(copyright http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/cartoonsandvideos/toles_main.html)

(copyright http://www.ucomics.com/patoliphant/)

This post gives some more detail about one element of our system of "fair trial" which I discussed here.

It's the very important principle of Habeas Corpus, litterally (from Latin) "(We command) that you have the body". This is an important legal tool to defend oneself against arbitrary or unlawful arrest. Habeas Corpus is a legal action undertaken to seek relief from arbitrary or unlawful arrest, either by the person arrested him or herself, or by a representative. The court should then issue a writ (a writ is a formal written order issued by a court) ordering the custodian,  i.e. the person or institution imprisoning a person, to bring this person to the court so that the court can determine whether the custodian has lawful authority to hold the person. If not, the person should be released from custody.

Any prisoner, in a well functioning judicial system, may petition the courts or individual judges for a writ of Habeas Corpus. (A petition is a request to an authority, more specifically in this case it is a legal pleading that initiates a case to be heard before a court. The purpose of a pleading is a correction or repair of some form of injustice, e.g. arbitrary arrest).

Habeas Corpus does not determine guilt or innocence, merely whether the person is legally imprisoned or not. It can also be a writ against a private individual detaining another, for example in slavery.

It has historically been and still remains today an important tool for safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action. Currently, the US is trying to set very strict limits to the writ, limits previously unheard of in democratic societies. The current US administration believes restrictions on Habeas Corpus are necessary in the war on terrorism.

Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile". One can therefore claim that the writ is an important means to make this right real.

The United States has detained approximately 2,500 people younger than 18 as illegal enemy combatants in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay since 2002, according to a report filed by the Bush administration with the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child.

Although 2,400 of the juveniles were captured in Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, only 500 are still held in detention facilities in that country. The administration's report, which was made public yesterday by the American Civil Liberties Union, says that most of the detained Iraqi youths were "engaging in anti-coalition
activity."

As of last month, 10 juveniles were still being held in Bagram, Afghanistan, out of 90 that had been captured in that country since 2002, according to the report.

source

They say the first one will stick in the memory. James from Stronsa Road I shall remember you. He had one blue eye and one brown and wore many hats. Today I learnt less is more and after my briefing with Nick at 1 I found that all I need to do is to wait for one to come my way. In a sense try not to try. I was too caught up with the process and although it was a fun experience meeting all these weird and weirder people, some ruder than others but most friendly and open, in retrospect I still wasn't exactly at home doing it. See, I really want to be good at this. Why? Because one day when the grunt work is behind me I can look back and say yeah, there you go, I deserve this because I've done that. The front line, the battlefield of apathy. I was there, don't step on my parade. I want to be good because this is what being a relevant advocate is. This is the only real way to connect to people, this is the only direct route that things like facebook and myspace just can't achieve; organic, real, human contact. You can't advocate the cause of human rights through cold interface and artifice, you've got to talk to them, open eyes by listening as well as talking. In what I've expereinced it's those moments of silence when no-one is talking on that doorstep, that you know if you've truly got them thinking. And that's something isn't it? And if your wondering, I've only been doing this for 3 days and I already know all this how? I'll tell you.

James told me.

He told me through his handshake and humour, his smile and good nature. The fact that he was comfortable about telling me he had been in financial difficulty recently but things were getting better and yeah, maybe it was time to start giving again, because he was in the position to do so. I sat at his dining table and he told me that he had first gotten interested in Amnesty because he had seen the movie Missing, I hadn't seen it. He laughed and told me he didn't believe me when I told him he'd be my first sign up ever. When I left he said well, they say the first one sticks in the memory. Nice one, mate. You will.

I knocked on 47 doors today, and among them was a lady who refused to acknowledge my existence on her doorstep as she shuffled past me to take her trash out and back up again to shut the door while I was in mid sentence. Michael Gambon was celebrating a little girls birthday in one of the houses I knocked on, that's right, I saw Dumbledore in a party hat. That was fun. 47 doors and 1 knock, and a knock incidentally, which only happened because I like the stained glass window, turned into me talking about the movie Missing and my first 'yes'. An no that 'yes' wasn't elusive, no it wasn't hard work. James came to me, I just provided the means for something that he already wanted to do. That's what it means when they say try not to try, my job isn't to sell Amnesty, my job is to search for those who want to help.That one right there, today, was a lesson worth learning.

RA

Der sidder ca. 660 mennesker på Guantanamo.
Fra omkring 50 forskellig lande.
Indespærret på ubestemt tid og uden rettigheder.
Man ander intet om dem. Man ved ikke om de er død.
Amnesty International vil forbyde Guantanamo.
Verden er imod Guantanamo findes.

Der er ingen beviser for
folk der over har begået
en "alvorlig" forbrydelse.
Hvordan kan man arbejde sådan
et steeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed?

Ikke èn af de svin ville
holde 10 min med mig i en ring.

De har magt over folk i jern
og bar en Tv skærm!

Det er UMENNESKELIGT.
Der bliver begået tortur
på den klammeste måde.
Folk bliver behandlet, som hunde,
hvis ikke værre!

Hvem er det lige der
trænger til en tur til Guantanamo?

For min skyld, INGEN MENNESKER
FOR DET ER UMENNESKELIGT.
Hvorfor kan vi ikke få stoppet det?

Hvem snakkede om Demokrati?

En el mundo que nos ha tocado en suerte hay algunas cárceles que se han hecho más famosas que otras. Así, las celdas de máxima seguridad Guantánamo, además del infierno en la tierra en la imaginación de cada uno de nosotros, se ha convertido en un símbolo transparente del destino que los Estados Unidos y las grandes potencias imperialistas tienen pensado y están ejecutando para el conjunto del planeta con vistas a que el capitalismo obtenga el pasaje a su sobrevida.

Pero, lamentamos tener que agregar, Guantánamo es en realidad sólo un botón de muestra. Algo que en realidad ya sabíamos o presentíamos, dado que las grandes potencias y sus organismos de seguridad se las han ingeniado para desparramar cárceles secretas por los lugares más diversos, poniendo en práctica una saña tal que coloca a la figura del "desaparecido" argentino y las andanzas de Jorge Videla y su troupe en el nivel de los juegos en el arenero.

A las pruebas nos remitimos. Hace unos días, el New York Times informó que el Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja llegó a la conclusión de que Estados Unidos ha mantenido a docenas de prisioneros incomunicados por semanas e incluso meses en la base militar de Bagram, en Afganistán.
La Cruz Roja dijo, en un comunicado cargado con sus habituales términos de cuidada diplomacia, que se mantuvo a los prisioneros fuera del alcance de sus inspectores y que eran sometidos a tratos crueles, que violaban las Convenciones de Ginebra. Estados Unidos mantiene actualmente a 630 prisioneros en Bagram, más del doble de los detenidos en Guantánamo.

Q: What consequences would the use of controlled “legislative” violence in the interrogation of suspects have for our present understanding of Human Rights?

A: In my view, the move to abusive interrogation has deeply undermined the United States' ability to promote respect for international human rights law. For that reason I deeply regret what has happened and sincerely hope that the United States will take corrective measure and bring its own house in order before inaction compels prosecutors and judges in other jurisdictions feel the need to intervene.

Q: Are European countries that allowed rendition-flights to Guantanamo complicit in violating the absolute prohibition on torture under international law? If so, how can these countries be held accountable?

A: Article 4 of the Convention prohibiting torture, criminalises "an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture". What constitutes complicity or participation will turn on the facts of a particular case. Knowing support for rendition flights, or turning a blind eye in circumstances in which torture is seen as likely or reasonably foreseeable, could constitute complicity or participation. Again, it turns on the facts, which are to be established.

Q: Why doesn’t the international committee put more pressure on the US to resolve this situation?

A: History shows that it can take time for countries to call to account abuses of international law. Senator Pinochet was arrested in London eight years after he had left office. But countries do seem to have turned a blind eye. On April 17, 2008 British Prime Minister Gordon Brown stood next to President Bush in the Rose Garden at the White House and said: “The world owes President George Bush a huge debt of gratitude for leading the world in our determination to root out terrorism, and to ensure that there is no safe haven for terrorism and no hiding place for terrorists.” (Read the transcript.)

President Bush has taken responsibility for approving techniques of interrogation that, in my view, have amounted to torture. Just a few weeks earlier President Bush vetoed legislation prohibiting the CIA from using the very same techniques of interrogation I describe in my book. “The bill Congress sent me,” President Bush said, “would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror — the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives”. (Click here for the transcript.)

Mr. Khadr, now 21, has been detained in Guantanamo Bay for six years. He faces multiple charges in connection to a 2002 afghan firefight in which an American soldier was killed. One of those charges is murder, and if convicted, Mr. Khadr could spend the rest of his life in prison.

There seems little argument here.  Child soldiers should not be designated as such according to what country they are fighting in, or who they are accused of fighting against.  Khadr was 15 at the time of his capture in Afghanistan.   A child. 

Mr. Dallaire said that it is very clear Mr. Khadr was a child soldier at the time of his capture, “unless you don't want to see it.”

“You're either with the law or not with the law.”

Agreed. 

ALSO: Stay tuned for another posting tomorrow on the CHARLES TAYLOR TRIAL: Charles Taylor’s former vice president, Moses Blah discusses the use of Small Boy Units (SBUs)

First full walkabout. My feet hurt but it didn't rain. So I'm thankful for the most part. I worked rich houses today. I was told they were a not so generous type. In fact Nick told me most people are rich 'cus they don't give away cash. Fair enough, live and learn. The houses were massive and I approached them more out of curiosity than anything else, to see how the other side live and look. Large heavy doors, with heavier knockers, most of them. Nick was right however, none wanted to part with their of bank details. Not to someone at the door anyway. Fair enough really, I figured, what are you gonna do? I soldiered on in my quest for that first evasive 'yes'. Nice people today, a pensioner and I had a brief discussion about the good activists do, an Australian woman was open to giving to such a worthy cause. But, however, the good ones had got got already, and the rest simply were too rich to care. Harsh perhaps but lesson learned, stick to the middle of the totem people, not too nice houses but not too shabby. The ones with 'DRUG INVESTIGATION IN PROGRESS' plastered on the front door were worth briskly walking past altogether. All in all then, not disheartened as progress was made on my spiel and approach but well, nothing is going to beat that first pledge. Long day tomorrow, lets hope for a bit of sunshine to go with it and more comfortable shoes.

RA

Vi förväntar oss att våra folkvalda ska föregå som goda moraliska förebilder. Och i de fall de inte gör det är vi inte sena med att ställa dem i schavotten: Obetalda TV-licenser, skattefiffel, taxiresor och lägenhetsaffärer. Varpå människor frågar sig varför de ska betala TV-licens om inte hon gör det? Och om nu han betalade svart så då kunde väl de.

Det finns således en koppling mellan det syrande etablissemangets moraliska värderingar och folkets.

Vad händer då politiker börjar laborera med grundläggande etiska principer, vad ger det för signaler?

Migrationsminister Tobias Billström (m) har kommit med ett förslag om att förvägra papperslösa vård. Han menar att vård av papperslösa ger ”fel signaler”. Det vill säga, uppmuntrar människor att olovligen stanna eller söka sig till Sverige. I sitt lagförslag säger han att ”.. obehandlad sjukdom är menad att utgöra en avskräckande påföljd för olovlig vistelse i landet.” Sjukvården skall alltså underlåtas att ge dessa människor vård som ett slags straff med andra ord.

Den gamla Afghanska kvinnan ska få lida alla helvetes kval då cancern sakta förtär henne. Den Iranska våldtagna flickan ska förnekas den vård som alla våldtagna kvinnor får. Därtill skall hon förnekas mödravård och hon får själv, med risk för liv och hälsa, föda barnet. Människor ska med sina kroppar bokstavligen betala för en politisk idé.

Det finns vissa fundamentala värderingar som bär upp våran civilisation . Det handlar om synen på vårt lika mänskliga värde och respekten för livet. Det är framförallt sådant som skiljer oss från barbaren. Det är också sådana till synes självklara värderingar som ligger till grund då vi tar till alla till buds stående medel oavsett kostnader för att rädda liv. Alldeles oavsett vems liv det är fråga om. Detta ger oss en självrespekt då vi med värdig stämma kan kalla oss civiliserade.

Barbariet uppstod inte i Sobibor, Treblinka, Tuol Sleng eller Guantanamos tortyrkammare. Det söker sitt ursprung i en bristande respekt för livet. Något som i grund och botten är emot den mänskliga naturen. Varför också alla inblandade gör sitt bästa för att distansera sig från konsekvenserna av sina beslut och handlingar.

Tobias Billström kommer att befinna sig lika långt ifrån sina offer som någonsin Pol Pot, Heinrich Himmler eller Dick Cheney. Men likväl, kommer människor - och det är Tobias Billströms utryckliga vilja - att med sina kroppar få betala för en politisk idé.

Nu kan man naturligtvis invända mot jämförelsen mellan de som skådad Gorgons ansikte och de som förvägras behandlig för en stukad fot. Men det som skiljer barbaren från den civiliserade människan är inte graden av mänskligt lidande utan idén om att orsakande av mänskligt lidande för politiska ändamål är berättigat.

Det har funnits och kommer tyvärr alltid att finnas människor som likt Tobias Billström och de Moderater, Centerpartister och Socialdemokrater som ämnar stödja hans förslag som tror att det finns politiska idéer som står högre än respekten för människan.

I sina funderingar kring vilka signaler sjukvård eller utebliven sjukvård kan tänkas ge asylsökande tycks Tobias Billström förbisett från vilket intryck hans förslag kan komma att ge folket i övrigt.

Att förslaget spelar Sverige demokraterna och allsköns andra xenofober rätt i händerna är lätt att se. Med detta lagförslag så legitimerar och understödjer självaste regeringen främlingsfientliga krafter i landet. Men det ger även en signal till folket om att vissa människor faktisk inte har samma mänskliga värde som vi andra. Och att de därmed kan och ska behandlas på ett annat sätt.

När Tobias Billström och alla de som stödjer hans förslag argumenterar för det riktiga i att låta människor lida så har de redan släppt den mentala spärr som skyddar oss mot barbariet. Nu är det endast en fråga om grad.

In his book Torture Team, Philippe Sands describes the treatment of Mohammed al-Qahtani, held in Guantanamo Bay and described by the authorities (like half a dozen other suspects) as “the 20th hijacker". By the time his interrogators started using “enhanced techniques" to extract information from him, al-Qahtani had been kept in isolation for three months in a cell permanently flooded with light. An official memo shows that he “was talking to non-existent people, reporting hearing voices, [and] crouching in a corner of the cell covered with a sheet for hours on end."(7) He was sexually abused, exposed to extreme cold and deprived of sleep for a further 54 days of torture and questioning. What useful testimony could be extracted from a man in this state?

His article begins with al-Ajmi, who blew himself up in Mosul. The argument made by the US government is that this proves they were right to arrest him.

The other possibility is that the men who became involved in armed conflict after their release had not in fact been involved in any prior fighting, but were radicalised by their detention. In the video he made before blowing himself up, al-Ajmi maintained that he was motivated by his ill-treatment in Guantanamo Bay. “Twelve thousand kilometers away from Mecca, I realized the reality of the Americans and what those infidels want," he said(8). He claimed he was beaten, drugged and “used for experiments" and that “the Americans delighted in insulting our prayer and Islam and they insulted the Koran and threw it in dirty places."(9) Al-Ajmi’s lawyer revealed that his arm had been broken by guards at the camp, who beat him up to stop him from praying(10).

[...] As a senior official at the US Defense Intelligence Agency says, “maybe the guy who goes into Guantanamo was a farmer who got swept along and did very little. He’s going to come out a fully fledged jihadist."(12)

Το bloggersunite είναι μια πρωτοβουλία που δεν γνώρισε μεγάλη απήχηση στην Ελληνική μπλογκόσφαιρα. Εγώ όμως το θεωρώ σημαντική πρωτοβουλία και συμμετέχω. Παρακάτω θα βρείτε τα θέματα που προτείνει η Διεθνής Αμνηστία για τη σημερινή θεματολογία. Εγώ όμως θα επιλέξω ένα διαφορετικό θέμα: την ελευθερία της έκφρασης στην Ελλάδα.

Θα επαναλάβω τη βασική μου θέση ότι η ελευθερία της έκφρασης, και ιδιαίτερα του Τύπου, στην Ελλάδα είναι σε διακινδύνευση (όταν δεν περιορίζεται εξόφθαλμα και θεσμικά). Θα μου πείτε: έχουμε τον Τύπο εκείνο που αξίζει απεριόριστη ελευθερία; Θα απαντήσω: δεν έχει σημασία. Η θέση μου είναι ότι δεν μπορεί να ποινικοποιείται η έκφραση. Ούτε να οδηγείται η άποψη στην εξόντωση, μέσα από αγωγές. Ο λόγος πολεμάται – και αποκαθίσταται - με λόγο.

Όλα αυτά μπορεί να μοιάζουν παρωνυχίδα μπροστά στις παραβιάσεις ανθωπίνων δικαιωμάτων ανά τον κόσμο. Αλλά για μένα είναι πολύ σημαντικό. Και γίνεται ακόμη πιο σημαντικό αν αναλογιστούμε ότι υποβόσκει η συζήτηση για την ελευθερία του λόγου στην ελληνική μπλογκόσφαιρα. Και επίκειται νομοθετική ρύθμιση, σύμφωνα με τις πληροφορίες. Θα το επιτρέψουμε;

Η Διεθνής Αμνηστία για τη σημερινή ημέρα:

Human Rights In China

China has long promised to improve its human rights record for before the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics. Instead, there has been a crackdown on peaceful dissent in Tibet, prominent human rights activists, and media. Today, China human rights record is worse than it was before they made their promise.

China currently holds the world record for the largest number of imprisoned journalists and cyber-dissidents. One of the most prominent stories includes journalist Shi Tao, who is serving a 10-year sentence in a Chinese prison for sending an email! On May 15, you can do something about it.

Call for the release of Shi Tao and other prisoners in China.

Urge your U.S. representative to press the Chinese government to release Shi Tao and others who were jailed simply for their legitimate use of the Internet.

Ask Yahoo Not to Violate Human Rights

Yahoo! helped put Shi Tao in prison. They provided information to the Chinese Government, which led to his unjust imprisonment.

Illegal Detentions at Guantanamo Bay

Since first detainees arrived on January 11, 2002, the U.S. detention facility at Guantánamo Bay has become a global symbol of U.S. human rights violations. Infractions have included: illegal detention, denial of fundamental legal rights, and torture. The only proper recourse is to close the detention facility.

Amnesty International calls for detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, other U.S. facilities, and secret CIA sites to be charged and given fair trial before independent and impartial tribunals such as U.S. federal courts. Tearitdown.org is Amnesty International’s global initiative to end illegal US detentions. On May 15, you can do something about it.

Sign the tearitdown.org pledge

and ask your readers to do the same. Only action and attention will end the illegal detentions at Guantanamo Bay.

Crisis in Darfur

One of the worst atrocities and abuses of human rights in the world today is taking place in Darfur, Sudan. The conflict in this country has led to the worst human rights abuses imaginable — the systematic and widespread murder, rape, abduction, and displacement of peaceful citizens.

Hundreds of thousands of civilians have been killed in deliberate and indiscriminate attacks by both sides of the warring factions. Today, more than 2.5 million civilians have been displaced in the Sudan. On May 15, you can do something about it.

Write about the human rights abuses taking place in Drafur

and ask your readers to take action for the people of Darfur. They have no voice so the world has to their voice for them.

In den letzten Jahren wurden im Auftrag der Regierung mehr Menschen verschleppt, als jemals zuvor. Dies bezog sich jedoch nicht nur auf rein amerikanisches Hoheitsgebiet. Hampelmännchen Bush wurde beauftragt seine Verbündeten (allen voran natürlich England) in Übersee um Hilfe zu rufen... diese spurten natürlich. Es wollen ja immer wirtschaftliche Interessen gewahrt bleiben. Unsere deutsche UncleSam-Marionettenregierung mit dem BND (BundesNachrichtenDienst) als langen Arm hatte da weitaus weniger zu melden (siehe dazu bundesrepublik-unter-kriegsrecht/). Und so konnten und können noch immer illegale Militärmaschinen Gefangene über die Ländergrenzen hinweg in rechtsfreie Inhaftierungszonen verfrachten. Hierzu eine Dokumentation über die Geheimflüge der CIA und deren Unterorganisationen:
[googlevideo=http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-3301451197849876155]

Erst wurden die Folterjets als Hirngespinste abgetan, dann wurde Mitwissenschaft von den beteiligten Länder bestritten und später heruntergespielt, wenn das Thema nicht schon aus den Medien ist. Hierzu ein guter Spiegel-Artikel mit Verweisen auf andere Berichte zu diesem Thema: Geheimgefängnisse in Europa und CIA-Gefängnis in Deutschland wie auch Eine Person ohne Weiteres verschwinden lassen von Telepolis.
Man muss durchaus Schizophrenie ader zumindest zynische Doppelmoral unterstellen, wenn UNO Staaten öffentlich solches Verschwindenlassen von Gefangenen ächten und sogar unterschriftlich besiegeln (7.Februar 2007 in Paris) aber im Nachhinein als direkte Mittäter entlarft werden. Zwischen 2001 und 2005 machten mindestens 245 Flüge Zwischenstopp auf EU-Flughäfen.

Ziele waren dann eben jene rechtsfreie Konzentrationslager der Neuzeit wie Guantanamo Bay, Abu-Ghraib oder noch nicht bekannt gewordene Folterbauten. Noch immer sind international Dutzende (die Zahlen schwanken zwischen 40 und über 100) mehr-oder-weniger terrorverdächtige Menschen verschollen und manche werden das wohl auch bleiben. Und noch immer, trotz des grossen öffentlichen Bekanntwerdens, bleiben diese Gefängnisse offiziell bestehen.
Und wer jetzt denkt, er wäre hier sicher, findet es sicher interessant zu wissen, dass es einen kleinen Paragraphen im Mitgliedsabkommen der EU, welcher da lautet Europäischer Haftbefehl. Dieses kleine Teufelswerk erlaubt angeklagte Menschen über nationale Landesgrenzen hinweg anzuklagen und zu bestrafen. Bedeutet im schlimmsten Fall, jemand wird in einem Staat für ein Verbrechen angeklagt, das dort unter schwerer Strafe steht. Gerichtshof ist das dortige Land. Bedeutet der Angeklagte wird dort hin verfrachtet und wird dort gerichtet (auch die Strafe wird dort verbüsst)l Dazu kommen natürlich auch Dinge wie Sprachbarrieren oder die fast aussichtlose Suche eines guten Verteidigers, welcher sich mit dem ständig im Wandel befindenden EU-Recht inklusive dem Landesrecht des Klägerstaates auskennen muss.
Bedeutet im Prinzip, ein Störenfried wird in einigen EU-Mitgliedsstaaten eines untergeschobenen Verbrechens angeklagt und man ist ihn zumindest einige Jahre los. Eine wunderschönes Spielzeug für jeden Geheimdienst...

"Taxi zur Hölle":

"Folter im Namen der Demokratie"

Dieser Irrsinn muss ein Ende haben! Ich danke allen aufrichtigen Organisationen, wie Amnesty International bis hinzu jedem Demonstranten (auch für diese wurden schon Sammellager eingerichtet) für den Einsatz im Namen des gesunden Verstandes!

La Cina ha promesso di migliorare la situazione dei diritti umani prima delle olimpiadi di Pechino 2008 . Invece, vi è stato un giro di vite sul dissenso pacifico in Tibet, proveniente dagli attivisti per i diritti umani e dei media. Oggi, la Cina dei diritti umani è peggio di quanto non fosse prima che loro presentassero la loro promessa.

La Cina detiene attualmente il record mondiale per il maggior numero di giornalisti e cyber-dissidenti. Una delle più importanti  comprende la giornalista Shi Tao, che sta scontando una condanna a 10 anni di reclusione in un carcere cinese per l'invio di una e-mail! Il 15 maggio, è possibile fare qualcosa al riguardo.

Call for the release of Shi Tao and other prisoners in China.

Detenzioni illegali a Guantanamo

Dall'arrivo dei primi detenuti l' 11 gennaio 2002, nel centro di detenzione a Guantanamo Bay, questi è diventato il simbolo globale delle violazioni dei diritti umani degli USA. Che includono: la detenzione illegale, la negazione dei fondamentali diritti legali, e la tortura. . L'unica è chiudere il centro di detenzione.

Amnesty International chiede che i detenuti a Guantanamo Bay, US altre strutture, e siti segreti della CIA, abbiano diritto ad un processo equo dinanzi ad un giudice indipendente e imparziale, come ad esempio i tribunali federali degli Stati Uniti. Il 15 maggio, è possibile fare qualcosa al riguardo.

Sign the tearitdown.org pledge

e chiedi i tuoi lettori di fare lo stesso. Solo  l'intervento e l'attenzione farà terminare le detenzioni illegali a Guantanamo Bay

Crisi nel Darfur

Una delle peggiori atrocità e violazioni dei diritti umani nel mondo di oggi è in atto nel Darfur, in Sudan. Il conflitto in questo paese ha provocato i peggiori abusi dei diritti umani immaginabile - la sistematica e diffusa omicidi, stupri, rapimenti, e lo spostamento di cittadini pacifici.

Centinaia di migliaia di civili sono stati uccisi in deliberati e  indiscriminati attacchi da entrambi i lati delle fazioni in guerra. Oggi, più di 2,5 milioni di civili sono stati sfollati in Sudan.Il 15 maggio, è possibile fare qualcosa al riguardo.

Report sulle violazioni dei diritti umani in Drafur

Loro non hanno voce nel mondo sta a noi fare il possibile per dargliela

Amalgam Virgo

I know! ...NOBODY was prepared 4 things like 9/11 !

Bush Quote:

"Nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government, could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalgam_Virgo

Amalgam Virgo 01 (June 1-2 / 2001)
Operation Amalgam Virgo is a CINCNORAD joint task counter-terrorist
and field training exercise (FTX) carried out in Tyndall
Air Force Base, Florida on early June of 2001.

NORAD sponsored the multi-agency planning exercise involving the hypothetical scenario of a cruise missile launched by a rogue government or threats from a barge off the East Coast. Osama Bin Laden was pictured on the cover of the proposal for the exercise.

Key military players involved in the exercise
also included personnel from the 1st Air Force battalion,
the U.S. National Guard, the U.S. Reserve forces, and the U.S. Navy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalgam_Virgo

please visit

http://911Revolution.magnify.net

http://911taboo.magnify.net

http://livevideo.com/spiney

http://livevideo.com/socialservice

It's a strange peephole I am shown. That's what I can sum up from today's experience, my first as a fund raiser for a cause. If I could dilute the walking, the worn-feet, the misgivings, the trepidation and focus on those fleeting moments, the vignettes of exchanges between me and the people behind those doors, it would be that. It's a strange peephole I am shown. For, that's what I am privy to, it seems, that's the random sidenote. For a brief few moments I get to see how others live and I get to interject an interest. I sliver open a peep by knocking on the door. I peek-a-boo a friendly 'Hello, I'm calling on behalf of Amnesty International' into a life for a few seconds. That's what I get to do, and it's cool. By the end of it all I think what will stand out most in my memory are the people. There was the Scottish housekeeper who already gives to Oxfam and Greenpeace, yet the lady whose house she keeps didn't give to any. I left a leaflet. There was the hurried man with the tie half done who had no time for door-knockers and nuisance. There was the old man, shuffling his slippers on parquet flooring, 80 if a day who already gave to Amnesty, thanks very much. I thanked him back for giving. The well-to-do American mom with the kids playground in the basement. The good-looking kid, who answered no before I asked the question, the dog running around his ankles. There was the man on the other end of the intercom, the mummy who said no thanks but wished me fun in the sun and door bell gone unheard because the occupants were jamming, playing the drums and bass guitar. Had they answered, I would've told them they rock, it's true. The interaction, the conversation, the polite way someone says no or the inkling of a yes but not now. For I had no definite 'yes' today, no funds raised, no donations pledged. Most of the doors were unanswered in fact, but when the sun was that high in the sky and my mood as high as the sun, I didn't mind walking on. Nick met me half way and watched me mis-step and carry on. He was pleased I thought. At the end of it all I gathered he was pleased with my budding beginning. I have the right sort of energy he had said, 'Just talk to them as your talking to me now, you'll do well'. Which was cool for him to say, he meant the words and I believed in them. He made it clear there was no target, no quota to attain. Have fun and enjoy, no stress no drama. As I type I'm not even fussed about not raising anything today. To be honest I'm not really surprised, it's strange, I'm not used to enjoying a job. But then again, when your job is to advocate relevant truths to people who can afford to help support a cause, the job is second to the wider perspective. All budding roses and shafts of sunshine? Well the weatherman says it's going to rain tomorrow, I suspect Day 2 will prove a steeper step in stone.

RA

I have always been fascinated with the kind grunt work involved with fund raising. What would it have to have taken for a young person to give up their time and effort into advocating a cause, a campaign, a fight? Canvassing for a Relevant Truth. I found that appealing. Well my original relevant truth is, anti-climatically, less of a cause and more of a necessity as I have been charged by my own pursuit of paying for my University fees over the course of this summer. This isn't voluntary work you see, I will get paid for raising money. A solid £8 an hour. A good strong oval number, which will help with the fees and well, let me confide, it beats working as a clerk or a retail drone for hours on end for that nameless, faceless, omniscient shape of a figure we call 'The Man', doesn't it?

To be honest I know nothing about fund raising. Nothing at all. This is a first time gig, I am a rookie raiser. Which adds to the excitement I suppose. Will it be a disaster? Will I take to it like a duck to water? To be honest I am optimistic. Why? Because I can speak. I can speak with clarity and conscience about causes, issues and fights. And in any case, I would rather be talking about IMF sanctions in Haiti or about Chinese human rights violations in Darfur than about madam's skinny jeans ensemble or which aisle the baby wipes is at, because, I'm sorry 'The Man', I simply don't give a shit about such irrelevance. So there you go. Give me leaflet and a message and send me on my way, for there is a nobility in this grassroots activism stuff.

Or am I being naive? This could all end in tears, a daft foray into the mean street of London. This isn't after all, the white picket fence capital, the people I will likely meet will not be as kindly and wholesome as I would hope to expect. The Kennedy's don't live in Kilburn. So I will head out, walk the streets, knock on doors, engage with the unkempt masses with only my wits and non-invasive manner as my tools of trade. Over the course of the next couple of weeks I will report back on my findings on the true state of the apathy of our nation. My chosen charity? Amnesty International. I wonder how many humans I will help protect by the time I'm done. A quest is it? Or a graft? In any case it will be an experience, and we shall see.

Gregory’s lecture will examine how these imbalances of power are currently playing out in the “war on terror” with a focus on the imprisonment and interrogation practices used in the global war prison. His talk will explore the strategic geographical sites of the global war prison including Bagram, Guantánamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and the so-called ‘Black Sites,’ showing how they are produced through constantly shifting folds between law and violence.

Derek Gregory is Distinguished University Scholar and Professor of Geography at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. He is the author of The Colonial Present: Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq (2004) and Geographical Imaginations (1993).

Click to see the lecture!

Ref: Simpson Center

Mohamed al Kahtani faces no trial after years of torture in a Guantánamo prison for a crime he wasn’t even in the country to commit. He was detained in January 2002. In February 2008, after "aggressive" interrogations, the prosecution finally submitted charges.

It took six years for the Pentagon to levy charges that took only three months to dismiss.

His military defense lawyer suggests the dismissal comes because the only evidence against Kahtani is his statements that were "derived from torture."

Even a military judge must repudiate such illegitimacy of testimonies made during what military officials have admitted were “degrading and abusive” interrogations.

But it's not over yet. The charges against him were dropped “without prejudice,” so the government can reinitiate charges at any time. The remaining five suspects continue to face the death penalty.

Kahtani was only 22 years old when he was taken to Guantánamo. He has spent one-fifth of his life in the military prison based on unsubstantiated allegations.

The interrogation room in Guantanamo Bay, Christmas Eve 2002. Detainee 063 – an Al-Qaeda suspect called Mohamed al-Kahtani, who may or may not be that sought-after 20th 9/11 hijacker – is crying in his chair. It is his 33rd day of continuous interrogation – a month with almost no sleep – and the interrogators have started up with the white noise again and are pouring water over his head.

Maybe the snarling dogs will come back too, or he’ll once more be humiliated by some woman pressing up against him while he’s told to stand or crouch naked for hours on end. He’ll be yelled at, shaved by force and made to act like a dog and will have instructions bellowed at him from a distance of 2in. He’ll be so terrified and exhausted that he’ll wet himself.

Happy Christmas, Mohamed. Good Christian men, rejoice.

This country used to elect imperfect people who, despite personal flaws and often failed policy- still practiced restraint and favored diplomacy, especially in regards to matters of foreign policy. 

Not anymore. In this post 9/11 era, we hear threats far more frequently from our own politicians than even Al Qaeda. Remember what Representative (and '08 GOP presidential candidate) Tom Tancredo once told a radio show host?  He said a Tomcredo presidency would "take out their holy sites" should Islamic terrorists pull off a multi-city nuclear attack on our soil. Yes, he actually clarified that he was talking about bombing Mecca. Way to distinguish between criminals and innocent Saudis, Tom. Innocent until stereotyped, I guess.

During the GOP presidential debates, the rhetoric had a vengeful tone. Mitt Romney had this to say about the lasting value of one of the not-so-bright spots in recent American history- the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp:

"I am glad [detainees] are at Guantanamo. I don’t want them on our soil. I want them on Guantanamo, where they don’t get the access to lawyers they get when they’re on our soil. I don’t want them in our prisons, I want them there. Some people have said we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is we ought to double Guantanamo," and later “Guantanamo is a symbol of our resolve.” Romney got his applause, but should've (at the very least) listened to the guys that he modeled his foreign policy after:

"If you just look at how we are perceived in the world and the kind of criticism we have taken over Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and renditions," Colin Powell said in an interview, "whether we believe it or not, people are now starting to question whether we're following our own high standards...Suppose North Korea or somebody else wants to redefine or 'clarify' " Geneva Conventions provisions prohibiting "outrages against personal dignity" and "humiliating and degrading treatment" of prisoners...The world...is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism." Even George W. Bush disagrees with Romney, and has said "I'd like to close Guantanamo." Oh well, Romney got his applause.

Moving on. Rudy Giuliani offered glimpses of his very ghoulish foreign policy during his recent attempt at the White House. Here's an example: "Iran is not going to be allowed to [become] a nuclear power. If they get to a point where they're going to become a nuclear power, we will prevent them; we will set them back eight to 10 years. That is not said as a threat; that should be said as a promise." Giuliani's foreign policy was so aggressive that even The American Conservative gave him this cover (it is not a fake):

Mrs. Clinton is up to bat next. Following what she called our "massive retaliation" should Iran strike Israel, Hillary buckled her Kevlar pantsuit and proceeded to fire another warning shot: "We will attack Iran...we would be able to totally obliterate them. That's a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that."  If it's terrible, then why are you saying it, Hillary? Why not something along these lines: "we have confidence that a new administration will be able to re-open dialogue with Iran so that such an outcome is never even approached. We want to build relationships with countries like Iran; not alienate and threaten them." A bully doesn't just fight, but also tries to provoke and intimidate, and it's not great to see it coming from so many of our presidential candidates.

Okay John McCain- will you one-up Hillary by promising to slowly lower the entire country of Iran into molten lava, or at least flatten, decimate and perhaps blast it back to the stone age? No, not in those words, but he did jokingly sing about bombing Iran, and also likes to take the threat of terrorism personally:

"I will follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell and I will shoot him with your products," he said. Whoops! Here's a clarification on that recklessness: "I certainly didn't mean I would actually shoot him. I am certainly angry at him, but I was only speaking in a way that was trying to emphasize my point...I would not shoot him myself." Thank you McCain, you too are so butch. Does he actually think that the American public will vote for him based on where his anger is focused? That's the last thing I want- an angry President with the world's most powerful military at his disposal.

These so-called Reagan Republicans sound pretty out of touch with the guy they frequently salute, and would be wise to remember his quotes:

"We the people" tell the government what to do, it doesn't tell us."

"History teaches that war begins when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap."

"The only way there could be war is if they start it; we're not going to start a war."

"Peace is not absence of conflict, it is the ability to handle conflict by peaceful means."

"The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never be an aggressor." 

Of course, in an attempt to officiate a civil war, Reagan did send marines into Lebanon, but even he "cut and ran" when things went sour there. His foreign policy is not worthy of unchecked praise as there were other blunders over those eight years, but again- this country used to elect imperfect people who, despite personal flaws and often failed policy- still practiced restraint and favored diplomacy- especially in regards to matters of foreign policy. 

Can we get back to that?

Stay tuned for the next installment...

Yesterday I had a terrible headache. I still have the remnants of it today but it's not painful.

I had precious little sleep the night before and not enough thin-drinks (water or juice as opposed to coffee with sweetened condensed milk or 'ovaline' type drinks etc...) during the day. Tired eyes and squinting due to yesterdays intense sunlight along with work being a bit more stressful than usual all added up to a big mental whack!

I had to seek darkness and a total lack of mental stimulation as even consciously thinking hurt. I took 3 tablets , drank a it of water and had about 13 hours sleep.

These days, if I feel the warning signs of a headache coming on I don't bother to wait for it to develop. I just pop a pill. Unfortunately yesterday, I didn't make enough effort to go out of my way and get a headache tablet - and I paid the penalty!

I've often thought things like: by taking these tablets, have I stopped some kind of natural mechanism that would ordinarily keep a headache bearable? and now that I take tablets, are the headaches getting worse and so on? I often think the answer is yes, but on most occasions the tablets work, and I don't know how long it would to assess any possible benfefits of 'cold turkey' and I don't really want all the additional pain if these natural mechanisms didn't exist.

Finally, when the pain subsided a bit, what came to mind was the torture victims in Guantamo bay, held in Camp Delta, a torture camp which allows US military personnel to indulge in their most beloved sadism, torturing them there so the change of legal action is minimised.

Previously tortured, blindfolded, ear-muffed,
breathing restricted, writsts tightly bound - circulation restricted,
forced to kneel on sharp stones - perhaps for hours
Hands unable to touch things, Back aches, leg muscles cramp and deform,
Just another USA at work in Gunatamano bay

-

These poor people will get headaches and probably due to their unimaginably more stressful conditions, will be far more frequent and possibly worse than mine. If yesterday I was put in a dark room naked, cuffed, cold and with some junk thrash metal 'music' blasting away at me for hours on end, after ferociously vomiting I honestly have no idea what would have happened to me. I am pretty sure I'd suffer some form of mental trauma and probably persistent trauma. I'd confess to the shooting of Lincoln, Archduke Ferdinand and for being Guy Fawks financier.

The worlds silence is appalling. People have accepted what's happening there, many no doubt as a result of the fake War OF Terror drilled into them. (and If your an Uzbek or Iraqi' that drilling is physical).

Even if there were "Al-Qaeda" - which if yor read about them is very very unlikely, (irrespective of my belief that Al-Qaeda is more phoney than real) then after about 6.5 years daily toture and detention they will have no value what so ever. Better just prosecute them according to the law. But that would deny the torture masters of their 'pain fix' wouldn't it.

When the British detainees were released I said to myself 'this is a bad day for the others at Guantanamo' as now the Brits will shut up about the demonic torture going on there every day, and won't even issue insincere protestations about it. Sadly I was right.

-

Pic: http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2008/03/18/iraq_anniversary/story.jpg

-

-

-

-

Captain Allred has more than enough time in the Navy to be able to retire. But I'm betting that after this ruling he eliminated any chance he might have had to become an Admiral. Last year we saw a Navy Lt Commander win at the Supreme Court, beating the Bush administration, and he is gone. Out of the Navy. A civilian, now.

I truly hope this decision does not ruin Captain Allred's career. But Bush is savage with those that disagree with him. I'd call Bush a "petty tyrant."

Scott Reid is chairing the committee again. I don't see Jason Kenney, which is odd because he's been taking the lead for the government up until now. Maybe he's off apologizing for another historic wrong like the head tax or internment camps. I wonder if the Jason Kenney of the future will wind up apologizing for Canada's failure to protect a child soldier from the machinations of the American military justice system.

Reid is muttering worriedly about quorum - which, for a subcommittee, can be as little as four, provided there is at least one government and one opposition member present. So far, the only ones here are Wayne Marsden - the NDP MP who spearheaded this study in the first place - and, for the Conservatives, David Sweet. Oh, and some woman from the Bloc Québécois, who just this second walked into the room, and is wearing a very cute burnt peach jacket.

12:04:19 PM
I guess quorum is actually three, because the gavel just went down, and the meeting is on, despite the fact that there's not a single Liberal here. Hey, Liberals! Get down here!

12:06:19 PM
The representative from Amnesty International kicks off her joint presentation with Kathy Vandergriff, who is here on behalf of the Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children. The Amnesty rep gives a recap of the story so far, calling Guantenamo a "highly coercive regime" where the presumption of innocence has been "systematically undermined." Apparently, the former head of the US military tribunals resigned after concluding there was virtually no possibility of being able to conduct fair trial. She also reviews the legal battles over the legitimacy of Gitmo - past, and ongoing - and notes that the commissions lack independence from the government, and that information extracted under torture is admissable.

Moving on to the issue of the treatment of minors at Gitmo and as potential defendants against war crimes charges, she says much the same as the committee has heard from previous witnesses: they should be treated in accordance with international law, with a focus on rehabilitation, "under the rules of juvenile justice."

I'm starting to wonder if there are any arguments - legal, or moral - that would justify failing to live up to the duty to protect Canadians and uphold international standards, not to mention all those protocols and treaties that we've ratified on child soldiers.

12:15:46 PM
Oh, there we go - a Liberal finally turned up: Mario Silva, to be precise. He's here just in time for the presentation by Kathy Vandergrift, who says she has three points to make to the committee: Omar Khadr does, indeed qualify as a child soldier; Canada's current treatment of him does not comply with international protocol on the rights of the child (or any other international protocol, for that matter); and the goal should be to rehabilitate and reintegrate child combatants, including Khadr.

12:20:13 PM
An interesting, possibly new, point: it is in the interest of the Canadian soldiers to support the protocols on child combatants. Although the military wasn't initially all that keen on having different rules for juvenile prisoners when Canada first signed onto the protocol, they've since come to see why it makes sense, according to Vandergrift, particularly after encountering them on the battlefield.

12:23:22 PM
Finally, she points to the global benefits of following the many international treaties and Security Council resolutions that Canada has previously signed and ratified. Otherwise, how can we be a good example for the rest of the world? Not to mention the fact that Canada has been a "champion" for the rights of children caught in armed conflict. The fact that our government won't lift a finger in the Khadr case is steadily damaging our credibility within the international community.

12:28:56 PM
Mario Silva leads off by asking if the witnesses agree that Canada has a "positive obligation" to comply with the protocols and conventions that it has ratified in the past; given the current state of quasi-international legality at Gitmo, and the commitments that we've made. How can the government be held to account and forced to take action?

Vandergrifte wants to see "more dialogue" amongst parliamentarians, and also with experts, advocates and even former child soldiers themselves.

12:32:58 PM
With that, the Bloc Québécois is up. She quotes from Khadr's lawyer, William Keubler, who noted that no child soldier acts voluntarily, and admits she is increasingly disturbed by the lack of intervention by the Canadian government. If you're tuning into these hearings (or this issue) for the first time, Canada is the only Western country that has not repatriated its citizens from Gitmo. (Yes, the only one. I know, I was kind of shocked to hear that too.)

Amnesty Kathy suggests the committee hear from Craig Forcese, a law professor, who, coincidentally, will be appearing at the Senate anti-terrorism committe I'm covering this afternoon, on the possibility that Khadr could be put on trial in Canada. She notes that some children who were held at Gitmo - not Khadr, it goes without saying - were transferred to Camp Iguana, a nearby facility designed for juveniles. Not that Camp Iguana was an appropriate venue for child soldiers, she hastens to add. But it was at least a little bit better than the main camp.

12:40:11 PM
The chair chides the Bloc for overly long questions - with just five minutes per member, it's not hard to go over the limit. He moves to Marsden, who raises the spectre of the Nuremberg trials. Khadr was a "dutiful son" being punished for the sins of the father, he says.

Jason Kenney just arrived, which saves David Sweet from having to read the official PMO talking points on Khadr, which, frankly, are a little slim on substance. "We trust that due process is being followed; let the system work; and, by the way, you all love terrorists" is pretty much the gist.

Meanwhile, Marsden wonders what the global precedent will be if Canada fails to take action. Not great is the unsurprising answer, although Vandergrift sounds almost Pollyannaish for a moment when she points to the (rapidly shrinking) window of opportunity to set a good precedent by doing something now.

"There is time to do something about it," she points out.

12:44:07 PM
Aha - Sweet does get to ask the questions! Or rather, to read the preamble. He just made a rather unfortunate Freudian speech by asking if Khadr would, in fact, not face trial for the death of James Moore. Both Kathys make short work of his ostensible angst over the possibility that Khadr would be set free automatically, although they each point out there are, to put it kindly, growing doubts over the case against him, including questions over the inadmissability of evidence, which could have a different result in Canadian court. Even so, Amnesty Kathy reminds him that many child soldiers stand accused of doing terrible things.

12:47:24 PM
David Sweet wonders why the witness said that this wasn't an "exceptional" case, and plays the Khadr Family Circus card: They're on the record "supporting" al-Qaeda. Vandergrift explains Khadr is not exceptional in the ranks of child soldiers. She wants a very specific plan that looks at the context, but this happens in other countries as well. It comes down to the best interest of the child.

12:49:47 PM
Back to Mario Silva for what is going to have to be an even more succinct final round. He is now eating up still more time by prefacing his question by acknowledging that Khadr is accused of, and may have committed, a very serious crime. This is not about turning him loose, but about the best venue to adjudicate his culpability and, if necessary, impose consequences. Even if Khadr is found innocent, he points out, he could still be declared an enemy combatant and held indefinitely.

Really? Wow. I didn't realize that the Kafka never stops when it comes to the Gitmo tribunal system.

12:54:00 PM
Ooh, the committee gets another ten minutes - overtime, as it were - after members agree to one more round of questions. Joanne Deschamps, the Bloc Québécois MP whose name I couldn't remember, asks if there are any human rights groups that haven't condemned the current tribunal system. If there are, I bet the government would be happy to invite them to testify at this committee. But the answer seems to be no. Well, at least as far as the tribunal system. She's not sure about the Khadr case particularly, but the "big ones" have expressed concern for years.

12:59:12 PM
David Sweet continues his rather plaintive attempt to rationalize his empathy for the child soldiers of Sierra Leone with his apparent lack of it for child soldier Omar Khadr. He wonders what "path" the witnesses see for reintegrating Khadr, who is "now a man," given the family situation. Vandergrift seems honestly thrilled he has made it to that point, as far as considering Khadr's position, and notes this is "where the discussion should go." That, she says, is where we should be focusing our attention.

1:02:11 PM
Lane Layne Morris and Christopher James Spear Speer.  Those are the names of the US soldiers who Omar Khadr is accused of having killed during a firefight. David Sweet wanted to put that on the record.

Marsden cannot understand how anyone can ignore for even one moment the fact Omar Khadr was a boy at the time. He recalls the opening scenes of Gone with the Wind, when the horsemen rode up with great excitement, talking of a war that would last for just a few days and end in easy victory for the Confederacy.

And with that, the meeting rolls to a pensive close.

Sami Al Hajj and his son: freedom at last (Photo: Aljazeera)

By Aijaz Zaka Syed

My youngest one is as old as the young son of Sami Al Hajj, the Al Jazeera cameraman who was carried home to freedom on a stretcher this week, after seven years in the Guantanamo Bay.

Watching a shockingly emaciated Hajj shower kisses on his son at a Khartoum hospital, where he has been admitted after freedom from the high security prison in Cuba, I couldn’t help think about my own kids.

I put myself in Hajj’s shoes and wonder how I would fare if I ended up in Bush’s gulag. What would happen to my own children and loved ones? And what chance would I have at freedom, if I got picked up by America’s friends and allies and ended up in the Bay, just as Hajj had been?

You might think I don’t have to end up in the Bay. I am not a terrorist. And I haven’t done anything except hold a mirror to the US and other big powers once in a while. But then Hajj is not a terrorist either. He did not fly any planes into the symbols of America’s might. He did not try to blow himself up near the White House or Pentagon. The only crime he ever committed was work for Al Jazeera, the television channel the Americans seem to think is run by Osama Bin Laden.

Hajj was on his way to Afghanistan to report for Al Jazeera when he was picked up by the authorities in Pakistan in 2001 and handed over to the US. Despite holding a valid visa to work as a journalist in Afghanistan, he was bundled off as an ‘enemy combatant’ to Gitmo.

Today, reunited with his family in Khartoum, Hajj is understandably emotional. Articulating his happiness at finding himself among his loved ones and sense of outrage at what he has been through at the same time is almost overwhelming for him. And more than the relief at his freedom, it is the thought of those left behind that torments him.

Watching the homecoming of Hajj, shown live on Al Jazeera for hours and watched by an outraged Arab world, a senior colleague comments: “I find it hard to believe this can happen in our age and time. And that too by the world’s greatest democracy and champion of human rights! I mean, how could you lock up a guy for years without a trial and charges and get away with it!”

Exactly. How could they do this to an individual in this age? Especially doing this to a journalist, working for a prominent media organisation as Al Jazeera, is a little hard to stomach. Yet that’s precisely what happened to Hajj. Repeated appeals and campaigning by human rights agencies and media groups failed to persuade the US authorities to let Al Jazeera man go.

If they are capable of doing this to a renowned journalist backed by a big organisation, I shudder to think what ordinary and nameless individuals picked up from around the world could go through at Gitmo. And there are hundreds of ordinary and nameless individuals languishing in the hellhole called Guantanamo Bay.

This is what Sami Al Hajj was trying to point out after his release. Fearing for those left behind, Hajj repeatedly appealed to the world’s conscience - if there’s such a thing as the world’s conscience - calling for justice and urgent efforts by the international community for freeing those still held at the Bay in most horrific conditions, without a trial, without a charge and without due process.

I don’t know how many people paid attention to what this distraught man was saying. But this is something that no human being with any belief in humanity and human dignity can ignore.

"Conditions in Guantanamo are very, very bad and they get worse by the day,” Hajj told the media from his hospital bed. "Our human dignity was violated and the US administration went beyond all human values, moral values, religious values. There are people from more than 50 countries who are completely deprived of all rights and privileges. They will not give them the rights that they give their animals."

Strong words! And a damning indictment of the US and all that it stands for. But there’s no reason to doubt Hajj’s claim. The journalist himself is a walking proof of all that is wrong with the Gitmo. The Al Jazeera man was in his early 30s when he was captured. Today he’s in his late 30s but looks like a man in 80s. So much so his own brother Asim couldn’t recognise him when he was brought out of the aircraft.

It’s believed that by targeting Hajj, the US was trying to punish Al Jazeera for trying to show the alternate reality of the war on terror that the US media can’t or dare not. Al Jazeera, with its refreshingly bold approach and daredevil team of reporters, offers you the perspective you won’t find on CNN.

David Remes, a lawyer fighting for the Bay detainees, says there was also an element of racism in the way Hajj was treated and abused at the Bay. "The Europeans would never receive this sort of treatment," Remes points out. As a result, Hajj is today "psychologically damaged" and might never recover from the trauma he underwent over the past seven years.

You would think those responsible for this would at least be repentant, if not offer a sincere apology to Hajj and his family. But as if responding to the outrage in the Muslim world over Hajj episode, a US spokesperson says Al Jazeera man was pretending to be ill when the aircraft carrying him landed in Khartoum. The official told ABC News Hajj was a ‘manipulator and a propagandist’ and was “faking illness” on his homecoming.

Hajj was in such a bad shape that the Sudanese and US officials accompanying him were alarmed. Sudanese minister Kamal Obeid says that "Hajj was exhausted, with very slow heart beats and low blood pressure”.

Only after he was drip-fed that the journalist was able to regain strength.
And there are still hundreds of Sami al Hajjs out there languishing in the biggest gulag of our time, waiting for their turn and waiting for freedom and justice. Contrary to the US claims, most of those individuals are innocent people who happened to be at the wrong place at a wrong time. Except for an odd militant or two, most of them are ordinary men like you and me.

This has been repeatedly argued by rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and several courageous lawyers and activists in the US. The Washington Post ran a whole series proving why most of the Bay detainees are innocent people picked up by booty hunters in Afghanistan and Pakistan who were turned over as ‘terrorists’ to the US for a cash price.
|
And the world has forgotten these innocent men. After all, it has enough of its own existing problems, from shooting oil prices to worsening food crisis. Who cares for nearly 300 faceless individuals, especially if they happen to be Arab or Muslim? There’s not a greater sin than being a Muslim in the time of terror war.

When will the US and the world wake up to the shame of Guantanamo Bay? Because this gulag and all that goes on in there fly in the face of all that America and the civilized world believe in. Freedom, justice, democracy, the rule of law and human rights; everything is at stake in the Guantanamo Bay.

Nicolas D Kristof of New York Times says, “it would take an exceptional enemy to damage America’s image and interests as much as Bush and Cheney already have with Guantanamo.”

They certainly have. The Guantanamo Bay violates everything that the US once celebrated and epitomised. And it’s not the terrorists and so-called enemy combatants who are incarcerated there. It’s America’s ideals that are imprisoned in the Guantanamo Bay. Free them, Mr Bush!

-Aijaz Zaka Syed is a Dubai-based journalist and commentator. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Contact him at: Aijaz.Syed@hotmail.com.