I'm Home, but Still Haunted by Guantanamo

By Jumah al Dossari, former Guantanamo Bay detainee
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Published in the Washington Post

Reporter/writer's note:

I've covered the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, since 2004 as military correspondent for The Post. Jumah al Dossari first caught my attention in October 2005, when I heard the story of his gruesome suicide attempt during a visit from his lawyer. Then known as Detainee #261, Dossari clearly was making a public plea for help. Though the U.S. military has said many times that all detainees at Guantanamo are treated humanely and that Dossari had been getting the help he needed, detention in Guantanamo apparently became more than he could bear. His wish to die humanized the desperation of many detainees held indefinitely at the facility.

U.S. officials maintained for years that Dossari was a dangerous terrorist who had been arrested after going to Afghanistan to fight with the Taliban against U.S. forces. Dossari also spent some time in the United States and allegedly tried to recruit terrorists with fiery sermons, something that obviously raised concerns among his interrogators and jailers. Nevertheless, he was never charged with a crime, never admitted any connection to terrorism and was ultimately released to Saudi Arabia in July 2007.

His return to freedom has been smooth. He is employed, married and doing well. When I talked to him by cellphone from Dammam late last year, he spoke of a hope and a peace and a forgiveness that arose from his "black days" behind bars at Guantanamo.

-- Josh White
---

DAMMAM, Saudi Arabia

It has been a little over a year since I left the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but I still have trouble sleeping sometimes. On a recent restless night, I found a DVD entitled "United 93" beside the family television set. I had no idea what it was about, but I started watching. When I realized that it was about the hijacked American plane that had crashed in Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001, I began to cry. It reminded me of a very simple question I had asked myself countless times during my 5 1/2 years in Guantanamo: When will humans start treating each other with respect, whatever our religion or color?

I arrived in Guantanamo in January 2002 after Pakistani forces handed me over to the United States, probably, I suspect, for a bounty. I had been in Afghanistan to assess the progress of a mosque-building project there, funded by people in my native Saudi Arabia. I knew that Afghanistan was a dangerous place, but I was paid for the trip and I needed the money, so I went. It is a decision I will always regret. When the U.S. began bombing Afghanistan in November 2001, I fled to Pakistan. At a border checkpoint, I asked Pakistani guards for help getting to the Saudi embassy. Instead, they put me in a prison, where I was kept for days with shackles on my legs.

After several weeks, I was blindfolded and flown with other detainees to a U.S. military base in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Upon our arrival there, we were thrown to the ground. Someone hit my head and forced his boot into my mouth. Despite the freezing Afghan winter, I spent several weeks in an open tent circled with barbed wire. I still have scars from my time in Kandahar. One is from a cigarette that was extinguished on my wrist and the other from the time I was pushed to a floor covered with broken glass.

One night about two weeks after our arrival, some soldiers came and cut off my clothes and put me in an orange suit. They fitted me with very tight goggles so that I could not see and put something over my ears so that I could not hear. I was chained to the floor of a plane for several hours, then again to the floor of another for what seemed like an eternity. When they pulled us off the second plane, we had no idea where we were.

It was Guantanamo.

We were taken to Camp X-Ray, which consists of cages of the sort that would normally hold animals. Imprisoned in these cages, we were forbidden to move and sometimes forbidden to pray. Later, the guards allowed us to pray and even to turn around, but whenever new detainees arrived, we were again prohibited from doing anything but sitting still.

Physical brutality was not uncommon during those first years at Guantanamo. In Camp X-Ray, several soldiers once beat me so badly that I spent three days in intensive care. My face and body were still swollen and covered in bruises when I left the hospital. During one interrogation, my questioner, apparently dissatisfied with my answers, slammed my head against the table. During others, I was shackled to the floor for hours.

In later years, such physical assaults subsided, but they were replaced by something more painful: I was deprived of human contact. For several months, the military held me in solitary confinement after a suicide attempt. I had no clothes other than a pair of shorts and no bed but a dirty plastic mat. The air conditioner was on 24 hours a day; the cell's cold metal walls made it feel as though I was living inside a freezer. There was no faucet, so I had to use the water in the toilet for drinking and washing.

I was transferred to the maximum-security Camp Five in May 2004. There I lived -- if that word can be used -- in a cell with cement walls. I was permitted to exercise once or twice a week; otherwise, I was alone in my cell at all times. I had nothing to occupy my mind except a Koran and some censored letters from my family. Interrogators told me that I would live like that for 50 years.

While I was in Camp Five, the military gave me a piece of paper that laid out the allegations against me. I had been in Guantanamo at that point for 2 1/2 years. My lawyer later told me that I had received this paper as a result of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that detainees were to be allowed to have court hearings. We never got the promised hearings; instead, we went through military hearings at Guantanamo in which we were not shown any evidence or allowed to have lawyers. All we got was the piece of paper.

Some of the allegations were silly. One said that I had gone to Afghanistan for military training in 1989. The truth was that I had told an interrogator about a trip I had made to Afghanistan for a weekend as an overweight 16-year old after the war with the Soviet Union there ended. This trip was sponsored by the Saudi government, which had helped fund the Afghan mujaheddin and was celebrating -- with the United States -- the defeat of the Soviets.

Only one of the allegations seemed to be directly related to what is called the "War on Terror." It said that I had been "present at Tora Bora." No other details were provided. I had never heard of Tora Bora (although I later learned that it was Osama bin Laden's suspected hiding place, where U.S. forces battled the Taliban in December 2001). Later, I learned that a Yemeni detainee had told interrogators that I had been there, along with many others, because he hoped to be released if he was seen as cooperating with the U.S. military.

I know that there have been newspaper stories saying that I recruited people to go to al-Qaeda training camps. But the sheet of paper the military gave me said nothing about recruiting, which is not something I have ever done.

There were many times in Guantanamo when I felt as though I was falling apart, like a sandcastle being washed out by the tide. I lost all hope and faith. The purpose of Guantanamo is to destroy people, and I was destroyed. I decided that I preferred death to life, and I attempted suicide several times.

Once, during a break in a meeting with my attorney, I cut my arm with a razor and tried to hang myself. I do not remember it, but apparently my attorney returned earlier than I had told him to and found me suspended by my neck from the cell wall, unconscious and covered in blood. I broke a vertebra but survived with surgery.

Between suicide attempts, I tried desperately to hold on to the few fleeting moments of light that presented themselves to me. I met every few months with my attorneys and felt better whenever they were in Guantanamo, but my despair would return within a day of their departure. On occasion, I was helped by compassionate guards. After the beating in Camp X-Ray, a young female guard appeared at my cage, looking to make sure that no other guards were watching. "I'm sorry for what happened to you," she whispered to me. "You're a human being just like us." These words were a temporary balm for my bruises and loneliness. Ultimately, though, I believe it was God who did not allow me to die.

In July 2007, a colonel told me that I was going home. He did not explain why I was suddenly no longer too dangerous to live in freedom. Four days later, I was put on a Saudi government plane. When we landed in Riyadh and I saw my family, I was overwhelmed. We all cried and hugged. I said hello to someone I thought was my sister only to hear her say, "Daddy." I looked at her face again and saw that it was my daughter, who had grown from a 7-year-old child to a 13-year-old young woman while I'd been gone.

In Guantanamo, I was very angry with the people who had decided to hold me thousands of miles from home without charging or trying me. I was very angry with the people who kept me in isolation even when I was at my most desperate. I was very angry about having no rights at all. I was not angry with Americans in general and I even drew comfort from some, such as my lawyers and the kind soldier. But I could scarcely comprehend how U.S. policy had allowed me to be treated as I had been.

On the plane ride home, though, I decided that I would have to forgive to go on with my life. I also know that Sept. 11 was a great tragedy that caused some people to do dark things that they would not otherwise do. This knowledge helped me forget my miserable existence in Guantanamo and open my heart to life again, including to my recent re-marriage.

When I was watching "United 93," I thought of the soldier who had offered me compassion in Guantanamo. Her words reminded me that we all share common values, and only by holding on to them can we ensure that there is mercy and brotherhood in the world. After more than five years in Guantanamo, I can think of nothing more important.

ALSO READ:

Who are the 16 Saudis released from Guantánamo?

CAIR Asks Studio to Change ‘Towelhead’ Film Title

The Greater Los Angeles Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-LA) today called on Warner Bros. and Warner Independent Pictures to consider changing the title of the soon-to-be-released film “Towelhead” because that derogatory term is offensive to American Muslims and Arab-Americans. CAIR says Muslims and Arab-Americans view the term “towelhead” as a racial and religious slur.

In a letter sent last week to studio executives, the Islamic civil rights and advocacy group asked that the film be called “Nothing is Private” – a title previously used in some markets.

In the letter to Warner Bros Chairman and CEO Barry M. Meyer, CAIR-LA Executive Director Hussam Ayloush said in part:

“The title…is of great concern to us, since the word is commonly used in a derogatory manner against people of the Muslim faith or Arab origin…We have no desire to inhibit the creative process or your right to produce any film you wish. However, I ask you to take the above concerns into consideration and examine the social implications of releasing the film under its current title, ‘Towelhead.’”

Ayloush said that although Warner Bros. executives have made it clear they intended no offense, the use of such a derogatory term by a major film studio will serve to increase its acceptability in public discourse.

“It is unfortunate that a major film studio would choose to exploit an ethnic slur as a sensational promotion for a movie,” said Ayloush. “Mainstreaming a bigoted term in this manner will only serve to legitimize and normalize anti-Muslim prejudice in our society.”

Commenting on Muslim Youth Leadership

Three Inland teens attend Muslim Youth Leadership Program

August 21, 2008, By DAVID OLSON, The Press-Enterprise

Malik Jiffry came back from the annual Muslim Youth Leadership Program on Sunday pumped up and ready to help dispel myths about fellow Muslims. "It was amazing," the Redlands High School senior said. "It changed my life. People there showed an interest and a want to help Muslim-Americans."

Jiffry was one of 35 high school juniors and seniors -- three from the Inland area -- who traveled to Sacramento to attend the fourth annual conference, which was sponsored by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The four-day conference featured a mock legislative session -- in which students took roles of state legislators -- and workshops on public speaking, media relations and community organizing and advocacy.

Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the council's Southern California office and a Corona resident, said his group hopes to get more young people interested in politics, journalism and community work.

"The goal is to demystify these fields and provide tools to be effective speakers, strong leaders and confident organizers in their own communities," he said.

Jiffry is considering whether to one day go into politics. At age 16, he already is active in his high school and community. He tutors and plays with children at a Christian-run center, and is a member of the volleyball team, speech and debate team and Spanish club.

Monsura Sirajee, a junior at Chaparral High School in Temecula and incoming co-editor-in-chief of the school newspaper, said that as Muslims get more involved in their communities and take leadership roles, non-Muslims will see the true face of Islam.

"If they're able to clear up misconceptions, which they can do through the media and through government, the word will get out that mainstream Muslims are not like the radical Muslims that Americans hear about," said Sirajee, 17, who also attended the conference.

Another conference participant, Aatif Sayeed, said one reason more Muslims are not involved in politics is that many are immigrants who know little about the U.S. political system. Sayeed said Muslims like him who have grown up in the United States need to fill the gap.

"Frankly, if we don't get involved in making laws, we don't have a right to protest," said Sayeed, 15, a junior at Centennial High School in Corona.

Many voters hold politicians' Muslim beliefs against them. A 2007 Pew Research Center poll found that nearly half of Americans were less likely to vote for a Muslim presidential candidate.

People who oppose Muslims holding political office because of a fear of them bringing a Muslim agenda to office "know nothing about Muslims," said Rep. Keith Ellison, a Minneapolis Democrat who in 2006 became the first Muslim in Congress.

"There are some (Muslim) people who would say it is anti-Islamic to do this or do that, just as there are a lot of Christians and Jews who say it is wrong to do this and do that," Ellison said by phone. "Extremists and authoritarians are in every faith, and people who are progressive and who believe in love and inclusion are in every faith."

Ellison is a strong supporter of abortion rights and same-sex marriage even though the major branches of Islam view abortion and homosexuality as immoral. Ayloush said voters shouldn't be surprised that Muslims have varying viewpoints on such issues.

"Muslims, like all other followers of faith groups, are not monolithic," he said. "They will have different levels of practice and have different interpretations of religious teachings."

Jiffry said the elections of Ellison and Rep. André Carson, an Indianapolis Democrat elected in March to replace his late grandmother in Congress, have made Muslims more likely to get involved in politics.

"It shows it's not impossible for a Muslim-American to rise up to public office and represent the people," he said.

Reach David Olson at 951-368-9462 or dolson@PE.com

Wrong...Wrong...Wrong: Obama Lets Muslim Advisor Resign

This is a good piece by Steve Clemons commenting on the recent resignation of Barack Obama's Muslim-outreach coordinator, Mazen Asbahi. It is worth reading so I decided to share on my blog. Please post your comments on the original post at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/wrong-wrong-wrong-obama-l_b_117270.html

---

Barack Obama needs to make a statement loudly, clearly, and with passion that he embraces Muslims as much as any other Americans of Christian, Buddhist, Jewish or other religious persuasions. It wouldn't hurt for him to embrace devout secularists like me for that matter.

But I'm irritated and saddened by news that Barack Obama's Muslim-outreach coordinator, Mazen Asbahi, has resigned "amid questions about his 'involvement' in an Islamic investment fund and various Islamic groups."


Let's tally up Obama's Muslim outreach record:

~ Obama campaign apparatchiks ask young Muslim women not to stand in photo with Obama because of head scarves (Obama campaign later apologizes).

~ Barack Obama gives AIPAC speech that manages to run to the right of President Bush and Israel Prime Minister Ohlmert in demanding that "Jerusalem must not be divided." (Obama later recants after the fact)

~ Barack Obama not only terminates Middle East advisor Robert Malley from his team because of Malley's views that Hamas should be engaged -- but his spokesman, Bill Burton, states that not only is Rob Malley no longer advising Obama "but will never advise Obama." That's running the bus over someone and then backing it up to make sure that Malley doesn't survive and has no chance in an Obama administration. I like to remind folks that Paul Volcker and Ted Sorensen signed the same letter Malley did but have thus far missed the campaign guillotine.

~ Barack Obama gives an inspirational speech to more than 200,000 Germans in Berlin calling for a "World Without Walls." But Obama is silent in Israel when it is the wall dividing Israelis and Palestinians that is becoming an increasingly worse and impactful global ulcer.

~ Barack Obama spends 30 plus hours in Israel and 45 minutes in Ramallah during his recent trip and meets many Iraelis who have been pro-settilement expansion, solidly violating international law and US policy. Some on Obama's advisory team turn a blind eye to Israel's expanding settlements and continue to be associated with and meet with settlement zealots -- but Obama keeps ALL of these people on his team.

~ Barack Obama accepts the resignation of a mainstream Arab-American lawyer from his advisory team because eight years ago, Mazen Asbahi served on a board "for a few weeks" that included a muslim fundamentalist imam from Illinois. Asbahi resigned from the board. . .eight years ago.
What? Wait? Obama has had a many years long relationship with Jeremiah Wright -- and sat on a board with William Ayers -- NEITHER of which I think are disqualifiers for Obama's candidacy... and yet Obama's political team and Obama himself did not demand from Asbahi that he stay on the team, stand his ground, and fight back against the vile right-wing hit on him and his credibility?!

I think that this is outrageous -- and those on the left who appreciate Obama and what he may mean for this country must become as tenaciously committed to what is right and what is good -- and fighting for that -- because those on the other side of these debates are trying to compel Obama to dilute himself.

Zalmay Khalilzad is an effective and popular MUSLIM Ambassador of the United States to the United Nations. We need more Muslims in our diplomatic corps. We need Muslims on the Supreme Court. We need more Muslims like Keith Ellison in the US Senate and House of Representatives.
Obama should say it. Convince the American public that he's not setting up a zero sum game between Muslims on one side and Christians and Jews on the other.

Obama is a Christian. I get that. I'm a secularist hard core -- but I won't stand by to watch more good people be flushed down the political drain because they are Muslims trying to work for a balanced and level playing field in America.

This resignation by Asbahi stinks -- and Obama and his team should immediately call him back and help him stand up to anti-Muslimism in America.

-- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note

How does a Republican-pushed bill amendment serve terrorists' interests?

By Corey Saylor

U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Holland, recently attached an amendment to the Intelligence Authorization Act that may unintentionally legitimize Al Qaeda and other anti-American forces.

Passed by a vote of 249-180, Hoekstra's amendment says that "none of the funds ... appropriated by this Act may be used to prohibit or discourage the use of the words or phrases 'jihadist,' 'jihad,' 'Islamo-fascism,' 'caliphate,' 'Islamist,' or 'Islamic terrorist' by or within the intelligence community or the Federal Government."

This amendment needs to be removed.

Many experts, including the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, find it misguided, and Hoekstra's arguments for it unsupported.

In January, the Department of Homeland Security's Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a guide called "Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims," and in March, the National Counterterrorism Center produced a similar publication called "Words that Work and Words that Don't: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication."

According to these recommendations, by using phrases such as "Islamic terrorism," U.S. officials may be "unintentionally portraying terrorists, who lack moral and religious legitimacy, as brave fighters, legitimate soldiers or spokesman (sic) for ordinary Muslims." The report also urges "caution in using terms such as 'jihadist,' 'Islamist,' and 'holy warrior' as grandiose descriptions," to avoid associating acts of violence or terrorism with religious concepts.

On the House floor, Hoekstra bitterly complained that "the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Department of Homeland Security have issued memos imposing speech codes."

The DHS document actually "outlines recommendations," and the NCTC document says its suggestions are "not binding."

Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, who chairs the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, wrote a letter to other members of Congress opposing Hoekstra's amendment, saying, "These are precisely the terms that Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders use routinely to describe their actions against the United States. We should not let them define this debate and claim a false mantle of legitimacy."

So this argument is not, as Hoekstra asserts, about creating "speech police" or "the politically correct politicization of our nation's intelligence community." It's about having America's spokespeople and soldiers smartly use language that defines Al Qaeda and other groups as thugs and criminals. This is done not because we worry about offending sensitivities, but because it serves the strategic purpose of isolating extremists and removing the false cloak of religiosity that they use to justify their barbarism.

COREY SAYLOR is national legislative director for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil liberties organization. He may be contacted at: csaylor@cair.com

Need for Common Code of Ethics

From the recent Interfaith Conference in Madrid.

Excerpts from speech by
Nihad Awad
National Executive Director
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Washington, D.C.

As growing worldwide trends show an increase in immoral behaviors, it becomes increasingly urgent for leaders of faith communities to talk seriously about issues of morality and ethics. Ideally, these discussions will lead to the creation and adoption of a universal moral code to help curb these disturbing trends.

Obviously differences in cultural, religious and social values would make such a code difficult to formulate, but a common definition of morality and ethics might allow people of different faiths to cooperate more productively.

It is difficult to create a common definition of morality because every society, culture and religion in the world today differs in its interpretation of the word. But the fact is that today’s global society is on the verge of losing its moral strength and social fabric.

Morality is most commonly interpreted as a complex system of general principles and particular judgments based on cultural, religious and philosophical concepts and beliefs. Cultures and groups regulate and generalize these concepts, thus regulating behavior.

The state of morality in the world today is difficult to judge accurately due to the vast amount of information that would have to be collected and analyzed for a comprehensive analysis.

The interpretation of morality and ethics varies from one society to another, but there are basic universal values. For example, the Golden Rule – do unto others as you would have them do unto you – is present in the teachings of nearly every major faith. It is incorporated into the teachings of Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, and Judaism.

The majority of every society, irrespective of that society’s religious traditions or philosophies, agrees that certain values, such as honesty and respect for human life, are essential for the survival of the social system. These universal values can be found in the Ten Commandments, the Bible, the Quran, and have been present in the laws of almost of every society since the creation of Hammurabi’s first code of law. Although there are many universally accepted moral values, each culture and faith differs on specific social norms...


Illicit drug use
For instance, illicit drug use is a global problem. But the deadly phenomenon of illegal drugs has been addressed effectively by the international community and there is much good news to report with the bad. One hundred eighty countries cooperate with the international drug control system that has been gradually developed over the last 100 years. Because of this system, new recreational drugs, however numerous, are not allowed to spread in the free market. This drug control effort, begun a century ago to confront the opium crisis, has evolved into a body of international law since the United Nations became involved in 1946.

Less than 5 percent of the world population uses drugs (if alcohol is excluded from the definition), and problem users are limited to less than 1 percent.

Areas ripe for increased global cooperation are: creating more resources in the public health arena to prevent people from taking drugs, treating those who are already dependent and reducing the negative social consequences from drug use. This public health effort cannot overlook that over 25 percent of adults worldwide used tobacco, an addictive drug with huge costs to both individuals and the societies of the users. The intimate links between drug money, organized crime, corruption, and national security also call out for even better cooperation between nations.6


Human trafficking
For example, the modern slave trade is a growing industry. According to US government estimates, more than 45,000 women and children are imported annually to the United States, the premier destination for trafficked victims. It is estimated that there are at least 30 million victims of slavery in the world today. The UNODC Global Programe against trafficking in human beings recognizes and assists countries in combating this crime. In 2000, the UN General Assembly adopted the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children.


Gambling
Another example of moral decay is the growing popularity and social acceptability of gambling. Gambling is a long-established form of recreation in most societies. Statistics show the magnitude of this phenomenon in a number of societies.

In this segment, the United States is focused on as an example of this growing problem. What is unique about the current gambling situation in the United States is the speed with which it has gone from an undercurrent in American society to a high-profile, socially accepted activity.

The gambling industry has grown 10-fold in the US since 1975. Thirty-seven states now have lotteries. Fifteen million people display some sign of gambling addiction. Two-thirds of the adult population placed a bet last year. There are now approximately 260 casinos on Indian reservations (in 31 states and with $6.7 billion in revenue). The gambling industry has utilized modern technology such as the Internet to boost profits. Internet gambling has nearly doubled every year since 1997 – in 2001 it exceeded $2 billion. The Internet boasts 110 sports-related gambling sites. According to the American Psychological Association, the Internet could be as addictive as alcohol, drugs and gambling...


Pornography
Pornography is considered immoral from the Islamic religious perspective, and Islamic societies have maintained a social code of ethics that promotes and encourages modesty. Social and official strictures limit the open distribution of pornographic publications. In other societies, the viewing of pornography may be considered a freedom to be exercised at one’s personal discretion and this type of material is widely available. One cannot overlook the spread of satellite channels and digital media, which have brought access to pornography to the Muslim world. This industry has claimed many victims among the most vulnerable and defenseless: children and trafficked women. The statistical information below shows both the magnitude of the pornography industry and its economic power.


Internet Pornography Statistics
Pornographic websites: 4.2 million (12% of total websites). Porn pages: 420 million. Daily pornographic search engine requests: 68 million (25% of total search engine requests). Daily porn emails: 2.5 billion (8% of total emails). Internet users who view porn: 42.7%. Received unwanted exposure to sexual material:34%. Average daily porn emails/user 4.5 per Internet user. Monthly porn downloads (Peer-to-peer) 1.5 billion (35% of all downloads). Daily Gnutella “child porn” requests 116,000. Websites offering illegal child porn 100,000. Sexual solicitations of youth made in chat rooms 89%. Youths who received sexual solicitation 1 in 7 (down from 2003 stat of 1 in 3) Worldwide visitors to porn web sites 72 million visitors to pornography monthly. Internet porn sales $4.9 billion...


Prostitution
An issue linked directly and indirectly with pornography is prostitution. It shares the feature of victimizing the defenseless and weak in societies around the world. Half of prostitutes are controlled by human traffickers. It is largely a hidden problem, occurring as it does behind closed doors. While 85-90 percent of those arrested are street prostitutes, streetwalkers account for only 20 percent of prostitutes. In other words, the majority of prostitution occurs discreetly and may be “invisible” to many. Prostitutes also account for 90 percent of arrests, their clients for only 10 percent – meaning that the customers, without whom there would be no sex trade, access prostitution with little fear of legal consequences.


Rape
One of the most egregious and immoral assaults on individuals and societies is rape. Across all cultures and religions, it is one of the most underreported crimes. Even in the US, known globally for its liberal attitudes about sex, more than half of rapes go unreported according to the US Department of Justice. This crime affects children as well as adult women. In fact, children are often targeted because of their greater vulnerability. And the negative effects of rape on individuals and societies are profound.

Victims of sexual assault are three times more likely to suffer from depression; six times more likely to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder; 13 times more likely to abuse alcohol; 26 times more likely to abuse drugs, and four times more likely to contemplate suicide. 12 In 2008, an historic resolution by the UN Security Council classified rape as a weapon of war.
The facts cited above comprise only a glimpse into today’s moral and ethical challenges. The global community has to come to terms and agree on a minimum common denominator of universal moral values and ethics that protects the fabric of global society.
Continuous interfaith dialogue and continuous joint initiatives promoting mutual understanding will lead to improved communication, more effective cooperation and an increase in tangible results in dealing with these important issues.

The support that religious and opinion leaders from various societies and backgrounds offer for global initiatives can help institutions like the United Nations andindividual governments tremendously in facing these challenges and implementing prevention measures.

A common definition of morality could also allow countries to cooperate with each other more easily and would make the work of international organizations much easier.

A universal code of morality would allow the international community to do what international religious bodies and figures, irrespective of their background and prominence, could not. It would allow the global community to counter the deterioration of basic human values by promoting universal values while combating the destruction of society.

A universal standard of morality would ideally apply to everyone, regardless of race or class. It would consist of voluntary societal guidelines, with the Golden Rule at its heart.

For example, lying, stealing, cheating, physically or verbally abusing others, murder, and not destroying the environment on which all life depends, would all be on the “Do No Harm” list. Not all of these guidelines could be enforced through a legal code. It is impossible to place specific restrictions on things such as lying, without invading peoples’ privacy and violating their human and civil rights. It is equally impossible to force others to do good. One cannot force humans to be kind to each other, to respect all life, or to be generous. Individuals would adhere to these principles without being forced to by law, but instead simply for their own good and for the greater good of all.

The potential for interfaith cooperation in promoting moral values is limitless. Post-9/11 developments have greatly accelerated the motivation of mainstream religious groups to work together, making the task easier.

Muslims worldwide can play a positive and cooperative role in this multicultural setting, helping to expand on the common ground with Christians and Jews. These three monotheistic religions share many values, scriptures and legal similarities. The Muslim world and Middle East, though sometimes politically and economically unstable, provide a good example of social stability and public morality. At the core of society is the family, and strong family values are at the heart of Muslim Society and the Islamic religion. This creates a sturdy, wholesome foundation on which to build a healthy society.

A recent BBC story about a Bedouin family supports this observation. It stated that “the trend across the Middle East is for continued close family ties among the old and the young. Religion and widespread traditional social values make it likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future.”

On its website, the Jordanian Department of Statistics describes the family as “the basic social unit for the individual because it represents the source of protection, food, shelter, income, reputation and honor.” This emphasis on the family is part of the Islamic religion, which is a reason it is so ingrained in Middle Eastern and Muslim societies. Respect for fellow humans, particularly parents and elders, is very important in Islam, and this helps to keep both the nuclear and extended families together.

The world’s current state of morality is not ideal, but it is not beyond redemption. If interfaith dialogue is established and faith communities cooperate to raise moral standards, improvements can be made.

Positive peer pressure is a powerful tool that can be utilized to raise these standards.
Muslims, Christians and Jews combined make up more than half of the world population. All three of these religions share the same basic moral guidelines, and if the devotees of each religion were to follow its teachings, they could become a powerful moral force for the rest of the world.

Israeli 'shooting video' of unarmed Palestinian civilian causes outrage

It is shamefully important to note that our American tax money funds Israel's ongoing atrocities and apartheid practices against the Palestinians.

First Guantanamo Bay Video Released - Omar Khadr Interrogation

Omar Khadr: The interrogation

Omar Khadr: The interrogation
Video captures righteous indignation
Colin Freeze and Omar El Akkad

WATCH VIDEO

Globe and Mail Update

July 15, 2008 at 8:04 AM EDT

Before the rage, the resignation and the tears, came the trust. Teenaged prisoner Omar Khadr seemed sure that his countrymen from Canada had come to Cuba to help him and spoke freely when they asked questions.

On the second day, the reality almost visibly dawned on his face. Agents had asked about his links to al-Qaeda, about his friends and family in Afghanistan, about whether he really thought dozens of black-eyed virgins awaited him in janna, or paradise.

The teenager realized the obvious. The Canadian agents weren't there to help. They were there to mine him for information. So he wept. He denied everything. He pulled at his hair and pulled down his orange prisoner's suit. He showed his war wounds, which nearly killed him during a battle with U.S. soldiers six months earlier.

From behind the flaps of a ventilation shaft, a hidden camera caught all the rage and righteous indignation of Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen raised by fundamentalist parents in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The 16-year-old al-Qaeda suspect and Guantanamo Bay detainee was facing allegations that he murdered a U.S. soldier.

After a series of Canadian court orders, remarkable footage of federal agents questioning Mr. Khadr was released Tuesday morning - starting with an eight-minute highlight reel released at 5 a.m., and a full seven hours of footage to come later in the afternoon.

The largest portion of the eight-minute segment shows a sobbing Mr. Khadr with his head buried in his hands, repeatedly moaning "help me, help me."

The grainy footage marks the first video of a Guantanamo Bay interrogation. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service prefers to describe the meetings as "interviews".

Mr. Khadr sits in one small room for the first half of the released footage. There is little in the first room other than a desk and vents in the walls. In another room, he sits on a small couch. The rooms are similar to rooms currently in the Guantanamo prison camps. Reporters were given a tour of such a room earlier this year. The military uses the word "reservation" to refer to prisoners' meetings with interrogators — the rooms are where the "reservations" take place.

During the meetings, Mr. Khadr wears an orange jumpsuit — at the time, the orange uniforms were synonymous with all Guantanamo prisoners. Today, the orange uniform is reserved for the most unco-operative prisoners. Mr. Khadr today wears the white uniform of the most compliant prisoners.

Mr. Khadr's mood varies from dejected to hopeless for much of the released footage. At one point he lifts his shirt over his head to show extensive wounds he suffered during the 2002 Afghan firefight where he was captured.

"You say this is healthy?" he tells his interrogator. "I can't move my arm."

His interrogator, whose face is obscured by a black circle as per government security rules, is not sympathetic.

"You look like you're doing well to me," he replies. "I'm not a doctor but I think you're getting good medical care."

In another part of the footage, Mr. Khadr says "I lost my eyes. I lost my feet," referring to his injuries.

"No, you still have your eyes, and your feet are still at the ends of your legs," his interrogator replies.

Mr. Khadr's mood appears to have gotten significantly worse between one set of interviews and the next, something that causes his interrogator much frustration.

The interrogator tells Mr. Khadr that he understands the situation is stressful, but by using a strategy of non-co-operation he isn't helping himself.

At one point, the interrogator talks to Mr. Khadr about the detained Canadian's wish to go home. The interrogator says he can't help Mr. Khadr with that, but suggests Mr. Khadr help him stay in Guantanamo.

"The weather's nice [in Guantanamo]," the interrogator says. "No snow."

The joke falls flat.

The footage is part of more than seven hours that was released by the government to Mr. Khadr's lawyers. The rest of the footage is expected to be released later Tuesday.

"The videos do not show Omar Khadr being tortured or mistreated during the interrogations," Mr. Khadr's Canadian lawyer, Nathan Whitling, said in a press release accompanying the video. "As documents released last week show, Guantanamo Bay authorities manipulated Omar's environment outside the interrogation room before Canadian interrogations to induce co-operation within the interrogation room."

Documents made public last week show that Mr. Khadr was subjected to weeks of sleep deprivation by U.S. military officials before being interviewed by Canadian officials, and that the Canadians were aware of the sleep deprivation.

Mr. Khadr was sent to Guantanamo after being captured in Afghanistan in 2002. The footage, compiled from three days of interviews taped six months after his capture, is being released by his defence team. Edmonton lawyers Mr. Whitling and Dennis Edney, who fought a successful legal battle for the DVDs to be disclosed, now hope to shame Canadian politicians into lobbying Washington for the repatriation of the now-21-year-old, still jailed, but not convicted after six years.

The video will allow the public its first glimpse of an interview undertaken inside the U.S. military jail for terrorism suspects that operates on leased land in Cuba. It is also the first footage ever shown of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service in action during its 24-year history.

Three CSIS agents were sent down to question Mr. Khadr, not to lend any sympathy to him. Their mission was to gather information that might safeguard national security. Visuals of the agents' faces and audio of certain questions are edited out for security reasons.

A Department of Foreign Affairs official was along for the interviews, and had a role split between gathering intelligence and ascertaining the prisoner's well being. DFAIT's Jim Gould later wrote a briefing note stating he had met a "screwed up young man" whose trust had been abused by just about everyone who had ever been responsible for him.

Ottawa has been bracing for the video's release for weeks. Various government agencies have been coordinating their talking points in response to the footage – while both the government and Mr. Khadr's defence lawyers agree that the footage does not show Mr. Khadr being tortured or mistreated, both have a keen interest in the Canadian public's response to the video.

Mr. Khadr's defence team released the eight-minute "highlight reel" shortly before 6 a.m. Ottawa time Tuesday – in time for most morning news shows. Canadian news web sites quickly carried copies of the video.

Ottawa, too, is paying attention. When a reporter called CSIS's media line early Tuesday morning, news coverage of the Khadr tape could be heard from televisions in the background.

The rest of the world is also watching. Within hours of the video's release, news stories began to surface around the planet, including on the front pages of The New York Times and BBC web sites.

When a Democracy deems it necessary to torture a 16-year old kid

Videos show Khadr crying in detention 16-year-old also pulling hair, covering face, shedding prison tunic

Steven Edwards
Canwest News Service


Monday, July 14, 2008

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=0436bad1-d0db-4bf6-a831-67378ea60e78


NEW YORK - A 16-year-old Omar Khadr is seen pulling at his hair, covering his face and shedding his tunic in stills taken from videotapes of Canadian officials interrogating the Toronto-born terror suspect in Guantanamo Bay.

They are significant because they are the first publicly released photographs of Khadr, now 21, since his capture by U.S. forces following a firefight in Afghanistan in July 2002.

The public will also get its first opportunity to view excerpts of the videotapes when Khadr's lawyers place a 10-minute sequence on a website that is yet to be determined.

Khadr is seen in the photographs wearing an orange tunic, which U.S. authorities in Guantanamo have long made detainees they consider unco-operative wear.

He is also reported to be crying on several occasions.

The lawyers plan to release DVDs of the full seven hours of interrogations at a news conference Tuesday in Edmonton, where the offices of the Canadian members of Khadr's legal team are located.

The Supreme Court of Canada recently ordered the federal government to release the tapes and a series of related documents to the lawyers, who had launched successive actions to obtain the formerly confidential files.

Khadr's Pentagon-assigned military lawyer may use the tapes as part of the Canadian's defence. Khadr is scheduled to be tried before a U.S. military commission in early October on five war crimes charges, including the murder of a US soldier in a grenade attack during the 2002 firefight.

Notes U.S. officials wrote of the interrogations are included in some of the accompanying documents that were released by the lawyers separately last week.

The interrogations took place over four days from Feb. 13, 2003, at the U.S. naval base in Cuba following Khadr's transfer from detention in Afghanistan the previous October.

Sitting in a folding chair on the first day, Khadr ate a burger and drank a soda, according to one report, whose author said he could not hear what was being said.

Khadr "mumbled and had his head down" on the second day, the author said. The detainee also would "not look at his interviewers."

The author said when the Canadian officials asked Khadr why his demeanour had changed, he replied: "Promise you'll protect me from the Americans."

Khadr also said he had been tortured while detained in Afghanistan, the U.S. official wrote, and said everything he had told the Canadians the previous day "was a lie."

The Canadians asked Khadr if he'd spoken with anyone the previous night, and Khadr "denied anyone coached him," the U.S. official says. "He covered his eyes and began to cry heavily."

The U.S. official describes how Khadr removed his shirt, saying it was to show wounds on his back and shoulder. Khadr was shot and suffered shrapnel wounds during the firefight in Afghanistan.

"Khadr put his head back in his hands and cried heavily," said the official.

Khadr sat on a couch on the third day, the official writes. "He declined food that was offered to him."

The official said the Canadians asked Khadr about members of his family, among them his father, whom the U.S. has accused of being chief financier to al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. Khadr's father was killed in an anti-terrorist raid in Pakistan in 2003.

On the fourth day the official says the Canadian interrogators "began to get more confrontational with Khadr, who "denied killing anyone."

"Khadr began to cry and was crying when the interrogators left," the official says.