|Founded by pro-Castro radicals
Opposes post-9/11 anti-terrorism lawsThe Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) was co-founded in November 1966 by the radical attorneys Morton Stavis, Ben Smith, Arthur Kinoy, and William Kunstler, longtime members of the Communist and radical left. All four were well known for their pro-Castro politics. Kunstler, for instance, once said: “The people of Cuba are a hell of a lot better off now [under Castro] than they were under [Fulgencio] Batista when American gangsters ran the island.” Attorneys Victor Rabinowitz and Leonard Boudin (father of Weather Underground terrorist Kathy Boudin) were both part of CCR and its ally, the National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee, and they actually provided legal representation for the Castro government. According to a New York Times report:
“The two lawyers [Rabinowitz and Boudin] won the new revolutionary government of Cuba as a client over a poolside chess game with Che Guevara at Havana’s Hotel Riviera in 1960 … Guevara won, then gave them Cuba’s business.
“It quickly provided considerable work. The United States banned Cuban sugar imports, and Cuba retaliated by nationalizing American corporate holdings. This led Mr. Rabinowitz to defend Cuba’s position in the case of Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino before the United States Supreme Court in 1963.”
David Horowitz and Peter Collier, in their book Destructive Generation, state that all four CCR founders “had long histories of public support for communist causes,” and that by “representing such paramilitary groups as the Baader-Meinhof gang and the Black Liberation Army,” they “had attempted to justify terrorist acts and criminal violence by indicting America and its democratic allies as partners in a system of economic oppression and social injustice.”
CCR characterizes itself as an organization that “uses litigation proactively to advance the law in a positive direction, to guarantee the rights of those with the fewest protections and least access to legal resources.” In pursuit of these ends, CCR only defends clients whose political views it supports, among the more notable of whom have been Tom Hayden, the Black Liberation Movement, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, Students for a Democratic Society, Women’s Strike for Peace, the Communist Party, the Black Panther Party, the Catonsville Nine, and the Chicago Seven (in a case handled by Kunstler and co-counsel Leonard Weinglass). The organization also took up the cause of Leonard Peltier, an American Indian rights activist who was convicted of murdering two FBI agents in 1975, a crime for which he is currently serving a life sentence in prison.
CCR identifies its major issues as follows:
Illegal Detention and Guantanamo: “Since 2001, the government has illegally detained thousands of people, the most recognized example being the men at Guantánamo. CCR has fought for the right to due process, filing countless cases on behalf of detainees and others swept up in the so-called War on Terror.”
CCR is a core member of the open borders lobby, which seeks to effectively initiate an era of mass, unchecked immigration. In 2002 the Center filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of illegal alien detainees, seeking punitive damages and a declaratory judgment that the detentions were unconstitutional and violated customary international law.
Since 9/11, CCR has focused its efforts heavily on reining in the U.S. government’s newly implemented anti-terrorism measures, which the Center depicts as having “seriously undermined civil liberties, the checks and balances that are essential to the structure of our democratic government, and indeed, democracy itself.” “Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the government’s actions,” says CCR, “has been its attack on the Bill of Rights, the very cornerstone of our American democracy.”
When law-enforcement agencies attempted, in the wake of 9/11, to conduct voluntary interviews with several thousand Middle Eastern men who were in the United States on temporary visas, CCR denounced such “racial profiling”; it issued this same complaint in response to the government’s detention of hundreds of non-citizens from the Middle East for possible terrorist connections. When Attorney General Ashcroft warned in 2002 that visa violators would henceforth be arrested, CCR characterized his comments as “chilling.” When new regulations permitted the FBI, CIA, and INS to share information about possible terrorist plots with one another, CCR lamented such assaults on “our privacy.”
CCR’s views on the political and psychological roots of anti-American terrorism were summarized in March 2002 by the organization’s President, Michael Ratner, who said: “If the U.S. government truly wants its people to be safer and wants terrorist threats to diminish, it must make fundamental changes in its foreign policies … particularly its unqualified support for Israel, and its embargo of Iraq, its bombing of Afghanistan, and its actions in Saudi Arabia. [These] continue to anger people throughout the region, and to fertilize the ground where terrorists of the future will take root.” Condemning America’s post-9/11 “aggression” against Afghanistan, Ratner suggested that as an alternative to war, the U.S. ought to “treat the attacks on September 11 as a crime against humanity, establish a UN tribunal, extradite the suspects, or if that fails, capture them with a UN force, and try them.”
CCR was a signatory to a March 17, 2003 letter exhorting members of the U.S. Congress to oppose the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, also known as “Patriot Act II,” which was then under consideration. The letter asserted that the new legislation “fail[ed] to respect our time-honored liberties,” and “contain[ed] a multitude of new and sweeping law enforcement and intelligence gathering powers … that would severely dilute, if not undermine, many basic constitutional rights.” In addition, CCR supports the California-based Coalition for Civil Liberties, which tries to influence city councils to pass resolutions creating “Civil Liberties Safe Zones”; that is, to be non-compliant with the provisions of the Patriot Act.
In April 2002 CCR filed a class action suit, Turkmen v. Ashcroft, seeking damages on behalf of illegal aliens and non-citizens who had been picked up for questioning by U.S. authorities in the immediate post-9/11 period. The suit alleged “that the INS arrested this group on the pretext of minor immigration violations and secretly detained them for the weeks and months the FBI took to clear them of terrorism, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and international human rights law.” The Turkmen case won CCR much publicity and, consequently, assistance from other law firms that had previously been fearful of taking cases involving 9/11 suspects.
After the Turkmen filing, CCR became directly involved in other major suits filed on behalf of terror suspects. These included, most notably, Habib v. Bush and Rasul v. Bush, both of which challenged the Bush Administration’s contention that because the Guantanamo prison camp is located outside of U.S. jurisdiction, its inhabitants are not entitled to access American courts. CCR later combined both cases under Rasul v. Bush and won an important ruling in that case (on June 28, 2004), which ultimately paved the way for CCR to gain direct access to the Guantanamo detainees.
In July 2005, CCR joined a coalition “including individuals and organizations ranging from Eve Ensler, Gloria Steinem, Not In Our Name, Code Pink, the Culture Project, [and] United For Peace and Justice” — who together demanded the closure of the Guantánamo Bay prison camp and an “immediate independent investigation into the widespread allegations of abuse taking place there.”
CCR has been a strong supporter of radical attorney Lynne Stewart, who in February 2005 was convicted on charges that she had illegally “facilitated and concealed communications” between her client, the incarcerated “blind sheik” Omar Abdel Rahman, and members of his Egyptian terrorist organization, the Islamic Group, which has ties to al Qaeda. CCR called Stewart’s indictment in 2004 “an attack on attorneys who defend controversial figures, and an attempt to deprive these clients of the zealous representation that may be required.”
In March 2005, CCR joined with the parents of deceased anti-Israel activist Rachel Corrie (the International Solidarity Movement volunteer who was accidentally crushed to death while trying to obstruct the path of a bulldozer that was engaged in anti-terror operations by Israeli Defense Force soldiers in Gaza) in filing a federal lawsuit against Caterpillar Inc., the Illinois-based manufacturer of the bulldozers used for such purposes by the IDF. Arguing that Caterpillar had violated international and state laws by providing the IDF with this machinery, CCR sued the company, marking the first time that American citizens had filed suit against a U.S. corporation for alleged misdeeds in a foreign country.
On January 17, 2006, CCR filed a lawsuit against President George W. Bush, the head of the National Security Agency (NSA), and the heads of the other major security agencies, “challenging NSA’s surveillance of persons within the United States.” (The NSA program targeted communications between persons in the United States and persons abroad where one party was suspected of having connections to terrorism.)
Characterizing President Bush as a political leader who is “out of control” and engaged in the “reckless abuse of power,” CCR in 2006 produced a book titled Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush. This screed accused Bush of “illegally spying on U.S. citizens, lying to the American people about the Iraq war, seizing undue executive power, and sending people to be tortured overseas.” CCR exhorted likeminded people to sign its online impeachment petition.
In November 2006, CCR filed a criminal complaint requesting “an investigation and, ultimately, a criminal prosecution that will look into the responsibility of high-ranking U.S. officials for authorizing war crimes in the context of the so-called ‘War on Terror.’” The defendants in the case included former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, former CIA Director George Tenet, and former Chief White House Counsel (and current Attorney General) Alberto R. Gonzales. The complaint was brought on behalf of 12 Iraqi citizens who were held at Abu Ghraib prison and one Guantánamo detainee — all of whom were, according to CCR, tortured by American authorities.
In December 2006, CCR and the Humanitarian Law Project (HLP) jointly petitioned a federal judge to dismiss many of the charges brought against the Hamas-linked organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, which in 2001 was shut down by the U.S. government because of its terrorist ties. Defense attorneys argued that Executive Order 13224, the statute under which HLF was named as a financier of terrorism, is overly broad.
In 2010, CCR and the American Civil Liberties Union jointly filed a lawsuit seeking to end a U.S. government program authorizing the killing of accused terrorists like the Muslim cleric (of Yemeni descent) Anwar al-Awlaki, a dual citizen of the United States and Yemen. (The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Awlaki’s father.) An al Qaeda “regional commander,” the younger Awlaki is known to have called for Muslims worldwide to wage jihad against America and the West. His sermons were attended by three of the 9/11 hijackers (two of whom he met with privately) and Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan (with whom he communicated regularly, and whose deadly 2009 shooting rampage he praised). Moreover, “Christmas Day bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab identified al-Awlaki was one of his al Qaeda trainers and spiritual advisers. In July 2010, Awlaki published an article in al Qaeda’s English-language magazine, Inspire, calling for Muslims to assassinate several people, including a young female cartoonist in Seattle and the novelist Salman Rushdie.
A member organization of the Abolition 2000 and United For Peace and Justice anti-war coalitions, CCR is supported, in part, by donations from the Ford Foundation, the JEHT Foundation, the Samuel Rubin Foundation, the Scherman Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the Public Welfare Foundation, the New World Foundation, the Stewart R. Mott Charitable Trust, the Tides Foundation, and the Vanguard Public Foundation.
Source: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6148 (2 August, 2011)
Follow Rebuilding Freedom
Search Rebuilding Freedom
Online NowUsers: 3 Guests
Visits Since 2-24-2012
Rebuilding Freedom Disclaimer
The views expressed in the posts and comments of this blog do not necessarily reflect the Administrators. They should be understood as the personal opinions of the author.
All readers are encouraged to join Rebuilding Freedom and leave comments. While all points of view are welcome, only comments that are courteous and on-topic will be posted. While we acknowledge freedom of speech, comments may be reviewed. The Administrators at Rebuilding Freedom reserve the right to delete posted comments at its discretion. Spam will not be posted. Participants on this blog are fully responsible for everything that they submit in their comments, and all posted comments are in the public domain.
Any email addresses, names, or contact information received through this blog will not be shared or sold to anyone outside of Rebuilding Freedom, unless required by law enforcement investigation.
This blog may contain external links to other sites. Rebuilding Freedom does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of information on other Web sites. Links to particular items in hypertext are not intended as endorsements of any views expressed, products or services offered on outside sites, or the organizations sponsoring those sites.