Pic taken from http://www.perdana4peace.org/

Two Zionists who called themselved Jews are in a Chinese restaturant in Manhatten. They discuss the diaspora but get stuck when it comes to China. They call the waiter who promptly makes his way to their table.

“My friend and I were talking about the Jews and we were wondering about the Chinese Jews. Is there any Chinese Jews?”

The puzzled waiter pauses and says with a strong immigrants accent “I think there is none”. The amazed Jews asked him again, in disbelief the Jews had no presence in China. This time the waiter says “I will check for you” and goes off.

A minute or so later he returns.

“Well? said the Zionists, tucking into their braized trotters, “is there any Chinese Jews?” to which the waiter replied.

“Sir, we have apple Jews and orange Jews, but no Chinese Jews”

-

I heard that joke roughly as above, some time ago. It didn’t contain the word Zionists however, just Jews. I put the word Zionists in it because it is those people who call themselves Jews but are actually Zionists that I hate. There is a difference. But the traits of Zionism, turning a blind eye to the manufacture and propagation of Israyhell means (in my minds eye) that MOST Jews are bad Jews. The world has about 12-16M Jews (strangely the same number as before and after the holocaust if you warp your mind about that one – so report people accused of anti-semitism) and the number of them who support the theft and continual theft of Palestine are the majority.

There are great Jews however, Jews which could well be better in Gods ‘eyes’ than some Muslims, myself included, but these people are so few and far between. It is the Zionist killers, corporate and banking heads who themselves lay the claim to be Jews. Why then can this label not be used to identify them by? The answer is because it would include those great Jews I am deeply proud of. These Jews, a handful, protest against the creation of Israyhell and the Shaoh on it’s people. They research and denounce Zionist crimes against the Jews and they understand full well the threat these Zionists pose not just to Judaism, but monotheism and on an individual level, a threat to all people on the planet.

For it is the Zionist who call themselves Jews who pull the strings. George Galloway speaking yesterday the the Forum to Crimilalize War jumped on a great researcher, K. Gajendra Singh, an author who writes articles for www.informationclearinghouse.info [1] and http://www.uruknet.com/ [2] when Mr. Singh mentioned the Jews contol the banks (or did he say the media? – or both???). That statement was factually correct and Mr. Singh didn’t accuse “The Jews” of anything, yet George rather sharply took what was said as being an attack on all Jews. He said Jack Straw wasn’t Jewsish (I actually think he is) and Bush’s cabinet wasn’t Jewish (he mentioned about three – but avoided the Jewish ones that were in Bush’s cabinet) and I think he said Bush wasn’t a Jew and he did say Rupert Murdoch wasn’t a Jew. Well George, you don’t have to be Jewish to be a Zionist, which is intertwined with rank greed and power via corporatism. Just becasue ALL the string pullers don’t calim to be Jews, does not in any way mean they don’t work to the favout of the Zionists…. And they DO work in tandem with Zionists as they share common perspectives in the sence that they have a perverted superiority complex which not only breeds high aggorgance amongst their circle {or inverted pentagon}, but invites dislike and hatred upon them. And rightly so!

George doesn’t do well for himself when he rapidly starts cautioning people for using the Jew word, as he sometimes takes it out of context. George also can quickly spin peoples words into directions they did not mean.

As for democracy, GG himself is on record as saying the tories and labour are two cheecks of the same arse yet advocates Democracy (presumably based on a sililar style – perhaps with PR) as the best solution. Yet he said when defending himself for not voting for Cynthia McKinney (GG suppoted Kuchinicg in the primaries, then Obama in the 3 horse run off) as he said his choice was ‘rael politik’. So George defeated his own arguement about voting. He would of course say Vote for the alternative aprties, such as Respect Renewal, but applying his logic, voters should vote Tory or NeoLabour instead as only they have the chance of getting in. So the procedure of democracy will simply elect the one head of a two headed beast.

The modern record shows, voteing out one piece of scum like Bush and electing a new piece of scum like Obama, that democracy as we know it is bankrupt.

I advocate an end to the party system. I think this would go a long way to solving the problem. Some Muslims shriek at ‘democracy’ and they have a point. According to ‘western’ democracy, man can make the forbidden, legal e.g. homosexual sex, Mercy killings, Abortion and I would dare say, pre-emptive strikes too! But Muslims are surely aware that a council elected the Kalifah. One could say there was some democracy there, and even say if democracy was offered, then rejected again, then that too is democracy as the ‘peoples’ desire not to have what we know of democracy is actually a democratic choice.

Well as usual, I am falling asleep at this computer and I must end here. I’ll correct the usual poor language later, and try soon to give more feedback on the  Criminalize War and Tribunal, although I would like to end by saying Sami al-Hajj and Mozzamam Beig’s speeches today were both horrifying and excellent. There’s still 220 prisoners in Guantanamo and probably thousands more in US spearheaded hell holes across the world. 

Can’t sleep till I’ve mentioned the glorious Iraqi Resistance. It was good to hear them mentioned and some information given out as to their steadfastness and achievements. Most agreed to their legitimacy. Their cause it without question, one that is utterly justified. On day 1 of the conference JUBA the legendary sniper (false or whatever) had hsi name displayed on one of the slides.

I have to say the case to criminalize war was very powerful and comprehensive. Iraq is an utter nightmare by ALL accounts. The US and those who pull its strings want to leave a permanently sick people behind to man the oil pumps, but the noble Iraqi Resistance will never allow that.

Even 9-11 was discussed by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky and Ex-PM Tun Dr. Mahatir Mohammaed as being False Flags. Lauren Moret agreed and suggested other conspiracies too – vaccines and depopulation and DNA sabotage was mentioned, and Cynthia McKinney when she mentioned the counter intelligence programmes (COINTELPRO). Getting back to 9-11, Prof Chossudovsky mentioned the BBC (and CNN) news reporting WTC-7 collapsed 20 minutes before it did actially collapse (the Jane Standley reporter with Philip Hayton as anchor) and also “OBL in a Rawalpindi urology ward on 10th Sept 2001 – a place impossble not to meet CIA agents as anyone whose been to Rawalpindi will know” (near exact quote}

I think it was Moazzam Beig who said Africans were shipped from Africa to the American Hemisphere shackled in chains in the slave trade, but the same thing has happened again with the Guantanmo bay prisoners.

WAR SHOULD BE CRIMINALIZED. Please investigate this matter thoroughly yourself. I’m confident you’ll arrive at the same conclusion.

I really need sleep now.

http://www.perdana4peace.org/    and     http://www.criminalisewar.org/

[1] http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15729.htm
[2] http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m42600&hd=&size=1&l=e

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

“So those who believe in him (Muhammad peace be upon him), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Qur’an) which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful.”

{ Sura Al-Araf 9:157}

Sami-al Hajj while addressing the cage prisoners ‘Beyond Gitmo’ charity Iftar :I have good news for all of you this Ramadan, One of the brothers (ex-gitmo prisoner) conveyed to me that he saw the prophet (peace be upon him) in a dream

The Prophet (peace be upon him) asked him how are you, so the brother conveyed the oppression the  prisoners are under the prophet (peace be upon) said to him

“Would it please you that I will witness for those who stand by you and denounce those who let you down”

Watch at 4:04 mins.

Cageprisoners: Beyond Guantanamo Event – Sami el-Hajj, Part 2

more about “Cageprisoners: Beyond Guantanamo Even…“, posted with vodpod

Tell My Nation – Sheikh Khalid Rasheed

more about “Tell My Nation – Sheikh Khalid Rasheed“, posted with vodpod

Thay Would Never Give Him Up – Imam Anwar Al Awlaki

more about “The Prophet Muhammad Campaign: Peace …“, posted with vodpod

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Campaign Trailer

more about “Prophet Muhammad (SAW) Campaign Trailer“, posted with vodpod

What was the legacy of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon our beloved)

more about “Who Is Muhammad (peace be upon him)? …“, posted with vodpod

You Claim To Love The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)?!-  Shaykh Khalid Rasheed

more about “You Claim To Love The Prophet Muhamma…“, posted with vodpod

Behind the Zionist Movement How “greater Israel” is formed

“To hit the Islamic movement from Iraq to Indonesia”

Richard Nixon in his book: 1999. Victory Without War

Published in 1998

for book see: www.marywardbooks.com

“And the end is for the Muttaqûn”

Shaykh Ali At Timimi:The Islamic Ruling on The Peace Process:

Source: www.kalamullah.com

Filled under : lectures  :Ali Al Tamimi

How the Pakistani army treat Muslims:

This is not an isolated case there have been 100s of accounts of heinous crimes committed  not only by the ISI  (Pakistani secret services) but also by the Pakistani army and police  (most of whom are involved with all kinds of corruption and bribery)

Women and children are tortured in methods that are  worse then those employed  in Gitmo and secret prisoners, Including removing of finger nails and  the use of electric drills.

Prison conditions are often just as bad as they are in secret prisoners.

Since the war on terror,1000s of Muslims have gone missing, picked up by the ISI and lost in the secret system. As well as known detention centres such as the notorious prison in Rawalpindi

Sister Affia Sidiqi was also first picked up by the ISI and then handed over to the Americans.

Just a few days ago the American government Announced that they had signed a new deal with the Pakistani  government, which would see  £10000 worth of aid pouring into the hands of the Pakistani government in order to crush out Islamism.

Until recently the Pakistani government was firm with it’s refusal of  the many threats and negotiation efforts of the Americans, (so the U.S  bribed them instead)

Ex- president  Parvez Musharuff admitted in his book that the Pakistani government  detained, tortured and killed 1000s of innocent Muslims  at the behest of the Americans in exchange for prize-money and financial aid

Cage prisoners and other rights organisations have more details, regarding such cases Moazzam Beegs book “enemy combatant”  Gives a detailed first hand account.

Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki: Allah is Preparing us for Victory

Clinton is threatening U.K. if doesn’t continue to bury evidence of C.I.A. torture; Eric Holder shouldn’t have passed his first semester of law school; C.P.D. backtracking on its “deadly force” policy announcement; “Land reform” is a global heist with more guns than any other; Senior U.S. military adviser: Get out of Iraq; H.R. 1207 up to 271 co-sponsors; and more…

U.S. Secy. of State Hillary Clinton is seeking a gag order to prevent the U.K. government from releasing evidence of C.I.A. torture. Binyam Mohamed, tortured at C.I.A. “black sites” and Gitmo for seven years is seeking the release of the C.I.A.’s summary of his treatment. Lord Justice Thomas said Mrs. Clinton has “merely demonstrated that the C.I.A. would like the court to withhold from the public findings about C.I.A. wrongdoing”. (AntiWar.com)

Atty. Gen. Eric Holder said, “Waterboarding is torture…. We will not criminalize policy differences” to ABC’s “Nightline”. What the fuck? You can’t call it “torture” and a “policy difference” at the same time. One is objectively illegal and the other is an arbitrary guideline. We’re going into our last years of law school and know this. The guy at the corner store who loves watching “Law & Order” knows this. Mr. Holder has a J.D., was a criminal prosecutor as U.S. attorney from 1993-1997, and Deputy Atty. Gen. from 1997-2001, but we’re supposed to believe he doesn’t know this? Mr. Holder should be disbarred, at the least.

Sami al-Hajj, the ALE cameraman recently released from U.S. captivity at Gitmo for over six and a half years, spoke to AJE. Read the interview here.

“Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis was forced to backtrack on his deadly force policy amendment… allowing cops to shoot at suspected felons fleeing in motor vehicles,” Michael Sneed reported today (Chicago Sun Times). “City Corporation Counsel Mara Georges and Mayor [Richard M.] Daley were flummoxed by the order, which they felt could have been a huge liability problem for a city already reeling in debt.” Click “deadly force” to see the update. The policy isn’t scrapped. The City Council is weighing the cost:benefit. Sayyid is making phone calls throughout the day trying to secure statements from city councilmen.

Iran police used sticks and batons to disperse a peaceful gathering to mourn the deaths of those murdered by the gov’t and its Basiji since the June 12 election (AJE). Primary opposition presidential candidate Mir Housein Mousavi was forced away from participating before he could pray at the grave of Neda Agha-Soltan (NYT), murdered by the State like an Afghan child.

Mississippi cops put prioritizing aside, opting to instead spin a wheel in determining who to arrest. You really can’t make this stuff up. (RAW STORY)

“Sergeant James Crowley believes that putting on a uniform and a badge puts him above just-folks like you and me and Henry Louis Gates, and so that it entitles him to special treatment,” writes Charles Johnson (RadGeek). “And that’s why, when he is in uniform, he’s willing to bully, browbeat, and physically coerce you into handcuffs and jail, just to violently punish you if you should dare to tell him off in your own foyer — because he stupidly believes that his work clothes entitle him to command, and to expect obedience from, people he doesn’t even know. That’s stupid.” I love it.

“Because of the political sensitivity of the modern-day land grab, it is often only the country’s head of state who knows the details,” Horand Knaup and Juliane von Mittelstaedt report (Der Spiegel) “In some cases, however, provincial governors have already auctioned off land to the highest bidder, as in the case of Laos and Cambodia, where even the governments no longer know how much of their territory they still own.” This article shows how mulitinationals target poor feudalist countries, seek earmarks from their ‘richer’ governments, and use their own ‘richer governments to broker “privatization” deals in the name of so-called “free trade” — mainly in Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. “Land reform” is the one the most oppressive doublethink terms in the Newspeak dictionary. There are a lot of socio-fascist dictators in Latin America who are demonized as reactionaries to these  incremental policies of genocide. Read this article and you’ll see why they’re generally so beloved by ‘their citizens’.

H.R. 1207, the bill to audit the Federal [sic] Reserve written by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), has 271 co-sponsors in the House (RT).  178 Repubicans and 97 Democrats are supporting the bill with 75% of the American people (3:22):

Some banks bailed out by TARP are charging more than 150% on short-term loans. Predatory lending is an understatement (IPS).

“The sense of Israeli exceptionalism and entitlement that drive the process, which has been noted and challenged even by many liberal Israelis and diaspora Jews, is without a doubt racist in origin,” writes former C.I.A. agent Philip Giraldi. “Israel has long had an unspoken policy of making life hopeless for the Arabs in its midst and over which it rules to force them to leave for economic reasons. This policy has not been completely successful, with the Arab population inside Israel proper sustaining itself due to its high birth rate in spite of a large rate of emigration.” The article is called “The Disappearing Palestinian” and is a must-read.

Senior U.S. military adviser in Iraq Col. Timothy Reese sent a memo “urging the U.S. to dramatically speed up its pullout from Iraq, saying it should be announced that all troops will be out of the nation by August 2010,” writes Jason Ditz (AntiWar.com).

The U.S. Air Force is looking to the ‘private sector’ to create more approaches to more efficiently monitor gov’t employees’ internet behavior (Wired).

$7.7m of Obama stimulus bought airport surveillance cameras (Wired).

U.S. is threatening Eritrea with sanctions for allegedly backing the Somali “insurgents”. Yes, Eritrea is becoming the new anti-christ…. Eritrea.

The U.K. inquiry into the events leading to its involvement into the Iraq invasion through July 2009 could go into 2011, chairman Sir John Chilcot said, who wants to  avoid “a long drawn out inquiry”. Fmr. PM Tony Blair pressed for the inquiry to be fully private, but Sir John is not ruling out “he possibility of hearings being televised and live streaming on the internet” (BBC).

China revoked the licenses of more the 50 human rights lawyers last week. “The lawyers handle a wide-range of cases, from families affected by last year’s tainted milk scandal, to Tibetan and Uighur rights and the representation of prominent dissidents,” AJE reports. “Last week police raided the offices of another Beijing law firm, Gongmeng, which offers legal aid specialising in human rights issues.” Lawyers estimate 70% of human rights lawyers have been harassed in the last few months.

The Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin signed an oil pact with Cuban state-owned Petroleo on behalf of the Russian oil corporation, Zarubezhneft, Granma reported (FT)

“Thirty four year-old blogger, Elisha Strom, has been arrested in Bedford County, Virginia for posting photos and the home address of an undercover narc on her blog,” writes Brad Taylor. “She is being charged with harassing a police officer, with police arguing that revealing the identity of undercover officers puts them in danger.” Can I charge the Chicago Police for its existence putting me in danger?

For more news, subscribe to The Wire via RSS

An Al-Jazeera reporter who spent six years in illegal US custody is to bring legal action against the former American administration.

On Friday, The Guardian quoted the former detainee Sami al-Hajj as saying that he was to sue former US president George W. Bush and other former US officials.

The action is expected to be taken through a Geneva center al-Haj is co-founding as a platform for the victims who had endured similar ordeals at the US Cuba-based detention facility, Guantanamo.

Suspecting him of being a ‘potential terrorist’, American operatives detained the Sudanese in 2001 in Pakistan. The capture took place as al-Haj was on his way to Afghanistan where he was to contribute to reports for the Qatar-based TV channel.

He was subsequently labeled an ‘enemy combatant’ — a term which signified a person in armed conflict against the United States.

“I need them to go to court … We do not want [what happened to us] to be repeated again,” the daily quoted him as saying.

“Torture is continuing in Guantanamo,” al-Haj said. “Obama needs to close Guantanamo immediately.”

The journalist is currently working at Al-Jazeera’s Doha center.

Reuters cameraman Ibrahim Jassam has been held since September. The U.S. military rejected a court order to release him, saying he is a ‘high security threat.’ No evidence has been presented.

Reporting from Baghdad — The soldiers came at 1:30 a.m, rousing family members who were sleeping on the roof to escape the late-summer heat.

They broke down the front door. Accompanied by dogs, American and Iraqi troops burst into the Jassam family home in the town of Mahmoudiya south of Baghdad.

“Where is the journalist Ibrahim?” one of the Iraqi soldiers barked at the grandparents, children and grandchildren as they staggered blearily down the stairs.

Ibrahim Jassam, a cameraman and photographer for the Reuters news agency, stepped forward, one of this brothers recalled. “Take me if you want me, but please leave my brothers.” The soldiers rifled through the house, confiscating his computer hard drive and cameras. And then they led him away, handcuffed and blindfolded.

That was Sept. 2.

Jassam, 31, has been in U.S. custody ever since. His case is the latest of a dozen detentions the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists has documented since 2001.

No formal accusations have been made against Jassam, and an Iraqi court ordered in November that he be released for lack of evidence. But the U.S. military continues to hold him, saying it has intelligence that he is “a high security threat,” said Maj. Neal Fisher, spokesman for detainee affairs.

The Obama administration harshly criticized Iran for its imprisonment of Roxana Saberi, the U.S.-Iranian journalist who was convicted of espionage and sentenced to eight years in prison before being freed two weeks ago. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized Iran’s treatment of Saberi as “non-transparent, unpredictable and arbitrary.”

Washington also has called upon North Korea to expedite the trial of two U.S. journalists being held on spying charges.

Yet the U.S. has routinely used the arbitrary powers it assumed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorism attacks to hold journalists without charge in Iraq, as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Committee to Protect Journalists said.

None of the detained journalists has been convicted of any charge, undermining the United States’ reputation when it comes to criticizing other countries on issues of press freedom, committee executive director Joel Simon said.

“The U.S. has a record of holding journalists for long periods of time without due process and without explanation,” he said. “Its standing would be improved if it addressed this issue.”

Reuters has expressed disappointment over Jassam’s detention and has said there is no evidence against him.

Sami al-Hajj, a cameraman for the TV network Al Jazeera, was detained by Pakistani authorities as he tried to cross into Afghanistan in 2001 to cover the offensive against the Taliban. He was turned over to the U.S. military, which held him for six years at the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He was accused him of being a courier for militant Islamic organizations, but was never charged. He was released a year ago.

In Iraq, Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein was held for two years without trial before being released in April 2008 on the orders of an Iraqi judge under the terms of an amnesty law. The U.S. military maintained that Hussein had links to insurgents, but the AP said the allegations were based on nothing more than the Pulitzer Prize-winning photographs of insurgents that he had taken on the streets of Ramadi, in western Iraq.

Jassam is the only Iraqi journalist still in U.S. custody, the last to be detained under wartime rules that predated a U.S.-Iraqi security agreement signed in December. Under the new accord, U.S. forces must obtain a warrant before they can arrest an Iraqi citizen.

Jassam was detained without a warrant “as the result of his activity with a known insurgent organization,” Fisher said.

No evidence against Jassam was presented at his court hearing in November, Fisher said, because the military intelligence against him had not yet been verified.

Under the wartime rules in place at the time, he said, “there was no requirement to link the military intelligence with rule of law type of evidentiary procedures.”

After the court ordered Jassam’s release, Fisher said, new evidence came to light that suggested he was a “high security threat.”

The CPJ’s Simon said it was possible for someone to use the cover of journalism to conduct other activities.

“No one is suggesting that journalists should have a get- out-of-jail-free card,” he said. “But if you accuse someone of something there needs to be a fair legal process. That’s what we said in the Roxana Saberi case, and that’s what we say in the Ibrahim Jassam case.”

Jassam will have to wait for the requirements of the security pact to play out before he gets another day in court or his freedom. The agreement states that the U.S. is to release low-threat detainees in a “safe and orderly” way and refer “high threat” cases to the Iraqi Ministry of Justice for review.

The decision to release him or transfer him to the Iraqi legal system will be made by the Iraqi government. The only timetable for that step is “by the end of the year,” Fisher said. By that time, Jassam will have been in custody for more than a year.

Jassam’s brother, Walid, visited him recently in Camp Bucca, the desolate, tented U.S. prison camp in the desert in southern Iraq, and found him close to the breaking point.

“He used to be handsome, but now he’s pale and he’s tired,” said Walid, who says his brother had no ties to insurgents. “Every now and then while we were talking, he would start crying. He was begging me: ‘Please do something to get me out of here. I don’t know what is the charge against me.’

“I told him we already tried everything.”

liz.sly@latimes.com

Times Staff Writer Saif Hameed contributed to this report.

American journalist Roxana Saberi, a former Miss North Dakota, has been sentenced to eight years in an Iranian prison after she was convicted in a secret court proceeding of being a spy. Saberi was working as a freelancer for National Public Radio at the time, and also has filed reports for Fox News and the BBC, according to one report.

The U.S. State Department, the Committee to Protect Journalists and NPR all have voiced concerns about the case. Saberi’s father said her testimony had been coerced, and that the sentence would be appealed.  Naturally I can’t logically weigh in about Saberi’s guilt or innocence–and neither can anyone else, because of the secrecy and obvious political bias involved.

In other words, a political and legal situation like the one offered in the United States by the Bush administration (including its treatment of foreign journalists such as Sami al-Hajj). And of course Bush did so much to promote good relations with Iran.

Sami Mohy El Din Muhammed Al Hajj is a Sudanese journalist and a cameraman for Al-Jazeera. In December 2001 he was arrested on a work trip in Pakistan and then held prisoner in Guantanamo for years. He was finally released without any charges on May 1 2008.

During the whole ordeal Al Hajj had no idea what he was being suspected of. The charges thrown at him in interrogation situations changed from day to day. He was not able to prove his innocence since his interrogators would not let him defend himself. He was tortured, force fed, sexually assaulted. His son, who was just a baby when he was captured, spent his early childhood without his father.

Al Hajj reported that during 125 of his 130 interrogations, he was questioned as to whether Al Jazeera was a front for al-Qaeda. He was the only journalist held in Guantanamo Bay.

This is Sami al-Hajj’s son Muhammad holding a picture of a father he did not remember and only met again last May.

I wonder what kind of atrocities we will find out once president Obama gets around to closing Guantanamo Bay. I can imagine that some in the previous administration are busy busy busy covering  their tracks right now.

One of the many hopes of those who voted for Barack Obama is that the embarrassment of Guantanamo might be closed. One of the very few benefits of Guantanamo, and of prisons in general, is the occasional glimpses of light cast on the humanity and hope of even the most destitute.

“Cup poems,” words scratched with pebbles into Styrofoam, offer one example. Perhaps none of the writings offered in one collection are great poetry, and one Amazon reviewer writes about the book of collected poems: “This is not poetry. It’s a political agenda chopped up into lines.” But for me, that raises the eternal question of what makes poetry great.

I would put such things as timeless truths and important questions high on the list. Great poems also must include beautiful, or at least creative, use of language, and that may be where the collection falls short. Still, there are lines worth considering as we reflect today on what we are most thankful for, including these words from the “world’s most famous journalist,: Sami al-Hajj:

They have monuments to liberty

And freedom of opinion, which is well and good.

But I explained to them

That architecture is not justice.

Speaking of architecture, in January I will visit Ground Zero and the Statue of Liberty for the first time. I’ve been thankful since the presidential election that the loss of the World Trade Center hasn’t quite managed to make Lady Liberty irrelevant.

Yet I also realize that despite the warnings of folks such as Deepak Chopra, yesterday’s unfortunate attacks and ongoing hostage situation in India (for which, despite hundreds of casualties, CNN felt obligated to provide a story headlined “Terrified Westerners describe Mumbai chaos” and a link to a separate story titled “Nashville woman hurt in Mumbai attacks”) make it likely that some will want to renew the same kind of policies that led to Guantanamo.

As we prepare to raise our own cups, let us be thankful on this day–but let us also pray for wisdom.

Next day update: While American media, including CNN, Fox News and The New York Times, bring the issue home by focusing stores on the Americans killed or injured in Mumbai–and Fox “terror expert” Walid Phares asks, “Are we at war, or not?” and argues that “the Jihadists are winning,” while Fox columnist John Avlon argues, “The war that was indelibly declared on September 11, 2001 continues unabated , not just against the U.S. but worldwide … ultimately a war between civilization and the terrorists”–Al-Jazeera again is left to remind us of the broader perspective, that the attacks are raising indigation around the world.

Han satt som fange i 7 år på Guantanamo. I går snakket han om mishandling og ovegrep til journalister som er samlet til konferanse på Lillehammer.

Aftenposten 12.09 2008

Han ble møtt med trampeklapp av journalistene på den internasjonale koneransen i undersøkende journalistikk på Lillehammer i går kveld. Så er da også Sami al-Hajj den eneste journalisten som har sittet fengslet på Guantanamo. I hele syv år satt han der.

I mai i år kom han hjem til Sudan- på båre etter å ha sultestreiket i over et år. 39-åringen er ennå sterkt merket av mishandlingen han ble utsatt for.

- Jeg vil fortelle hele verden sannheten, sa Sami al-Hajj.

Det var i desember 2001 at den ledende arabaiske TV-kanalen Al Jazeeras kameramann Sami al-Hajj befant seg i Pakistan på grenseområdet til Afghanistan. Hans oppdrag var å dra inn til Khandahar og dekke krigen der.
Det var bare tre måneder siden terrorhandlingene 11. september og situasjonen var svært spent.

Men al-Hajj fikk ikke krysse grensen, han ble arrestert og etter 23 dager utlevert til amerikanske myndigheter. Et stjålet pass på avveie og kameramannens reisevirksomhet for Al Jazeera, den ledende TVkanalenn i den arabiske verden, var blant indisiene mot ham.

- De slo oss, de sendte hunder på oss, vi fikk ikke mat, ikke snakke, ikke sitte, forteller han om de første ukene i fangenskap.

Men oppholdet på Guantanamo , dit han ble sendt etter et halvt år, skulle bli like ille. Han tror de var cirka 800 fanger der, en av dem var en baby.

Fangene ble mishandlet, seksuelt torturert, noen fikk kappet av armer og ben, de ble isolert, de fikk ikke lov å praktisere sin relgion og avhørerne lette etter fangenes psykisk svake punkt, for å bruke det mot dem, fortalte al-Hajj i går.

- For meg var det familien, min sønn. Først etter 11 måneder fikk jeg et brev, noen av de som satt der fikk aldri brev.

Usynlig i vesten
Først i 2005 fikk familien, arbeidsgiveren og menneskerettighetsorganisasjoner kontakt med Al Jazeeras kameramann gjennom en advokat som fikk møte ham. I det hele tatt var verden lite opptatt av Sami al-Hajjs skjebne.

I motsetning til reporterne fra BBC-og Wall Street Journal, var vestlige medier ikke interessert i å skrive om al-Hajj. Kanskje var det fordi han var svart, fra Sudan og muslim, ble det spurt på konferansen på Lillehammer i går.

Amerikanske myndigheter var imidlertid svært interessert i kameramannens arbeid.

Al-Hajjs støttespillere tror at grunnen til at han satt fanget så lenge er at amerikanske myndigheter tror at Al Jazeera dekker Osama bin Laden og er med å støtte terrorisme.

- Nitti prosent av avhørene spurte de om Al Jazeera. De spurte om hva slags forbindelse vi har med Osama bin Laden, om Al Jazeera støttet ham med penger. De sa at hvis jeg kunne fortelle dem hvor han er skulle jeg få amerikansk statsborgerskap.

Fortsetter arbeidet
Etter syv år ble al-Hajj løslatt uten hverken tiltale eller dom. Etter å ha sultestreiket i over et år ble han sendt hjem og møte kone og sønnen som var blitt åtte år.som han ikke hadde sett siden han var halvannet.

Etterhvert skal han arbeide med menneskerettigheter for Al Jazeera i Quatar, og han skal skrive og lage TVprogrammer om de som sitter igjen på Guantanamo, de som ennå ikke er sluppet fri.

On the war in Georgia and the response of the US and other NATO countries, such as mine, see this

And for a great analysis (as always) of the FBI’s disintegrating case against supposed anthrax conspirator Bruce Ivins, who lost his life to the allegations, see this and Tom Englehardt

UPDATE:  And on Russia, Georgia and the US, see Jim Kunstler.  Here’s a bit:

The feeble American response to Russia’s assertion of power in the Caucasus of Central Asia was appropriate, since our claims of influence in that part of the world are laughable. The US had taken advantage of temporary confusion in Russia, during the ten-year-long post-Soviet-collapse interval, and set up a client government in Georgia, complete with military advisors, sales of weapons, and even the promise of club membership in the western alliance known as NATO. These blandishments were all in the service of the Baku-to-Ceyhan oil pipeline, which was designed specifically to drain the oil region around the Caspian Basin with an outlet on the Mediterranean, avoiding unfriendly nations all along the way.

UPDATE II:  I’m into passing you off to other writers tonight.  Check out this piece on the US administrations struggle to muzzle al-Jazeera:

After more than six years as a prisoner of the United States, former TV cameraman Sami al-Hajj is back at work with Al-Jazeera, the largest broadcaster in the Arab world, a thorn in the side of most Arab governments – and, by most indications, a target of deep hostility from the Bush administration.

Al-Hajj, 39, was the longest-held journalist in U.S. custody at the time of his release in May, and the only one ever held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Military authorities repeatedly accused him of being a terrorist in league with al Qaeda, then released him without charges.

His case is emblematic of the poisoned relationship between the U.S. government and a television network with 40 million viewers in the Middle East.

Since 2001, Bush administration officials have regularly denounced Al-Jazeera as an anti-American propaganda organ and a mouthpiece for terrorists, and have periodically urged its chief patron, the emir of Qatar, to rein it in.

The United States even founded a rival Arab-language network, Al Hurra, in 2004, but commentators on the region generally agree it hasn’t made a dent in Al-Jazeera’s popularity.

Al-Jazeera has also been hit twice by U.S. artillery fire. One shelling destroyed its Kabul bureau in November 2001. The second struck a Baghdad office in April 2003, killing correspondent Tareq Ayoub. The U.S. military concluded both shellings were accidents.

According to the Defense Department, al-Hajj was just another suspected terrorist among the 780 who have been held as enemy combatants since January 2002 at Guantanamo. But his lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, says al-Hajj’s imprisonment was all about Al-Jazeera.

When I read things like this, about people held for years at Guantanamo without charge and then being released without any charges ever having been laid, I often think I’m living in a whole different world than the one I’ve been used to.  Perhaps that’s because administrations like that of George W. Bush are able to  carry off these anti-democratic, anti-rule of law acts right out in the open with apparently little fear of being held to account.  Ever.  And rightly so it seems.  I mean “rightly” with respect to accountability of course.

More than six years after he was captured and held without charge in Guantanamo Bay, the Al Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Hajj has returned triumpantly to Qatar – his place of work.

Words above and video below posted by AlJazeeraEnglish

A column by Sabin Willett (an attorney for a firm that has represented Guantanamo prisoners) in today’s Miami Herald, reprinted by CommonDreams.org, illustrates why so many Americans are clueless about this nation’s standing in the rest of the world. “The world’s most famous journalist isn’t Peter Arnett or Bob Woodward or Carl Bernstein or Dan Rather,” Willett writes. “His name is Sami al-Hajj. Chances are you’ve never heard of him. That should worry you.”

Willett points out that al-Hajj, a TV cameraman from Sudan, was recently released without comment after years in Guantanamo–years in which “al-Jazeera followed his odyssey day by day” while “most Americans never saw his photograph in mainstream American newspapers or heard about him on television.” I’ve attached YouTube clips (more than 23 minutes, or about the length of a full nightly news broadcast in this country) of al-Jazeera’s “Inside Story” coverage of the al-Hajj case and world Press Freedom Day below. A quick search of the New York Times archives for al-Hajj’s name reveals a total of 12 results, only two of those news story focusing on al-Hajj–a four-paragraph story in September 2002 with the lead, “A reporter for the Arab satellite station Al Jazeera is being held at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba, suspected of having links with the terror network of Al Qaeda, according to a statement issued by the station,” and then one reporting his release earlier this month.

The press did pay a bit more attention a couple of weeks ago to the government’s decision to drop charges against Mohammed al-Qahtani, the supposed “20th hijacker,” after al-Qahtani’s information apparently was deemed worthless in part because he was tortured (supporting John McCain’s early criticism of torture, before he voted to allow more of it). To the surprise of no one who closely follows the media, the charges against al-Qahtani were dropped on a Friday so that American press coverage would be limited.

Willett is justifiably critical of the U.S. news media in the case of the Sudanese cameraman, noting that while they could not have known whether al-Hajj was a journalist or a terrorist, they “should have been shouting from the rooftops about al-Hajj–demanding evidence, a trial, the truth. But our press was silent.” Willett also suggests that the press silence may be a harbinger of ineptitude to come:

Today the war drums are rumbling again, this time for Iran. Will our press stand its post, or pick up the pom-poms of 2002 and 2003?

The omens aren’t good. The most famous journalist in the world was imprisoned by Americans, without charge, for almost seven years–was beaten, isolated, humiliated, force-fed, relentlessly interrogated and then quietly released. And you never heard about him.

Al-Hajj claims he was tortured while in American custody, that he was interrogated more than 130 times, and that his keepers wanted him to go to work for the U.S. “They wanted me to betray the principles of my job and turn me into a spy,” he said. “It was made clear to me later that the main goal behind my detention was to detain the journalist who reveals the truth.”

We have no way of knowing whether al-Hajj is telling the truth, of course. But part of the reason we don’t know is because the American press never bothered to investigate.  And if they won’t investigate the case of a fellow journalist, what are the odds they’ll examine any of the other almost 800 other people sent to Guantanamo?

Al-Jazeera’s “Inside Story” on Sami al-Hajj (2 parts)

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.

An Al-Jazeera cameraman was released from Guantanamo Bay and described it as the worst prison mankind has ever seen. He spent 2,340 days in prison. Al-Hajj was never prosecuted so the United States did not make public its full allegations against him. He claimed to be subject to 130 interrogations during his 6 year stay. He had been on a 16-month hunger strike at Guantanamo.

For what is omitted from U.S. stories but is consistent with other tales of abuse (source Al-Jazeera):

He said that the psychological torture included guards insulting the Quran and on the physiological level he was beaten and force fed.

Again, this is dog whistle.  Muslims focus on it.  Western reporters or editors feel that it is hardly worth mentioning.  Conclusions to draw from this are left as an exercise for the reader.  But it is illustrative of a key point, there is a narrative that is hardly mentioned in the mainstream media that is heard elsewhere.

Studied outrage over the tribulations of Mark Steyn and Maclean’s before various human rights commissions continued this last week, with editorials appearing in both the National Post and Maclean’s.  Granted, the complaints were an abuse of process, and means need to be found to prevent the frivolous and vexatious from reaching the tribunals.  Freedom of speech ought to be absolute, no matter how odious the subject.  But at the same time, I find myself unmoved by the suppression of free speech the complaints supposedly produced.  In point of fact no one’s speech was actually curtailed.  As much as some might have wished,  the authorities have not sequestered and burnt the original Maclean’s article in any figurative or literal public square.  Mark Steyn continues to issue his screeds from his New Hampshire redoubt, unmolested.  No agents in the name of state security have hauled him to a nameless gulag.  A cursory glance at the magazine rack indicates Maclean’s still publishes openly, its reduction to the status of samizdat postponed to the indefinite future.  At the end of the fuss, it’s rather unclear as to whether Maclean’s et al. are outraged over attempts to limit their speech by a few law students, or whether someone had the audacity to challenge the received wisdom on Islam and the West.

To be sure, the importance of freedom of speech cannot be underestimated, and the complaints, where they have been adjudicated, have been rightly tossed out.  My sourness at this triumph of freedom of expression resides in the generally parlous state of civil liberties in general: the subtle contempt for notions of human rights and due process by the present government, the replacement of open and fair trials by arbitrary justice, accusation treated as evidence for determining guilt or innocence, the implicit endorsement of torture as state policy, even if we do not condone it on our own soil, the endless intrusions on individual privacy by a government already bloated with information, “no-fly” lists, and the gaping void of secrecy which obscures all of these activities  — all in the name of national security against a nebulous enemy whose strength the public cannot begin to gauge, because that too is secret.  While Maclean’s, The National Post and other organs of the free press fret away countless pails of ink on the real and imagined dangers to free speech, the erosion continues, unchecked and unremarked upon by the right-wing press (and the media in general), in this country and abroad. 

Examples of undereporting are numerous. If you believe this is because civil liberties in Canada are intact, think again.  For example, in April 2007 The International Commission of Jurists held public hearings in Toronto and Ottawa to investigate the impact of counter terrorism legislation on civil liberties. I quote part of its report at length:

The definition of terrorism and related offences under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA)

• Concerns were expressed about the speed with which ATA was enacted and in particular about the broad definition of “terrorist activity” contained in the Act and the risk that the clause requiring that the act be committed “in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause” leads to discrimination against the Muslim and Arab communities. Many witnesses, including representatives of Arab and Muslim communities drew attention to a widespread belief within these communities that the implementation of the Act is directed against Muslims and Arabs resulting in their stigmatization and a sense of insecurity. In this context, some participants welcomed the October 2006 ruling of the Superior Court of Ontario in the Khawaja case striking down the motivation requirement provision for being a violation of the rights to freedom of religion, expression and association while others expressed concern that the decision in fact broadens the definition. The Government representatives informed the Panel that they were aware of the concerns of the Muslim community and that positive action is taken to create a climate in which these concerns can be addressed and resolved. 
• Concerns were raised about the breadth and imprecision of terminology used in the ATA, in particular the offence of “facilitating terrorist activities” and its potential implications for charities and persons.

Privacy

Concerns were raised about warrantless electronic surveillance of international communications introduced under ATA and the lack of adequate safeguards over collection, storage and sharing of the data. Participants expressed the view that an erosion of privacy within a free and democratic society could, in the long run, make the Canadian population less secure.

Secrecy

Growing secrecy surrounding national security measures was raised as a major issue of concern, in particular, the increasing reliance on untested intelligence information that becomes a substitute for evidence. In addition, concerns were expressed about cross-border sharing of intelligence information and about action taken on the basis of that intelligence that may have been obtained through torture and has often proven to be inaccurate. These actions are a matter of great concern when liberty is at stake as documented by the Maher Arar Commission of Inquiry. In light of these concerns, the introduction of a provision in Canada’s domestic legislation to clearly prohibit the use in all legal and administrative proceedings of evidence obtained by torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment was proposed by some participants.

• Concerns were raised also about the use of security certificates under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) as a form of administrative detention against non-citizens suspected of being a security threat and that, in practice, has led to the detention for years without charge or trial of those subject to the certificates with very limited judicial review.
• Concerns were expressed about the secrecy of the proceedings (ex parte and in camera) in security certificate cases where evidence is presented only to the judge in the absence of the suspect and his or her counsel who only receive an unclassified summary of those proceedings. 
• Although almost all individuals subject to security certificates have been released as a result of the Charkaoui decision, strict conditions and limitations have been imposed on them affecting their freedom of movement and their right to privacy. These measures constitute a severe form of punishment for persons who have not been accused or convicted of any crime. Several participants have expressed scepticism about the possible resort to special advocates as used in the United Kingdom as this system also falls short of guaranteeing due process rights.

 Deportation on the basis of diplomatic assurances against torture

• Serious concerns were raised about increasing reliance upon diplomatic assurances against torture to deport non-citizens suspected of involvement in terrorist activities. It was stressed that such deportation constitutes a major departure from the absolute prohibition in international law to send persons to countries where they face a risk of torture or ill-treatment.

This collection of particulars, from government invasion of privacy, to effectively imposing punishment on suspected terrorists without trial, to the use of immigration law as a tool to detain suspected security risks — an abuse of process if there ever was one — garnered exactly two references in the Canadian media, a Canadian Press story subsequently picked up by a Montreal radio station. In contrast, a quick Google News search on the Steyn complaint yields 398 returns. Bloggers in this case did a bit better: three posts referred to it.  The outrage was palpable, except it wasn’t.

Or we can talk about the larger international scandal of detainees in United States custody.  Sami al-Hajj, an Al Jazeera journalist was released from prison four days ago. If you haven’t heard of him, don’t be surprised: the likes of Maclean’s and Mark Steyn –or CBC, CTV, or CanWest Global– aren’t particularly interested in his plight.  He was one of the 275 faceless prisoners still remaining in American custody at Guantanamo Bay.  He was arrested in Pakistan after the Afghan invasion, despite being accredited with Al Jazeera, apparently for the crime of being Muslim, Sudanese, and a journalist all at once. He had obtained an interview with Osama bin Laden and between 1996 and 2000 he transferred money at the behest of his then employer to Islamic charities linked to terrorist activity.  He spent 78 months at Guantanamo as an “enemy combatant.”  No charges were ever laid. He was never tried.  His lawyer was prevented by law from seeing the evidence against him.  He went on a hunger strike, and for the last sixteen months he was force-fed by means of a naso-gastric tube twice daily, a procedure when administered against an unwilling person, is the very definition of torture. When finally released, one imagines a few hushed words of regret, a token offer of compensation, a handshake and the equivalent of a second-hand suit and a bus ticket.  There was none of that. Instead, he was blindfolded, handcuffed and chained to his seat on his flight home.  “In Guantanamo,” he says, ”rats are treated with more humanity.” One can believe it.

Sami al Hajj’s treatment at the hands of U.S. authoities is not unusual.  The 275-odd prisoners still confined at Guantanamo are just the beginning.  Reprieve, one of the few organizations which will advocate for “enemy combatants” estimates that 14,000 men are imprisoned in secret American jails, caught in a Kafkaesque nightmare of bureaucratic doublespeak, without legal recourse or even simple hope, and in far worse conditions than Guantanamo. 

Which brings me back to Maclean’s, The National Post and other media organizations which tilt rightward.  How many column inches did the magazine, or any other media outlet in Canada devote to the story of Sami al-Hajj, or to any of the thousands languishing in secret prisons, or even on the concerted attack on civil rights in this country in the past year?  Instead we receive lengthly sermons on the supposed threat to individual liberty posed by those firebrand, authoritarian-minded human rights commissioners  — a danger that in any reasonable analysis is negligable and in any case easily fixed, at least compared to the hysterical morass of anti-terrorist measures. Free speech is integral to civil liberties.  But does anyone seriously think Mark Steyn’s right to free speech and Maclean’s right to publish this speech was ever in jeopardy?  There is a certain gap in credibility, where the rightwing press can mouth pieties about free speech while wilfully ignoring more egregious violations of human rights.  Apparently the rights of well-connected pundits and the corporate media are sacrosanct.  Everyone else can go rot.

One suspects under different circumstances the hue and cry might be different and–let’s say it softly–another agenda might be at work. Fulminations against the imposition of the War Measures Act in 1970 and the civil rights iniquities of Pierre Trudeau are still regular fodder for pundits even now, twenty-four years after Trudeau left office.  Under the present government, not to mention the Bush Administration, similar abuses of power, and worse, are given a pass.  It should not be forgotten either that human rights commissions have been intensely disliked by conservatives since their inception.  They interfered with property rights, said conservatives, or religious or personal belief , and  they even proposed the hackneyed arguments that more appropriate remedies were to be found in the market place or the civil courts. (Let pass that not so long ago racial and religious discrimination was justifed by Holy Writ, and that the poor and marginalized haven’t the money to buy their way out of discrimination or launch a lawsuit.)  However unjustified the proceedings against Steyn and Maclean’s, their cause has become a vehicle to attack the HRCs in general as inquisitional bodies hellbent on destroying individual liberty, whether the facts bear this interpretation or not. Lastly, can it be that the conservative media has bought the government’s position that the threat of Islamic terrorism is so overwhelming that the safety of all is worth the sacrifice of a few civil liberties and the notion of due process?  Subtext: the story is already done (though the abuses continue,) the debate is over, and who really cares if a few grubby Muslims are caught up in the net.

Complicity with the authoritarian’s eternal cry of safety trumping freedom or even silence becuase one has common cause with the ruling party’s ideology, is a dangerous game for the conservative press.  At best it exposes the rhetoric around freedom of speech for what it is — rubbishy cant.  In the long view, secrecy, arbitrary proceedings, extraordinary renditions and the rest of it are the antithesis of democratic society, for ultimately all of these are the root of corruption of power and the seeds of tyranny, where no accountibility is possible: a no man’s land where predators roam freely.  The contrast with the much-maligned human rights commissions, with their insistance on due process and open proceedings, accompanied by a vigourous debate on their purpose and relevance, could not be greater.  It is a contrast worth pondering.

Sami al-Hajj’s release from Guantanamo Bay throws the controversial detention centre back into the spotlight. Sami’s plight was common, but also exceptional. Here we have an al Jazeera cameraman in Afghanistan, working with a legitimate visa. Captured by Pakistani intelligence officers in December 2001, he has handed over to the US military in January 2002, and ship off to the notorious detention centre in southeast Cuba, where has remained until last Thursday. He went on hunger strike in January of last year in protest of his detention, and his health has suffered as a result. He is the only reporter to have been detained at Guantanamo. And now, he is free.

Many supporters suspect, rightly in my opinion, that Sami was punished not for anything he may have done, but what his station al Jazeera had done. Al Jazeera’s coverage of the American invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, coupled with the networks willingness to air Osama bin Laden’s propaganda videos has in the past led to the station receiving harsh criticism from the Bush administration. Sami al-Hajj is not the first al-Jazeera journalist to have suffered from the stations dedication to the truth; in 2003 al Jazeera journalists in the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad were fired upon by US soldiers, although as this article says, many journalists from other networks have also been targeted.

In my mind the man was clearly innocent. He never received a trial, in fact he was never charged. He spent 2139 days in Guantanamo Bay in what he says were inhumane conditions. Now, all of a sudden, he is free to walk the streets in Khartoum, and spent time with his wife and small child. Why has the United States sent an “enemy combatant” back to his native Sudan?

Washington claims that he has not been released, but has been “transferred to the Sudanese government”. Yet the Sudanese minister of justice says that al-Hajj is a “free man”. The US had claimed that he was the executive assistant in a Qatar-based beverage company, that the Americans allege supported militants in Chechnya and Bosnia. It also says al-Hajj traveled to Azerbaijan at least eight times carrying money for a now defunct “terror” organisation, al-Haramain Islamic Foundation. These claims were never tested in court, and in my mind are unfounded, or else to US would not willingly hand him over to the Sudanese government.

Guantanamo Bay has become a PR disaster for the Bush administration and it appears as though it will be closed sooner rather than later. The detention centre has been one of many recent issues (in particular Abu Graib and the Iraq war) that have turned world opinion against the United States. American tourists pretend to be Canadian when they go abroad (Australians apparently pretend to be Kiwis!). But is this fair? Are there not scores of other countries whose human rights abuses rival those of the Americans? Why does the United States receive more criticism and disapproval than China, Saudi Arabia or Russia? Is this a sign of rampant anti-Americanism in politics and the media?

No. America does deserve all the scrutiny it gets, if not more. This is the country whose president claimed was the brightest beacon of freedom and democracy in the world. A nation who believe they forever inhabit the moral high ground, particularly in the wake of September the 11^th 2001. A patriot nation of a people proud of the things the country stands for, but does not represent in reality. A religious people with Christian values, whose religious right government hold themselves on a pedestal as being morally superior. A nation that has positioned itself as the sole global superpower. Fair enough. Unfortunately it appears that its leaders have forgotten that this position carries not just rights, but responsibilities. The country acts in its own best interests, which is understandable, but these interests frequently run contrary to the interests of other sovereign nations. America talks a good game, but doesn’t play fair.

As far as Guantanamo Bay and the other detention centres American uses, these defy everything the country stands for. International laws are circumvented with tactful semantics. Notions enshrined in their constitution are bypassed in the pursuit of winning an unwinnable war. Because for every unjust crime America commits, another terrorist is born. Sami al-Hajj and his family, and those of any other innocent men incarcerated at Guantanamo, have every reason to hate America. America, the land of the free, stole the freedom from these men, and has no defence for this charge. Unfortunately, like these men, we are unlikely to see the perpetrators of this crime before a court.

Sami al Hajj is a al Jazeera cameraman who was taken prisoner by the American Army while doing his job in Iraq. He has spend 6.5 years in Gitmo, in solitary confinement, was beaten, interrogated (tortured) and finally released because there was absolutly nothing they could pin on him. No trial, no lawyer, away from his family whom he was not allowed to contact. For absolutely nothing than being a cameraman for al Jazeera trying to bring news to the world about what is really going on in Iraq. There are still hundreds of people of more than 50 different nationalities locked up in the US gulag and thousands of people are in undisclosed black hole CIA torture camps. New Zealand should pull its troops out of Afghanistan, and should also pull out it’s 300 ex-military out of Iran.

With the news that Al Jazeera cameraman, Sami Al-Hajj has finally been released without charge or trial from Guantanamo Bay, I think perhaps it is important to reflect on what freedom really means. The current political climate has led to curtailing of civil rights and liberties in many countries, at a time when politicians are claiming to be fighting for those same freedoms. Perhaps what has angered people most in the last few years, is the blatant lying and hypocrisy from many world leaders. I think some intelligent thinkers have posed on this same idea throughout history.

Abraham Lincoln:

“Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves”

William Faulkner:

“We must be free not because we claim freedom, but because we practice it”

Edmund Burke:

“The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion”

Benjamin Franklin:

“They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security”

Carl Shurz:

“If you want to be free, there is but one way; it is to guarantee an equally full measure of liberty to all your neighbors. There is no other”

Epictitus:

“We must not believe the many, who say that only free people ought to be educated, but we should rather believe the philosophers who say that only the educated are free”

Goethe:

“None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free”

Noam Chomsky:

“If we do not believe in freedom of speech for those we despise we do not believe in it at all”

Okay that should do. I know there are many others. Many a wise person has come to similar conclusions. Yet the masses swallow the bull shit. Who’s to blame? Politicians? The media? Religion? The education system? Parents? TV?

Today, most, if not all, Arab media devoted space to the release of Sami al-Hajj, a Sudanese al-Jazeera photographer, from Guantanamo Bay

Sami was in Gitmo for six years and it does not sound like he enjoyed his stay.  Though not new, he accuses the US of, among other things, intentionally abusing the Quran, preventing prisoners from praying and denying prisoners clothing.

According to the news reports, he is currently in a hospital in Khartoum because he was in bad health upon his release.

Whether or not Sami’s allegations are true, his comments have been broadcast across the Arab world.  As a result, the story’s focus so far has been on Sami’s poor treatment rather than the fact that the U.S. released him from Guantanamo.