usually not a war crime (see #1).

7) Indiscriminate Syrian aerial or artillery bombardment of rebel-held civilian neighbourhoods. War crime (see #4).

8) Denying Palestinian right to self-determination. Immoral, politically-short sighted, a violation of other aspects of international human rights law, but not a war crime per se.

9) Settlement activity in occupied territories. Yes, a war crime (Rome Statutes, Art 8.2.b.viii)

10) Deliberately using civilians as human shields. Yes, a war crime.

11) Conducting military operations in built-up areas where there are lots of civilians around. No. The difference between this and #10 is hard to discern in practice, of course, since it hinges on intent.

12) Hiding rockets in the basements of houses. Not a war crime. Bombing those houses is also not a war crime. Shooting those rockets is a war crime if they aren't really aimed, or are aimed at a civilian target. It is not a war crime if they are aimed at a military target or a strategic economic target.

13) Deliberately bombing UN facilities. Yes, war crime. Ditto Red Cross facilities, hospitals. Deliberate targeting of religious establishments and cultural institutions is a war crime too--UNLESS those installations have lost their protection by being used for military purposes (like weapons storage or firing positions). In that case bombing them is permitted.

14) Accidentally bombing UN facilities, etc. No, unless one could show some willful disregard for the presence of such facilities.

15) Car bombs and suicide bombers. Depends on the target (and hence proportionality/military advantage). See #4.

In general, international law clearly allows military forces to kill civilians. However, it places limits on that killing: it must not be deliberate, the use of force may not be indiscriminate, and the use of force (and collateral damage caused) must be proportionate to the military advantage gained.

Finally, the extent to which actions are or are not technically "war crimes" is a separate issue from the morality (and legality) of the larger purpose for which military force is employed (although that can get fuzzy if notions of aggression vs legitimate self-defence are introduced).

By: Rex Brynen

Afghan Police Switching Sides

I guess it's only surprising that this doesn't happen more often.

An Afghan police commander and 13 junior officers have joined the Taliban in the western Afghan province of Farah, in what correspondents say could be the biggest defection by police.

They say the commander, named as Mirwais, was in charge of a 20-man checkpoint when he defected on Sunday.

The men are said to have taken heavy weaponry, radios and police vehicles including US-made armoured Humvees.

Farah is one of the most insecure areas in the relatively peaceful west.

The commander was based in Shewan village in the district of Bala Bulak, which was until recently considered a Taliban stronghold.

The insurgents were driven out of the area following a series of operations carried out by Afghan security forces. But local officials say insurgents have regrouped in the area recently.

By: Brant

Child Soldiers Across the World

While there was good news over the past year, there's a lot of progress yet to be made.

More than 11,000 child soldiers were freed from military slavery last year, but the United Nations believes hundreds of thousands around the world remain at the mercy of warlords like Thomas Lubanga.
The 14-year jail term ordered against Lubanga by the International Criminal Court on Tuesday is a "historic" signal, according to Radhika Coomaraswamy, who ends a six-year term this month as UN special representative on children in conflict.
The crime of recruiting and using children as soldiers "is now written in stone, nobody can say they are unaware of it," Coomaraswamy told AFP in an interview.
Governments are starting to get the message. Only Lubanga's native Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan are holding up a UN target to rid all government armies around the world of child soldiers by 2015.
The UN believes hundreds of thousands of children are forced to fight at gunpoint by the likes of the Taliban in Afghanistan, notorious Congo warlord Bosco Ntaganda, the Shebab in Somalia, Ansar Dine in Mali and other terror groups and private armies around the world.

By: Brant

Italy Intervening in... Italy?!

With political violence on the rise in Italy, will the Army get involved?

Italy is considering using the army to protect the defense conglomerate Finmeccanica and the tax collection agency Equitalia, the targets of a series of attacks that are raising concerns about political violence, the interior minister said.
Although protests against Italy's austerity program have been largely peaceful, last week a well-known anarchist group claimed responsibility for an attack in which a Finmeccanica executive was shot in the leg.
"Investigators tell me this is a credible claim. This forces us to raise our guard to avoid an escalation that, sadly, is one possible scenario. This is what we are going to do in the next days," Interior Minister Annamaria Cancellieri told the daily La Repubblica in an interview.
She said using the army to defend potential targets was "a possible solution".
A national security committee will meet on Thursday. Cancellieri said Equitalia, the target of a string of letter bomb and petrol bomb attacks, needed tighter security.

By: Brant

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Finally Back in Court

The tribunal in Guantanamo Bay Bis set to resume.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other men accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks are to be charged by a military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay.

An earlier attempt to try the men was halted in 2009 when President Barack Obama tried to shut Guantanamo down.

New rules for Guantanamo trials have been since introduced, including a ban on evidence obtained under torture.

However, defence lawyers still say the system lacks legitimacy, because of restricted access to their clients.

President Obama's efforts to hold Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's trial in New York foundered in the face of political and public opposition and it will now be held at a military tribunal in Guantanamo Bay, as previously planned.

A small number of victims' relatives have arrived at the military complex to attend the arraignment.

By: Brant

Lord of War and a Life Sentence

Looks like he might just be the lord of a jail cell.

Russian man who became known as the "Merchant of Death" for his exploits in the arms sales markets worldwide is set to learn how long he'll be in prison after his defense lawyers asked a judge to set him free and prosecutors asked that he never get out.
Viktor Bout, 45, faces a mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison and possibly life during sentencing Thursday for his conviction on terrorism charges. His lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin to throw out his conviction, saying he's a political prisoner who stepped into a vindictive U.S. government sting operation.
Federal prosecutors say Bout should spend life in prison because he agreed "without hesitation and with frightening speed" to ship "a breathtaking arsenal of weapons," including hundreds of surface-to-air missiles, machine guns and sniper rifles along with 10 million rounds of ammunition to men he believed represented a foreign terrorist organization willing to kill Americans in Colombia.
They say his weapons fueled armed conflicts in some of the world's most treacherous hot spots, including Rwanda, Angola and the Congo and that he was looking for new arms deals in places like Libya and Tanzania when he was arrested.

So we're putting a guy in jail for fast, responsive customer service? I mean, if he had agreed to ship weapons to Colombia, but not "without hesitation and with frightening speed" would the prosecution still be so intense?
What if he was just shipping staple guns, and not "a breathtaking arsenal of weapons"?
What if they were intended to kill Peruvians, and not Americans?
Is the zeal with which the prosecution is proceeding due to the triangulation of efficiency, lethality, and target choice? How does changing any one of those change the approach to the prosecution?
Let's get real here: we're after him because he agreed to try to help kill Americans. We didn't care when he was supplying Rwandans, or Angolans. Keep his activities confined to Africa, and no one gives a rip. But come into our backyard, and suddenly, he's the world's greatest criminal, and-look-at-all-the-other-bad-things-he's-done-for-years** for which he should be locked away for life, and then jettisoned into the sun for good measure.

It just feels like we're trumping up justifications for pursuing a bad guy who we should've pursued a long time ago, if he was really that bad. And if the reason we care now is because he wanted to help kill Americans, then fine. Just come out and admit it, instead of hiding behind the faux-humanitarianism of putting a dent in the world arms trade.

By: Brant


** while we've been ignoring him

Former Head of Turkey's Military a "Terrorist"?

Are we using "terrorism" and "terrorist" as by-words for anything we don't like? Yes, the Turkish military hierarchy looks bad for the way they've opposed the actions of the Erdogan government. And yes, there's probably something to the charges that Basbug faces. But does that mean he's a terrorist?

Turkey's former armed forces chief raised a clenched fist and waved to supporters when he faced terrorism charges on Monday in a historic trial that demonstrates the ebbing power of an army that once ranged above political leaders in the country.
The court, sitting in the Silivri high security prison complex, underlined the fall of the military by denying General Ilker Basbug's opening appeal to have his case considered by the Supreme Court.
Basbug, chief of staff from 2008 to 2010, is accused of being a leader of a shadowy network dubbed "Ergenekon", behind a string of alleged plots against the government of Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan. His lawyer, however, said at the weekend the case targeted not only Basbug, but also "the Turkish armed forces and even, in political terms, the state."

By: Brant

Excellent Perspective on Afghan Killing Incident

Following the shooting of 16 Afghan civilians by a US soldier, there is no end of analyses. This one, from The New Yorker, is one of the best.

A man with a gun walked into a house and killed eleven people, according to officials who spoke to the press. Four of the victims were little girls, younger than six years old. The man walked into two more houses, and in the end sixteen people were dead, nine of them children of various ages. He had tried to burn their bodies, allegedly; and he had walked a mile in order to kill them.
Does it matter that the victims were Afghans and the alleged killer was an American soldier, a sergeant, deployed there? In a way, no; those four little girls are as much a loss as if they were in Brooklyn or Birmingham or anywhere, and the same is true of all of the victims. And from the allegations that have been made public so far, this wasn’t some blundering misdirected drone strike—though that is quite bad enough—but a grown-up man who set out to kill children, along with their parents and other relatives.
In another way, though, it makes an enormous difference. This man was wearing our uniform, with our country’s name on it, and whatever awfulness in his heart found a shape in a war that we, in recent years, have only half-regarded, with a fitful unease. In wars awful things happen; that is why one must be so wary of even the most necessary of them. What exactly happened and why we don’t know; an investigation is under way. (There are conflicting witness reports, with some villagers saying that more than multiple soldiers were involved, perhaps drunk. The military says just one, and that he's in custody.) We’ll have more at News Desk soon.

The official statement from Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta on the shooting.

“Today I spoke to President Karzai to offer my deepest condolences and profound regret for the tragic incident in Kandahar province that resulted in the loss of life and injuries to innocent Afghan civilians, including women and children.

"A full investigation is already underway. A suspect is in custody, and I gave President Karzai my assurances that we will bring those responsible to justice. We will spare no effort in getting the facts as quickly as possible, and we will hold any perpetrator who is responsible for this violence fully accountable under the law.

“I condemn such violence and am shocked and saddened that a U.S. service member is alleged to be involved, clearly acting outside his chain of command. I told President Karzai that the American people share the outrage felt by President Karzai and his fellow citizens. This tragic incident does not reflect the commitment of the U.S. military to protect the Afghan people and help build a strong and stable Afghanistan.

“As we mourn today with the Afghan people, we are steadfast in our resolve to work hand in hand with our Afghan partners to accomplish the missions and goals on which we have been working together for so long. This terrible incident does not reflect our shared values or the progress we have made together. As I told President Karzai, I am fully committed to ensuring that our cooperation continues. It is essential to forging a more peaceful future for the citizens of both our nations.”

By: Brant

There's Soooo Much Wrong Here

Really... You're going to try to prop up a government and a people who run dogfighting rings, call the losers "Americans", and want to kill the people trying to drag you into the 19th century?

Protests over the burning of Korans at a NATO base may have faded but some Afghans are still venting their rage over the incident -- at a bloody Kabul dogfighting ring.
If emotions here are any indication, desecration of copies of the Muslim holy book did lasting damage to the image of the United States, which is struggling to pacify the country before NATO combat troops leave at the end of 2014.
"We call the dogs who lose Americans. We are furious about the Korans," said Mirwais Haji, 28, as a defeated canine limped off the snow-covered dirt ring on the edge of the capital.
"We want the Afghan government to bring the people who did this to us. We will kill them ourselves."

By: Brant

Retaining Serial Criminals?

Wow. While reading an article about the coming personnel drawdown in the US Army, there's this little nugget at the end of the article.

Soldiers with patterns of misconduct will not be retained, Chandler has said repeatedly. His first target is the 4,877 soldiers who have committed multiple felonies while on active duty.

Huh?!
I get that retention in wartime can be a problem, but you mean to tell me we've got an entire brigade of troops on active duty that are repeat felony offenders?!



By: Brant

Gitmo Charges for Majid Shoukat Khan

The DoD is charging detainee Majid Shoukat Khan with a whole bunch of bad things, including kicking puppies, sunspots, and not wiping his ass after taking a dump.

The Defense Department announced today that military commission charges have been sworn against Majid Shoukat Khan, a Pakistani national who lived in the United States from 1996 to early 2002 before returning to Pakistan.

The charges allege that Khan joined with members of al Qaeda in Pakistan to plan and prepare attacks against diverse targets in the United States, Indonesia, and elsewhere after Sept. 11, 2001. Specifically, they allege that Khan:

• Used a fraudulently obtained travel document to travel from his residence in Baltimore, Md., to Karachi, Pakistan, in January of 2002;
  
• Conspired with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed regarding a plot to blow-up underground gasoline storage tanks at gas stations in the United States and other domestic plots;
  
• At Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s direction, recorded a “martyr video,” donned an explosive vest, and sat in a mosque waiting for Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to arrive so that Khan could assassinate him, an attempt that was foiled when Musharraf never arrived;
  
• Traveled in March of 2002 from Karachi to Baltimore, where he performed tasks for al Qaeda and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, including purchasing a laptop computer for al Qaeda and contacting a military recruiter to obtain materials regarding the United States military, which he intended to give to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed;
  
• Upon returning to Pakistan in August 2002, worked directly for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ali Abdul al-Aziz Ali, and other al Qaeda associates, all of whom were evading capture by United States and Pakistani authorities;
  
• At the direction of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ali Abdul al-Aziz Ali, traveled with his wife in December of 2002 from Pakistan to Bangkok, Thailand, where he evaded notice by posing as a tourist;
  
• While in Bangkok, delivered $50,000 in al Qaeda funds to a southeast Asia-based al Qaeda affiliate, which in turn delivered the money to the allied terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah, which used the funding to detonate a bomb in August of 2003 at the J.W. Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia, killing eleven people, wounding at least eighty-one others, and severely damaging the hotel.

Based on these allegations and others outlined in the charge sheet, Khan is charged with conspiracy, murder and attempted murder in violation of the law of war, providing material support for terrorism, and spying. In accordance with the Military Commissions Act of 2009, Chief Prosecutor Mark Martins has forwarded the sworn charges to Convening Authority Bruce MacDonald with a recommendation that the charges be referred to military commission for trial. By separate action, Martins today also detailed Courtney Sullivan of the Justice Department as trial counsel in the case and Army Lt. Col. Michael Hosang and Navy Lt. Nathaniel Gross as assistant trial counsel. Martins has not recommended that any of the charges be referred to a military commission empowered to adjudge the death penalty, and therefore the maximum allowable penalty for the charged offenses is life imprisonment. The convening authority will make an independent determination as to whether to refer some, all, or none of the charges to trial by military commission. If the convening authority decides to refer the case to trial, he will designate the commission panel members who function as jurors. The chief trial judge of the Military Commissions Trial Judiciary would also detail a military judge to the case. The charges are only allegations that the accused has committed offenses under the Military Commissions Act, and the accused is presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

By: Brant

Jamaica is Melting Down Seized Weapons

In an effort to reduce gun violence, the Jamaican government is melting down the seized weapons.

Jamaica has melted down about 2,000 illegal firearms as part of a programme to reduce gun trafficking and violent crime on the island.

The pistols and revolvers were thrown into a furnace in the capital Kingston, watched by police and officials from the government and the UN.

Jamaica has one of the highest rates of gun crime in the world.

Correspondents say criminal gangs are often as well armed as the security forces.

Officials said about half a ton of ammunition would also be destroyed in the operation.

Many of the guns had been seized in police operations. However, old firearms from police, military and prison personnel were also destroyed to ensure they did not end up in the hands of criminals.

I can't help but wonder if all this is doing is increasing the cost of an illegal .45 in Kingston.

By: Brant

Even Idiots Have Money

And can spend it in ridiculous ways.

Supporters of the Army private accused of providing a trove of U.S. government secrets to WikiLeaks have erected a billboard along New York Avenue NE in advance of an investigating officer’s recommendation on whether Manning should face a court-martial. “Free Bradley Manning,” reads the billboard, with a tag­line: “Blowing the whistle on war crimes is not a crime.”

“The military would like to characterize Manning as someone who broke military regulations and should be jailed for the rest of his life for doing so,” said Jeff Paterson of the Bradley Manning Support Network, which paid for the billboard. “We obviously have a different opinion.”

By: Brant

A New Drug Problem

Synthetic marijuana usage is growing in US forces.

U.S. troops are increasingly using an easy-to-get herbal mix called "Spice," which mimics a marijuana high, is hard to detect and can bring on hallucinations that last for days.
The abuse of the substance has so alarmed military officials that they've launched an aggressive testing program that this year has led to the investigation of more than 1,100 suspected users.
So-called "synthetic" pot is readily available on the Internet and has become popular nationwide in recent years, but its use among troops and sailors has raised concerns among the Pentagon brass.
"You can just imagine the work that we do in a military environment," said Mark Ridley, deputy director of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, adding, "you need to be in your right mind when you do a job. That's why the Navy has always taken a zero tolerance policy toward drugs."
Two years ago, only 29 Marines and sailors were investigated for Spice. This year, the number topped 700, the investigative service said. Those found guilty of using Spice are kicked out, although the Navy does not track the overall number of dismissals.
The Air Force has punished 497 airmen so far this year, compared to last year's 380, according to figures provided by the Pentagon. The Army does not track Spice investigations but says it has medically treated 119 soldiers for the synthetic drug in total.
Military officials emphasize those caught represent a tiny fraction of all service members and note none was in a leadership position or believed high while on duty.
Spice is made up of exotic plants from Asia like Blue Lotus and Bay Bean. Their leaves are coated with chemicals that mimic the effects of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, but are five to 200 times more potent.

Great - 'cuz there's nothing better than people with heavy weaponry who are hallucinating in a war zone.

By: Brant

Are We Waving A White Flag In The War Of Ideas?

(and am I using too many capital letters in the headline?)

So the Shababians in Somalia are pretty fond of twitter and that's casuing heartburn in the US.

The United States government is increasingly concerned about the Twitter account of the Shabab militant group of Somalia, with American officials saying Monday that they were “looking closely” at the militants’ use of Twitter and the possible measures to take in response.

Hmmm... this doesn't sound good.

Most of the Shabab’s Twitter messages are in English, not Somali, and are clearly meant for an outside audience. American officials said they were worried that the Shabab might be using Twitter to reach potential recruits in the West.

So we're not even going to try to win the war of ideas, eh?

American officials say they may have the legal authority to demand that Twitter close the Shabab’s account, @HSMPress, which had more than 4,600 followers as of Monday night.

That sure sounds like "no" to me?

The State Department said federal law enforcement agencies had taken action in the past against individuals using “Web hosting and related services.”

So we're no longer allowing people to make public idiots of themselves in pursuit of their misguided goals. We're now afraid of boasting boneheads in Somalia?! Really? We can't out-debate these guys? We can't demonstrate the superiority of our way of life without resorting to techno/legal methods of simply cutting off their voices?

By: Brant

Legal Maneuverings Start in WikiLeaks Case

Bradley Manning is starting his pre-trail hearings. The BBC reports...

A military officer overseeing the hearing of a US Army analyst accused of leaking government secrets has rejected a request to withdraw from the case.

The request was made by a defence lawyer for Private Bradley Manning, 23, as he appeared at a military court.

He faces 22 charges of obtaining and distributing government secrets - which he allegedly leaked to anti-secrecy site Wikileaks.

The Article 32 hearing will determine whether Pte Manning is to stand trial.

During the hearing, which is expected to last around five days according to the defence team, prosecution and defence lawyers will each make their initial cases and are permitted to cross-examine witnesses.

Friday's session has been adjourned and the hearing is due to resume on Saturday.

The Brits abbreviate "Private" as "Pte" instead "PVT"...

By: Brant

Gitmo Still Not Closed... Why?

Foreign Affairs Magazine has a solid article on why Obama can't close Guantanamo.

The last two prisoners to leave the U.S. detention center at Guantánamo Bay were dead. On February 1, Awal Gul, a 48-year-old Afghan, collapsed in the shower and died of an apparent heart attack after working out on an exercise machine. Then, at dawn one morning in May, Haji Nassim, a 37-year-old man also from Afghanistan, was found hanging from bed linen in a prison camp recreation yard.

In both cases, the Pentagon conducted swift autopsies and the U.S. military sent the bodies back to Afghanistan for traditional Muslim burials. These voyages were something the Pentagon had not planned for either man: each was an "indefinite detainee," categorized by the Obama administration's 2009 Guantánamo Review Task Force as someone against whom the United States had no evidence to convict of a war crime but had concluded was too dangerous to let go. Today, this category of detainees makes up 46 of the last 171 captives held at Guantánamo. The only guaranteed route out of Guantánamo these days for a detainee, it seems, is in a body bag.

more after the jump, click the headline to follow

The Red Cross Weighs In on Virtual War Crimes

I'm going to admit that at first blush, the article about the ICRC investigating possible war crimes in video games gave me a facepalm. I was going to post a poll with the options being "dumb idea", "stupid idea", and "f'n' waste of time". But on further reflection, I will give the ICRC credit here, even though I don't think they're doing this with the foresight I'm about to ascribe to them.

One of the world's largest and most respected humanitarian groups in the world is investigating whether the Geneva and Hague conventions should be applied to the fictional recreation of war in video games.
If they agree those standards should be applied, the International Committee of the Red Cross says they may ask developers to adhere to the rules themselves or "encourage" governments to adopt laws to regulate the video game industry.
The International Committee of the Red Cross is mandated under the Geneva Conventions to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. That includes war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants. The question they debated this week is whether their mandate should be extended to the virtual victims of video game wars.

While the "virtual victims" are virtual today, we've seen no shortage of remote-control warfare, from Predator-equipped drones to CROWS turrets. Given the slow, but inexorable, shift in the visualization provided by remote-control weaponry, and the more graphically realistic portrayal of game-based content, are we rapidly closing on the day when the video games and video targeting are visually indistinguishable? And if so, then how far are we, really, from Ender's Game?

If that's really where the Red Cross is going with this, then bravo. They're establishing standards now, before the industry ever catches up to the standard from a technical aspect. Maybe we've learned the lessons of internet 'regulation' after all. But somehow, I'm pretty sure that's not what the ICRC is actually trying to do. So it seems as though they might actually be doing the right thing, even if it's for the wrong reasons.

What do you guys think?

poll by twiigs.com

UPDATE: Here's a thoughtful piece from Rex over at PaxSims about the same topic.


By: Brant

Parallel Wars

The low-intensity conflict in the AfPak revolves around religious terrorism. The low-intensity conflict in Mexico revolves around apolitical mercantile interests. In either case, we have "partners" who are on the take for the other side, and turn a blind eye to incredibly large-scale mis-behavior by those they should be fighting, despite having truckloads of money dumped on them by us to fight on our side.

The tunnel discovered Tuesday was about 40 feet deep, 4 feet wide and 4 feet high. It featured a wooden staircase at the U.S. entrance, located inside a large, white building with a long line of trucking docks.
The Mexican warehouse was on the same block as a federal police office and sits next to a runway at Tijuana's main airport. It featured a hydraulic lift at the tunnel entrance that dropped about 30 feet. Its carpeted floors were found littered with garbage and dirty linen. The kitchen was stocked with tortillas and oranges, with a window painted black.
Six men were charged in federal courts in Southern California with conspiracy to distribute marijuana. No arrests were made in Mexico.

my emphasis
How big was this this most recent drug-tunnel bust?

Tuesday's find netted more than 32 tons of marijuana — nearly 17 tons at a warehouse in San Diego's Otay Mesa area, about 11 tons inside a truck in the Los Angeles area and 4 tons in Mexico. According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, it ranks as the second-largest pot bust in U.S. history if the drugs found on the Mexican side of the tunnel are counted and the third-largest without the Mexican stash.

By: Brant

Legal Problems with US Defense Authorization Bill

The Senate's bill would strip away fundamental Constitutional rights, and put the military squarely in the law enforcement arena.

Section 1031 of the act permits indefinite military detention of American citizens, without charge or trial, if those citizens are accused of supporting or being members of or supporting an affiliate of al-Qaeda.

While this sounds like something from George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four," it is exactly what the act would permit. If American citizens are arrested, even on U.S. soil, and accused of aiding al-Qaeda, they could be held in military confinement. Indefinitely. They need not be charged or tried.

Another provision (Section 1032 of the act) puts the entire burden of holding and trying non-U.S. citizens who commit or plan acts of terror on behalf of al-Qaeda on the U.S. military. These detainees may not be turned over to civilian authority for trial, unless an unlikely series of political events leads to their transfer to civilian jurisdiction.

The consequence of this, according to the retired military officers, is to alter the purpose of the U.S. military and to undermine American values. As they put it in a letter to the Senate majority leader,

"If passed, we believe these provisions would reshape our counterterrorism policies in ways that would undermine our national security and transform our armed forces into judge, jury and jailor for foreign terrorism suspects. The military's mission is to prosecute wars, not terrorists. ... It [the bill] would also authorize the indefinite detention without trial of terrorism suspects, including American citizens captured on U.S. soil - a policy that is contrary to the very American values needed to win this fight."

This is a bad, bad, baaaaaaad idea. But if anyone votes against it because of the legal problems in it, they'll get accused of not supporting the troops. Politics sucks. Strike that - re-election campaign politics sucks.

By: Brant