First, most of the inmates were probably innocent all along, but Pakistanis or Afghans turned them over to America in exchange for large cash rewards. The moment we offered $25,000 rewards for Al Qaeda supporters, any Arab in the region risked being kidnapped and turned over as a terrorism suspect.
Second, torture was routine, especially early on. That’s why more than 100 prisoners have died in American custody in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo.
Ponder that for a moment. Realize that most Americans have little awareness of either truth, but both are well known elsewhere, particularly in the Muslim world.
Then perhaps you will read Nicholas' Kristof's A Prison of Shame, and It's Ours. That is the starting point of my thoughts for the day. But there will be more.
Yesterday I wrote a diary which was well-received by this community, in which I used a column by Bob Herbert, also a writer for the NY Times, to explore the idea that our press is failing us, but we are also responsible - it is apparently up to us to insist that there be focus - by press and politicians - on issues being ignored for matters like Jeremiah Wright. Kristof brings his usual laser focus to the issue of the abuses being done in our name. And I will explore his column further.
Joan Vennochi does something similar in her Boston Globe column, We're in a war - where are the media? Consider these facts, derived from a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism:
The Washington-based research organization studied roughly 1,300 stories from 48 news outlets during the month of April. The group's analysis found that during that time frame, the top news story was the presidential campaign, which accounted for 33 percent of news coverage. The economy came in second, accounting for 6 percent. The pope's visit accounted for 4 percent of the coverage, and the Texas polygamy case garnered another 4 percent.
Even as violence in Iraq increased, events on the ground in Iraq accounted for only 3 percent of news coverage, and the Iraq policy debate accounted for another 3 percent.
. In a month where 49 Americans died, and we know an average of 39 Iraqis a day suffered violent deaths, the media offers so little coverage that of course the issue of Iraq has slipped from the concerns of many American voters. Here we can only be grateful that the words of John McCain may succeed in elevating the subject of our Iraq debacle to the point where voters will pay some attention.
The topics of the two columns are related. They are twin pillars of the distortion of America, our inappropriate and continued application of military force in violation of international agreement and the will of the American people is first - and while Americans may originally have supported the efforts in Iraq, we now know that was only because they were lied to, that the press failed to do its job of exposing lies of which many in the media were aware, and that continued support was manufactured by coopted talking heads bloviating on television and writing op eds from the myriad of "military experts" to which we were subjected. And the use of embedded reporters and the refusal to allow coverage of the returning bodies of those who died further shielded Americans from the truth of the conflict, and prevented what would have been a natural upwelling of opposition.
I have only described the first pillar of the distortion. Unfortunately the lack of media coverage continues the process. As did Herbert yesterday, Vennochi notes the obsession with Jeremiah Wright seeming to suck up media oxygen that should at least be shared with the ongoing Iraqi conflict, noting that even the 5th Anniversary of "Mission Accomplished" drew minimal attention - even as we know the ratio of those killed since May 1, 2003 is now 30 times the amount killed before "major combat operations" ended. Vennochi concludes her column like this:
There's the horse race to cover: How many superdelegates are in Obama's corner versus Clinton's?
And, there's the ratings race to exploit: Why did country singer Billy Ray Cyrus allow his 15-year-old daughter, Miley, to pose in a sheet for Vanity Fair? Was Barbara Walters driven by a desire for catharsis or book sales when she revealed an affair with former senator Edward M. Brooke that dates back to the 1970s?
It's enough to distract the media from writing an elegy for the war and its dead.
I opposed the war, but think it is near criminal how little recognition we give for the sacrifices suffered by those who have fought it. I know that here we attempt to honor that sacrifice - IGTNT is one illustration that some Americans remain aware of the costs of this debacle.
For all the anger and sorrow I might feel over the lack of attention of what continues to happen in Iraq and to our military men and women, that pales with the rage inside me for the abuses that have been done in our name, supposedly as a means of combating a terrorist threat. For all of the shock of Abu Ghraib, the continuation of abuses by US personnel in Guantanamo - and in all the other locations around the world, from Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to the end points in Eastern Europe of the journeys of those subjected to "extraordinary rendition" to still too many places in Iraq - shame and dishonor this nation even more than our continued presence in Iraq or our expanding military presence around the world.
Kristof begins his column with a reference to a colleague:
My Times colleague Barry Bearak was imprisoned by the brutal regime in Zimbabwe last month. Barry was not beaten, but he was infected with scabies while in a bug-infested jail. He was finally brought before a court after four nights in jail and then released.
His next paragraph provides the "appropriate" contrast for his column:
Alas, we don’t treat our own inmates in Guantánamo with even that much respect for law. On Thursday, America released Sami al-Hajj, a cameraman for Al Jazeera who had been held without charges for more than six years. Mr. Hajj has credibly alleged that he was beaten, and that he was punished for a hunger strike by having feeding tubes forcibly inserted in his nose and throat without lubricant, so as to rub tissue raw.
Of course, an American in the custody of officials of even a brutal Zimbabwean regime is afford some level of protection because of the power of the United States - to some degree the regime that held him is aware that there are limits to how far it can mistreat an American, unless it is given a green light by American officials. Please retain this thought, about green lights.
Kristof tells us about 3 books about the experience of Guantanamo. The first is by Murat Kurnaz, a German citizen of Turkish descent, who describes his 5 years there. His description includes interruptions of his torture for medical examinations to ensure it was safe to continue his torture.
Let me quote Kristof on the 2nd:
Mahvish Rukhsana Khan, an American woman of Afghan descent who worked as an interpreter, has written a book to be published next month, "My Guantánamo Diary," that is wrenching to read. She describes a pediatrician who returned to Afghanistan in 2003 to help rebuild his country — and was then arrested by Americans, beaten, doused with icy water and paraded around naked. Finally, after three years, officials apparently decided he was innocent and sent him home.
We physically abused the man for three years, we humiliated him, we never found any evidence that he was guilty of any crime or even a threat against the United States or its interests. And yet the treatment to which he was subjected was agreed to at the highest levels of the American government - we have the memos that gave legal permission, we know who read and agreed to these kinds of actions, and yet NONE of them has been prosecuted, impeached, or even subject to public shaming. Some still hold high office, others hold high positions in academia and think tanks. Please hold this thought as well.
The third book is by an American lawyer, Steven Wax, and its title points where I am going: Kafka Comes to America.
Let me offer the concluding words from Kristof's column before I return to the two thoughts I asked you to retain. Please read these carefully, then stop and ponder for a moment before you continue on to my words:
When I started writing about Guantánamo several years ago, I thought the inmates might be lying and the Pentagon telling the truth. No doubt some inmates lie, and some surely are terrorists. But over time — and it’s painful to write this — I’ve found the inmates to be more credible than American officials.
Both Condoleezza Rice and Robert Gates have pushed to shut down Guantánamo because it undermines America’s standing and influence. They have been overruled by Dick Cheney and other hard-liners. In reality, it would take an exceptional enemy to damage America’s image and interests as much as President Bush and Mr. Cheney already have with Guantánamo.
Now take a deep breath.
It should be possible to make the case against the kinds of mistreatment being done to those in our custody simply because it is wrong, it is immoral. For some reason that case has not been made - the kind of "journalism" that gives us "on the one hand, on the other hand" opposing viewpoints unfortunately gives a patina of legitimacy to the arguments offered on behalf of such actions, whether it is the Bybee memo, the other memo written by Yoo, or the various arguments offered by talking heads and op ed writers within the framework of something like Jack Bauer scenarios (and is it not frightening to think that a sitting Supreme Court Justice like Antonin Scalia can refer to Bauer with approval?).
We have had some argument that insofar as we treat those of other nations we risk having our nationals and soldiers treated similarly - we have set the example. While that is true, and the argument has had some traction, for example when it is made by someone like Colin Powell, it misses the real import of the kinds of actions we are doing.
I asked you to remember the idea of green lights. We know the torture of people subjected to extraordinary rendition occurs with the acquiescence of American authorities, and it matters not whether the winks and nods come from the CIA, the military, or the White House - that makes us complicit in what is occurring. And I have no doubt that similar green lights can be flashed even when the person in the hands of another nation is an American national. Somehow our consular officials will lament that they did not know, or that they have no leverage. The ability to "green light" such actions is a way of shutting off the press or others who seek to examine and expose the wrongdoing of other governments and agencies of those governments whose assistance we have decided we want, or even actions by our own military and intelligence forces And if you doubt the statement I have just made about American forces, remember that our military offered a not so veiled threat against any journalists in Iraq that were not embedded with (and hence under the control of) American military forces. We saw a tank fire on the location of journalists, we saw Al Jazeera have its broadcast facilities taken out by our military, we had journalists working for American news organizations taken into custody so that the Americans were blinded and deafened - the people seized were the ones fluent in Arabic and knowledgeable about the local scene.
Remember that book title by the American, Kafka Comes to America? And remember as well the second thought I asked you to retain, about all the high ranking officials involved in these atrocities who have yet to suffer any meaningful consequences? It is my contention they are related. And that brings me to the subject that should be clearly illuminated, by the press, by politicians, by all of us. This administration has been establishing the pretext and the context for acting similarly towards Americans within our borders. I am not prone to conspiracy theories, but to me the evidence is overwhelming. We have seen it in the treatment of Jose Padilla and Salim Ahmed Hamdan. The Military Commissions Act is yet another illustration. Arguments about whether Habeas Corpus can be suspended by the administration is still one more. Adding two justices to the Supreme Court who seem inclined to support the idea of the unitary executive is yet another. KBR seemingly having a contract to build camps within the United States is yet one more point of light illuminating the crisis we face.
There is no logical limit on what the administration believes it can do if you put all the pieces together. If there are no limits on a president in prosecuting a "war on terror" that by definition has no definable end point, and if on his say so someone can be declared an enemy combatant and denied a right as basic as habeas, then we no longer live in a Democracy.
We are the frog sitting in the water as the temperature is slowly but inexorably increasing it to a boil. The FBI has the ability to root through our records without our being informed and to do it on its own say so. The TSA can bar us from flying on its own say so, with no right for us to see what basis there was for inclusion of our names on such a list. Despite Congress having rejected Poindexter's TIA, we now know it has been largely implemented. And you can add all the other illustrations and examples of which you can think.
Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.
I cannot say with Langston Hughes the next line of the poem, presented in parentheses, that America was never America to me. It was, I grew up believing in the promise and even largely the actuality of a liberal democracy. In the past 7+ years I have seen that promise being canceled.
Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.
(It never was America to me.)
O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.
This time I included the parenthetical remark, because it is increasingly the case for many of the students I teach, of Muslim background, or of dark skins, whose parents or themselves perhaps are not citizens, who are told that the words of the Constitution that say "persons" will now be interpreted to mean only those citizens approved of by those in power.
I often quote Hillel - because his words make clear that we cannot be concerned only about ourselves. Let me again offer those words:
If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?
If our news media, our politicians, and ourselves, are so consumed by other things that we give short shrift to the important issues - of war, of torture, of abandonment of what America should be - then we will have only ourselves to blame when the water becomes so hot that we are boiled alive, like that hypothetical frog.
There are two essential truths about Guantanamo. That is where I started, and it will be where I conclude. But I will end with a different pair than I began.
The first truth is that all that has happened in Guantanamo and elsewhere is in our name, and therefore we bear responsibility.
And the second? Unless we speak out loudly and persistently, unless we insist that our press, our politicians and ourselves demand that we pay attention, we acquiesce by our silence and become fully complicit.
The choice is ours. And unless we are willing to act upon it, then my final salutation is without any meaning, which is why once again I place the question mark after it.
Peace?