"Scream for Freedom"

The above picture, entitled "Scream for Freedom," is a reproduction of a cartoon drawn by Sami al-Hajj, a cameraman for news agency al-Jazeera, while he was imprisoned in the Guantánamo prison facility.  It's a reproduction because the original cartoon drawn by al-Hajj's own hand has been banned from publication in the United States.  Al-Hajj had to describe the drawing to a Canadian artist, who was able to re-produce it from his detailed description.  Freedom of the press is a wonderful thing - remember to cherish it always.

Al-Hajj was just released from prison today, having been incarcerated at Gitmo for seven years.  He was, like all detainees in the prison, labelled an "enemy combatant," but never charged.  That's right: he was in prison for seven years and was never charged with a crime.

He was, however, encouraged to spy on al-Jazeera, and most of his questioning did not refer to his own purported "terrorist links" (he was accused of having al-Qaida training and supplying some Chechnyan rebel groups) but rather to the actions of the Qatar news network, according to al-Jazeera itself.  I hesitate to use al-Jazeera as my only source on this, and I think we should take the network's assertions with a grain of salt, considering the fact that al-Hajj is their employee.  I actually have no choice, however: BBC and CNN only give al-Jazeera's account, and FoxNews doesn't have a clue that this has happened at all (or, more likely, doesn't want us to have a clue).

I think there is plenty of information out there, from the New York times to Slavoj Zizek, about the chargeless detention of these executively labeled "enemy combatants" at Guantánamo; I don't feel there's anything for me to add.  Just be aware that this guy was a cameraman and had a legitimate work visa with a respectable international news agency; he now has gone on hunger strike and been force-fed, interrogated regularly, acquired a kidney infection and throat cancer, and has not seen his young son since he was a toddler.  He's 38.  And he was never charged with any crime.

And second, what about his drawing?  Banned in the United States?  Let me just say this: if America is so afraid of a cartoon of Guantánamo being released, then our government had damn well better clean up whatever the hell is going on in there, because this whole situation is worthy of absolutely nothing better than a fascist state.  I'm thoroughly disgusted.

Tariq Ramadan

It is really tragic, in my mind, to see the world of intellectual scholarship damaged by the "War on Terror." In a recent court case, the U.S. Government's decision to revoke Professor Tariq Said Ramadan's visa, thereby barring him from accepting a position at Notre Dame University, was upheld.

Ramadan, a Muslim Swiss professor of Islamic Studies, is a controversial character -- his statements on what he perceives as "human rights violations" on the part of the Israeli state have brought him under suspicion of anti-semitism, and he has been vocally critical of the Iraq invasion -- but the revocation had nothing to do with any of these positions. His visa was revoked because he gave money, over a period ending in 2002, to two Swiss charities set up to aid Palestinians. The U.S. declared the charities "terrorist funding organizations" in 2003, a year after Ramadan quit donating to them. This is the sole reason (at least the sole stated reason) for denying him the visa; the government mentioned that he "should reasonably have known" that the organizations funded terrorists. Ramadan pointed out that it would have been hard for him to have known before the government itself did, and I have to admit he has a point there.

Now, the ironic thing is that Ramadan has been speaking out his whole career about Euro-Muslim identity and the urgent need for Muslims to use non-violence, give up the death penalty, and respect the laws of whatever nation they reside in. He encourages them to respect the freedom of religion they are given in the West and not worry that Westerners drink alcohol or tolerate pre-marital sex, since none of this is forced on any Muslim. He strongly condemned the 9/11 attacks, called for punishment to be wreaked on the perpatrators, and has specifically spoken out against suicide bombing. Goodness, he even said that Muslim anger at Pope Benedict XVI's (in)famous speech was disproportionate and made Muslims look bad.

So this leaves, in my view, three things to object to:

1. The official reason -- Ramadan did not anticipate, by at least one full year, the U.S.'s discovery that two charities he gave a thousand bucks to subsequently gave some money to Hamas;

2. The fact that Ramadan opposes U.S. foreign policy, indicating a desire to admit only those scholars deemed ideologically sound by the oh-so-scholarly Bush administration;

or 3. His last name is Ramadan, and we know that is some scary thing that terrorists celebrate. If he would just change that name to something nice, like "Wolfowitz" or "Mukasey" . . . . . .