If Iran Freed Roxanna Saberi, Why Won't the US Release Journalist Ibrahim Jassam?
The US has bombed media outlets, killed reporters and imprisoned journalists without charge for years at Gitmo and elsewhere. The US war on the media must end.
Last week, we reported on how retired US Army Colonel Ralph Peters penned an essay for a leading neocon group calling for future US military attacks on media outlets and journalists. Writing for the journal of the the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), Col. Peters wrote, "future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media... a media establishment that has forgotten any sense of sober patriotism may find that it has become tomorrow's conventional wisdom. The point of all this is simple: Win. In warfare, nothing else matters. If you cannot win clean, win dirty. But win."
Of course, what Col. Peters is advocating is not new, nor does he need to propose it as a policy for "future wars." It is already a de facto US policy to target journalists. The US has consistently attacked journalists and media organizations in modern wars. In the 1999 US-led NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, General Wesley Clark, then the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, ordered an airstrike on Radio Television Serbia, killing 16 media workers, including make-up artists and technical staff, an action Amnesty International labeled a "war crime." Richard Holbrooke, who is currently Obama's point man on Afghanistan and Pakistan, praised that bombing at the time.
The US bombed Al Jazeera in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, attacked it multiple times in the 2003 Iraq invasion, and killed Jazeera correspondent Tarek Ayoub. On April 8, 2003, a US Abrams tank fired at the Palestine Hotel, home and office to more than 100 unembedded international journalists operating in Baghdad at the time. The shell smashed into the fifteenth-floor Reuters office, killing two cameramen, Reuters's Taras Protsyuk and José Couso of Spain's Telecinco. In a chilling statement at the end of that day in Iraq, then-Pentagon spokesperson Victoria Clarke spelled out the Pentagon's policy on journalists not embedded with US troops. She warned them that Baghdad "is not a safe place. You should not be there."
Last week, a Spanish judge reinstated charges against three US soldiers in Couso's killing, citing new evidence, including eyewitness testimony contradicting official US claims that soldiers were responding to enemy fire from the hotel. One year ago, former Army Sergeant Adrienne Kinne told Democracy Now! she saw the Palestine Hotel on a military target list and said she frequently intercepted calls from journalists staying there.
As I have reported previously, Reuters cameraman Mazen Dana was shot by US forces near Abu Ghraib prison when his camera was allegedly mistaken for a rocket-propelled grenade launcher. The US listed as "justified" the killing of Al Arabiya TV's Mazen al-Tumeizi, blown apart by a US missile as he reported on a burning US armored vehicle on Baghdad's Haifa Street.
There have also been several questionable killings of journalists at US military checkpoints in Iraq, such as the March 2004 shooting deaths of Ali Abdel-Aziz and Ali al-Khatib of Al Arabiya. The Pentagon said the soldiers who shot the journalists acted within the "rules of engagement." And Reuters freelancer Dhia Najim was killed by US fire while filming resistance fighters in November 2004. "We did kill him," an unnamed military official told The New York Times. "He was out with the bad guys. He was there with them, they attacked, and we fired back and hit him."
The Obama administration has recently paid a lot of lip service to freedom of the press, particularly around the case of Iranian-American journalist Roxanna Saberi, who was released May 11 from an Iranian prison. Yet, the US military continues to hold journalists as prisoners without charges or rights in neighboring Iraq. Ibrahim Jassam, a cameraman and photographer for Reuters has been a US prisoner in Iraq since last September despite an Iraqi court's order last year that he be freed.
As The Los Angeles Times reported:
His case represents the latest in a dozen detentions the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists has documented since 2001.No formal accusations have been made against Jassam, and an Iraqi court ordered in November that he be released for lack of evidence. But the U.S. military continues to hold him, saying it has intelligence that he is "a high security threat," according to Maj. Neal Fisher, spokesman for detainee affairs.
The Obama administration harshly criticized Iran for its imprisonment of Roxana Saberi, the U.S.-Iranian journalist who was convicted of espionage and sentenced to eight years in prison before being freed last week. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized Iran's treatment of Saberi as "non-transparent, unpredictable and arbitrary."
Washington also has called upon North Korea to expedite the trial of two U.S. journalists being held there on spying charges.
Yet the United States has routinely used the arbitrary powers it assumed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorism attacks to hold without charge journalists in Iraq, as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Committee to Protect Journalists points out.
None of the detained journalists has been convicted of any charge, said Joel Simon, executive director of the group, undermining the United States reputation when it comes to criticizing other countries on issues of press freedom.
"The U.S. has a record of holding journalists for long periods of time without due process and without explanation," he said. "Its standing would be improved if it addressed this issue."
Reuters has expressed disappointment at Jassam's detention and has said there is no evidence against him.
[...]
Jassam was detained without a warrant "as the result of his activity with a known insurgent organization," Fisher alleged.
No evidence against Jassam was presented at his court hearing in November, Fisher said, because the military intelligence against him had not yet been verified.
Under the wartime rules in place at the time, he said, "there was no requirement to link the military intelligence with rule of law type of evidentiary procedures."
After the court ordered Jassam's release, Fisher said, fresh evidence came to light that suggested he was a "high security threat."
This reminds me of how the US held Al Jazeera journalist Sami al Hajj at Guantanamo from December 2001 to May 2008. He alleges he was tortured at Guantanamo and that he had been interrogated over 130 times (as of 2005) with his interrogators insisting in 125 of those interviews that he link al Jazeera to terrorism and Al Qaeda, which he wouldn't. "He is completely innocent," his lawyer Clive Stafford Smith said during al Hajj's imprisonment. "He is about as much of a terrorist as my granddad. The only reason he has been treated like he has is because he is an Al Jazeera journalist. The Americans have tried to make him an informant with the goal of getting him to say that Al Jazeera is linked to Al Qaida." Al Hajj was eventually released after an international campaign and the tenacious work of his lawyers.
When you hold up Iran's handling of Roxanna Saberi against the US handling of Jassam, the comparison is striking. So too is the level of outcry from other journalists. Loud voices demanded Saberi's freedom. Websites were established. Some 400 people reportedly joined a hunger strike in solidarity with Saberi. The same is not true for Jassam, who has spent many months in US custody without charges. It is time for journalists, particularly US journalists, to break their silence and demand Jassam's release. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad released Saberi pretty swiftly after her arrest on espionage charges (and subsequent conviction and sentencing). Obama should follow Iran's example and release Ibrahim Jassam. But, in the absence of outcry and protest from other journalists, Obama has little to lose by ignoring Jassam's case.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
9 Comments so far
Show AllA better question is in Scahill's conclusion:
Why are journalists, especially US journalists, US bloggers, who raised hell over Saberi, not raising hell here?
If Iran Freed Roxanna Saberi, Why Won't the US Release Journalist Ibrahim Jassam?
Answered above, but to put it in neo-con, republican-speak (for trolls and others), "He's a dangerous terrorist!" Of course, neo-con republicans need no proof, no evidence, no Christianity to be arrogant assholes. You see, neo-con republicans are scared of everybody but Rash Limpdick, the Bush family and Dick 'don't shoot me' Cheney.
Perhaps Chris Hedges is more qualified to advance this point, but I'll venture a theological guess:
See, Amerika is a Jealous God, an Angry and Vengeful God.
It wasn't always this way. Once upon a time, there lived an America that was still struggling to find its feet and was, although not without serious flaws and exceptions, a Just, Merciful, and even Humble God.
But fast-forward to the present century, and find that all of those troublesome and troublemaking OTHER nations, teeming with evil, depraved leaders, had infringed so badly upon innocent and harmless America's wealth and territory that America was forced to change its thinking to: No More Mister Nice God!
So, as regards your question, Nice Gods finish last, see, and that ain't gonna happen to Amerika-- or the members of its hegemony.
Jealous Gods don't release wrongfully detained captives because that might be interpreted as just the faintest sign of an admission of wrongdoing, or capitulation to common decency. It might leave the tiniest mark, chip, or crack in the glassy obsidian edifice that divine Amerikan Power presents to the world.
Jealous, possessive Gods can't yield to leniency; it smacks of weakness, and only calls into question the absolute righteousness and authority of the God Who Proclaims Itself "Leader of the 'Free World'".
Hope that clears it up for you. If not, check out Jerry Rose's typically trenchant comment above.
· Yr Obd't Servant
Thanks, YOS, I needed your touch with words to bring me down from the miasma of having to live through yet another orgy of American exceptionalism known as Memorial Day. When I read of Tuscaloosa parents of dead soldiers who "honored" their sons by giving awards to 5th grade children for their "respect for military, for authority and for leadership," and this year's winner wanted to grow up to be a Marine, I almost screamed. This, when one of those "honored" soldiers, who had committed the most despicable possible act against a teenage Iraqi girl and her family, was spared the death penalty by the very U.S. government that had executed Saddam Hussein. If there is ever any inclination to question our military, it is put aside on Memorial Day (and about every other day of the year) as we are called on again and again to offer up more fallen heroes to our country's international predations so that those who preceded them will not have "died in vain."
-If Iran Freed Roxanna Saberi, Why Won't the US Release Journalist Ibrahim Jassam?
What a stupid question! to ask it pre-supposes that justice in America mixes with politics. Next, you will be asking why Bush and cohorts are not in jail.
Obviously Obama cannot preside over a system of justice when there is an eternal war on and economic difficulties. Just as soon as the eternal war is over and the economy is perfected, whomever is president then will get around to letting his law enforcement officials do their jobs.
locke 1:38 ------------I guess you are being scarcastic. There are many different departments one is called Justice and that one is for Justice issues in case your not joking.
USA killer of journalists and torturer for false information.
And Obama protecting EVERY war profiteer, torturer and scoff law.
I am finding it more and more difficult to distinguish the USA from Soviet Russia. Except maybe the USA is more imperialist.
Mr. Scahill, the answer to the question in the title of your article is o-so-obvious: (as in Bill Clinton's and John Edward's answer to why they had their affairs): "because we can," we're the 500 pound gorillas of the world and yes we can do whatever we f..g well please. If others do it, we'll chastise them but not ourselves. I think that is technically called hypocrisy and I think it's largely our hypocrisy and not our freedom that people in other countries hate.
It is true that the Iranians actually had the decency to tell Saberi why she was being kept in confinement. They charged her and then released her.
By contrast, Sami Al Haj, the cameraman from Al Jazeera was tortured without charges for SEVEN WHOLE YEARS at Guantanamo, without being given anything that even vaguely resembled evidence.
Face it, under the Bush administration, the US's foreign policy was every little bit as tyrannical as the ideologies it purports to oppose. I hope things change under Obama.