Is This Terror on Trial?
The 9/11 hearings at Guantánamo begin as a bizarre spectacle.
Maj. Jon Jackson flew repeatedly to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, in the past month trying to build a rapport with his client. The veteran military lawyer had been assigned to represent Mustafa Ahmed Hawsawi, a 39-year-old Saudi who is one of five alleged co-conspirators in the attacks of September 11. Jackson says he thought he'd gained Hawsawi's trust during eight meetings—despite his Army uniform. He even brought him a white Arabic robe during one of his visits. But Hawsawi's demeanor changed when he sat in the same Gitmo courtroom with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused architect of 9/11. At their arraignment last week, Mohammed, sporting a bushy white and gray beard and a white tunic, held a menacing sway over the other four detainees, instructing and even reprimanding them. Hawsawi had indicated he was ready to accept Jackson as his lawyer—but backtracked when Mohammed taunted him: "What, are you in the American Army now?" Jackson says his client was visibly intimidated. "He was shaking," he tells NEWSWEEK.
The start of proceedings against the Qaeda men allegedly responsible for the attacks that killed 2,973 people nearly seven years ago should have been a showcase of American justice. Instead, the hearing was more of a bizarre spectacle, with Mohammed chanting Qur'anic verses and the judge struggling to impose order. Already, Gitmo justice has been tarnished by the detainees' long, secret imprisonment and alleged torture. Critics of the process added censorship to their list of grievances after a security officer shut off the audio for journalists watching the proceedings whenever the defendants mentioned anything about their whereabouts and treatment in the years they were in CIA custody. If all five end up representing themselves (the judge granted the requests to three of them and said he would weigh the other two), the impression of a fair trial in the death-penalty cases will be even harder for Pentagon officials to maintain. It will also give Mohammed and his codefendants just what they want: a stage to denounce American injustice. "After torturing, they transfer us to Inquisition land in Guantánamo," he said at the hearing.
The torture allegation will hang over the trial with or without defense attorneys and could be the issue on which the case turns. Capt. Prescott Prince, Mohammed's military lawyer, told NEWSWEEK before the hearing that he would challenge as inadmissible any evidence submitted by the prosecution that is based on his client's confessions over the years. The CIA has admitted waterboarding Mohammed—pouring water in his nose and mouth until he nearly drowns—and abusing him in other ways. But prosecutors say FBI "clean teams" have reinterrogated the defendants in the past 18 months, providing what they hope the judge, Marine Col. Ralph Kohlmann, will accept as untainted evidence. Prince says it's an exercise in futility. "Once you've been tortured … how can you unscramble the egg?" If the new confessions are OK'd, the government has a strong case, says former chief prosecutor Col. Morris Davis. Without them, he says, prosecutors have a "steep hill to climb."
So far, Kohlmann has shown more patience for the defendants than for their attorneys. While the latitude he gave Mohammed was striking, he was fierce with the defense lawyers, cutting them short repeatedly and ordering them to stop objecting. Nothing better captured the absurdity of the proceedings than the conversations Kohlmann conducted with the defendants to make sure they understood that the U.S. government was prepared to provide them with lawyers "free of charge." Given that the detainees have been locked up for so long with no access to funds, the judge's assurance must have seemed hollow. "The government has tortured me free of charge for all these years," cracked one detainee, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali.
The courtroom theatrics might serve the government in at least one way: if defense lawyers are largely sidelined, the case could proceed quickly. Prosecutors have said they want to get a trial underway by mid-September and wrap it up weeks later—a remarkably brief time for a complex conspiracy case. The November presidential election has long been a target date, says Davis. Since both presidential candidates advocate closing Gitmo, Davis says, the window for staging the military tribunals is rapidly closing. President Bush also wants a verdict before he leaves office, says a senior administration official who didn't want to be named discussing internal matters. Back in 2006, Vice President Dick Cheney counseled Bush to keep Mohammed and the other high-value detainees in the secret prisons to avoid stoking the torture debate. But Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice argued at a key meeting that summer that the perpetrators of September 11 had to be tried in the open: "9/11 happened on the president's watch. We need to make sure that justice is done on his watch," she said, according to the official. Rice won the argument and might now get her wish—if there can be order in the court.
Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
Michael Isikoff has been an award-winning investigative correspondent for Newsweek since 2004. He has written extensively on the U.S. government's war on terrorism, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, presidential politics and other national issues. His book, "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War," co-written with David Corn, was an instant New York Times best-seller when it was published in September, 2006. The book was hailed by the New York Times Book Review as "fascinating reading" and "the most comprehensive account of the White House's political machinations" in the run up to the war in Iraq. Since January 2009, Isikoff has been an MSNBC contributor, making regular appearances on the Rachel Maddow Show and Hardball w/ Chris Matthews.
Ever since the events of September 11, Isikoff has broken repeated stories about the U.S. government's war on terror and won numerous journalism awards. His blog "DeClassified: Investigative Reporting in Real Time," which appears regularly on Newsweek's Web site and is written with MarkHosenball, has become a must-read for senior U.S. intelligence officials. Isikoff and Hosenball won the 2005 award from the Society of Professional Journalists for best investigative reporting online.
Isikoff's June 2002 Newsweek cover story on U.S. intelligence failures that preceded the 9-11 terror attacks, along with a series of related articles, was honored with the Investigative Reporters and Editors top prize for investigative reporting in magazine journalism. He was honored, along with a team of Newsweek reporters, by the Society of Professional Journalists for coverage of the Abu Ghraib scandal. For that coverage, Isikoff obtained exclusive internal White House, Justice Department and State Department memos showing how decisions made at the highest levels of the Bush administration led to abuses in the interrogation of terror suspects. Isikoff was also part of a reporting team that earned Newsweek the National Magazine Award for General Excellence in 2002, the highest award in magazine journalism, for their coverage of the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks.
Isikoff's exclusive reporting on the Monica Lewinsky scandal gained him national attention in 1998, including profiles in The New York Times and The Washington Post and a guest appearance on "Late Show with David Letterman." His coverage of the events that lead to President Bill Clinton's impeachment earned Newsweek the prestigious National Magazine Award in the Reporting category in 1999. Isikoff's reporting also won the National Headliner Award, the Edgar A. Poe Award presented by the White House Correspondents Association and the Gerald R. Ford Journalism Prize for Reporting on the Presidency. In 2001, Isikoff was named on a list of "most influential journalists" in the nation's capital by Washingtonian magazine.
Isikoff is the author of "Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter's Story," a book that chronicled his own reporting of the Lewinsky story and was hailed by a critic for The Washington Post-Los Angeles Times news service as "the absolutely essential narrative of the scandal with revelations that no one would have thought possible." The book, also a New York Times bestseller, was named Best Non-Fiction Book of 1999 by the Book of the Month Club.
Isikoff came to Newsweek from The Washington Post, where he had been a reporter since September 1981. There he covered the Justice Department and the Persian Gulf War, reported on international drug operations in Latin America and worked on the Post's financial news desk. Isikoff graduated from Washington University with a B.A. in 1974 and received a Masters in Journalism from Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism in 1976.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.




Comments