Gaza Detainee Treatment 'Inhuman'

Palestinians seized during Israel's operation in Gaza faced "appalling" conditions and "inhuman" treatment, Israeli human rights groups have said.

The seven groups say they have gathered 20 testimonies which indicate detainees were kept in pits without shelter, toilets or adequate food and water. Some detainees also said they had been held near tanks and in combat areas, the groups said. The Israeli military says it is investigating the allegations.

The accounts were gathered by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) and Hamoked, the Center for the Defense of the Individual, from Palestinians now being held in Israel.

'Gross Violation'

"The reports indicate that... many detainees - minors as well as adults - were held for many hours - sometimes for days - in pits dug in the ground, exposed to bitter cold and harsh weather, handcuffed and blindfolded," the groups said in a statement. "These pits lacked basic sanitary facilities... while food and shelter, when provided, were limited, and the detainees went hungry," it said.

The groups accused the military of "gross violation of international humanitarian law" by holding some of the detainees close to tanks.

Incidents involving "extreme violence and humiliation by soldiers and interrogators" were also reported, the statement said, without giving details.

"We were handcuffed and blindfolded. They put us in a three-meter deep ditch with some 70 other people," Majdi Muhammad Ayid al-Atar, 43, from northern Gaza described, in one of the testimonies. "We spent two days there without any food, water or blankets. They also didn't let us go to the toilet. Afterwards they moved us to another ditch. The soldiers kept beating anyone who dared ask for anything," he was quoted as saying.

Lengthy Preparation

The groups have addressed a written complaint to the Military Judge Advocate General, and Israel's Attorney General, Meni Mazuz.

Attorney Bana Shoughry-Badarne, Legal Director of PCATI, said the findings were "particularly objectionable" as the Israeli military had repeatedly stressed that it "prepared at length for the Gaza operation". "It seems that, during these lengthy preparations, the basic rights of the detainees and captives were completely forgotten," she said.

She said the groups had the names of 29 people who had been detained, 25 of whom were still being held.

The other groups were the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Physicians for Human Rights, B'Tselem, Yesh Din and Adalah.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7856372.stm

Help Us To Make These Obama Years As Remarkable As The Bush Years Were Horrific

The signing of Executive Orders to close Guantánamo and the CIA Black Sites is a huge victory in the struggle against systematic governmental abuse of human rights. It is also the result of years of investigative and legal work by Reprieve and similar organisations.

Within his first few hours in office, President Obama began an exemplary movement away from torture and illegal imprisonment with the following orders.

1. The prison in Guantánamo Bay is to be closed as soon as practicable but in any case within a year;

2. Cases of those imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay are to be reviewed;

3. Military Commissions are to be suspended;

4. CIA prisons are to be closed permanently and as soon as practicable;

5. Transfer policies (including rendition) will be reviewed to ensure compliance with all rules including the Convention Against Torture;

6. Interrogation must be limited to methods permitted by the Army Field Manual (and incidentally, all legal advice given to the Bush White House from Sep 11 2001 onwards is wrong and not to be relied upon) and

7. General US detention policies must be reviewed.

This is overwhelmingly positive. However, we should beware of hanging up the ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner quite yet. Obama wants to do the right thing, but it would be naïve to think these orders can ‘fix’ seven years of human rights abuses.

Mission not accomplished – just some of the many things on Reprieve’s agenda:

1. We need to identify and locate the ‘Disappeared’ in US controlled prisons across the world.

- There are many on our ‘Ghost’ list who have disappeared. Reprieve, together with other human rights organisations, drafted a document called ‘Off the Record’ which featured 39 men who had disappeared in US custody. Only 2 of those 39 have been located.

- The CIA prisons being closed now were never a big factor in terms of prisoner numbers. The Military and Department of Defence prisons hold the majority of overseas prisoners. An example is Bagram Air Force base, where terrible human rights abuses have been perpetrated. These prisons are not yet going to be closed and inmates should be given access to lawyers, so that the validity of their detention can be considered.

- Proxy prisons. The US has long outsourced torture and imprisonment to places like Morocco , Jordan and Egypt . Reprieve continues to target these - and others around the world- in order to reunite prisoners with their legal rights.

2. The closure of Guantanamo Bay and

3. Suspension of Military Commissions.

- At least 60 prisoners cannot return to their home countries for fear of torture; we need to find third country homes for them. Portugal and Ireland have stepped up, and we are working hard on others.

- Revealing the mistreatment. In cases like Reprieve client Binyam Mohamed, we need to ensure their stories of abuse and torture are exposed.

- There will be a significant struggle over what replaces the Military Commissions; it is desperately important this should be regular civilian courts. These have long been considered capable of dealing with the most sensitive cases – from the 1991 WTC bombing to Soviet Spy trials. Yet there is pressure to use military courts martial (unwise and unnecessary) or some new security court (downright foolish).

4. Review of ‘Rendition’ and transfer

Initiated by Reagan and embraced by Clinton , the policy of rendition is finally being reviewed. We need to brief on this so that ‘official kidnap’ can be stamped out for once and for all.
Transfer poses an immediate danger due to the pressure to purge secret prisons. Prisoners may be forced to countries where they could face persecution. While President Obama has ordered that the law should be respected, who is there to enforce the rights of the ‘secret prisoners’?

5. Ending torture

President Obama is considering adding more coercive techniques to the Army Field Manual – this must be opposed. We have documented the “enhanced interrogation techniques” used during the Bush era, and must join the public policy debate to show how wrong they were.
Through our Zero dB initiative – Against Music Torture (http://www.zerodb.org/), Reprieve is pressing for ‘no-touch’ torture to be outlawed. We will brief on the full impact of such psychological techniques.

6. Review of detention policies

Reprieve must help structure a new law governing detention. The existing laws of war have simply not met the challenges of the last seven years. We will look at the Army Field Manual and the Geneva Conventions, and construct a policy document urging the earliest possible legal intervention.

7. Accountability

President Obama is under pressure from both sides of the aisle not to look too carefully at the criminal practices of the Bush Administration.
To ensure that the abuses of the last seven years are not repeated, there must be a full and open accounting process. You cannot learn from history without knowing exactly how it happened.

This is a moment of profound opportunity. The struggle for control of the agenda is over, and the breadth of what can be accomplished is breathtaking. We must aim to achieve:

- A steel frame of justice for all, guaranteed by treaty and by common practice

- Better understanding between Islam and the Judeo-Christian and Secular industrial nations

- Redefinition of ourselves as nations of law, of moral standing, and of peace.

None of this can come about if we step back and say the job is done. It is not.

President Obama stressed in his inaugural address that real change cannot be achieved by his arrival alone. Now, as the President said, we roll up our sleeves and get to work.

We cannot work without you. Please: help us to make these Obama Years as remarkable as the Bush Years were horrific. To find out about how to donate to support Reprieve please visit: www.reprieve.org.uk/donate.htm

India Muslims In 'Torture' Rally

Indian Muslims are holding a mass demonstration in the capital, Delhi, to protest against alleged harassment of Muslims by security forces. Most of them arrived in Delhi on Thursday morning in a special train. The train travelled from Azamgarh in northern Uttar Pradesh state and picked up more passengers en route to Delhi.

The organisers are also seeking a meeting with the interior minister. Indian police have been blamed by the community for torturing Muslims. Security agencies, for example, have arrested 10 men from Azamgarh district in Uttar Pradesh in the past two years - all as suspects in different attacks.

One of the protest organisers, Maulana Amir Rashadi, said Muslim youths were being falsely targeted as terrorists. The protesters arrived in Delhi carrying banners which said: "Let the truth prevail, bring the innocents out of jail" and "Give us security, not tears and blood".

The BBC's Joana Jolly in Delhi says more than 2,000 people gathered at the protest at Jantar Mantar, a popular forum for demonstrations.

'Justice'

Amik Jamai, an activist and documentary film maker who joined the protest, said Muslims were feeling "uncomfortable". "The Muslims here are proud to be patriotic, they have promoted the concept of peace here, they live together in harmony," he told the BBC. "We are hoping for justice. We are hoping for transparency."

In November, Human Rights Watch said police in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh should be prosecuted for torturing Muslims detained after bomb blasts last year.

The group warned of the risks of stigmatising and alienating "an entire community".

The state government had admitted that 21 men had been tortured and would each receive $600 in compensation.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7857468.stm

EU Divided Over Taking In Detainees When Terror Camp Closes

After bitterly denouncing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp as a legal black hole and a torture chamber, EU governments were facing charges of hypocrisy last night as they failed to agree on how to respond to Barack Obama's decision to close the camp within a year.

Foot-dragging in Europe about taking in detainees could create tensions with the new administration. The issue is seen as the first test of the EU's relations with the Obama government and its willingness to repair ties severed during the Bush administration's "war on terror".

At a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels yesterday, only a handful of countries showed support for an expected US request to take Guantanamo inmates into their prisons. Most said they would only take prisoners that the US could show were not a threat.

"It's really up to the US to deal with this and give these detainees a fair trial. It's hugely complicated for us to do so," said the Dutch Foreign Minister, Maxime Verhagen, voicing widespread concern about the legal minefield of accepting those of indeterminate status. "Don't forget these inmates are not kittens – it's a risk for us to bring them into Europe."

The Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, in effect ruled out Britain accepting detainees other than its legal residents still at the camp.

Britain has taken back nine nationals and three foreigners with UK residency. Two cases are still being processed. "We feel that is already a significant contribution," Mr Miliband said. "We're happy to offer our experience to other European countries, as they think about what steps they want to make to help in the closure of Guantanamo Bay."

Some countries said the EU had a moral responsibility to play an active role. "We need to shake hands with the US. It is a new fresh start," said Alexander Stubb of Finland, which like France, Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Sweden is considering taking in inmates.

The German Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said chief responsibility for solving the problem lay with those who set up the camp. "But it is also a question of our credibility, of whether we support the dismantling of this ... camp."

France pushed for a fact-finding mission to the camp and for the EU to take in at least 60 of the 254 detainees. Its Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, has floated the idea of a centralised system to check prisoner backgrounds but the plan received only a muted response.

Dozens of Guantanamo inmates would face abuse, imprisonment or death if returned to their homelands because of their alleged links to al-Qai'da or the Taliban. They come from Algeria, Azerbaijan Afghanistan, Chad, China, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. Over the past seven years, they were picked up in security sweeps in Afghanistan or Pakistan and detained at Guantanamo.

The Pentagon says 60 prisoners are ready for release but their files and those of other detainees are yet to be examined. The Pentagon also leaked that 61 former prisoners returned to terrorism after being released, a figure difficult to verify.

EU divisions mean the matter may have to be decided by countries individually but some Europe-wide legal framework is required as most countries are part of the Schengen area that allows border-free travel.

"It's an absolute nightmare to sort out what kind of laws would apply to which kind of detainees. The complexity of this is unprecedented," said one EU diplomat.

EU justice ministers will have to navigate through the minefield but there was little optimism of a quick fix. "This could take weeks, even months," said the Czech Foreign Minister, Karel Schwarzenberg.

Problem prisoners: Where will they go?

*Who is still imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay?

Since it opened in January 2002, the camp has held 779 detainees. Now, with 532 transferred out, either released or moved into the US penal system, just 247 remain. Those remaining include some who will be tried in the US for terrorism-related offences, some who will be returned to their home countries and 50 to 60 "hard cases", to whom America is not willing to grant asylum, but who cannot be returned to their homes.

*Why can't the rest just go home?

A small group are stateless individuals, others would almost certainly face persecution or torture in their homelands. The biggest single group of problem detainees are 17 Chinese Muslim Uighurs. They fled oppression in western China, were picked up in Pakistan and accused of undergoing terrorist training. Although the US has determined that they are no longer "enemy combatants", they cannot be returned to China.

*Why won't the US take them?

No official explanation has been given, but fears about the political consequences of having former Guantanamo inmates in their home states is one reason; the maintenance of diplomatic relations with the prisoners' home countries may be another.

*Will European governments take in some inmates?

France and Portugal argue that having called for the closure of Guantanamo, the EU must help in housing detainees. That group also includes Albania, Ireland and Finland. Britain supports them but says that taking Guantanamo's British citizens and residents constitutes a major contribution in itself. Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria and Sweden see no political or national security benefit.

Source: www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/eu-divided-over-taking-in-detainees-when-terror-camp-closes-1516807.html

Guantanamo In Our Back Yard - Write To The Prisoners

Former Guantanamo prisoner Omar Deghayes, currently travelling around the UK as part of the "Two Sides: One Story" speaking tour, writes:

"We have been meeting people who are on control orders so that we can report their plight and I am very saddened by what I have seen. They are raided by police on a weekly basis, their wives and chlidren are caught up in this horrible system that punishes the whole family and not just the one on a control order. The police raid them early in the morning on a weekly or more basis and the children get to witness their father being searched and humiliated.

Their wives are sometimes shackled in front of their children during these searches and the police have been known to pass sexually abusive comments about them. The children as young as 3-5 years old are dragged out of their bedrooms in the early hours of the morning so that the whole house can searched which makes them psychologically scarred and have trouble at school and fear any policeman on the street. All of the households have had the internet and computers banned which affects their learning at school and further isolates them from the outside world.

Its not enough that these control orders are extra judicial and backward but that these families are raided on a regular basis and have their property confiscated is unacceptable and barbaric - sometimes the police come in with guns to intimidate and throw all their property about or take it away and not return it.

This is a huge disappointment for me by coming back from Guantanamo Bay and then seeing another Guantanamo in our back yard. Chris Arendt, the guard, was very shocked by the way the British government has treated these people and he was a guard at Guantanamo Bay."

Please write to the men under control orders, to the men awaitimg deportation to countries where they are likely to be tortured and to the other victims of the Guantanamo in our back yard.

Addresses for some of these men are at www.sacc.org.uk/index.php?option=content&pcontent=1&task=view&id=51Please show them they haven't been forgotten.

Is Halting Guantánamo Trials Enough?

Within hours of taking office, President Barack Hussein Obama has issued an order to stop the military tribunals at Guantánamo Bay in order to review and possible overhaul them. Many would have hoped that the decision would have gone well beyond a mere review of the Military Commissions' process. However there has been a clear message that justice will be provided to the detainees.

The projected aim of the new administration to close the base has been declared a triumph from those in his camp. Although the human rights community has welcomed this position despite its delayed arrival, there are a number of questions that still hang heavy around the neck of those who must find an alternative solution.

One of the main sticking points that will be brought by human rights campaigners is the volume of detainees being held as part of the "war on terror" elsewhere in the world. With reports of 24,000 detainees in Iraq and 14,000 in secret detention – the numbers seem astronomical compared with the 250 or so detainees remaining in Guantánamo. In light of the numbers, dealing with Guantánamo is the easy option for President Obama despite his attempts to show an overt commitment to human rights and the rule of law. The extent to which such policies will be taken further to those detained outside of Guantánamo will still need to be seen.

From the perspective of abuse and torture, the detainees unanimously agree that Guantánamo was by far more humane than any of the prisons they were detained in elsewhere. Detainees speak of their time in Bagram Airbase and the Dark Prison, both in Afghanistan, and both steeped in some of the worst offences by US soldiers against detainees. Despite the scandal to emerge from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, the volume of those detained in detention without charge in US department of defence (DoD) facilities remains staggering and well beyond reasonable especially in light of the grievances attached to Guantánamo.

Measures have already been drafted to bring about a change in policy from the Bush period as legislation is used as a key tool to counteract illegality. On 6 January 2009, Senator Feinstein of California proposed the lawful interrogation and Detention Act 2009 purportedly aiming to: "reverse the harmful, dangerous, un-American, and illegal detention and interrogation practices of the past seven years." The Feinstein proposal has four aims that it seeks to achieve in helping to change the status quo of detention policies:

The detention camps at Guantánamo Bay must be closed.

• The CIA's coercive interrogation programme is to be outlawed.

• Civilian contractors must be prevented from being involved in the process of interrogation.

• CIA black sites used as part of the programme of secret detention must be ended.

The implementation of the above points would be hailed as a great victory by human rights groups and would prove that change is possible under the new Obama regime. In the words of Senator Feinstein, these changes would allow for detainees to:

Be charged with a crime and tried in the United States in the Federal civilian or military justice systems. These systems have handled terrorists and other dangerous individuals before, and are capable of dealing with classified evidence and other unusual factors.

With all the attention both through the media and politically being on Guantánamo, the question of justice for Muslim suspected terrorists in the US legal system has never truly been raised.

The presidency of Barack Obama has been one that has threatened hope for change in attitudes and history. Decades of African-Americans being incapable of receiving fair trials in certain courts in the US has brought about the need for a major shift in policy: nothing has said that more clearly than the election of a black president. It is this point in itself that provides the greatest challenge to the new administration. How will it stop Muslims becoming the new blacks in the US judicial system, when a number of cases suggest that it is inconceivable that they could possibly receive a fair trial?

One case that is of particular importance is that of Ali Saleh al-Marri, the last enemy combatant on US soil. For seven and half years he has been detained in the US without having been charged with any crime; in his case, Guantánamo is in the US as much as it is in Cuba.

Al-Marri's case is only one though among a sea of others wrought with procedural and ethical difficulties. Biased juries, insufficient evidence and disproportionate sentencing have become a key feature of the way in which Muslim suspected terrorists are treated. Sabri ben Kahla was detained as part of Virginia Paintball trials and acquitted of any involvement with jihad or terrorism. Kahla was later detained again on a perjury charge and convicted on the same facts as the original case to a sentence of 10 years. The prosecution's case rested on evidence by Evan Kohlmann, a purported terrorism "expert" who gave evidence on jihad movements around the world without ever referencing Ben Kahla's guilt – the guilty verdict was very much based on Kahla's Muslim identity rather than any tangible evidence.

The imminent closure of Guantánamo Bay is a policy change that should be praised. However by itself it does not represent the necessary paradigm shift that proves that the US has truly changed its attitude in detention policies in the "war on terror". Public opinion in the US may have improved over the years in relation to the African-American community, however there is a very real danger that the bias may have merely displaced itself on to Muslims – a community which to all intents and purposes has become the new black.

- Asim Qureshi

Source: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/21/guantanamo-barackobama

Israeli Commanders In Crosshairs For War Crimes

Israel has taken measures to protect the identity of Gaza war commanders as the case for war crimes in the populated area gains momentum. Israeli authorities have issued an order banning the publication of the full name and photographs of the field commanders of the Gaza war, the Haaretz reported.

The measure has been taken amid concerns that international bodies and rights groups are planning to take legal actions against the high-ranking Israeli commanders who have been involved in the alleged war crimes in the Gaza Strip.

Israel is accused of using controversial weapons against the civilian population of Gaza during its 23-day war against the Hamas government. Rights groups and international bodies say the Israeli acts violated international laws, constituting war crimes.

The Israeli Defense Ministry fears that interviews with army officers describing the destruction of civilian homes and other internationally unlawful acts could incriminate the military commanders.

The ban applies to the full name and photographs of officers from the rank of battalion commander down. The order also prohibits tying particular battlefield commanders to the destruction of particular areas in the coastal sliver.

According to the report, the decision had been made following the publication of reports that a lawsuit had been filed with a Dutch court against one of the Israeli brigade commanders after his identity was revealed by the media.

Tel Aviv launched Operation Cast Lead on December 27 to put an end to rocket attacks against southern Israeli towns. At least 1,330 Palestinians died during the offensive, while some 5,450 others were reported wounded. The huge number of civilian casualties in the densely-populated coastal sliver has provoked widespread outcries around the globe among many nations as well as their leaders.

Source: www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=83570§ionid=351020202

US: Steps to End Torture Set a New Course

US President Barack Obama's executive order to end the use of torture sets a new course for US counterterrorism policy, Human Rights Watch said today. Obama's decision to issue this order within two days of becoming president signals the high priority the new president places on establishing legal and effective counterterrorism policies.

"For years, the Bush administration claimed, ‘We do not torture,' yet approved methods like waterboarding, sleep deprivation, and prolonged exposure to cold," said Jennifer Daskal, senior counterterrorism counsel at Human Rights Watch. "President Obama's order rejecting such practices is a major step toward restoring America's moral authority around the world."

The executive order on torture issued today sets a government-wide single standard of humane interrogation, ends the use of secret CIA "black sites" for detention, and mandates that the International Committee of the Red Cross be granted access to all detainees held by the US outside of the ordinary criminal or immigration system.

Under the order, all government agencies are required to apply the Army field manual on interrogation - which has been used by the military since 2006 - without exception. The order also prohibits the reliance on any of the Bush Justice Department's legal opinions on interrogation or detention.

"This executive order makes meaningful the US commitment not to torture detainees," Daskal said. "President Obama has rejected the abusive practices of the last seven-and-a-half years."

The order also creates an interagency task force, led by the attorney general, to evaluate the interrogation practices allowed by the Army field manual, "and, if warranted, to recommend any additional or different guidance for other departments or agencies."

Human Rights Watch said that any new interrogation manual should apply a single standard across all government agencies. The manual should be public and include an exhaustive list of approved techniques that all follow the "Golden Rule" standard.

"Today, Obama made huge strides to put US counterterrorism policies on a legal and effective course," said Daskal. "He should now categorically reject the illogical claim that the standard for humane and effective treatment somehow varies across agency."

The order does not address the legality of what is known as rendition to torture - the practice of illegally transferring a person to a country where he or she faces torture or persecution - and instead leaves review of that practice to the task force as well. The best known case is that of Maher Arar, a dual Canadian-Syrian citizen arrested at New York's John F. Kennedy airport in September 2002, flown to Jordan, and then driven across the border to Syria, where he was detained in a tiny cell for almost a year and tortured repeatedly.

Human Rights Watch said that Obama repeatedly condemned the practice of rendition to torture on the campaign trail, and urged him to put an end to this illegal practice as well.

An executive order on Guantanamo, also issued today, sets January 2010 as a date certain for the prison's final closure, suspends the use of military commissions, and puts in motion a review of the detainees' files.

Another order creates an interagency task force to review detention and interrogation policies going forward. A fourth order mandates a review of the fate of Saleh al-Marri, a Qatari who was on the eve of trial for credit card fraud when he was declared an "enemy combatant" and transferred to a naval brig in South Carolina in 2003. He has been there ever since.

"At the end of the review period, we hope and expect that Obama will either return al-Marri to federal court or order his release," said Daskal.

Send this News to: * Please enter email addresses separated by commas.Personal message: HRW.org visitor sent you this article from Human Rights Watch www.hrw.org

Source: www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/01/22/us-steps-end-torture-set-new-course

Obama Shuts Network Of CIA 'Ghost Prisons'

Barack Obama embarked on the wholesale deconstruction of George Bush's war on terror, shutting down the CIA's secret prison network, banning torture and rendition, and calling for a new set of rules for detainees. The repudiation of Bush's thinking on national security yesterday also saw the appointment of a high-powered envoy to the Middle East.

Obama's decision to permanently shut down the CIA's clandestine interrogation centres went far beyond the widely anticipated move to wind down the Guantánamo Bay detention centre within a year.

He cast his scrapping of the legal apparatus set up by Bush as a way for America to reclaim the moral high ground in the fight against al-Qaida. "We are not, as I said during the inauguration, going to continue with the false choice between our safety and our ideals," Obama said at the signing ceremony. "We intend to win this fight. We are going to win it on our own terms."

In a sign of the sweeping rejection of the legal standards set by Bush, officials briefing reporters at the White House yesterday said the new administration would not be guided by any of the opinions on torture and detainees issued by the justice department after 11 September 2001.

Instead, Obama, in three executive orders, renewed the US commitment to the Geneva convention on the treatment of detainees. All detainees will be registered by the International Committee for the Red Cross, in another departure of past practice under the Bush administration.

A group of 16 retired admirals and generals, in a meeting organised by Human Rights First, said the move would restore America's moral authority in the world, and strengthen its national security. "President Obama has rejected the false choice between national security and our ideals," they said.

As expected, Obama made good on his campaign promise to shut down Guantánamo, issuing an executive order to close the camp within a year. He also ordered a taskforce, led by the attorney general and the secretaries of defence, state and homeland security, to review the intelligence and information on each detainee and to determine whether they can be released or put on trial.

He called for a review on the treatment of prisoners at Guantánamo to be completed within 30 days. Another order directs the CIA to follow the US army field manual on interrogations, which bars such techniques as waterboarding.

Obama also directed a taskforce to study and report back within 180 days on whether new guidelines were required for intelligence officials, beyond those set down by the military. Administration officials were adamant that the review was not intended as a back door to reinstate torture. "There is not a secret annexe that allows us to bring enhanced interrogation techniques back," said one.

The final order mandates a review of the case of Ali Saleh Khalah al-Marri, a Qatari, the last enemy combatant on US soil, who is being held in a naval brig in Charleston, South Carolina.

Obama followed up the burst of activity on detention policy by announcing that his administration would put resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the top of his agenda, "actively and aggressively" seeking a comprehensive peace deal. As a sign of that intent, he confirmed that former senator George Mitchell, a veteran US mediator, would be his Middle East envoy.

Obama, who had been criticised for his silence during the Israeli bombardment of Gaza, set out a new position that, while still leaning towards Israel, was more even-handed than that under Bush. He called for Hamas to stop firing rockets at Israel, but also said that Israel must "complete the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza".

Source: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/23/obama-rendition-torture

IHRC Urgent Alert:
Sudanese Government Forces Arrest Dr Hasan Al-Turabi

1. Summary

Dr Hasan Al-Turabi, Secretary General of Popular People’s Congress Party (PCP), was arrested on 14 January 2009, following certain comments he made with regards to the widely expected ICC warrant against Sudanese President Omer Hassan Al-Bashir.

2. Background

Arrest

Dr Hasan Al-Turabi, Secretary General of Popular People’s Congress Party (PCP), and Dr Bashir Adam Rahma, the External Relations Secretary of the party, were arrested on 14 January 2009 in Khartoum. According to report by Amnesty International (AI), Dr Al-Turabi was taken from his home by armed agents of Sudanese National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS), and has since been held incoummunicado and without charge. He was recently transferred to Kober prison from the NISS detention centre where he was initially held, reports stated.

Reasons

It is reportedly believed that Dr Al-Turabi was arrested in relation to recent comments he made about the President Omer Hassan Al-Bashir, calling on him to surrender to the International Criminal Court. He reportedly stated last Monday, 12 January 2009, “He [President Al-Bashir] should assume responsibility for whatever is happening in Darfur, displacement, burning all the villages, rapes, I mean systematic rapes, continuously, I mean on a wide scale and the killing.”

An ICC warrant is widely expected against the Sudanese President after the ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo filed a number of charges on 14 July 2008, with the ICC board for review against President Al-Bashir, consisting of “…three counts of genocide, five of crimes against humanity and two of murder and accused Al-Bashir of masterminding a campaign to get rid of the African tribes in Darfur; Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa.”

According to AI, Dr Al-Turabi is one of the many individuals who have been recently arrested, especially since 14 July 2008, for their peaceful use of their right to freedom of expression.

With the ICC warrant imminent, the government is reportedly doing their utmost to curb any dissension against the regime by suppressing all views in support of the warrant. The spokesperson for the Sudanese cabinet has been quoted as saying, “There is zero tolerance to any attempts to break the national consensus. We will not allow any movements to create instability and confusion.”

Prison & Health Conditions

AI has called for Dr Al-Turbai’s immediate release and has appealed against the PCP’s leader’s detention conditions and his denial to medication and specific diet that he requires. AI reports state that Dr Al-Turabi is about to turn 77 and thus has special requirements with regards to his health and food which are not being met in prison.

Further, according to reports, Dr Al-Turabi’s family has not allowed to see him nor have they been informed of his health conditions and treatment in prison. His lawyers and family members are also unaware about the reason for his arrest.

3. Action Required

a. Write to Sudanese Ambassador to your country and urge him/her to immediately release Dr Al-Turabi.

UK campaigners can write to:

H.E. Mr Omer Mohammed Ahmed Siddig
Embassy of the Republic of Sudan
3 Cleveland Row
St. James’s
London SW1A 1DD
Fax: +44 207 839 7560
Email: admin@sudanembassy.co.uk

4. Sample Letter

Sample letters are given below for your convenience. Please note that model letters can be sent directly or adjusted as necessary to include further details. If you receive a reply to the letter you send, we request you to send a copy of the letter you sent and the reply you received to IHRC. This is extremely important as it helps IHRC to monitor the situation with regards to our campaigns and to improve upon the current model letters.

___________

a. Sample letter

[Your Name]
[Your Address]

[Date]

Dear [Name],

Re: Arrest of Dr Hasan Al-Turabi

I am very concerned about the recent arrest of Dr Hasan Al-Turabi, Secretary General of Popular People’s Congress Party (PCP), on 14 January 2009. He is reportedly been held incommunicado and without charge at the Kober prison, Khartoum.

Dr Al-Turabi is about to turn 77 and thus has special requirements with regards to his health and food which are not being met in prison. He is also reportedly being held in inappropriate prison conditions. Reports also state that his lawyer and family have not been informed of the reasons for his arrest and that his family members are not being allowed to meet him.

I urge you to ensure that he is immediately released. Further, please also ensure that he is granted immediate access to his family members and legal representatives and that he is provided with all the necessities which are essential for his well being.

I look forward to hearing from you with your assurances regarding this matter.

Yours sincerely,

[Your Signature]
[Your Name]

Obama Moves Swiftly On Guantanamo

The US moved today to halt the Guantanamo war crimes trials, filing motions to suspend proceedings for 120 days until President Barack Obama's administration completes a review of the system for prosecuting suspected terrorists.

The motions, made at the direction of Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, will be considered early Wednesday by the military judges hearing the cases of five men charged in the Sept. 11 attacks and of Canadian Omar Khadr, who is accused of killing an American soldier with a grenade in Afghanistan in 2002.

In the motion filed for the Sept. 11 case, US military prosecutor Clay Trivett says a continuance is necessary in all pending cases because the review may result in significant changes to the system.

"The interests of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the interests of both the public and the accused in a prompt trial," Trivett wrote. He said the motion was written at the direction of the president and defense secretary. "It will permit the newly inaugurated president and his administration to undertake a thorough review of both the pending cases and the military commissions process generally," he added.

Human rights group at Guantanamo to observe this week's session of the war crimes court welcomed what appeared to be the looming end of the special tribunals. "It's a great first step but it is only a first step," said Gabor Rona, international director of Human Rights First. "The suspension of military commissions so soon after President Obama took office is an indication of the sense of urgency he feels about reversing the destructive course that the previous administration was taking in fighting terrorism."

Jamil Dakwar, director of the human rights program at the American Civil Liberties Union, said it was a positive step but "the president's order leaves open the option of this discredited system remaining in existence."

Relatives of victims of the Sept. 11 attacks, who were also at the base to observe the hearings, have said they oppose any further delay in the trials of the men charged in the case.

The motion for a suspension came on the day a military judge adjourned the war crimes court just before Obama was sworn in by noting the future of the commissions is in doubt. The hearings were dismissed until Wednesday "unless otherwise ordered."

There are war crimes charges pending against 21 men, including the five charged with murder and other crimes in the Sept. 11 case. Judges will be required to suspend the other cases as well though hearings may not be necessary.

Obama has said he will close Guantanamo, where the US holds about 245 men, and had been expected to suspend the widely criticized war-crimes trials created by former President George W. Bush and Congress in 2006. The president's nominee for attorney general has said the so-called military commissions lack sufficient legal protections for defendants and that they could be tried in the United States.

Source: www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/obama-moves-swiftly-on-guantanamo-1452428.html

Say 'No' To Extraordinary Rendition

Date: Tuesday 20th January 2009
Time: 6.00 pm - 8.00 pm
Venue: US Embassy, Grosvenor Square, Mayfair, London, W1K 6US

After a busy weekend of actions to mark the sad seventh anniversary of the opening of Guantanamo Bay, you are invited to join us as we make history again, holding the first demonstration of the Obama administration outside the US Embassy.

Obama has already called for the closure of Guantanamo Bay, but this is just the visible face and tip of the iceberg of an international network - a spider's web of secret, illegal jails across the planet, including in Europe, Asia and Africa, and the conspiracy of world governments through the use of their airspace, airports and other facilities.

This demonstration is being held in solidarity with Witness Against Torture, an American NGO that will start 100 day action in Washington DC calling on the US government to close Guantanamo Bay and other illegal jails, an end to torture and the immunity of torturers, and justice for victims. Everyone is
encouraged to attend.

For further information please contact: Tel: 07985 382 188 / E-mail: london.gtmo@googlemail.com / Website: www.100dayscampaign.org / www.guantanamo.org.uk

British Resident To Be Freed After Four Years At Guantanamo Bay

One of the last British residents to be held at Guantanamo Bay has been told by the US government to prepare for release, according to declassified documents seen by The Independent.

Binyam Mohamed, who has been held for four years, could be freed from US custody as early as next week. He is one of three remaining detainees who claim British residency and whose return to this country would bring to an end the UK's association with the notorious camp set up to house suspects arrested in the "war on terror" after the attacks of 11 September 2001.

In a document dated 29 December but only released by US prison officials this week, Mr Mohamed, 38, says he has begun the process for his return to Britain. He writes in the declassified note to his lawyers: "It has come to my attention through several reliable sources that my release from Guantanamo to the UK had been ordered several weeks ago. It is a cruel tactic of delay to suspend my travel till the last days of this [Bush] administration while I should have been home a long time ago."

Last night, Mr Mohamed's lawyers said they were concerned for his health after it emerged that he was into the 20th day of a hunger strike which he began in protest at his continued detention. Clive Stafford Smith, director of the human rights group Reprieve, said the military at Guantanamo had obstructed lawyers' efforts to find out details of their client's medical condition.
"Binyam was literally kidnapped and taken to Morocco, Afghanistan and then Guantanamo Bay. Now he is being held there after almost seven years without a trial, and the military refuses to let us know when his health is threatened. It is very worrying," Mr Stafford Smith said.

Mr Mohamed, an Ethiopian who was granted refugee status in the UK in 1994, was arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and handed over to US security agencies before being questioned by MI5. He claims the Americans flew him to a prison in Morocco where he suffered horrific torture before his transfer to a US detention centre in Afghanistan. In 2004, he was taken to the US base at Guantanamo. All terror charges against him were dropped late last year. He alleges that Britain was complicit in his rendition and torture.

In a letter to David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, Mr Stafford Smith said: "I am attaching for you, and also for the Prime Minister, copies ... of the letter from Binyam Mohamed that I received through the classification procedures late last night. Unfortunately, I have not been in the position to discuss this before now as it was only now unclassified. It reflects the fact that Mr Mohamed has been on a hunger strike since 29 December – now 17 days – in protest at the latest mistreatment. I would appreciate if the Government could redouble its efforts to secure Mr Mohamed's return to this country, to end this poor man's suffering."

The Government said that of the 250 detainees still at Guantanamo, it recognised the British residency of only two men: Mr Mohamed and Shaker Aamer, 41, a Saudi married to a British woman, who has four children living in London.

The Foreign Office said it had "offered to receive" Mr Aamer from US custody but the negotiations had ended. The British residence status of a third detainee, Ahmed Belbacha, 39, an Algerian who lived in London and once received a £30 tip from John Prescott at a Labour Party conference, is disputed by Britain. A spokeswoman for the Foreign Office added last night: "Our priority has been to get Binyam Mohamed back to the UK."

Source: www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/british-resident-to-be-freed-after-four-years-at-guantanamo-bay-1418231.html

Austria: Bring Killers of Chechen Exile to Justice

The Austrian government should act swiftly to bring to justice those responsible for the killing of a Chechen man who had alleged he had been tortured by Ramzan Kadyrov, who is now the Chechen president, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Memorial Human Rights Centre said today.

According to news reports, assailants shot and killed 27-year-old Umar Israilov on January 13, 2009, as he left a grocery store in Vienna, where he lived in exile. Israilov had stated publicly that he had been tortured by Kadyrov and had filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in 2006. Several days prior to the killing, Israilov complained to Austrian police authorities that he was being followed by unknown individuals.

"We are deeply alarmed about what appears to be another politically motivated killing of a critic of high-level Russian government officials," said Oleg Orlov, director of the Memorial Human Rights Centre. "In light of the brutal retaliation inflicted on those who speak out on abuses in Chechnya, Israilov's actions were particularly courageous, and his killers and those behind them need to be promptly held to account."

An article that appeared in the New York Times about the killing says that Israilov had been detained in 2003 as a rebel fighter, was amnestied, and then briefly served as a bodyguard for Kadyrov. The article cites an interview with Israilov in which he said that during his detention Kadyrov had tortured him, including using electric shocks. He was also quoted as saying that he had witnessed beating, kicking, and other torture of detainees by Kadyrov and his subordinates. Israilov eventually fled to Austria, where he was granted asylum.

"We're familiar with the case, and find Israilov's torture allegations entirely credible," said Rachel Denber, director of Human Rights Watch's Europe and Central Asia division. "Torture is a long-standing problem in Chechnya that the Russian authorities have failed to stop, even in the face of credible evidence from victims like Umar Israilov."

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented persistent ill-treatment and torture in Chechnya by both Russian federal forces and pro-Moscow Chechen forces under the effective command of Kadyrov.

"We have credible reports of people in Chechnya being threatened or killed for filing an application with the European Court of Human Rights," said Nicola Duckworth, director of Amnesty International's Europe and Central Asia program. "We cannot exclude the possibility that Umar Israilov was killed because he sought justice at the court."

News reports also stated that after Israilov fled Russia, his father was abducted, tortured by Kadyrov, and held illegally for more than 10 months, apparently in an effort to force the son to return home. A person claiming to be an emissary from Kadyrov had visited Umar Israilov in Austria last year and reportedly pressured him to withdraw his ECtHR application and return to Chechnya.

In August 2008, another alleged victim of torture in Chechnya, Mokhmadsalakh Masaev, was abducted in Chechnya several weeks after the publication of an interview in which he described his torture in an illegal detention facility. In the interview, Masaev said that in 2006 he had been held in inhuman conditions in a secret prison in Kadyrov's home village in Chechnya for over four months and subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment. He had filed numerous complaints with the prosecutor's office of the Chechen Republic in which he alleged that his detention occurred with the acquiescence of Kadyrov. Six months after his abduction, Masaev's whereabouts remain unknown.

Source: www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/01/14/austria-bring-killers-chechen-exile-justice

Reprieve Press Release
Amazing News!

We are absolutely thrilled that our client, Mohammed el Gharani, is to be released from Guantánamo Bay following a federal court order obtained yesterday. Judge Leon ruled that Mohammed, who was just 14 years old when he was imprisoned in Guantánamo in 2002, is not and never has been an enemy combatant, and was wrongfully held at the notorious military prison.

Zachary Katznelson, Reprieve’s Legal Director, who spoke to Mohammed immediately after the hearing last night to tell him the good news, said that he was delighted, and very excited about going home to his family after such an ordeal.

Mohammed is the youngest remaining juvenile in Guantanamo Bay . He was just 14 years old when he was seized by the Pakistani authorities and sold to the US military for a bounty. As a Chad national living in Saudi Arabia, his opportunities for education were extremely limited, so Mohammed had left his home for Pakistan, hoping to learn English and train to work with computers.

Seized in a random raid on a mosque, targeting Arabs and Africans in Pakistan in October 2001, he is one of 22 juveniles held in Guantánamo Bay since the prison opened in January 2002. He was accused of participating in an Al Qaida cell in London , however has never been to England and would have been 11 years old at the time in question.

Mohammed has endured terrible abuse, first in Pakistani custody, and for the last six and half years in US custody, first at the US prison at Kandahar airport and then at Guantánamo, where, he has explained, he has been hung from his wrists on 30 occasions. On one occasion a heavily armoured riot squad slammed his head into the floor of his cell, breaking one of his teeth, and on another occasion a cigarette was stubbed out on his arm by an interrogator.

Mohammed has said that he received constant abuse from some guards at Guantánamo, much stemming from his vocal objection to being called a “nigger” by US military personnel. As a result of the violence against him he became deeply depressed, and tried to commit suicide on several occasions. We are all incredibly relieved that Mohammed’s seven-year ordeal is finally over.

Thank you so much, as ever, for your support of Reprieve, which makes fantastic achievements like this one possible. We are only able to continue this life-saving work with your help - please donate now: www.reprieve.org.uk/donate.htm

Source: www.reprieve.org.uk

Family Of Iraqi Shoe Thrower Says He Remains In Isolation

More than a month has passed since an Iraqi television reporter threw his shoes at President George W. Bush during a news conference held to highlight what Bush called a successful U.S. military effort to pacify Iraq. The journalist, Muntader al-Zaidi, 29, who was immediately arrested, has been allowed only two visitors - and none since Dec. 21, according to those close to him. His family and his lawyer say they do not know where he is being held and are gravely concerned about him.

On Wednesday, Dhiyaa al-Saadi, Zaidi's lawyer, said he had recently seen medical records that were part of Zaidi's court file that added credence to the journalist's claim that he had been beaten and tortured after his arrest on Dec. 14 by the security detail of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. Saadi said two separate medical reports conducted by government physicians within a week of Zaidi's arrest described bruising that covered the reporter's face and body but was especially severe on his legs and arms; a missing tooth; a gash on the bridge of his nose; and what appeared to be a burn mark on his ear.

Saadi said he had not been permitted to remove the records from the office of the judge investigating the case, so the existence of the documents could not be verified independently. But the account of Zaidi's wounds matches injuries described by Zaidi's brother after his prison visit last month.

Uday al-Zaidi, 33, said Wednesday that he feared that his brother, who faces up to seven years in prison, might not emerge from government custody. But Fadhil Mohammed Jwad, the legal adviser for Maliki, said Wednesday that Zaidi had not been tortured and would receive a fair trial. A trial date had been scheduled for Dec. 31, but it was delayed at the request of his lawyer, who has challenged the basis of the charge.

The shoe episode took place Dec. 14 during a televised news conference with Bush and Maliki in the Green Zone in Baghdad. Zaidi rose from his seat, threw a shoe at Bush and shouted: "This is a gift from the Iraqis. This is the farewell kiss, you dog!"

Zaidi threw his second shoe at Bush before he was restrained. Both shoes missed. As he was pulled from the room by the prime minister's guards, Zaidi was seen being beaten. In Iraq, throwing a shoe at someone is a grave insult.

Several days later, Maliki said Zaidi had been put up to the act by a man the prime minister described as a "head cutter" - an apparent reference to a member of the Sunni extremist group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which is known for beheading people.

Zaidi's family, however, has insisted the reporter has no ties to a political group and acted solely out of his opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Since his arrest, the reporter has been seen by only a few people, including one visit each by his lawyer and brother. Each visit occurred Dec. 21, they said. Subsequent requests have been rejected or ignored by the government and the judiciary, the men said.

It remains unclear who is responsible for clearing visits to Zaidi. Jwad, the prime minister's legal adviser, said such matters were handled by the investigating judge and the suspect's lawyer, but a spokesman for the judge said the issue was one reserved "for the executive branch."

During a telephone interview, Abdul Sattar al-Biriqdar, the spokesman for the High Judicial Council, which administers Iraq's court system, said Dhiyaa al-Kinani, the investigating judge, had not been aware that Zaidi's lawyer and family members had repeatedly sought to visit Zaidi in prison. At first, Biriqdar denied knowing where Zaidi was being held, but later said he was being kept at an Iraqi detention center in the Green Zone that is operated by the Baghdad Brigade, a military unit that reports directly to the prime minister's office. Biriqdar said anyone who sought to see Zaidi would be permitted to do so. "No one is preventing you from visiting him," he said.

But during a recent visit to the complex, an Iraqi Army soldier guarding the facility told a reporter who requested a visit with Zaidi to leave immediately and said it was "dangerous" to seek to meet Zaidi. The soldier, who did not identify himself, said he did not know whether Zaidi was being held at the facility or not.

On Wednesday, an e-mail request sent to Maliki requesting a visit with Zaidi received no reply. Biriqdar, the judicial spokesman, said Zaidi had not told the investigating judge about being tortured or beaten while in custody and that during a meeting with Zaidi last month the judge had seen no signs of physical abuse.

"The investigating judge said he had not noticed if he had been tortured or beaten," Biriqdar said. "Muntader did not say he was beaten and did not ask to be referred to a medical committee." But a few days after that meeting, Zaidi's lawyer and his brother said during their visits that it had been clear that Zaidi had been beaten.

Riyadh Mohammed, Alissa J. Rubin, Atheer Kakan and Souadad al-Salhy contributed reporting.

Source: www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/15/mideast/shoe.php

Obama Unlikely To Probe Bush 'Torture' Acts

US President-elect says his administration 'will not torture', but not likely to investigate Bush's actions.

President-elect Barack Obama is unlikely to probe President George W. Bush's 'torture' policies despite mounting calls by rights groups for independent investigation, analysts say.Obama, who takes office January 20, signaled in an interview Sunday that he was not inclined to open an independent probe of his predecessor's actions unless there was evidence that US laws were broken.

Meanwhile, rights activists have boosted pressure on the incoming administration to prosecute US leaders for alleged abuses including torture techniques, domestic wiretaps without warrants, unlimited detention of suspects and mishandling the Iraq war.

Amnesty International has repeatedly called for "a thorough and independent investigation of the widespread and systematic abuses undertaken in the name of national security," and aligned itself on the issue with other groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Several Democrat lawmakers have also called for the creation of an independent panel of experts to probe policies that were instituted under Bush's claims of unreviewable presidential war powers, in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

While some observers view this as a sign that the Democratic-led House and Senate intend to devote considerable time to an investigation of Bush's consolidation of power, Obama played down the possibility."We're still evaluating how we're going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth," Obama said on ABC This Week when asked about alleged abuses under Bush.

"My instinct is for us to focus on how do we make sure that moving forward we are doing the right thing," he said."That doesn't mean that if somebody has blatantly broken the law, that they are above the law. But my orientation's going to be to move forward."

According to Laurence Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard University, Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney do not have blanket immunity due to their high level posts, but any trail of wrongdoing could be difficult to trace.

"Such prosecution could not succeed without extremely clear proof that the official in question personally directed the illegal actions charged," Tribe said."It would not be enough to prove that the individual was at the head of a chain of command overseeing a project or program in the course of which crimes were committed."

In December, a bipartisan panel of senators led by Democrat Carl Levin and Republican former White House hopeful John McCain issued a report blaming top administration officials for installing harmful interrogation policies such as forced nudity, prolonged standing, sleep deprivation and the use of dogs.

"The abuse of detainees in US custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," the report said."The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees."

Even though Obama had pledged to close the war-on-terror prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and vowed that his administration "will not torture," major American media outlets expressed skepticism about a possible probe of Bush's wartime actions.

"We do not hold out real hope that Barack Obama, as president, will take such a politically fraught step," the New York Times wrote in an editorial.

The Los Angeles Times echoed the sentiment.

Analyst Thomas Mann at the Brookings Institution said that Obama, faced with the task of unifying bitterly partisan legislators and reversing the economic downturn, is not likely to take the risk of angering his Republican foes.

"Opening such a probe would embitter Republicans and diminish his capacity to pursue broad support for a number of challenging policy initiatives he will take on other fronts," he said."I think President Obama is unlikely to call for such an independent inquiry but instead focus on stating clearly what policy on these matters will be during his administration."

But even if the executive branch of US government does not call for a probe, nothing prevents rights groups from seeking to bring a case against former administration officials -- in which case the Supreme Court could have the last word.

Source: www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=29741

Obama's Guantánamo Challenge: A Boy Soldier's Trial

Barack Obama has seven days after he enters the White House before the looming war crimes trial of a former child soldier will force the new president to demonstrate his resolve to swiftly shut the Guantánamo Bay detention camp.

Omar Khadr is among the handful of 240 or so detainees whose face and story are widely known. The Canadian was 15 when he was held in Afghanistan six years ago. Footage of Khadr weeping under interrogation and calling for his mother caused a sensation when it emerged last summer. To allow his trial to go ahead on 26 January would be seen as endorsing the prosecution of a child soldier and the Bush administration's discredited system of military tribunals, human rights organisations said.

"I cannot believe that the Obama administration really wants its legacy to be that the first thing it did was put on trial a child soldier," said Lieutenant-Commander Bill Kuebler, Khadr's military lawyer.

Halting the military tribunals would be the first concrete action dismantling the legal regime put in place by President Bush that allowed the rendition, torture and indefinite detention of al-Qaida suspects.

"The proceedings that are going on will be stopped in their tracks," said Scott Horton, a law professor who has written extensively about the detention camp at the US naval base in Cuba. "You are going to see an order to stand down on the military commissions." Obama aides said on Monday that he intends to issue an executive order closing the camp, possibly on his first day as president. But the aides gave no timeline and Obama has ruled out a closure in his first 100 days. The president-elect's admission to ABC television, with its striking similarities to statements from Bush administration officials, is troubling human rights organisations. So is the lack of detail in leaks by aides to the Associated Press. Bush has been saying since 2006 that he would like to close Guantánamo.

"This raises concerns that what we are talking about is not change, but the same old Bush administration policies but with some human rights window dressing," said Vincent Warren, the executive director of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, which has represented about 600 of the detainees who have passed through Guantánamo.

A number of lawyers for detainees believe the process of closing Guantánamo could take up to a year. During the US presidential election the Obama camp organised law professors and others to explore closure but there was no attempt to develop a firm plan or timeline, said one human rights adviser to the campaign. But the scores of legal advisers did reach two broad areas of agreement.

First, they would sift through the files to re-evaluate evidence against the detainees. Even in the Bush administration's judgment, only 80 or so should stand trial. The rest can be released or transferred.

"It is essential that the Obama administration goes forward with a new set of eyes and moves detainees into one of two categories: either prosecute for crimes committed, or release or transfer," said Jennifer Daskal, a lawyer at Human Rights Watch.

Second, the Obama administration would move ahead on high-profile cases, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. "They want a handful of high profile convictions and they want them quickly," said Professor Horton.

Human rights activists were encouraged by Obama's selection of Dawn Johnsen, a constitutional law professor who has frequently criticised the Bush adminstration's human rights record in the online magazine Slate, for the central post in the justice department.

The Obama camp's hopes of making headway on case reviews before 20 January were frustrated by the failure of the Bush administration and the Pentagon to turn over detainee records. Obama's relatively late selection of his intelligence team, which he wanted involved in the reviews, meant further delays.

Another obstacle to closure is diplomatic. The Bush administration has not been able to reach agreement to return detainees to their home countries. It is hoped goodwill to the new administration, and fresh willingness from some European countries to take in stranded detainees, could lift the barriers.

The biggest group of prisoners is from Yemen, and Vincent Warren and others are hopeful of an agreement that will allow 97 Yemenis due for release to be repatriated. About 59 prisoners cannot be returned to their own country, according to the Centre for Constitutional Rights. These include 17 Uighurs and 12 Algerians.

Obama faces the challenge of deciding how to try the remaining prisoners, and where to house them. Some advisers had pressed for the creation of yet another new court system, but that has lost support.

"One of the lessons of the last eight years is that you cannot create a new detention system in the US from scratch without enduring years of trial and error and litigation," said a human rights expert who was involved in the discussions.

Obama is said to be leaning towards using conventional military trials and the US civilian courts but faces increasing opposition to housing the detainees on US soil - especially the 15 high-profile suspects such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Last week Kathleen Sebelius, the Kansas governor who was one of Obama's closest election allies, said that while she wanted Guantánamo to close, she did not want the prisoners moved to Fort Leavenworth. "Closing Guantánamo Bay doesn't mean the prisoners come to the heartland of America," she told reporters.

Source: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/14/barack-obama-guantanamo-human-rights

Demands Grow For Gaza War Crimes Investigation

Israel is facing growing demands from senior UN officials and human rights groups for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza over allegations such as the "reckless and indiscriminate" shelling of residential areas and use of Palestinian families as human shields by soldiers.

With the death toll from the 17-day Israeli assault on Gaza climbing above 900, pressure is increasing for an independent inquiry into specific incidents, such as the shelling of a UN school turned refugee centre where about 40 people died, as well as the question of whether the military tactics used by Israel systematically breached humanitarian law.

The UN's senior human rights body approved a resolution yesterday condemning the Israeli offensive for "massive violations of human rights". A senior UN source said the body's humanitarian agencies were compiling evidence of war crimes and passing it on to the "highest levels" to be used as seen fit.

Some human rights activists allege that the Israeli leadership gave an order to keep military casualties low no matter what cost to civilians. That strategy has directly contributed to one of the bloodiest Israeli assaults on the Palestinian territories, they say.

John Ging, head of the UN Palestinian refugee agency in Gaza, said: "It's about accountability [over] the issue of the appropriateness of the force used, the proportionality of the force used and the whole issue of duty of care of civilians.

"We don't want to join any chorus of passing judgment but there should be an investigation of any and every incident where there are concerns there might have been violations in international law."

The Israeli military are accused of:

• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;

• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;

• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;

• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;

• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.

Israeli military actions prompted an unusual public rebuke from the International Red Cross after the army moved a Palestinian family into a building and shelled it, killing 30. The surviving children clung to the bodies of their dead mothers for four days while the army blocked rescuers from reaching the wounded.

Human Rights Watch has called on the UN security council to set up a commission of inquiry into alleged war crimes.

Two leading Israeli human rights organisations have separately written to the country's attorney general demanding he investigate the allegations.

But critics remain sceptical that any such inquiry will take place, given that Israel has previously blocked similar attempts with the backing of the US.

Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".

"There has been reckless and disproportionate and in some cases indiscriminate use of force," said Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty investigator in Israel. "There has been the use of weaponry that shouldn't be used in densely populated areas because it's known that it will cause civilian fatalities and casualties.

"They have extremely sophisticated missiles that can be guided to a moving car and they choose to use other weapons or decide to drop a bomb on a house knowing that there were women and children inside. These are very, very clear breaches of international law."

Israel's most prominent human rights organisation, B'Tselem, has written to the attorney general in Jerusalem, Meni Mazuz, asking him to investigate suspected crimes including how the military selects its targets and the killing of scores of policemen at a passing out parade.

"Many of the targets seem not to have been legitimate military targets as specified by international humanitarian law," said Sarit Michaeli of B'Tselem.

Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.

"It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now," she said.

While there are growing calls for an international investigation, the form it would take is less clear. The UN's human rights council has the authority to investigate allegations of war crimes but Israel has blocked its previous attempts to do so. The UN security council could order an investigation, and even set up a war crimes tribunal, but that is likely to be vetoed by the US and probably Britain.

The international criminal court has no jurisdiction because Israel is not a signatory. The UN security council could refer the matter to the court but is unlikely to.

Benjamin Rutland, a spokesman for the Israeli military, said an international investigation of the army's actions was not justified. "We have international lawyers at every level of the command whose job it is to authorise targeting decisions, rules of engagement ... We don't think we have breached international law in any of these instances," he said.

Source: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes

Change We Can Believe In?

Obama's election win in November was the defining moment of 2008, and his plan to close Guantánamo Bay over the next two years was a real human rights victory. The illegal prison at Guantánamo will have existed for seven years on Sunday 11 January. That is seven years of torture, ill treatment, and detention without proper charge or trial. Today there are still over 250 prisoners inside, all of whom are facing an uncertain future.

On 20 January Obama's work will begin in earnest, and to hold him to his pre election promises, we'd like you to sign our global petition.

As the worldwide movement of Amnesty International, we are calling on the incoming President to:
- announce a plan and date to close Guantánamo
- ban torture and other ill-treatment as defined under international law
- ensure an independent commission on US "war on terror" abuses is set up

We're giving him 100 days to do it, the so-called 'honeymoon period' when a new leader enters office.

Please take a moment to add your voice. If you have a little more time please download our widget, send the petition to a friend and use our activist kit. For all this and more visit: www.obama100days.org

Protect the Human

Want to get more involved in human rights, meet like minded individuals, share ideas and take action? Visit our new online community at http://www.protectthehuman.com/

LGC Press Release:
"What are You Doing About it?": Day of Action to Mark the Seventh Anniversary of the Opening of Guantánamo Bay

The London Guantánamo Campaign will hold a day of action on Sunday 11 January 2009 to mark the seventh anniversary of the opening of the Guantánamo Bay detention camp on 11 January 2002.

The day of action will consist of:

A Demonstration:

A demonstration outside the US Embassy in Grosvenor Square, Mayfair, from 3-5pm, to call on the US administration to close down Guantánamo Bay

Speakers include: Moazzam Begg (former detainee), Andy Worthington (journalist), Jean Lambert (Green MEP), Bruce Kent (Pax Christi), Imam Shakeel Begg (Lewisham Mosque), Baroness Sarah Ludford (Lib Dem MEP), Jeremy Corbyn (Labour MP), Walter Wolfgang (CND), Martin Linton (Labour MP with a constituent in Guantánamo Bay) and others.

Preceded By Local Actions:

Local stalls held from 12-2pm in Camden Town, Kilburn, Speaker's Corner and Whitechapel, to raise awareness about what is happening at Guantánamo Bay. Groups of individuals, some wearing orange jumpsuits and black hoods, will hand out leaflets and speak to passers by. Signatures will be collected on a petition to be handed in to the US Embassy on 20 January, the date of Barack Obama's inauguration.

Demands

The London Guantánamo Campaign is calling on the US administration to shut down Guantánamo Bay and other illegal US-run jails around the world immediately; to cease the regime of torture and arbitrary detention under the pretext of the "war on terror"; to repatriate detainees to countries where their safety and liberty will be guaranteed; and to hold to account those who have had a role to play, at all levels, in this shameful episode in human history.

The London Guantánamo Campaign welcomes Barack Obama's pledge to shut down Guantánamo Bay during his presidency. We intend to hold him to this pledge, and will be demanding an end to torture, an end to the impunity of torturers and those who authorise torture, the upholding of the rule of law, and respect for international law.

We also call on the British Government and other European governments to assist the US in closing down Guantánamo Bay, in the first instance by accepting released men who have links to their country and who would be unable to return safely to their own country. Britain must urge the return of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian resident from west London, and Ahmed Belbacha, an Algerian asylum seeker from Bournemouth.

Aisha Maniar, from the London Guantánamo Campaign, coordinating this action, said: "For seven years, the world, including the British government, has sat back and turned a blind eye to torture and arbitrary detention at Guantánamo Bay. The election of Barack Obama provides the US with a golden opportunity to close down this and other illegal camps run by the US administration and to close this dark chapter in modern history. It is up to the US's allies, like Britain, to help it in this process by accepting innocent detainees who do not have other countries to go to. We call on the world to take action now".

Note To Editors

The London Guantánamo Campaign campaigns for justice for all prisoners at Guantánamo bay, for the closure of this and other secret prisons, and for an end to the practice of extraordinary rendition.

There are currently around 200 detainees being held at Guantánamo Bay, most of whom have been cleared for release, but are effectively refugees, as they have no safe country to return to. Charges are currently pending against approximately a dozen detainees. However, as the detainees do not have the right to choose their own counsel, to defend themselves or see the evidence against them, among other violations of due process rights, they are denied the right to a fair trial and representation.

Contact: london.gtmo@googlemail.com / http://www.guantanamo.org.uk/ / Aisha - 07809 757176 / Christine – 07737 783159

Hunger Strikers Surge To 10 Percent At Guantanamo

Guantanamo captives are staging a fresh wave of hunger strikes ahead of the seventh anniversary of the controversial prison camps — a campaign a lawyer links to the speedy release of Osama bin Laden’s driver from U.S. military detention.

As of today, 30 of the 250 war-on-terror detainees were classified as hunger strikers, 25 of whom were being fed through tubes in their noses, said Navy Cmdr. Pauline Storum at Guantanamo.

Defense lawyers have long described the tactic as a spontaneous protest against their indefinite detention. Military officials see it as part of a choreographed power struggle between detainees and their guards.

Washington lawyer David Remes, who represents 17 Yemenis, said some of his clients launched the latest hunger strike after Yemeni Salim Hamdan went home in November, a month shy of completion of his 66-month prison sentence.

"They’ve actually gone ballistic at the fact that Hamdan, who was convicted of supporting terrorism, was released and they, who have been charged with nothing, continue to languish there," said Remes, who met with clients before Christmas.

At that point, he said, there were 19 hunger strikers segregated in a feeding block of Camp 1. Hunger strikers at Guantanamo are counted as captives who refuse nine meals in a row. Those fed through tubes have fasted for 21 days in a row, Storum said — or weigh less than 85 percent of their "ideal body weight," or weight on arrival.

The forced-feeding regime has guards and medical staff strap a captive into a chair, Velcro his head to a metal restraint, then tether a tube into the man’s stomach through his nose to pump in liquid nourishment twice a day. A doctor and the prison camps commander signs off on each case, said Storum.

A military commission this summer convicted Hamdan, 40, of supporting terror for working as bin Laden’s $200-a-month driver in Afghanistan until his capture in November 2001. He was sent to the Yemeni capital Sana’a for his final month in jail — meaning he would have had a Dec. 29 release date — but has not yet been released, according to both Yemeni and U.S. legal sources.

Long-held detainees, most held without charge since early 2002, were "elated" that Hamdan was leaving the prison camps, Remes said. But, "that doesn’t mitigate the perverseness of the situation. If an ordinary detainee knew that all you had to be (was) Osama’s servant to get out, a lot of them would have fabricated confessions that they were Osama’s servant."

Storum said about two-thirds of the fasters are Yemeni, but said "the data" did not support Remes’ claim that it was linked to Hamdan’s return. About 40 percent of Guantanamo detainees are Yemeni, some of whom the Bush administration has sought to negotiate return to custody in their Arabian peninsula nation.

Moreover, two of the protesters have been nourished exclusively through tubes in their noses since August 2005 — long before the latest wave surged to 10 percent of the detainees.

Storum said prison camp analysis linked the latest wave to the coming change of administrations, coupled with the seventh anniversary of creation of the prison camps.

On Jan. 11, 2002, the first 20 detainees, manacled and masked, landed at Guantanamo on an 8,000-mile air bridge from Afghanistan. Now, President-elect Barack Obama has vowed to empty the prison camps, and human rights activists are planning vigils this weekend to remind him of his promise.

"We typically see an upswing in those numbers as we approach the anniversary of the beginning of the operations here," Storum said.

Source: http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view/2009_01_08_Hunger_strikers_surge_to_10_percent_at_Guantanamo/srvc=home&position=recent

IHRC Urgent Alert:
UK/Palestine – 24/7 Gaza Vigil Outside Israeli Embassy

1. Summary

The Islamic Human Rights Commission will begin its round the clock vigil on Friday 09 January 2008 at 3:00 PM, carrying on indefinitely until Israel ends its onslaught on Gaza. All are urged to come out to show your support, but attendees must first schedule themselves in by contacting the relevant IHRC officer. Instructions and contact details are provided below.

2. Background

With the Gazan death toll quickly rounding 700 with 3,000 injured, Israel’s relentless attack on the civilian population of Gaza must be met with our relentless vigils, demonstrations, boycotts, campaigning and prayers. Accordingly, IHRC is beginning a 24 hour vigil outside the London Israeli embassy, to show solidarity with the victims of Israeli war crimes.

Supporters are very much encouraged to show up and express their outrage over Israel’s inhuman actions, whilst it is necessary for any prospective attendees to first have themselves scheduled in by contacting the relevant IHRC event coordinator beforehand. Kindly find contact details below.

3. Action Required

If you would like to be scheduled in to attend any part the 24 hour vigil, please contact: 07515 029 560 or email aaron@ihrc.org

Dangers Of A Preventive Detention Law

Barack Obama has said he'll close the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay. The question is how. If the government has evidence that Guantanamo detainees have committed crimes, it should put them on trial in the federal courts, just like other suspected criminals. Those the government chooses not to prosecute should be safely repatriated or released.

But some are advocating a third option. They say the United States should pass a law that would allow preventive detention for Guantanamo detainees. This means they would be imprisoned, perhaps indefinitely, not for what they supposedly did, but for what the government fears they might do.

In an effort to minimize the radical nature of their proposal, some preventive detention advocates point to the commitment of so-called "sexually violent predators." If rapists and child molesters can be locked up without being convicted of a crime, they ask, why not suspected terrorists?

But the sexually violent predator laws are deeply flawed. They result in additional confinement for people who have already served lengthy prison sentences, and they can lead to long-term detention based on vague criteria. But whether such laws are good or bad, they are different from the proposed preventive detention system.

The Supreme Court has rightly been wary of government attempts to make an end-run around the constitutional protections of the criminal justice system - the right to the assistance of counsel, trial by jury, the presumption of innocence, and, most important, the requirement that the government prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant violated a specific criminal law that was in effect at the time of his or her actions. As the Court said more than 20 years ago, "in our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception."

In the case of sexually violent predators, the courts have carved out a narrow exception to this rule, and allowed detention of people who are both dangerous and suffer from a "mental illness or mental abnormality" that makes them unable to control their behavior. This second element is essential. In a 2002 case, the Supreme Court ruled that Kansas could not detain someone as a sexually violent predator, no matter how dangerous he might be, without this lack-of-control showing. This showing is necessary, the Court said, to distinguish those subject to civil commitment from those who should be handled by the criminal justice system. It is necessary to prevent the civil commitment exception from swallowing the rule that those whom the government wants to imprison must first be provided with the protections of a criminal trial.

In other words, a finding of dangerousness alone is not enough to permit indefinite detention.

There are other differences as well. Consistent with the idea that those detained are suffering from a mental illness, sexually violent predator laws generally require that suspects receive treatment for their condition, are housed in psychiatric facilities, and are otherwise treated like patients rather than prisoners. By contrast, some preventive detention proposals call for detainees to be housed in maximum-security prisons or military brigs. This starts to look a lot like punishment, not treatment.

Supporting Al Qaeda or the Taliban may make a person dangerous, but it is not a recognized mental illness. And no one contends that Al-Qaeda members are unable to control their behavior, or are most appropriately dealt with through psychiatric treatment. So proposals for a new preventive detention law for terrorist suspects simply cannot be justified by reference to the sexually violent predator system.

Preventive detention would be an unprecedented, unnecessary, and dangerous expansion of government power. The Guantanamo detainees should be either prosecuted or released.

Source: www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/01/03/dangers-preventive-detention-law

Moazzam Begg: Why Guantanamo Detainees Deserve Asylum In Europe

I was astonished earlier this year when our Prime Minister Gordon Brown met with former Guantanamo Bay detainees and shook hands with them on a visit to Saudi Arabia. When I travelled to Downing St on 11 January last year to deliver a letter calling for the return of three British residents, he didn't answer. In fact, he's never met with any of the British former Guantanamo prisoners.

But I have something a little different planned for this year. My US lawyer in Guantanamo once explained to me the types of prejudices that seemed prevalent in his homeland: "They detested the African-Americans, but never really feared them; they feared the Soviet Union, but didn't really hate them. But Muslims today are both feared and hated."

This fear and hatred has produced a plethora of laws and wars that have targeted Muslims in an unprecedented way.

Who could have imagined that the next president of the US would be a black man with the Muslim name Barack Hussein Obama? The president-elect, reached the White House under the banner of "change". The Sam Cooke civil rights classic "A Change is Gonna Come" was Obama's campaign-trail song and was paraphrased in his victory speech: "It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America."

Cooke's protest song was also played upon the death of Malcolm X, and featured in Spike Lee's epic film of his life. Malcolm X embraced his Islamic roots and chose a Muslim name. He saw Islam as a panacea for the problems facing America – not as a menace.

During my years in Guantanamo I came across many African-American US soldiers who understood something of their roots. They even acknowledged that the last time Muslims were taken across the Atlantic, en masse and in chains, was during the enslavement of their ancestors.

In fact, rendition, extraordinary as it is today, was, they accepted, originally used to recapture fugitive slaves. And in Guantanamo, it was not surprising to see some black soldiers reading classics like The Autobiography of Malcolm X or The Souls of Black Folk. Since several detainees were English-speakers of African origin – including all three Britons who returned with me and one UK resident, Binyam Mohammed, who is still there – the Guantanamo mission triggered among those US soldiers a desire to learn more about themselves.

And some nations too have finally agreed to accept those men who are unable to return to their home countries for fear of torture or even execution – like the "Chinese" Uighurs.

Considering they have been scrutinised, and tortured, by the world's most powerful military and intelligence agencies, you might expect that it would be easier to establish the credibility of their asylum applications than most of the thousands of others who are granted asylum each year.

In Britain, there is still the issue of the three detainees held in Guantanamo on whose behalf the British government has not yet acted although all three have UK residency: Binyam Mohammed, Ahmed Belbacha, and Shaker Aamer. Aamer's wife and four children are all born-and-bred British citizens.

Those who do not wish toaccept them conveniently ignore that dozens of European men – including myself – have returned from Guantanamo. We are not recipients of state benefits – despite what is owed us by the state which stole irreplaceable years of our lives without our being charged or brought to trial.

Since my return, I have been in contact with several US soldiers. The ones I've spoken to express a deep sense of shame for having been part of Bush's war machine and are reaching out to some of the men they guarded – men who, they had been told, were the most dangerous on the planet.

One of them, who was responsible for interrogations in Bagram, Afghanistan (where I was held during 2002), has now begun speaking about the abuses there.

Another, Christopher Arendt, a former Guantanamo guard, has agreed to visit the UK and speak about his experiences of the "war on terror" with me and other former prisoners there. We will be accompanied by former Guantanamo detainee and al-Jazeera journalist Sami al-Hajj, and the brother of Ali al-Marri, a Qatari national who has been imprisoned without charge as an "enemy combatant" since 2003.

Moazzam Begg was held in Guantanamo Detainment Camp between 2003 and 2005. The 'Two Sides, One Story' tour begins on Sunday: cageprisoners.com

Source: www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/moazzam-begg-why-guantanamo-detainees-deserve-asylum-in-europe-1228164.html

Israel Has Yet To Learn The US Lesson, That The War On Terror Was A Failure

On New Year's Day Atif Irfan boarded an AirTran flight at Reagan National Airport in Washington with seven members of his family. Edging his way down the aisle, he wondered out loud to his wife whether the back of the plane was the best place to be. As they took their seats, his sister-in-law said she thought it was the safest part, rather than being close to the engine or wings "in case something happened".

The conversation was overheard by two teenage girls, who took one look at the mens' dark skin and beards and the women's headscarves and saw a family of suicide bombers, including three small children aged between two and seven. The girls told their parents; their parents told the flight attendant; the flight attendant told the air marshals and then the captain; the air marshals called the FBI and the airport police.

The pilot asked the marshals to remove the entire family from the plane. Then officials asked everybody else to get off so they could perform a thorough sweep. The family (as well as a family friend who happened to be on the same flight) was surrounded by armed guards, detained for questioning and then released. The plane eventually took off without them. When they tried to get on a later AirTran flight the airline refused to book them, even though they had been cleared (it has since apologised).

The Irfan family's ordeal escalated according to its own humiliating logic. And yet seven years after 9/11 it was no isolated incident. Pre-emptive, presumptive, disproportionate and discriminatory, it speaks volumes about the prevailing values those two American teenagers have lived with for much of their lives. A world that confuses Muslim and terrorist, and conflates the civilian and combatant by taking popular fear and prejudice and handing them over to state power. Driven by the maxim that you are better safe than sorry, it leaves nobody safe and everybody sorry. The only thing that prevented this particular incident from becoming yet another ideal metaphor for the war on terror is that nobody was killed or disappeared.

There is nothing particularly American about this. Like Nike or McDonald's, the war on terror may have started here but it quickly got branded and went global. In the months after the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, everybody wanted a piece of the action. President George Bush found himself in illustrious company. Among others, Zimbabwe's president, Robert Mugabe, and India's former prime minster Atal Bihari Vajpayee sought to ride his coattails to their own version of violent despotism.

However, few nations pursued it with such consistent zeal as Israel. "You in America are in a war against terror," Ariel Sharon said after he left the White House following suicide bombings in Haifa and Jerusalem in December 2001. "We in Israel are in a war against terror - it's the same war."

The trouble is that over the last seven years, the war on terror has been thoroughly discredited - not only morally, but militarily and strategically. Nobody listens to moderates, let alone to reason, when bombs are falling and people are dying. That is as true for the rockets that have killed a handful of Israelis as it is for the barrage of bombs and now tanks that have killed hundreds of Palestinians.

By erasing any prospect of negotiation, the violence did not weaken extremists but emboldened them. Israel may want to boost the moderate Fatah faction which governs the West Bank now. But Hamas's electoral rise was a direct result of the contempt the Israeli's showed them in the past.

Meanwhile, the Iraq war has left Iran - the primary sponsor of both Hezbollah and Hamas - with far more influence in the region than they would have had. On almost every front in almost every part of the world, including in the US, the war on terror is now seen as a colossal mistake. Only Israel did not get the memo. And it is now set to fail for the same reasons that America has.

Diplomatically, Israeli efforts to sell its bombardment and now invasion of Gaza as a straightforward extension of the war on terror have been fairly blatant. It has described the shelling of homes, mosques and police stations as the destruction of "the infrastructure of terror". Even as the rest of the world condemns it, Israel's foreign minister, and Kadima party leader, Tzipi Livni, has been telling anyone who will listen that her country's actions place it firmly within the community of nations and leaves Gazans and their democratically elected rulers outside.

"Israel is part of the free world and fights extremism and terrorism. Hamas is not," she said. And from there we are just one small step away from putting the world on notice that either "you're with us or you're with the terrorists". "These are the days when every individual in the region and in the world has to choose a side," Livni said.

Meanwhile, Israel has been busy implementing the very tenets of the war on terror that have served the US so badly, primarily that intractable political problems can be solved solely by military means with the aim of not simply bombing your enemies into submission, but eliminating them altogether and then creating resolution on your own terms from the rubble.

"What I think we need to do is to reach a situation in which we do not allow Hamas to govern," said Vice-Premier Haim Ramon. "That is the most important thing." Who he thinks should govern when Hamas has gone, and precisely what legitimacy they would have, does not seem to bother him. He does not want to change the government of Gaza, he wants to change the people.

On this matter Livni is right. People do have to choose sides. But, so far, it has not been her side. Seven years after 9/11 the world has a good idea of what's coming next and how widespread the ramifications might be - and they want no part of it. The war on terror is over. War lost. For the first time in a long time, that even appears to be true in America.

A recent Rasmussen poll shows the American public far less indulgent of Israeli aggression than many previously believed. Opinion on the bombing of Gaza is fairly evenly divided, showing 44% supporting Israel's military action against the Palestinians and 41% saying it should have tried to find a diplomatic solution to the problems.

Given the absence of any honest or informed debate about events in the Middle East, this suggests significant room for manoeuvre for President-elect Obama in pursuing a more even-handed policy towards the region, if he should chose to take it.

The benefits could strengthen America's hand throughout the region. Majorities in seven Arab nations say their opinion of the US would significantly improve if it put pressure on Israel to comply with international law in its treatment of Palestinians - generally more than say the same about closing Guantánamo Bay, according to Gallup.

That is the change both America and the Middle East need. It's also the change most of the rest of the world wants to believe in.

Source: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/05/terrorism-israel-obama

Cageprisoners Press Release
Press Launch: Two Sides, One Story - Former Guantanamo Guard Speaks With Detainees Live

5th December 2009

Cageprisoners presents Two Sides, One Story, a tour of the UK that brings those on opposite sides of wire at Guantanamo together for the first time.

Christopher Brandon Arendt, a former guard at the detention camp, will be speaking about his experiences in guarding suspected terrorists and bringing new insight into the way the US administration's detention policy has affected both soldiers and prisoners.

Also for the first time, the former Guantanamo detainee and current Al Jazeera journalist, Sami Muhyideen El-Haj, will be speaking with Moazzam Begg as they both reflect on life at the prison on the other side of the wire from Chris.

We believe this unique tour and gathering comes at historic juncture in the midst of the 'War on Terror' at a much needed time.

The tour begins on 11th January 2009, at Friends Meeting House, Euston, London , to mark the seventh anniversary since the first transfers of prisoners to Guantanamo Bay .

A full schedule of the tour can be found at the following link: www.cageprisoners.com/tour

The media are invited to the press launch where the participants will be giving a short presentation and opening the floor to questions as well as the opportunity to give interviews. The details of the press launch are:

Date: Friday 9th January 2009
Time: 11am - 2pm
Location: Room 115, Fielden House, 13 Little Cottage St , London , SW1P

Also participating in the events will be Jarallah Al-Marri, a former Guantanamo detainee from Qatar . Al-Marri will speaking about his time in the detention camps and will also be presenting a documentary on his brother, Ali Al-Marri, the last US enemy combatant. An excerpt from the documentary report, produced by his lawyer, Andy Savage is available online at: http://main.comcastc2.com/SavageReport/

The speakers will all be available for interview upon request.

____________

Cageprisoners is a human rights organisation that exists to raise awareness of the plight of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other detainees held as part of the War on Terror. We aim to give a voice to the voiceless.

Media

Contact: Asim Qureshi
Email: contact@cageprisoners.com
Number: 0044 (0) 7973264197

Our Role In Closing Guantanamo

Some 255 prisoners are held without charge in Guantanamo Bay detention centre. Barack Obama's commitment to close the facility is one of the most important, symbolic elements of his agenda as president-elect. It represents the rejection of a disreputable element of US foreign policy. Asked by Time magazine about criteria by which he would measure his success in office, Mr Obama said: "On foreign policy, have we closed Guantanamo in a responsible way, put a clear end to torture and restored a balance between the demands of our security and our constitution?"

Guantanamo has become shorthand for giving the rule of law short shrift and riding roughshod over the Geneva Convention. It has also become associated with practices incompatible with civilised values. Its very location was a means of circumventing protections afforded by the US constitution. And the use of torture – the only honest description of the simulated drowning known as waterboarding – to extract testimony from prisoners would unquestionably be condemned by the US were it practised in other countries. Closing Guantanamo would represent a commitment to the rule of law.

It should also be a signal that the "war on terror" is not an end that justifies any means. As Rupert Cornwell reports today, there are already some worrying indications that President Bush may pardon those within the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House who authorised coercive interrogation in Guantanamo, and those who used it. That would be an indication that individuals are not responsible for their actions. It would also undermine US attempts to buttress the principle of accountability elsewhere in the world, not least in war crimes tribunals.

Barack Obama has raised almost impossible hopes, and one of them has been for a new kind of world order in which the rule of law will hold, in which there is some congruence between US rhetoric and US actions, in which America can be an exemplar of respect for the rights of individuals. Closing Guantanamo is just the start of that wider endeavour, and it should have Britain's wholehearted support.

This country's tacit acceptance of "extraordinary rendition" by the US was a sin of omission at the very least. The lack of curiosity shown by senior ministers about the provenance of much US intelligence will surely return to haunt them.

What to do then with the Guantanamo prisoners is a relatively small question, though one that could have been designed to stoke popular resentment at the prospect of Britain taking any of them. Some detainees cannot be returned home either because of reluctance on the part of those countries to have them, or because of fears that they could be tortured on their return.

The British Government is reported to be in negotiations about the possibility of taking some of them here. Lord Goldsmith, the former attorney general who negotiated the return of British detainees, has said that Britain should accept some of the prisoners if that would help to close the facility. It would be, he said, in the country's self-interest because Guantanamo was damaging Britain, having become "a recruiting agent for terrorism".

It has indeed, and we should never say never. But this is not of itself an argument for this country to take on detainees who have no connection with this country. This is a problem made in America, and America must deal with its consequences.

Britain, given its solidarity with the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, has no need to curry favour with Barack Obama. His election delighted Britain; he knows as much. Unlike some of America's European allies – Germany, to name just one – Britain has put its troops in harm's way as part of the US-led alliance in the region. In the overall scheme of things, the US needs Britain, not least for Mr Obama's forthcoming surge in Afghanistan.

In any event, what needs to be questioned seriously is just why it is unsafe for detainees to be returned to their own countries. Do we have to accept as a fact of life in this new world order that prisoners are routinely tortured in detention? Yemen has accepted Osama bin Laden's driver, to serve his sentence at home.

The US does have considerable political and economic clout in the region, and under the new administration it will have more. It could use that influence to ensure that prisoners returned to their home countries will not be abused in detention or on release. Otherwise, it should provide ex-detainees with a home, protection and an identity for themselves and their families in the US; that is the minimum price America must pay for Guantanamo.

Source: www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-our-role-in-closing-guantanamo-1224211.html

Prosecute The Iraq Invasion, Not Just Torture

The U.S. government’s torture of detainees in the “war on terror” can be traced directly to a Feb. 7, 2002, memo signed by President George W. Bush.

This was conclusion #1 of the recently released final report of the Senate Armed Services Committee Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody.

Thanks primarily to this document, debate concerning one of the most shameful aspects of the "war on terror" has entered the mainstream debate after years on the edges of public discourse. [For more on the report, see Consortiumnews.com's "Torture Trail Seen Starting with Bush."]

Torture, however, is only one of the crimes associated with the "war on terror." A few prominent examples of other crimes waiting to be "sourced" are:

Extraordinary rendition, illegal detention, loss of habeas corpus, abuse and murder of civilians in Iraq and elsewhere, and the creation of millions of impoverished refugees.

With these crimes, the need to find the origin is every bit as imperative as with torture. But we don't need to ask the Senate Armed Services Committee to initiate 18-month investigations for each of these as well.

The question of responsibility for these and all other war crimes, including torture, was answered over 60 years ago at Nuremberg when high-ranking Nazis were brought to account for their atrocities in World War II.

On Sept. 30, 1946, Sir Geoffrey Lawrence, president of the International Military Tribunal, read the judgment of the first Nuremberg trial, which included these memorable words:

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

Torture, rendition, loss of liberties, unnecessary death and destruction are just some of the trees. Aggression is the forest.

And there can be no doubt that President George W. Bush and members of his inner circle have committed "the supreme international crime."

The invasion of Iraq is the clearest example of American aggression associated with the "war on terror." The invasion - launched on March 19, 2003 - violated the Nuremberg Charter (Article VI(a)), as well as the United Nations Charter (Article 2, Sec. 4 and Article 39) and U.N. Security Council Resolution #1441.

In addition, since "Operation Iraqi Freedom" violated both the Nuremberg Charter and the U.N. Charter - treaties signed and ratified by the U.S. government - the invasion also violated Article VI, Clause 2 (the Supremacy Clause) of the U.S. Constitution.

To many Americans -- and to the great majority of the rest of humanity -- it couldn't be more clear: starting an unprovoked war is an outrage, both legally and morally.

It is nothing short of mass murder. It cries out for prosecution, for justice, for accountability -- no matter how powerful the aggressors are.

With the Senate Armed Services Committee report, we have taken the first steps towards assigning responsibility for torture.

However if we ignore or marginalize the more fundamental crime of aggression, we risk accepting the unfortunate contemporary American assumption that aggressive war is a legitimate and useful tool of foreign policy - when employed by the U.S. President.

Until this assumption is unequivocally banished, it is likely that future U.S. administrations will repeat this "supreme" crime, further ensuring that torture and other war crimes which flow from aggression will be repeated as well.

It's good that the debate on accountability for torture finally has entered the mainstream. But the principles of accountability and rule of law do not end with a Senate committee report.

We should be discussing the possibility of arresting and prosecuting George W. Bush and all others responsible for the unprovoked invasion of Iraq.

The search for the source of war crimes should be followed to its logical conclusion. It's time we saw the forest as well as the trees.

Source: www.alternet.org/waroniraq/116837/prosecute_the_iraq_invasion,_not_just_torture/

Emergency Demo: End Israel's Barbarity

Date: Saturday 3rd January
Assemble 12.30pm at Embankment, WC2 (Nearest tube Embankment or Charing Cross)

Israel has launched a terror bombing against the people of Gaza, with over 300 hundred dead and many hundreds more injured. Not content after three days of devastating slaughter, the Israeli government promises more barbarity to come. The head of the Israeli military says, "This is only the beginning". The people of Gaza are asking, if this is only the beginning, what will the end look like? (See http://tinyurl.com/83b7el)

An eye witness describes what happens when the world's fourth most heavily armed nation rains down such devastation on the civilians of the world's most densely populated area:

"People are going through the dead terrified of recognizing a family member among them. The streets are strewn with their bodies, their arms, legs, feet, some with shoes and some without… Hospitals and morgues cannot cope and some of the dead are still lying in the streets with their families gathered around them, kissing their faces, holding on to them. Outside the destroyed buildings old men are kneeling on the floor weeping. Their slim hopes of finding their sons still alive vanished after taking one look at what had become of their office buildings." (See http://tinyurl.com/82fuho)

Protests against these atrocities have already taken place across the world with two big demonstrations in London, called at the shortest notice, blocking the roads to the Israeli Embassy.

Now a national emergency demonstration in London has been organised for Saturday 3 January. Called by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Stop the War Coalition, British Muslim Initiative and many more organisations, the demonstration will assemble in central London at 2.0 pm (location to follow very shortly).

We need to mobilise in the largest possible numbers for the emergency demonstration. Gordon Brown needs to be reminded that Tony Blair's support for Israel's attack on Lebanon in 2006 lead to him being forced from office. The British government must call for the bombing to stop now and for an end to Israel's illegal blockade of Gaza over the past year, which has inflicted near starvation and lack of essential resources on its people.

Please do all you can to mobilise for the emergency demonstration:

* Spread the word as widely as you can among your friends, neighbours, work colleagues, fellow students.

* Download the demonstration flyer from the Stop the War website, photocopy or print it, distribute it as widely as you can (available shortly http://www.stopwar.org.uk/)

* Take leaflets to your local community centre, mosque, church, etc. Help leaflet tube and bus stations.

Stop the War is asking all of its local groups around the country to mobilise support for the demonstration as widely as possible.

Called by Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Stop the War Coalition, British Muslim Initiative and many other organisations.

HANDS OFF GAZA: STOP THE BOMBING: FREE PALESTINE

Britain Ready To Take Guantanamo Prisoners

Britain is now preparing to take in detainees from Guantanamo Bay to help US president-elect Barack Obama shut down the prison camp, The Times newspaper said Thursday, citing government sources.

London has previously said it would consider any US requests to take in prisoners on a case by case basis. But The Times said Britain had now decided to support moves to rehouse those detainees still left in the camp, which is on a US sovereign naval base on Cuba. Government departments are discussing the subject, with the Foreign Office pushing for a deal and a final decision expected to be made by the Cabinet, the daily said.

The Foreign Office said it recognised that the US authorities would need "assistance from allies and partners" to shut down Guantanamo. London's established position is that the camp should be closed.

Obama, who takes office on January 20, has pledged to shut down the "war on terror internment camp" in a move he called rebuilding "America's moral stature in the world".

"Of course the Foreign Office wants to do it, they want to get off to a good start with Obama," The Times quoted an unnamed government department source as saying. "This is the sort of thing that will require a Cabinet-level decision."

Britain has taken charge of nine detainees who are British nationals and four former residents.

A spokesman for Britain's Foreign Office said: "We have made it clear that we think Guantanamo Bay should be closed. "We recognise the legal, technical and other difficulties and that the US will require assistance from allies and partners to make this happen.

"We have long pressed the US for release of British nationals and residents. To date, we have got all British nationals back, as well as four former residents.

"We continue to press for release of the two remaining former British residents, Binyam Mohamed and Shaker Aamer. Our priority has been to get Binyam Mohamed back to the UK and our offer for receiving Shaker Aamer remains open."

Some 250 inmates remain at Guantanamo.

Alleged "enemy combatants" captured since 2001 by US and allied forces around the world during the so-called War on Terror, some are no longer considered a threat by US authorities and will be resettled.

Some face renewed arrest in their homelands and could face torture or lengthy incarcerations.

The European Union is divided over the issue, with the Netherlands ruling out accepting any newly freed inmates, Portugal and Germany signalling that they might do so, Poland not keen and France calling for a common European position.

Source: www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jLRJr3qef_dpZmJhrzRFk6bR94Mg