In his legacy interview, Cheney basically tried to recuse himself of wrongdoing in spite of international law with regard to the torture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed because of the importance of the confession which was obtained. The ground has been well covered over whether a confession under the given circumstances is valid. We should consider that the integrity of the information within the confession itself is suspect, which belies its importance and thus completely invalidates Cheney's entire argument.
(1) KSM was reported to be killed in an ISI raid in October 2002 and his body was even identified by his wife. Other than a few leaked photos there is nothing to confirm whether the man locked up in Guantanamo is the same as the one who stands accused.
(2) The accuracy of KSM's transcript is questionable since no press was present at the point it was submitted and it was allowed to be edited by members of the military who may have a conflict of interest.
(3) The 31 crimes which KSM has reportedly confessed to include some which have already been prosecuted and have led to others being convicted. If his confession is to be taken at face value, should these cases be reopened?
More after the jump:
As reported by the Asia times in October 2002, Khalid Shaik Mohammed was killed in a joint ISI-FBI raid in Pakistan.
The FBI, still keen to take Shaikh Mohammed alive, teargassed the area, and a number of people were captured. However, despite instructions to the contrary, a few Pakistan Rangers entered the flat, where they found Shaikh Mohammed and another man, allegedly with their hands up. The Rangers nevertheless opened fire on the pair...
But now it emerges that an Arab woman and a child were taken to an ISI safe house, where they identified the Shaikh Mohammed's body as their husband and father. The body was kept in a private NGO mortuary for 20 days before being buried, under the surveillance of the FBI, in a graveyard in the central district of Karachi.
The widow subsequently underwent exhaustive interrogation in the custody of FBI officials, during which she revealed details of people who visited her husband, and of his other contacts and plans. News of the death of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was intentionally suppressed so that officials could play on the power of his name to follow up leads and contacts.
A dead KSM would certainly shred the case against him. There should be a higher identification threshold of the person being held in custody than simply leaking photos to the press implicitly suggesting that it is KSM.
According to the transcript released by the military, KSM confessed to 31 al Qaida plots.
Al-Qaida suspect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessed to United States officials that he was involved in the planning of, or support for, 31 terror plots. But observers question his claim to be the mastermind of almost every al-Qaida plot in the last 15 years...
No journalists were present at the hearing. All of the information about Mohammed's confession comes from partially redacted transcripts released by the U.S. military.
Even if he weren't already dead, wasn't tortured, and didn't have his statements released through the military outside the view of the press, there still remains the question of how his confession of crimes would effect those who were already prosecuted.
The problem is that other masterminds have already been attributed to many of these plots. For instance, Omar Saeed Sheikh has already been sentenced to death for the murder of Daniel Pearl. Should Omar Saeed now be released from jail?
Another example is that KSM confessed to being the mastermind for the 1995 New York City Landmark Bomb Plot. However, the blind Egyptian Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman has already been sentenced to life for the same plot. Should Rahman be released as well?
These points show that the information in KSM's confession lacks integrity. Because of this, it also lacks importance. Since it lacks importance, Cheney's entire rationale is undermined with respect to being recused of any personal wrongdoing.