New detainees show Bush has no plans to close Guantanamo Bay

The announcement of the transfer of a new detainee to Guantanamo Bay on Friday was the latest signal sent by the Bush administration that it was not committed to any plan to close the detention facility. More than suggesting that Guantanamo will remain open, the announcement showed that the CIA had re-opened its system of secret prisons.

But while the Bush administration moves to continue its detention programs, members of Congress have plans of their own to shut down Guantanamo.

‘No inclination’ to close Guantanamo Bay, says Senator

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced legislation on Monday to close Guantanamo Bay. The bill would require the shuttering of the detention facility within a year of its enactment.
“The President himself has said that he would like the detention facility closed. Yet it is clear that the Administration shows no inclination to close it,” the Senator said in a statement she released Monday.

She added, “We must recognize the sustained damage this facility is doing to our international standing. We are better served by closing this facility and transferring the detainees elsewhere.”
Feinstein’s spokesman, Scott Gerber, told RAW STORY that the statements of President Bush and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that they want the base to close rang hollow.
“Bush and other members of his administration have stated that as a wish, but there does not appear to be any action,” Gerber said Tuesday. “Senator Feinstein is taking action where the administration has failed to do so.”

While Secretary Gates has stated a desire to close Guantanamo Bay, another Defense Department official made it clear that Pentagon planners had no real intention of shutting the prison down.

“To abandon this carefully crafted system and attempt to transplant the trials of enemy combatants into the civilian courts would be ill-advised, as would be transplanting the commissions themselves from the secure facility at Guantanamo to some unspecified location in the United States,” Daniel Dell’Orto, a Defense Department lawyer, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last Thursday.

Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), who chairs that committee, declined to comment to RAW STORY on Dell’Orto’s remark.

But in the House of Representatives, a powerful subcommittee will take up the question of closing Guantanamo.

“We’re going to look at what’s going on down there, and there are a lot of questions coming out that need to be answered,” said Austin Durrer, a spokesman for Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA).
The Congressman will hold a hearing on May 9 looking at how to close Guantanamo Bay next year. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, has asked Moran to take the lead in examining the question.

Durrer added, “We’re looking forward to exploring these issues and finding out what’s going on, why they’re adding more prisoners, and what the administration is looking at in the long-term.”
New Guantanamo detainee second added this year.
Durrer’s reference to the new prisoners at Guantanamo was occasioned by Friday’s announcement that a new detainee had been taken into custody by the Defense Department at Guantanamo Bay.

Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi was described in a Defense Department press release as “one of al-Qaida’s highest-ranking and experienced senior operatives.” The Pentagon also noted that “As a result of this latest transfer, there are now approximately 385 detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.”
Al-Iraqi is the second new detainee to be sent to Guantanamo Bay in 2007. In late March, the Pentagon announced the transfer to the facility of Abdul Malik, a detainee accused of being involved in terrorist activities in East Africa.

Dell’Orto, the Pentagon legal counsel, explained in the previous week’s Senate hearing why the Pentagon was holding detainees like Malik and Al-Iraqi at Guantanamo Bay.
“Since the war in Afghanistan began, the United States has captured, screened, and released approximately 10,000 individuals. Initial screening has resulted in only a small percentage of those captured being transferred to Guantanamo,” Dell’Orto explained. “The United States only wishes to hold those who are enemy combatants who pose a continuing threat to the United States and its allies.”

The Pentagon’s screening process is ongoing. The Washington Post wrote on April 29 that 82 detainees at Guantanamo have been informed that they will be sent home as soon as possible.
“Eighty-two remain at Guantanamo and face indefinite waits as U.S. officials struggle to figure out when and where to deport them, and under what conditions,” wrote Craig Whitlock.
Still, Whitlock noted that the Pentagon would not free all of the Guantanamo detainees.
“Of the roughly 385 still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest,” he added.

New detainee shows CIA secret prisons re-opened

But even as the Pentagon appeared to be winnowing down the number of detainees who would stay at Guantanamo indefinitely, new prisoners appeared to be emerging from secret CIA prisons that President Bush had previously promised were closed.
“Prior to his arrival at Guantanamo Bay, he was held in CIA custody,” the Pentagon’s news release acknowledged.

Various news reports referred to an e-mail sent to CIA staff by Director of Central Intelligence Michael Hayden on Friday, saluting the CIA’s interrogation programs.
“In an E-mail message to CIA employees hailing the arrest as a ‘triumph,’ CIA director Michael Hayden said the agency’s interrogation program was vital and legal. ‘The information it has produced has prevented terrorist attacks and saved innocent lives,’ he wrote,” according to an item at the News Desk blog, produced by US News and World Report.
The revelation of continued CIA detention of terror suspects triggered strong condemnation from one member of Congress.

“Last September when the president announced that he was moving detainees from secret CIA prisons to Guantanamo, he left the distinct impression that his Administration was discontinuing their secret prison program,” Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) said in a statement sent to RAW STORY. “Unfortunately, we learned this past weekend that the Administration never saw an error in their ways and that secret CIA prisons are still operating outside the law and outside the public eye.”

Human rights groups were also alarmed by the announcement.

“In the absence of clear knowledge about how al-Iraqi was detained and treated, there have to be serious red flags raised everywhere as a result of this announcement,” said Hina Shamsi, deputy director of Human Rights First’s Law and Security Program. “Even as the rules governing CIA interrogation are being debated, it appears that the CIA program has continued. Congress should demand to know under what rules these detentions and interrogations may be operating.”

The group Human Rights Watch also accused the President of misleading the public.
“We’re skeptical that President Bush was telling the whole story when he said the CIA prisons were empty,” said Joanne Mariner, the group’s terrorism and counterterrorism director. “It’s quite possible that his claim was based on legal niceties: that while detainees were in the custody of other countries, the CIA had the power to determine their fate.”
Human Rights Watch believes at least 38 additional detainees who were at one time held in the CIA’s secret prisons still cannot be accounted for.

Rep. Markey has sponsored the “Torture Outsourcing Prevention Act” to restrict the ability of the CIA and other agencies to cooperate with other countries for extra-legal detentions and interrogations. 

Source: TheRawStory.

Anger at bus firm’s veil ruling in Scotland

A bus company in Edinburgh has sparked anger over rules requiring drivers to ask Muslim women wearing the veil to show their faces.

Religious groups and unions said the rules introduced by Lothian Buses to catch potential fare cheats were unnecessary.

Passengers have been told to lift their veils or produce a passport or driving licence when boarding.

The company said the rules brought them into line with airport security.

The orders were introduced in February in an attempt to stop travellers using other people’s passes.

Veiled Ridacard pass holders who refuse a driver’s request to show their faces would have to pay for a full fare ticket.

‘Quite unnecessary’

Sohaib Saeed, events co-ordinator at Edinburgh Central Mosque, said: “This seems quite unnecessary. You have to wonder how much of a problem this really is.

“People going to all the trouble of wearing a veil just to dodge a bus fare seems an incredible effort. This rule is intrusive and it’s singling people out.”

Osama Saeed, from the Muslim Association of Britain in Scotland, said: “In the current climate, I don’t think there are many women in Edinburgh wearing a veil, let alone getting on buses to evade fares.”

However, Ian Craig, managing director for Lothian Buses, stood by the “best practice” decision.

“Guidance notes have also been issued to our drivers on how to deal with passengers wearing veils who travel using a Ridacard,” he said.

“Our Ridacards are unique to the holder and are non-transferable. Drivers must check that any travel pass presented is not being used fraudulently.”

However, the Transport and General Workers’ Union (T&G) said bus drivers could go on strike unless the new rules were ditched.

“Drivers are unhappy and uneasy about this. There’s a real risk of causing offence and their jobs are hard enough,” regional industrial organiser Sandy Smart said.

“It’s not particularly clever, it’s a bad idea and Lothian Buses need to have a rethink.”

Former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw sparked controversy last year when he revealed he asked Muslim women to remove their veils when they visited him at his Blackburn constituency.

Source: BBC

Muslim woman wins headscarf case in Sweden

In western Sweden, a Muslim woman has won her battle with a supermarket which told her at a job interview that she couldn’t work there if she refused to remove her headscarf. The woman took her case to the Ombudsman against Ethnic Discrimination and was awarded compensation. The ICA Kvantum supermarket in Västra Frölunda were ordered to apologize to the woman and pay her around $11,000 in damages. The supermarket has adjusted its dress code for staff.

Source: Islamophobia Watch.

43% of Iraqis live in absolute poverty – government report

Azzaman, May 2, 2007

Poverty is rampant throughout Iraq with more than half the population lacking basic means to survive, a government survey shows.

The survey by the Central Statistical Bureau says that 43 percent of Iraqis suffer from ‘absolute poverty’ and another 11 percent of them live in ‘abject poverty’.

Both terms are measures aid organizations use to quantify poverty in the world and they refer to people below poverty level.

People in absolute poverty lack the necessary food, clothing or shelter to survive and 43 percent of Iraqis now fall into that category, the survey says.

People in abject poverty lack a minimum income or consumption level necessary to meet basic needs and 11 percent of Iraqis are in that category, according to the survey.

The study is the result of a nation-wide survey of families across the country and takes into consideration the millions of Iraqis who have been displaced or forced to flee abroad.

The survey is the largest and most comprehensive the bureau has conducted in the past four years. Hundreds of researchers and civil servants working in its offices in Iraq were involved.

Source: Azzaman.com

US Jurors Have 9/11 Doubts

Many potential jurors in the Jose Padilla terrorism-support case say they aren’t sure who directed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks because they don’t trust reporters or the federal government.”There are too many ifs, too many things going on,” one male juror said. “I don’t know the whole story.”

Others say they just don’t pay close enough attention to world events to be certain.

“I’m oblivious to that stuff,” one prospective female juror said during questioning this week. “I don’t watch the news much. I try to avoid it.”

The doubts were noted by a significant portion of the more than 160 people who have been questioned individually since jury selection in the case began April 16.

Padilla and two co-defendants are charged with being part of a North American support cell for Islamic extremists. A jury is expected to be seated next week, with testimony to begin May 14.

Padilla, a U.S. citizen held for 3 1/2 years as an enemy combatant, is accused of applying for an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan. He was previously accused of an al-Qaida plot to detonate a radioactive “dirty bomb” in a U.S. city, but that allegation is not part of the Miami case.

Before they came to court, each of the jurors filled out a 115-question form asking about a wide range of legal, political and religious topics, particularly their views of Arabs, Muslims and Islamic radicals. On question No. 60, which asks for an opinion about responsibility for the Sept. 11 terror attacks, many people said they don’t know.

“I’ve been surprised at the number of our jurors who don’t have an opinion about 9/11,” U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke, who is presiding over the case and asks most of the juror questions, said Wednesday.

The questionnaires were used to weed out dozens of people with obvious biases or personal hardships before the face-to-face interviews began, meaning many potential jurors with strong views about Sept. 11 never made it to court because their ability to be impartial was in question.

A cottage industry of conspiracy theorists has sprung up among academics and others who claim such things as that the U.S. was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, or that explosives planted inside the World Trade Center towers brought the buildings down rather than the jetliners that crashed into them.

In the Padilla case, what’s notable is not so much conspiracy theories as the lack of any views at all.

To be sure, most jurors without a Sept. 11 opinion are aware that the attacks have been blamed on terrorists of some sort. But many seem unwilling to blame al-Qaida and its leader, Osama bin Laden – the conclusion reached by the national Sept. 11 Commission and the Bush administration and widely reported by news media.

One female juror agreed that was a “general public consensus” but still held out skepticism.

“I don’t have an opinion. I don’t tend to trust the news media,” she said.

Many jurors seem to be unwilling to state the al-Qaida connection as fact because they don’t have firsthand knowledge. An older male juror said he answered “al-Qaida and bin Laden” on his questionnaire because “that was what the news said.”

“I really can’t say who did it,” said the man, who was not being identified because Cooke has prohibited publication of jurors’ names.

Samuel Terilli, a journalism professor at the University of Miami and former general counsel at The Miami Herald, said that hesitancy often comes naturally when people are asked for their opinions in an official setting, such as federal court.

“You have a tendency among some people when they are called to jury duty to heighten their skepticism about what they have read or watched, and also they have a desire to be more neutral,” Terilli said. “People are on guard too much.”

Some people say they don’t necessarily believe the U.S. government’s statements about Sept. 11, with many of those people citing the faulty intelligence and misinformation about weapons of mass destruction that led to the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the toppling of President Saddam Hussein.

“It could have been Saddam Hussein. It could have been bin Laden. I really don’t know who,” one woman said.

Source: TheRawStory.com

Psychiatrists and Psychologists: Government’s 9/11 Story is Crazy

Should people who question the government’s version of the events of 9/11 have their heads examined?

Well, the following psychiatrists and psychologists have concluded that the official version of 9/11 is false. Moreover, many of these mental health experts have concluded that the government’s account is so obviously false that people who believe the government’s version are in psychological denial:

Psychiatrist Carol S. Wolman, MD

Psychiatrist E. Martin Schotz

Professor of Psychology at University of New Hampshire William Woodward

Professor of Psychology at University of Essex Philip Cozzolino

Professor of Psychology at Goddard College Catherine Lowther

Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California Institute of Integral Studies Ralph Metzner

Professor of Psychology at Rhodes University Mike Earl-Taylor

Retired Professor of Psychology at Oxford University Graham Harris

Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Nebraska and licensed Psychologist Ronald Feintech

Ph.D. Clinical Neuropsychologist Richard Welser

Clinical psychologist, Ed.D., Harvard University Gwendolyn Atwood,

Psychology researcher, M.A., Psychology Victoria Ashley

Psychotherapist, M.S. Clinical Psychology, Greg Henricks

M.S. in educational psychology, Roy Holcombe

M.A. in Counseling Psychology Tova Gabrielle

There are literally thousands of other mental health professionals who have reached the same conclusions. So who is out of touch with reality: those who question 9/11 or those who believe the government’s version without question?

Source: GeorgeWashington`sBlog.

Lawsuit: Recognize 2nd generation as Shoah (Holocaust) victims

WhatReallyHappened.com commented on that lawsuit saying “In other words, we will soon have a permanent class of people who feel they are permanently owed compensation for something that happened before they were born, to be paid by people who were not alive back when it happened, via a government that did not exist at the time.”

Here is an article published at YNetNews.com which is a Jewish news website. The article is full of lies. The biggest lie, of course, is that the victims of the Holocaust were 6 million. You may read a previous post of mine, which exposes the so many lies about that Holocaust, at the following link:

http://ahmedismailibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/04/26/i-am-a-holocaust-denier-and-i-am-unafraid/

FBI agent testifies he posed as al-Qaida recruiter in terror case – There is no real Al Qaeda. They are all Mossad, MI5, CIA, FBI, etc.

An FBI agent who posed as an al-Qaida recruiter in a terrorism investigation testified Thursday at a doctor’s trial, recalling that a key conspirator in the case showed him how he could strangle somebody with his prayer beads.

The agent, Ali Soufan, is a key witness in the terrorism trail against the doctor, Rafiq Abdus Sabir, 52, who was charged two years ago with pledging to provide material support to al-Qaida by offering to treat the group’s injured fighters.

Most of Soufan’s testimony in nearly a day on the witness stand revolved around conversations he had with Tarik Shah, a martial arts expert and jazz musician who said he wanted to introduce him to Sabir. Several taped conversations from a meeting between the agent and Shah in Plattsburgh, N.Y. were played for the jury.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Karl Metzner often paused the tapes to ask Soufan to explain portions of the conversations.

During one talk, Soufan said Shah showed him long prayer beads of the type worn by martial arts masters, and said Shah demonstrated that he could strangle someone with the prayer beads _ “that he could kill with these beads.”

Soufan testified the demonstration came after an earlier conversation in which he told Shah that members of al-Qaida had already used martial arts effectively in attacks “and were very successful.”

Soufan said he was referring to the hijackers involved in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Shah pleaded guilty several weeks ago to providing material support to a terrorist organization. He faces 15 years in prison. Two other defendants, a former Washington D.C. cab driver and a Brooklyn bookstore owner, have pleaded guilty to similar charges and face between 13 and 15 years in prison.

The pleas left Sabir as the lone defendant in the case that relied on tape recordings by a government informant that began weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Sabir’s lawyer, Ed Wilford, said there was very little evidence, if any, related to his client.

“It’s clear you’re dealing with two different people,” he said of the distinction between his client and Shah. “Dr. Sabir is a medical doctor,” he said. “This guy, Shah, is a nut.”

Wilford said the government was trying to make up for the lack of evidence against Sabir by showing the jury heavy evidence against someone he knew, Shah, and by linking al-Qaida to multiple terrorist attacks.

“What the government is trying to do is lump everybody into one pot,” he said.

If convicted, Sabir could face up to 30 years in prison.

Sources:

(1) WhatReallyHappened.com

(2) PrisonPlanet.com

Iraqi lawmakers demand U.S. withdrawal

As calls in the U.S. Congress grow for a scheduled troop withdrawal from Iraq, similar demands are escalating in Iraq’s National Assembly.Some 133 Iraqi lawmakers from different political blocs, calling themselves the “free deputies,” signed a document demanding a scheduled withdrawal of the U.S.-led multinational troops from their country, according to the Sadrist bloc in Parliament.A legislator from the Sadrist bloc, Saleh al-Okaili, told reporters Wednesday that his group initiated the document ahead of a U.N. Security Council review on Iraq slated for next month. The Sadrist bloc, whose Cabinet ministers had resigned, represents members of a group led by Shiite maverick leader Moqtada Sadr, who has been calling for setting a timetable to end the U.S.-British occupation of Iraq.

Okaili said the memo signed by the lawmakers in the 275-seat Parliament would be handed over to the U.N. Security Council and its secretary-general, the Organization of Islamic Conference and the Iraqi government.

“We call on the Iraqi government to refer to Parliament when discussing a review of the foreign presence in Iraq and not to deal unilaterally with the issue, as has been the case in the past,” the lawmaker said.

Source: International Intelligence.

Swedish Bus Driver Sacked After Stopping a Muslim Woman From Taking The Bus

A Malmö bus driver has been fired from his job following revelations that he stopped a woman from boarding his bus because she was wearing a niqab, a form of Islamic headdress that covers the face.

The bus company, Arriva, has elected not to extend the driver’s contract, suggesting that this was not an isolated incident.

“What happened last week was the straw that broke the camel’s back,” spokesman Daniel Stjernfeldt told newspaper Punkt SE.

The incident occurred last Tuesday morning when ‘Leonora’ boarded the number 35 bus on her usual route between the Rosengård housing estate and the city’s central station. According to Leonora, the driver stopped her from boarding, saying that her niqab made her hard to identify.

“I have never before needed to identify myself on a public bus. This wasn’t a weapon I was carrying,” she told The Local.

Leonora stayed on the bus anyway, but claims that the driver mocked her and looked at her angrily.

“I can understand that people don’t like it, but I think they should leave their prejudices at home,” she said.

While admitting that it was inappropriate not to let the 22-year-old woman board his bus, the driver does not think he deserves to lose his job.

“I have nothing against her personally, or her religion,” he told Punkt SE.

According to the driver, it was the first time that a woman wearing a niqab had tried to board his bus. He found her clothing inappropriate and felt very uncomfortable.

He also said that he had read that about it being illegal to cover your face in public.

Daniel Stjernfeldt would not reveal the other reasons Arriva claimed to have for firing the driver, who claims never to have previously argued with a customer. The driver did however concede that he has arrived late to work on occasion.

Leonora welcomed the decision on Wednesday. She told The Local that it “feels good that somebody’s doing something for me.”

“It feels weird to say that when someone has lost their job, but quite honestly it feels good.”

“He shouldn’t be able to tell other people how to dress. Some women where I work wear very provocative clothes, and I don’t react at all. In fact, some of my friends wear pretty short skirts. Why does everyone have to react to my clothes? I know I can look a bit intimidating, but if only people would listenm” she said.

Source: TheLocal.se