Il y a vraiment des moments succulents.

(mon client s'en soucis) il a été un peu frappé, attaché avec du scotch, violé. Mais il n'aurait jamais du commencer par aller là-bas pour offrir une aide humanitaire. Et maintenant, quoi ? Il espère vraiment être écouté, être jugé, avoir un avocat ? Il veut que le gouvernement montre des preuves. Nous sommes en guerre ! Nous devons faire des sacrifices !

A commencer par des petits trucs. Comme les droits de l'Homme. Je suis d'accord avec l'exécutif, ils ont une assez bonne expérience de la chose. En fait ils sont brillants. Appeler les prisonniers "combattants ennemis" au lieu de "prisonniers" pour contourner la convention de Genève sur la torture. Brillant ! Localiser le camp à Cuba de façon à ce que la constitution ne soit pas vraiment valable. Brillant ! Et sous la nouvelle convention du Pentagone, c'est ma préférée et je suis sûr que ce sera la votre, nous aurons des petits tribunaux à Guantanamo, ce qui permettra aux suspects d'être emprisonnés à vie ou exécutés. Les preuves ne seraient jamais admissibles dans un tribunal civil ou même militaire. Imaginez, être capable d'exécuter quelqu'un sur des ouïs dire ou des confession forcées (pas sur du tout de la traduction de ce passage). Brillant !

(Pourquoi devrais-je prendre tout cela au sérieux ?) Qui le fait ? Le publique américain ? Les médias ? Ils pourraient le mentionner, si seulement il n'y avait autant d'actrices américaine souffrant de la faim avec des problèmes de drogue dont il faut parler. Le congrès ?? Pourquoi devrions nous prendre cela au sérieux ? Nous torturons des gens, nous les maintenons indéfiniment, la plupart sans preuve en ne leur donnant aucun procès ou avocat. C'est hilarant. Et même s'ils se suicident, nous appelons ça "comportement d'auto-mutilation manipulé".

Mais bon, nous sommes en en guerre, nous devons tous prendre un peu ça plus légèrement.

Traduit à l'arrache, je ne suis pas anglophone :-) Donc si certains veulent corriger certains termes, bienvenues !!!

(pour ceux qui veulent revoir les photos de la manifestation pour la fermeture de Guantanamo)

Edit 14/05/2007 : pas de traduction mais la transcription du passage. Merci beaucoup à Yves !

He sits down. Alan pauses a moment and gets up for his closing. Alan Shore: Your Honor, I believe a lawyer should put his country before his client, and for that reason I’m gonna take the unusual step of asking you to dismiss my client’s lawsuit. He sits down.

US Attorney Mark Freestone: He scoffs. Objection. It’s a trick.

Alan Shore: It’s not a trick. Even though you argue and I would agree… He stands.…that nobody knows how to fight this war. We should nevertheless defer to the Executive Branch who have indeed demonstrated a particular expertise. I, for one, just can’t wait to see what they do next. He sits down.

Judge Gloria Weldon: Mr. Shore! I told you I would not allow this case to become a political football.

Alan Shore: standing And I give you my word, your Honor, not a single toss of the pigskin. And, by the way, if one were to condemn Guantanamo, which I would never, it certainly wouldn’t be an indictment of just the administration but of the entire Congress, Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama included. Congress’s silence can only be attributed to consent, acquiescence, or disinterest, take your pick. But it’s at least safe to say they don’t much care. I should mention Joe Biden because he wants people to know he’s running too.

Judge Marianna Folger: Tell me why you care.

Alan Shore: I don’t. I say, “Dismiss.” My client cares, but come on, he’s a whiner. So he got beat up a little. Duct taped. Sexually violated. He never should have been over there offering humanitarian aid in the first place. And then what? He expects to be heard? Get a trial? A lawyer? He wants the government to show evidence. He turns to Benyam and yells. We’re in a war! We need to make sacrifices! He turns to the Judge, shakes his head and makes a “get a load of this guy” gesture at Benyam. And we should start with the little things. Like human rights. I agree that the Executive Branch has a particular expertise. In fact, I think they’ve been brilliant. Calling the prisoners enemy combatants instead of prisoners so we can end run the Geneva Convention, and torture them? Brilliant! Basing the camp in Cuba so the Constitution won’t really get in our way? Brilliant! And under the Pentagon’s new draft guideline, this is my favorite, I’m sure it will be yours, we’ll have little tribunals in Guantanamo that allow suspects to be jailed for life. Or even executed on evidence that would never be admissible in civilian or military court. Imagine being able to execute somebody on triple hearsay, or on totally coersed confession. Brilliant! He sits down.

US Attorney Mark Freestone: I object. Counsel doesn’t wanna take this seriously.

Alan Shore: Why should I? Who does? The American public? The media? Who might give it mention if only there weren’t so many starving actresses with drug problems to focus on. Congress? Why should any of us take it seriously? We’re torturing people. We’re holding them indefinitely. Many with no evidence. Giving them no trials. No lawyers. It’s laughable. And then when they finally kill themselves we call it “manipulative, selfinjurious behavior” an act of “asymmetric warfare” waged against us. It’s all very funny! Very funny! Maybe the only reason we aren’t having a really good laugh is because the little Gitmo tricks have started popping up close to home. The recent revelations of FBI abuses of the Patriot Act. All those bogus subpoenas and manufactured evidence against American citizens. Maybe it’s just ruined some of the fun of Gitmo.

Oh well. We’re in a war. We all need to lighten up a little.

He sits down. Denny smiles proudly at Alan and then he turns and smiles suggestively at the Judge. She looks at Denny as he continues smiling.