The Ordeal of Al Jazeera 
		Cameraman Sami Al-Hajj 
		By Abdus Sattar Ghazali
		ccun.org, May 8, 2008
		
		Torture remains Bush Administration's official policy
		
		After six and a half years of imprisonment in Guantanamo Bay military 
		prison, Al Jazeera cameraman, Sami Al-Hajj, was released on May 2, 2008 
		in a very bad shape. He was carried off a US air force jet on a 
		stretcher when he arrived in Khartoum, Sudan, and immediately taken to 
		hospital on a stretcher. Al-Hajj's case symbolizes the policy of torture 
		and human rights violation of the Bush Administration.
		
		Sami al Hajj, who is originally from Sudan, is a journalist working for 
		the Qatari TV Al-Jazeera. After an assignment to cover the conflict in 
		Afghanistan, he was asked to return there from Pakistan to cover the 
		inauguration of the new Afghan government. He and his crew were stopped 
		by the Pakistani intelligence officers before they reached the border. 
		He was handed over to US authorities who took him to Bagram airbase in 
		Afghanistan and ultimately transferred to Guantánamo Bay. Al-Hajj was 
		held as an "enemy combatant" without ever facing trial or charges. 
		Al-Hajj was never prosecuted at Guantanamo so the US did not make public 
		its full allegations against him. 
		Al-Haj's detention may be described as political 
		since the U.S. interrogators focused almost exclusively on obtaining 
		intelligence on Al-Jazeera and its staff. At one point US officials 
		reportedly told Al-Hajj that he would be released if he agreed to inform 
		U.S. intelligence authorities about the satellite network's activities. 
		Al-Hajj refused. In October 2006, Committee to Protect Journalists 
		highlighted his plight in a special report titled "The 
		Enemy?"  From his hospital bed in Khartoum, now a free man, he 
		told Al Jazeera TV that "rats are treated with more humanity", than the 
		Guantanamo inmates, whose "human dignity was violated." 
		While denying those held at Guantánamo Bay 
		prison the right to challenge their detentions in an independent and 
		impartial court, in line with the centuries old right to habeas corpus, 
		the US authorities have subjected detainees to treatment and conditions 
		that violate the absolute prohibition on torture or other cruel, inhuman 
		or degrading treatment. 
		 
		Hence it was not surprising when former President Jimmy Carter 
		said in October last that the United States tortures prisoners in 
		violation of international law and President Bush creates his 
		own definition of human rights. "Our country for the first time in my 
		life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights…We've said 
		that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib 
		prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and 
		deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."
		 
		In the aftermath of 9/11, the Bush Administration is trying to make its 
		own definition of torture and say we don't violate them. In March 2003, 
		a notorious torture memo was written in which John Yoo, who was then 
		deputy assistant attorney general for the office of legal counsel, 
		argued that President Bush's wartime authority had priority over any 
		international ban on torture. "Our previous opinions make clear that 
		customary international law is not federal law and that the president is 
		free to override it at his discretion," Yoo wrote. 
		 
		The 81-page memo, declassified in January 2008 in response to an ACLU 
		law suit, was rescinded after nine months but it was replaced by another 
		secret legal opinion in 2005 that for first time provided explicit 
		authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful 
		physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated 
		drowning and frigid temperatures. 
		 
		In March 2008, President Bush vetoed a legislation that would have 
		limited the CIA to using only the 19 interrogation methods approved in 
		the Army field manual. That guidebook bans the use of waterboarding, a 
		technique that simulates drowning. CIA Director Michael Hayden has 
		confirmed that the spy agency used the technique on three terrorist 
		suspects in 2002 and 2003.
		 
		To borrow Senator Dodd, in the name of national security, our government 
		is sponsoring torture programs that transcend the bounds of law and 
		threaten our most treasured values. The U.S. once led the fight against 
		torture and not only signed, but helped craft many of the international 
		treaties and laws that outlaw torture. It spoke out against inhumane 
		treatment of detainees and prisoners and offered refuge to victims of 
		atrocities perpetrated by other governments. Now, upending two centuries 
		of humane detention and interrogations practices, the current 
		administration is facilitating of torture. 
		 
		By failing to honor our vaunted ideals, we've lost the respect of much 
		of the world. Over the past years, a litany of sordid policies and 
		practices has sullied our image: the abuses at Abu-Ghraib; the 
		kidnapping of innocent civilians for torture in other countries, such as 
		Syria and Egypt; the maintenance of a miserable prison at Guantanamo 
		Bay; and President Bush's refusal to disavow waterboarding and other 
		abhorrent forms of "interrogation."
		 
		As recently as a decade ago, our steady adherence to our constitutional 
		values - our struggles to stick to our righteous principles - stood us 
		in good stead, giving us the moral authority to lead the world. But now 
		we've lost our moral authority. When the terrorists struck six years 
		ago, the vast majority of the world's people mourned with us. But we've 
		managed to squander the world's good will, partly by ignoring our own 
		revered principles.
		 
		Support for America's so-called war on terrorism has plummeted since 
		2002, especially in Europe, where U.S. practices against inmates at the 
		Guantnamo Bay and Abu Ghraib prisons have been harshly condemned. 
		Distrust of the United States has intensified across the world, 
		according to a Pew Research Center survey of June 2007. Over the last 
		five years, favorable ratings of the United States have decreased "in 26 
		of the 33 countries for which trends are available," Pew said. The 
		United States had the third-highest negative ranking, with 51 percent 
		citing it as a bad influence and 30 percent as a good one. Next was 
		North Korea, which was viewed negatively by 48 percent and positively by 
		19 percent.
		 
		Reverting to the issue of Sami Al-Hajj who was released just one day 
		before the World Press Freedom Day. Interestingly, in its 2007 press 
		freedom index, Reporters Sans Frontieres (Reporters Without Borders) 
		ranks the United States in 48th position. It cited three cases for its 
		decision: 
		(1) The detention of al-Jazeera's Sudanese 
		cameraman, Sami Al-Haj, since 13 June 2002 at the military base of 
		Guantanamo. 
		(2) The unresolved murder of journalist Chauncey 
		Bailey in Oakland, CA. in August last. 
		(3) The prison sentence served by San 
		Francisco-based video blogger Josh Wolf who was found in contempt of 
		court for refusing to turn over video footage to a grand jury 
		determining whether to bring arson charges against participants in an 
		anti-G-8 protest.
		 
		In short, the so-called "war on terror" has led to an erosion of a whole 
		host of human rights. Many states are resorting to practices which have 
		long been prohibited by international law, and have sought to justify 
		them in the name of national security.
		 
		Abdus Sattar Ghazali is the Executive Editor of the 
		online magazine American Muslim Perspective:
		www.amperspective.com email:
		asghazali@gmail.com