Yep, still nothing wrong at Gitmo

By See-Dubya  •  January 12, 2007 07:22 PM

We’ve seen this before, but now the WSJ’s Rob Pollock writes up a junket to Gitmo. (It’s subscriber-only at this point, but will probably show up on Opinionjournal.com in a day or two.) The terrorists are fat and happy, sittin’ in La-Z-Boys, watching Harry Potter. It tracks pretty well with Patterico’s extensive interviews with former Gitmo psychiatric nurse “Stashiu” about the high standard of care offered to the inmates.

(Pollock spotted one grossly obese fellow in the yard and thought it was KSM. Actually, it turned out he was Saifullah Paracha, who according to Michelle’s July 12th Vent was already rather hefty. He’s getting state of the art medical care, as are all the prisoners there.)

What struck me as new about Pollock’s piece was this argument about how corporate America–and their white shoe law firms–are effectively subsidizing the terrorists:

Guantanamo detainees don’t lack for legal representation. A list of lead counsel released this week in response to a Freedom of Information Act request reads like a who’s who of America’s most prestigious law firms: Shearman and Sterling; Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr; Covington & Burling; Hunton & Williams; Sullivan & Cromwell; Debevoise & Plimpton; Cleary Gottlieb; and Blank Rome are among the marquee names.

A senior U.S. official I spoke to speculates that this information might cause something of scandal, since so much of the pro bono work being done to tilt the playing field in favor of al Qaeda appears to be subsidized by legal fees from the Fortune 500. “Corporate CEOs seeing this should ask firms to choose between lucrative retainers and representing terrorists” who deliberately target the U.S. economy, he opined.

I find it scandalous, yes. Look, of course these guys ought to have lawyers. But there’s nothing that says they deserve the best lawyers in the country. Why they have top-flight attorneys falling all over themselves to represent them, though, I’ve no idea. It’s almost like it’s some sort of tony corporate status symbol to defend a terrorist…but the result of that mentality is that the Gitmo prisoners end up getting far better legal representation than, say, the average out-of-luck schlub with a court-appointed lawyer on a drunk-driving beef.

Exit Question: I wonder if any of these corporations are clients of any of those law firms?

Extra Bonus Exit Question: When Marine Lt. Ilario Pantano was facing court martial–and potentially, the death penalty–over his conduct on the battlefield, did any of these law firms offer to send down a pro-bono attorney for him?

Posted in: Gitmo

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

  1. JammedGun
  2. JunkYardBlog

Trackback URL

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Where’s the transparency on Gitmo?

October 22, 2009 10:16 AM by Michelle Malkin

19 Comments | 0 Trackbacks

Amherst MA: Please give us Gitmo detainees!

October 21, 2009 10:44 AM by Michelle Malkin

42 Comments | 1 Trackback

One step closer to bringing Gitmo circus to U.S. soil

October 20, 2009 10:26 PM by Michelle Malkin

29 Comments | 2 Trackbacks

ACLU defends its CIA paparazzi project

September 18, 2009 09:11 AM by Michelle Malkin

56 Comments | 7 Trackbacks

ACLU’s spying project: Operation CIA Paparazzi

August 26, 2009 09:27 AM by Michelle Malkin

35 Comments | 7 Trackbacks

Obama’s CIA in turmoil; Panetta on the ledge; awaiting document dump

August 24, 2009 12:05 PM by Michelle Malkin

56 Comments | 17 Trackbacks

All wee-wee’d up.

Just say no to jihadi-dumping in your backyard

August 19, 2009 03:32 PM by Michelle Malkin

106 Comments | 12 Trackbacks

Standing up in Standish, Michigan.


Categories: Gitmo




HotAir GreenRoom