Happy 5th birthday, Guantanamo
Puck78
Posts: 737
www.amnesty.org
www.amnesty.org.uk
www.amnesty.org.uk
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Puck78
Posts: 737
Comments
by Khalid Al-Odah, father of Guantánamo detainee Fawzi Al-Odah
Consider this. Over the course of the past five years, America, the most powerful country on earth, overthrew Saddam Hussein, a ruthless dictator. And after Saddam’s fall from power in 2003, US forces captured him, and he was tried, convicted and executed.
In those same five years, Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Yasser Arafat have died. Kuwait’s beloved ruler, Sheik Jaber Alsabah has passed away and we have a new ruler, a new crown prince, a new prime minister and a new parliament.
So much has happened in the past five years, and yet for my son Fawzi -- detained in Guantánamo Bay since January 11, 2002 -- time has stood still. Fawzi has spent his days in a 6.8ft x 8 ft cell, often in solitary confinement and denied all contact with his family. Even death row inmates in U.S. prisons are treated better than this. Fawzi’s treatment has irreparably scarred him and our family. And for what?
When my family learned of Fawzi’s detention in early 2002, we were optimistic that, within a matter of months, at most, he would be tried, and his innocence would be established. After all, Americans surely believe in justice, in speedy trials, in avoidance of cruel and unusual punishment, that men are innocent until proven guilty, and that no one is above the law. In fact, all of this is written in the U.S. Constitution and established in the American legal system.
However, a quick, fair trial is not what happened. Quite the contrary. The U.S. government did not give any hearing for years. Then, they provided hearings which were a farce because hearing officers were not independent of the jailor. No known democracy has ever acted this way. Why is America doing this?
Believing in the American way, my family and I took our grievances to the U.S. courts. The Bush administration used all its might to block us. Yet, after working with the American legal system for over two years, our diminished hope was renewed when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Rasul v. Bush that the U.S. court system had the power to determine whether foreign nationals were rightfully imprisoned.
With that court decision, our faith in the American way appeared to have been rewarded. But once again, the Bush administration stonewalled its own federal courts. Instead of a hearing before an independent judge, the U.S. government established military tribunals whose hearing officers report to the administration. No independence; no due process; no justice.
In June 2006, at the same time Saddam Hussein was facing trial in Iraq, the U.S. Supreme Court again ruled against the administration, upholding the challenge of a Guantánamo prisoner against the military commission trials established by President Bush. However, three and a half months later, the U.S. Congress continued to frustrate our access to an independent tribunal by enacting the Military Commissions Act. This act prevents my son from challenging his detention in a habeas corpus petition – a basic right of all prisoners – and reverts to the use of a tribunal for trials that is not independent, is not speedy, does not afford our son a right to counsel of his choosing, does not guarantee him access to evidence used against him, does not exclude evidence that results from torture, and does not give any time frame for release. Thus, this unprecedented American indefinite detention without any family contact continues – now about to achieve a five-year milestone.
As a father, I am devastated by the American system being used to prevent my son from receiving a fair, speedy trial and from any contact with his family. I understand and accept that prisons are not built for comfort. But, our son and the other prisoners in Guantánamo have been punished beyond those who have been convicted of crimes. By being in a legal limbo with absolute uncertainty surrounding their fates and the complete isolation from loved ones. This cannot possibly be the American way, for it is the epitome of cruel and unusual punishment.
Our son is an honourable, charitable man who travelled to the Pakistan/Afghanistan border region in 2001 to do aid work, to help the poor, and to teach. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, our son tried to flee the region and return home to our family in Kuwait. En route, he was captured by Pakistani bounty hunters who immediately turned him over to U.S. forces. Our son is a victim of circumstances, not a threat to America. I am confident that if Fawzi were to be charged and tried by an independent tribunal, he would be acquitted and released.
If the Bush administration believes my son is dangerous, among what U.S. officials have called the "worst of the worst", what does the president of the most powerful nation on earth fear from sending him to trial in this country’s legal system? What does the president fear from our son coming before an independent U.S. court of law that is good enough to try murderers, rapists, bank robbers, gangsters, and Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh?
My great faith in American values and the American judicial system remains. But, five years of disappointment have left me with little faith in the Bush administration’s willingness to uphold these American values.
On this fifth anniversary of Guantánamo Bay, I hope and pray that justice will come for the men in Guantánamo before we have the chance to mark the sixth anniversary. I thank Amnesty International and others who are helping me to fight on behalf of the men who cannot fight for themselves.
May God continue to bless America, and may the young men imprisoned in Guantánamo be tried or set free.
www.amnesty.org.uk
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/stoptorture-070111-features-eng
www.amnesty.org.uk
By THOM SHANKER and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: March 23, 2007
WASHINGTON, March 22 — In his first weeks as defense secretary, Robert M. Gates repeatedly argued that the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, had become so tainted abroad that legal proceedings at Guantánamo would be viewed as illegitimate, according to senior administration officials. He told President Bush and others that it should be shut down as quickly as possible.
Back Story With Thom Shanker (mp3)
Threats & Responses
Go to Complete Coverage »
Mr. Gates’s appeal was an effort to turn Mr. Bush’s publicly stated desire to close Guantánamo into a specific plan for action, the officials said. In particular, Mr. Gates urged that trials of terrorism suspects be moved to the United States, both to make them more credible and because Guantánamo’s continued existence hampered the broader war effort, administration officials said.
Mr. Gates’s arguments were rejected after Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and some other government lawyers expressed strong objections to moving detainees to the United States, a stance that was backed by the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, administration officials said.
rest of artice at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/23/washington/23gitmo.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Five years. Has it been that long. If it wasn't for Adam Sandler's new movie. Who the hell would remember anything is this fast paced world we live in.
Is that the SOL in a devil's costume?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Why can't these people be tried in a court of law, whether it be a US court or an international court? If a bunch of Americans were rounded up and imprisoned in Iran or North Korea for 5 years with no contact to the outside world or no charges filed, but instead just reviewed by the same military that captured and imprisoned them, can you imagine the outrage in our country?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
If Guantanamo has taught the world anything, it's about the travesty that has become justice in this messed up world.
I will email the American ambassador in protest as your link suggested.
I just wanted to let you know that I support you. Not that that does very much it would seem.
It's time to bring these people home. And let them face trial or release them.
To have them uncharged and so clearly deprived of all human decency for the amount of time that they have been, is truly one of the great war crimes of our times.
BRING DAVID HICKS and all the detainees HOME NOW!!!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I need to get back to the inappropriate laughing thread
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Helen, come play on the other.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Ahh just like old times...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I thought it might be easier if you could see them here too.
I guess what happens with David will very much affect what happens to the others still being detained and awaiting trial.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo...043009,00.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...3/s1881582.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s1881995.htm
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
By MICHAEL MELIA, Associated Press Writer
3 minutes ago
GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba - An Australian accused of helping the Taliban fight the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan pleaded guilty Monday to providing material support for terrorism, a step which officials and lawyers said will assure his transfer to a prison in Australia.
David Hicks, a 31-year-old convert to Islam, could be sentenced by the end of the week, military officials said. Defense attorneys said a gag order by the military judge prevented them from discussing details of the plea until a sentence is announced.
In the days leading up to the hearing, defense attorneys said Hicks did not expect a fair trial and was severely depressed and considering a plea deal to end his five-year imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070327/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_australian_detainee
----
now what? you see, Guantanamo was well worth it.
Definitely. Why waste time trying to sort out innocents when you know there's GOTTA be a bad guy in there. Hell, they look different than us, so why care?
I'm afraid you've offered up the question of our time.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
That question was there long before either you or me came along.
Um David looks exactly like any white Aussie male. His plea of guilty is just as I suspected. And here in the media we were warned to expect that he would make a plea deal in order to end his forced encarceration. If he truly is guilty then he needs to be repatriated to Australia asap, to serve out his sentence. BUT given that he was held for so long without charge in the conditions that he was I am fairly certain he'd have said anything to get himself out of there.
Now we will never really know if he is guilty or innocent because it would appear that the whole situation is not about finding the guilt or innocence of the detainee. I can't see that justice has been served.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I was talking more of the majority of captives being held in the bay.
Oh, ok. And you were being sarcastic? And I missed it? Or deadly serious?
I'm a wee bit tuckered out so having trouble telling. And besides you folks need to use more emoticons!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
It's sarcasim. I hate the bay, think it contradicts everything america says it stands for, is useless, and needs to be closed.
I've used one emoticon. By accident. I hate em.
Thank you!!
I've been sucked into the Train vortex the last couple of days and I think I need to go crawl into the corner, in a fetal position, suck my thumb, rock back and forward and drool for a little bit!! :eek:
Ah! Now I'm sounding like David Hicks!!!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Clearly you haven't read the ultrasound thread then!!
Even I'm not sure what I mean anymore on that thing??!!!?? :eek:
Anyway, thanks mets!
I'm not sure I have a problem with it being open so much. I accept that there are prisoners of war. What I'm struggling with is the length of the detainment before charge. THAT seems to me to be completely and utterly wrong. And if the human rights abuses that have gone on are not also subject to war crimes trials by the UN then something seems very wrong to me. And I don't mean war crimes trials against the odd private or sergeant. I want to see them review this place from the top down not the other way round.
If people insist on war and all that goes with it, then surely we must find ways to be more humane?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Ok well I'm not going to argue that it's in entirely the wrong place, or that it needs to be checked out and needs to be made more humane.
I'm just not sure about the holding the detainees in the country they were found in. I mean do you think that would work? It would mean that you would have detention centres all over the world. I'm not saying that it wouldn't work that way, I just wonder how it would work.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I have only just read about him acceptinng the guilty plea. I can't seem to find out how much shorter the sentence will be if pleading guilty as opposed to not. I feel like we'll never really know now, in terms of how he would have pleaded if he wasn't held there for so long. Even if he is guilty for providing "material support" what does that really mean in the scheme of things? Guilt by assocaiation can be proven so easily, I think the whole thing just seems quite unjust.
I guess I got a bit over excited that they were finally going to try him.
So I stupidly thought we might finally see justice, but I realize that simply isn't possible in this situation. He will have pleaded guilty to the charge because that's what they will have told him to do and he'll just want it over. And who could blame him? As far as I'm concerned they bring him home and he goes free. End of story. He's done his time.
AND then we need a bloody Royal Commission into the department of foreign affairs and the attorney general's office. I'm done with their handling of this situation. They need to be accountable for their appalling inaction.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift