View previous stories
	Our Shameful Guantánamo Anniversary by American Civil Liberties Union USA   February 14, 2008   When we torture, by Nicholas D. Kristof. (NYT)   The most famous journalist you may never have heard of is Sami al-Hajj, an al-Jazeera cameraman who is on a hunger strike to protest abuse during more than six years in a Kafkaesque prison system.   Al-Hajj''s fortitude has turned him into a household name in the Arab world, and his story is sowing anger at the authorities holding him without trial. That''s us. Al-Hajj is one of our forgotten prisoners in Guantánamo Bay.   If the Bush administration appointed an Undersecretary of State for Antagonizing the Islamic World, with advice from a Blue Ribbon Commission for Sullying America''s Image, it couldn''t have done a more systematic job of discrediting our reputation around the globe.   Instead of using American political capital to push for peace in the Middle East or Darfur, it is using it to force-feed al-Hajj.   President George W. Bush is now moving forward with plans to try six Guantánamo prisoners before a military tribunal, rather than hold a regular trial. That will call new attention to abuses in Guantánamo and sow more anti-Americanism around the world.   Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pushed last year to close Guantánamo because of its wretched impact on American foreign policy. But they lost the argument to Alberto Gonzales and Dick Cheney. So America spends millions of dollars bolstering public diplomacy and sponsoring chipper radio and television broadcasts to the Islamic world - and then undoes it all with Guantánamo.   After al-Hajj was arrested in Afghanistan in December 2001, he was beaten, starved, frozen and subjected to anal searches in public to humiliate him, his lawyers say. The U.S. government initially seems to have confused him with another cameraman, and then offered vague accusations that he had been a financial courier and otherwise assisted extremist groups.   "There is a significant amount of information, both unclassified and classified, which supports continued detention of Sami al-Hajj by U.S. forces," said Commander Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, adding that the detainees are humanely treated and "receive exceptional medical care."   Military officials did acknowledge that al-Hajj was not considered a potential suicide bomber and probably would have been released long ago if he had just "come clean" by responding in greater detail to the allegations and showing remorse.   Hajj''s lawyers contend that he has already responded in great detail to every allegation. One indication that the government doesn''t take its own charges seriously, the lawyers say, is that the United States offered al-Hajj a deal: immediate freedom if he would spy on al-Jazeera. Al-Hajj refused.   Most Americans, including myself, originally gave Bush the benefit of the doubt and assumed that the inmates truly were "the worst of the worst." But evidence has grown that many are simply the unluckiest of the unluckiest.   Some were aid workers who were kidnapped by armed Afghan groups and sold to the CIA as extremists. One longtime Sudanese aid worker employed by an international charity, Adel Hamad, was just released by the United States in December after five years in captivity. A U.S. Army major reviewing his case called it "unconscionable."   Al-Hajj began his hunger strike more than a year ago, so twice daily he is strapped down and a tube is wound up his nose and down his throat to his stomach. Sometimes a lubricant is used, and sometimes it isn''t, so his throat and nose have been rubbed raw. Sometimes a tube still bloody from another hunger striker is used, his lawyers say.   "It''s really a regime to make it as painful and difficult as possible," said one of his lawyers, Zachary Katznelson.   Al-Hajj cannot bend his knees because of abuse he received soon after his arrest, yet the toilet chair he was prescribed was removed - making it excruciating for him to use the remaining squat toilet. He is allowed a Koran, but his glasses were confiscated so he cannot read it.   All this is inhumane, but also boneheaded. Guantánamo itself does far more damage to American interests than al-Hajj could ever do. To stand against torture and arbitrary detention is not to be squeamish. It is to be civilized.   January 11, 2008   Our Shameful Guantánamo Anniversary, by Anthony D. Romero.   Today, America’s Guantánamo era enters its seventh shameful year. If we are ever to regain our standing as a nation committed to the rule of law and fundamental human rights, we must close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay now, reaffirm our commitment to international treaties and our own Constitution, and either release or prosecute fairly the men who have been held so long in a legal and moral black hole.   Six long years ago, the first orange-clad, shackled and blindfolded prisoners arrived at Guantánamo’s Camp X-Ray. The Bush administration’s plan was to fashion Guantánamo quite literally as an island outside the law — a place with no lawyers, no rights and, above all, no public scrutiny. The administration labeled the men imprisoned at Guantánamo “illegal enemy combatants” who were to be held until the “cessation of hostilities” in the “war on terror” — in other words, forever. Such “quaint” notions as the Geneva Conventions and the constitutional “Great Writ” of habeas corpus were swiftly discarded because the men at Guantánamo were uniformly, in former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s words, “among the most dangerous, best trained vicious killers on the face of the earth.” President Bush, somewhat more prosaically, assured the world that the Guantánamo prisoners were “bad people.”   Make no mistake: There were, and are, innocent people imprisoned at Guantánamo. Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, who was Guantánamo’s commander for several years, candidly acknowledged in the Wall Street Journal: “Sometimes, we just didn’t get the right folks.” And we now know that only a small percentage of the many hundreds of men and boys who have been held at Guantánamo were captured on a battlefield fighting against Americans; far more were sold into captivity by tribal warlords for substantial bounties.   But the appalling fact that innocent men have been imprisoned and abused at Guantánamo is not the only reason why its closure is of such urgent importance. The most profound and enduring stain of Guantánamo is its corrosive effect on America’s reputation and standing, and on respect for the rule of law worldwide. Repressive regimes have cited America’s example to defend their abysmal human rights practices; for instance, Malaysia’s law minister insisted that his country’s practice of detaining suspects without trial was “just like Guantánamo Bay.” Will future enemies make the same claim to defend the detention and torture of our own men and women in uniform? Such concerns have led former Secretary of State Colin Powell and other former military officers to call for Guantánamo’s closure. “Not tomorrow, but this afternoon. I’d close it,” Powell has said.   In truth, Guantánamo has demolished America’s moral standing because the government chose to abandon our time-tested criminal justice system. In its place, they’ve erected a new regime of military commissions that permits — according to recent congressional testimony by the Pentagon general who oversees it — evidence obtained through torture, including the brutal practice of waterboarding.   I traveled to Guantánamo Bay to witness the very first military commission proceedings in August of 2004. More than three years later, this system has produced a single conviction: a guilty plea by Australian David Hicks that resulted in a nine-month incarceration in Australia, where Hicks is now a free man. Meanwhile, several terrorism suspects who were prosecuted in U.S. courts have received lengthy prison sentences. It is small wonder that the chief prosecutor for the commissions recently resigned in disgust, disparaging the system as “deeply politicized.”   There is no reason why the prison at Guantánamo Bay should remain open even one day longer. The men who are held there should either be prosecuted in fair proceedings that accord with our own values and legal traditions, or sent to their home countries or countries that will accept them as refugees where they will be safe from torture and abuse. Although long overdue, the first step in restoring the rule of law is clear — close Guantánamo now.   * Anthony D. Romero is the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
	Violence: Comparing Reporting and Reality by Sara Tiegreen and Elana Newman Dart Center for Journalism & Trauma   An overview of reporting trends in crime news, comparison with actual crime rates and an analysis of how coverage affects public perception of criminal activity.   Newspapers are a primary source of information about local crime (Stempel & Hargrove, 1996). As such influential sources, newspapers are charged with the vast responsibility of bringing objective information to the public (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001). Yet, how representative is our daily news of actual events in our communities? Do reporting trends mirror or shape reality? This fact sheet reviews reporting trends in crime news and what is known about the influence of this reporting/coverage on consumers.   Reporting Trends for Violent Crime   Reports of crime don’t match actual rates of crime.:   From 1993 to 1994, public perception of crime as the most important problem in the U.S. jumped from a 9% endorsement to a 37% endorsement that remained considerably high for several years. The increase in perception may be due, at least in part, to the way in which crime news is delivered to the public; whereas perception of crime as a major problem rose, the actual crime rates did not (Lowry, Nio, & Leitner, 2003).   Approximately half of crime news in New Orleans focused on homicide in 1981, while only 0.4% of the total crimes committed were actually homicides (Sheley & Ashkins, 1981).   Among crime stories in Chicago’s The Tribune in the early 1980’s, 26% were about murder, while only 0.2% of crimes known to police were murder. Conversely, theft news made up only 3% of crime stories, but accounted for a dramatically larger percentage of reported crimes (36%) compared to homicide (Howitt, 1998).   In Los Angeles, 80% of local murders were reported in the LA Times, while only 2% of local physical and sexual assaults were reported, misrepresenting the relative frequency of the types of crime that actually occured (Dorfman, Thorson, & Stevens, 2001).   A content analysis of 175 crime-related articles in Time magazine, taken from selected years (1953, 1958, 1975, 1979, & 1982), showed that although 73% of the stories concerned violent crime, only a minority of crimes reported to police (10%) actually involved violence (Barlow, Barlow, & Chiricos, 1995).   The least common types of homicides received the most news coverage in Los Angeles County from 1990-1994. Specifically, homicides of women, children, and the elderly, and homicides involving multiple victims were reported more often than homicides involving one young or middle-aged adult. Actual crime rates showed that the majority of homicide victims were males between the ages of 15-34 with only one victim involved. Furthermore, gender, age, socioeconomic status, and relationship biases were found in homicide coverage (Sorenson, Manz, & Berk, 1998).   While only 6% of crime in Great Britain is violent crime, a study of 10 popular British dailies showed that more than 2/3 of the crime news is devoted to violent crime (Smith, 1984).   Content analysis of all national British press and television news reports of child sexual abuse during in 1991, revealed a disproportionate amount of coverage focused on abuse outside the home.   83% of the news coverage focused on events surrounding a particular stranger abduction/murder case that occurred that year, rather than more general and common forms of child sexual abuse within families.   Although sexual assault against children is most often perpetrated by someone the child knows, 96% of newspaper articles highlighted ways to protect children from stranger’s threats. Only 4% mention the more likely scenario of abuse by relatives (as cited in Kitzinger, 2004).   47 news items focused on strangers and staff in schools or community/residential homes, while only 2 items focused on family members.   * Visit the link below for more details. Visit the related web page
	View more stories