Private Bradley Manning; Caged Like an Animal, Ignored Like a Criminal

Personhood denied

By Kate Randall

Private First Class Bradley Manning, suspected by the United States Army of being WikiLeaks’ source for thousands of classified military reports and diplomatic cables, was stripped naked in his cell Wednesday and Thursday nights.

This degrading treatment at the brig at the Marine base in Quantico, Virginia came alongside notification March 3 by the Army that Manning was facing 22 additional charges, including a charge of “aiding the enemy,” which carries the death penalty. (See “US Army charges accused WikiLeaks source Private Bradely Manning with capital offense”)

According to Manning’s lawyer, David E. Coombs, Manning, 23, was inexplicably stripped of his clothing on the night of March 2 and then forced to remain naked in his cell for the next seven hours. Coombs wrote in his March 3 blog, “At 5:00 a.m., the Brig sounded the wake-up call for the detainees. At this point, PFC Manning was forced to stand naked at the front of his cell.”

Shortly after 5:00 a.m., the duty brig supervisor arrived and walked through the facility to conduct a prisoner count. Following this, Manning was told to sit on his bed, and about 10 minutes later a guard came to his cell and returned his clothing. The young private was told the same thing would happen the following night.

According to Coombs’ March 4 blog, the same treatment was meted out the night of March 3. The decision to strip Manning of his clothing was made by the brig commander, Chief Warrant Officer-2 Denise Barnes. Coombs writes that according to a Marine spokesman, “the decision was ‘not punitive’ and done in accordance with Brig rules.”

Coombs notes: “There can be no conceivable justification for requiring a soldier to surrender all his clothing, remain naked in his cell for seven hours, and then stand at attention the subsequent morning. This treatment is even more degrading considering that PFC Manning is being monitored—both by direct observation and by video—at all times.” Brig officials informed Manning’s defense that the decision to strip Manning and have him remain naked overnight was made without consulting the brig’s mental health providers.

This debased treatment constitutes an escalation of the torture to which Manning has been subjected in his 10 months of solitary confinement at the brig. He has been convicted of no crime, but has earned the wrath of US military and government authorities for allegedly aiding WikiLeaks’ exposure of US atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan and other imperialist crimes and conspiracies around the world.

While not displaying any suicidal tendencies, and against the advice of military psychiatrists, Manning is being held under a prevention of injury order (POI). Confined to his cell 23 hours a day, he is allowed out for only one hour of exercise a day in an empty room where he can walk but is forbidden to run. He is not permitted to sleep during the day, and is severely restricted in the use of his eyeglasses and reading material.

In an appearance on the MSNBC cable television channel Thursday, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoffrey Morrell attributed the conditions of Manning’s imprisonment to “the seriousness of the charges he’s facing, the potential length of sentence, the national security implications and also the potential harm… that he could do to himself or from others,” adding that the brutal treatment was “for his [PFC Manning’s] own good.”
Manning’s friend, David House, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and one of the few people to have visited him in prison, spoke Thursday of seeing Manning go from a “bright-eyed intelligent young man” to someone who appeared “catatonic” at times, with “very high difficulty carrying on day-to-day conversation.”

“For me this has been like watching a really good friend succumb to an illness or something,” House said, “I think that Bradley Manning is being punished this way because the US government wants him to crack ahead of his trial.”

The most serious of the new charges brought Wednesday in Manning’s court martial process is the charge brought under Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice of “aiding the enemy” by supplying information “either directly or indirectly.” By not specifying the identity of the alleged “enemy,” the Pentagon leaves open the possibility that this could refer to WikiLeaks and individuals like the whistleblower web site’s founder, Julian Assange, who as the enemy could be targeted for military action.

The military has stated that Assange and WikiLeaks are not the unnamed enemy. “It’s not WikiLeaks, OK?” said Shaunteh Kelly, chief of media relations for the US Army Military District of Washington. She added, “Given that this is a national security case during a time of war, identifying this information may potentially compromise ongoing military operations.”

On Thursday, the military said that the word “enemy” in the charge against Manning referred to any hostile forces that could benefit from learning about classified military tactics. If such a catch-all definition of “aiding the enemy” were applied to civilians, it could be used to prosecute any media outlet or Internet site that published classified military-related material leaked by a whistleblower.

The escalation of the torturous treatment of Manning, coming on the heels of the new charges laid against him, is likely aimed at getting Manning to provide information implicating Assange and WikiLeaks. More broadly, the military and the Obama administration are seeking to make an example of Manning so as to intimidate others from exposing the crimes of US imperialism.

Although military prosecutors have said they are not seeking the death penalty, the decision is ultimately up to Maj. Gen. Karl R. Horst, the Military District of Washington commander, who could refer the “aiding the enemy” charge as a capital offense.

Final charges in Manning’s case are expected in late May or early June at a provisional hearing in the court-martial process.

Isreal Continues Its Vicious Ethnic Cleansing

Palestinians' plight of peril continues

By Kathleen Christison

The U.S. complicity in Israeli expansionism, and the desperate acquiescence of the Palestinian leadership in Israeli demands for its surrender, have now been exposed in the massive document leak by al-Jazeera.

Dubbed the Palestine Papers, the collection of almost 1,700 documents was obtained from unknown, possibly Palestinian, sources and covers a decade of “peace process” maneuvering.

So far, there is only silence from the Obama administration, which is implicated in the documents along with the Bush and Clinton administrations. But reaction around the world is voluble and hard to ignore.

Palestinians, the documents show, offered compromises that verge on total capitulation. At a time in 2008 when talks with then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were coming to a head and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was pushing hard, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat and his colleagues offered Israel the 1967 borders, the Palestinians’ right of return, and Israeli settlements on a silver platter.

The Palestinians would have agreed to let Israel keep all settlements in East Jerusalem except Har Homa; allowed Israel to annex more settlements in the West Bank (altogether totaling over 400,000 settlers).

They would have agreed to an inequitable territorial swap in return for giving Israel prime West Bank real estate, and settled for the return of only 5,000 Palestinian refugees (out of more than four million) over a five-year period.

And still Israel rejected the package of compromises, which they said “does not meet our demands” -- presumably because their principal desire is that the Palestinians simply disappear.

The Palestinian eagerness to offer Israel such massive compromises has been the most prominent story from the Palestine Papers.

But the story of the pressure one U.S. administration after another has exerted on Palestinian negotiators to make these concessions and accommodate all Israel’s demands shows U.S. conduct throughout almost two decades of negotiations to be perhaps the most cynical, and indeed the most shameful, of the three parties.

Remembering Gay Victims of The Nazi Holocaust

Remembering Gay Victims of The Nazi Holocaust

It is estimated that 1.2 million homosexual men were living in Germany in 1928. Between 1933 and 1945 100,000 men were arrested and charged with being homosexuals, 50,000 were officially sentenced. Most were sent to regular prisons, while an estimated 5,000-15,000 were sent to concentration camps.

In Nazi Germany, homosexuality was persecuted to a degree unprecedented in history. In 1935, the National Socialists issued an order making all male homosexuality a crime; the provisions governing homosexual behaviour in Section 175 of the Criminal Code were significantly expanded and made stricter. A kiss was enough reason to prosecute. There were more than 50,000 convictions. Under Section 175, the punishment was imprisonment; in some cases, convicted offenders were castrated. Thousands of men were sent to concentration camps for being gay; many of them died there. They died of hunger, disease and abuse or were the victims of targeted killings.

The National Socialists destroyed the communities of gay men and women. Female homosexuality was not prosecuted, except in annexed Austria; the National Socialists did not find it as threatening as male homosexuality. However, lesbians who came into conflict with the regime were also subject to repressive measures. Under the Nazi regime, gay men and women lived in fear and under constant pressure to hide their sexuality.

For many years, the homosexual victims of National Socialism were not included in public commemorations -- neither in the Federal Republic of Germany nor in the German Democratic Republic. In both East and West Germany, homosexuality continued to be prosecuted for many years. In the Federal Republic, Section 175 remained in force without amendment until 1969.

Because of its history, Germany has a special responsibility to actively oppose the violation of gay men's and lesbians' human rights. In many parts of the world, people continue to be persecuted for their sexuality, homosexual love remains illegal and a kiss can be dangerous.

With this memorial, the Federal Republic of Germany intends

to honor the victims of persecution and murder,
to keep alive the memory of this injustice, and
to create a lasting symbol of opposition to enmity, intolerance and the exclusion of gay men and lesbians.

Das Denkmal für die im Nationalsozialismus verfolgten Homosexuellen ist eine Gedenkstätte am Berliner Tiergarten, die am 27. Mai 2008 eingeweiht wurde. Das von dem dänisch-norwegischen Künstlerduo Michael Elmgreen und Ingar Dragset entworfene Denkmal ist ein 3,60 m hoher und 1,90 m breiter Steinquader, in dem ein Fenster eingelassen ist, durch das zwei kurze Filme mit zwei sich küssenden Männern bzw. zwei sich küssenden Frauen im zweijährigen Wechsel zu sehen sind. Die Errichtung des Denkmals wurde im Zuge der Diskussion über die Gestaltung des Denkmals für die ermordeten Juden Europas im Jahr 2003 vom Deutschen Bundestag beschlossen.

May 27th 2008 has been announced to be the date of the official publication of the Berlin memorial for the persecuted homosexuals of the Nazi period of time.

Estimates vary wildly as to the number of gay men killed in concentration camps during the Holocaust ranging from 5,000 to 15,000. Larger numbers include those who were Jewish and gay, or even Jewish, gay, and communist. In addition, records as to the specific reasons for internment are non-existent in many areas, making it hard to put an exact number on just how many gay men perished in death camps. See pink triangle.
Gay men suffered unusually cruel treatment in the concentration camps. They faced persecution not only from German soldiers but also from other prisoners, and many gay men were beaten to death. Additionally, gay men in forced labor camps routinely received more grueling and dangerous work assignments than other non-Jewish inmates, under the policy of "Extermination Through Work". SS soldiers also were known to use gay men for target practice, aiming their weapons at the pink triangles their human targets were forced to wear.

El monumento fue diseñado por los artistas Michael Elmgreen y Ingar Dragset. Es una estructura de hormigón en forma de ortoedro. En la cara frontal hay una ventana a través de la cual los visitantes pueden ver un vídeo con dos homosexuales besándose.

When the war ended, the persecution under the Nazis of homosexuals was not acknowledged. Homosexuals did not qualify for state pensions and reparations available to other groups, and continued to be classified as criminals simply for being gay.

Although both East and West Germany liberalized the criminalization of homosexuality in the 1960's the official Nazi anti-gay law was not repealed until 1994.

In some instances they were freed only to be re-imprisoned by the Allies for their sexual orientation. Under the Allied Military Government in Germany, many homosexuals were forced to serve the remainder of their prison sentence, regardless of any time spent in a concentration camp. Gay Holocaust survivors still had to live in fear of re-imprisonment for "repeat offenses" and were kept on the registered "sex offenders" list.

On Torture

Just say, no

By Kate Karam Moore

An alarming number of people, including many active in church life, have come to regard torture as an acceptable interrogation method rather than a violation of human rights or a degradation of the image of God in each person. This is especially when the accusation of terrorism has been made.

Euphemisms like “enhanced interrogation methods” and “water-boarding” are frequently published in newspapers and heard on our radios and televisions. Over time we have become less disturbed by reports of U.S.- sponsored torture.

One can only hope that the recent White Paper issued by Physicians for Human Rights – recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 – will help awaken our ethical senses. The 30-page report, issued in June, indicates that since 9/11, CIA medical professionals have engaged in medical experimentation on detainees. These doctors were not caring for the health of individuals. They were not prescribing medicine or diagnosing disease. They were involved in torture. To quote from the report:

Health professionals, working for and on behalf of the CIA, monitored the interrogations of detainees, collected and analyzed the results of those interrogations, and sought to derive generalizable inferences to be applied to subsequent interrogations. Such acts may be seen as the conduct of research and experimentation by health professionals on prisoners, which could violate accepted standards of medical ethics, as well as domestic and international law. These practices could, in some cases, constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity.” (To read the full text, go to: http://phrtorturepapers.org)

Responding to the physicians’ initiative, on June 8 the National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT) organized a press conference at which Executive Director Rev. Richard Killmer announced that NRCAT has formally requested a federal investigation into allegations of CIA use of torture and experimentation on prisoners. For Linda Gustitus, President of the Campaign, the physicians’ report provided disturbing evidence that “doctors employed by the CIA monitored, recorded, and assessed” torture practices “to improve their effectiveness.” Not only were doctors used to develop interrogation techniques, but their involvement protected non-medical personnel involved in torture from prosecution for what they were doing – “a cynical effort,” said Gustitus, “to meet the conditions manufactured by the Department of Justice to get around the well-established definition of torture.” In this way the U.S. government can declare that it vehemently opposes torture while departments of government research and practice torture.

Several Orthodox bishops have signed NRCAT’s Statement of Conscience against U.S.-sponsored torture, including Greek Archbishop Demetrios, Antiochian Metropolitan Philip, Armenian Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, Romanian Archbishop Nicolae Condre, and Metropolitan Christopher of the Serbian Orthodox Church. By signing the Statement, they agree that torture “degrades everyone involved – policy-makers, perpetrators and victims. It contradicts our nation’s most cherished ideals. Any policies that permit torture and inhumane treatment are shocking and morally intolerable.”

Thank God they are taking a public stand. It’s a beginning. In other areas of the world, Orthodox bishops, priests, and lay people are prominent in the anti-torture movement. Sadly, American Orthodox believers remain far more passive regarding torture, a silence that can only create a breeding ground for more torture and other acts of abuse. We must speak out. If ever there was a time to speak out against torture, the time is now.

Given our experiences with torture, the Orthodox Church is uniquely prepared to speak out against torture practices in our governments. The Orthodox Church has experienced the evil of torture from our founding to the present day. Following the torture and crucifixion of Christ, the apostles faced torture and imprisonment, in the end giving their lives as martyrs. Many of our churches are named after martyrs who were tortured, among them St. Christina of Tyre and St. Katherine of Alexandria. One cannot imagine an Orthodox church lacking icons of saints who suffered torture. Our faith is dynamically shaped by the sufferings of the faithful.

Many of our parishioners have fresh memories of torture, ethnic cleansing and genocide. Indeed, we have living witnesses in our midst who carry on their bodies and in their minds the scars of torture. CIA doctors are alleged to have used techniques on detainees that are reminiscent of Ottoman, Nazi, and numerous Communist regimes. During the Armenian Genocide, doctors used typhoid injections to kill thousands of Armenian prisoners. In Romania, Communist doctors tested sleep deprivation and extreme temperatures on captives in the gulags. Torture was commonly carried out against prisoners in Russia in the Soviet era, including many Christians. Now it appears America has joined the ranks of history’s torturing nations.

God reminded Israel, “You shall not enslave others because you were slaves in Egypt.” (Exodus 22:21, 23:9) Likewise we, whose community includes so many victims of torture, should feel a special obligation to prevent torture because we know what it is like to be tortured. As a communal Church, each of us is included in the experience of our co-communicants and is accountable for protecting others from torture. Every time we enter the church building, see the icons, light a candle, we are including ourselves in the great flow of the Orthodox faith. When we prepare ourselves for the Eucharist, we acknowledge that we are surrounded by a great “cloud of witnesses,” many of whom were tortured and degraded. When we include ourselves in the Church, we are incorporating the lives and struggles of the apostles, martyrs, and saints into our own experience.
During funeral services, when we sing, “May their memory be eternal,” we are asking God to further include us in the great movement of the Church. We are asking that the memory of past Christians be so absorbed by the souls of the present believers that their memories might be passed down eternally. There is a social responsibility involved in this process – that the faith, courage and values of earlier Christians would become ours.

None of us personally witnessed the actual death of Christ, yet we remember His death in the mystery of bread and wine. We participate in a historic event even though we were not there. When we receive communion, we are in communion both with Christ’s death and resurrection and with those who have lived the faith before us. In this way, for Orthodox Christians the experiences of the martyrs should be personal. They were tortured. They suffered under unjust governments. Torture threatened to degrade the image of God and the dignity of their faith. Although we, as individuals, may not have been tortured, we are included in the experience by “their memory eternal.” Accordingly, when Orthodox Christians encounter torture in our governments, we have a responsibility to act with the collective voice of the martyrs and saints and fight against the use of torture.

As Orthodox Christians, our understanding of community differs significantly from many of our Western counterparts who speak of Christ’s life and actions in the past tense. We are not asking God to help us learn from historic figures – we are asking for their actual, living faith, the intense and radical faith of the Apostles. When we say the words of the Creed, we are connecting ourselves with that faith. When we care for the sick or homeless, we are connecting ourselves with that original faith. The Apostles and Church Fathers took such strong stances in upholding the truth that they challenged the power structures of their governments. They loved the faith more than their own lives.

Care for the basic needs of others is at the heart of Christian faith. Christ represents a turn-the-other-cheek justice, a lay-down-your-life-for-the-lives-of-others type of justice. As Christ said, “What you have done to the least person, you have done to Me.” Through the Church calendar and our many commemorations, we remember the Christ-revealing lives of those who have gone before us. Yet in honoring heroes of the past, we cannot forget our responsibility to help shape the future. Christ’s crucifixion and His legacy mean nothing if we do not protect those being tortured and stripped of dignity in our own time. In communion with the radical faith of our forebears, we must stand against torture.

A significant action an Orthodox Christian in America can take is to join the National Religious Campaign Against Torture as a member, as the Orthodox Peace Fellowship has done recently. Via our web site, you can sign its “Statement of Conscience.” Encourage your parish to use NRCAT’s Orthodox materials. A video for adult parish use is available, including an Orthodox-specific discussion guide. Support our Metropolitans Christopher and Phillip and Archbishops Demetrios, Nicolae and Vicken by getting involved.

As Archbishop Demetrios stated, “The deliberate torture of one human being by another is a sin against our Creator, in whose image we all have been created. This practice should not be condoned or allowed by any government. It must be condemned by all people of faith, wherever it exists, without exception.”

Bearing the wounds of torture, Christ looks at us from our cathedral ceilings. In loving our Lord, Orthodox Christians ought to be doing all we can to abolish the abuse of captives, for whose protection and salvation we pray at every Liturgy. For the peace in the world, we pray to the Lord. For the sick, suffering, and the captives, we pray to the Lord. May our Liturgy so permeate our lives that our actions reflect our prayers as instruments of divine justice and compassion.

Against Homicide

To be Pro-life is to oppose ALL violence, life is a gift from God

By Metropolitan George Khodr of Mount Lebanon

Metropolitan George is highly regarded throughout Lebanon for his untiring efforts to encourage dialogue and mutual respect as well as to make known basic Christian truths and principles. It is notable that during the Lebanese civil war, the only religious community which refused to form its own army was the Orthodox Church.

The life in us is a gift from God. Only God gives life and only God takes it back. Thus we are not to commit suicide or to harm ourselves, and certainly no one has the right to take another person’s life. Each person receives both his life and his neighbor from God. The other may live as he wishes. It is our duty to counsel him, to keep him company, to serve him and help him improve his situation to attain a better life. In doing this, our own spirit becomes better. But you have no right to kill another person, even if this person asks you to, because he has no right to put an end to his life which was entrusted by God to him. Accordingly, abortion cannot be permissible because the mother doesn’t own her fetus. Similarly a doctor has no right to kill his patient, no matter how bad his condition. He does not own his patient’s body. He cannot make the decision to kill a patient even when in a long-lasting coma. Your body is not an object for you to do with it whatever you like. Your body is a part of you as a person; it is not for the governor to flog nor for the judge to execute.

In the situation of human dialogue, the body is the place of conversation, but if a human connection cannot be established between you and the other, the destruction of the other’s body is an act of contempt for his human nature and with it the permanent loss of the possibility of dialogue.

You and the other, your body and his, are intended to mature together in a heavenward movement. God attracts you with your bodies to Himself where He becomes your meeting place. Your journey is always upward, and the other can only accompany you in his yearning for the higher. If you are not both attracted together to God, the relationship between you is severed; it becomes either abuse or slavery. Slave and master both become objects. A relationship between two beings is impossible apart from God. In the depths of its truth, a “being” cannot exist without openness towards its Creator and towards other creatures. There is no “I” unless it affirms “we.” The “I” can only be fulfilled in the communion of “we.” The same for the body. After its deliverance from itself and from its slavery, it becomes stretched towards embracing and accepting the other. The moment this “threesome” of “I,” “you” and the Divine is achieved, then God embraces the whole man and all humanity. Killing ruptures this threesome.

By annihilating the other you annihilate yourself and renounce the dominion of God over both of you. Every sin is alienation, a denial of one of God’s qualities: a denial of God’s patience, mercy and love. Killing is an absolute denial of God because it is a denial of Him as Lord and Giver of Life.

A man annihilates his opponent because he decides that the other is obstructing his plan, his business, passions or freedom. He thinks that only in this way can he be safe and have the guarantee of dominion. Killing is both isolation – the killer is alone in his imagination – and the deification of self. In his mind and deepest thoughts, the killer replaces God. Every time you sin, you substitute yourself for God to some degree. By killing, you replace Him completely.

In a recent movie about Joan of Arc, I appreciated an episode where she was deeply grieved by all the bloodshed suffered by her English enemies after the victory in the battle of Orleans. Despite the belief that she was delegated from heaven to fight this war, she couldn’t bear the waste of blood. The commander explained to her that no war is possible without bloodshed. She had a different logic. I will not analyze here the conversation between a virgin saint and an army commander, but the horror of war comes to my mind as I recite Psalm 50: “Deliver me, O God, from blood guiltiness.” No one of us, no matter what his capacity, is far from the temptation of blood guiltiness.

Because of the importance of blood, canons that come down to us from early Church require the dismissal from the priesthood of any priest who even accidentally causes the death of another human.

Relationship between humans is made possible by language, a word connected with logos . We know the from the Evangelist St. John that Christ is the Logos: the Word of God. “Word” is the relationship between you and the other. Otherwise you annihilate both him and yourself.

This brings us to the dilemma of genocide. When a group of people, in the grip of fear, proceeds to exterminate another group, it means the murderers think they can reestablish themselves only by existing alone, without the context of coexistence, solely because their victims are “different.” Cain killed his brother Abel, a herdsman (thus the words Habeel and Kabeel in Arabic), because he had a “different” occupation. The “other” is sentenced to death for his differences – he is not of your country, race, religion or party – and because he cannot be put to death legally, he is slain without a trial. After all, a trial is a form of dialogue.

Every massacre is an attack against the name of God. Every massacre is “religious,” in the sense that ethnicity or political ideology can become a pseudo-religion. “The time is coming when whoever kills you will think he is doing service to God.” (John 16:2) We can speak of a “liturgy” of extermination. They regard mass murder as a divinely appointed task.

The logic of genocide is that the world should be of one color, one kind.

In its ideal form, a national army does not desire killing but wishes, within existing possibilities, to maintain order and justice and defend the country without killing. We can say that the army has no enemy, it only has temporary opponents. The army is not supposed to occupy other lands, because occupation causes humiliation. This is why the greatest leaders, because they detested bloodshed, always sought paths of peace. The philosophy of the military is that it defends the entire nation. It is not, in its essence, hostile to any other nation. This was the ideal of the Byzantine Empire. Offensive wars were excluded. The army was to be used only as a shield for peace and a defense force.

In contrast there are militia groups, the “military” of certain groups. A militia does not support the general cause – it is set against other militias. It is an instrument of extermination of the other. This is why civil war is always the hardest to resolve. In the case of the Lebanese civil war, every group which participated in massacres must come to repentance in order for us all to repent to our motherland. God cannot be the victor unless every group comes forward and confesses his sins to the other group in the presence of the entire nation.

In the context of this logic, there is no worse proverb than the popular saying: “God forgives the past!” No, God does not forgive us. It is not in His nature to forgive unless every one of us has acknowledged and repented from his own sin of murder against the other. He who dipped his hands in blood, or wished the death or the displacement of the other, is an accomplice in the sin of extermination. Every murdered person, no matter what religion he belongs to, is innocent because he is part of God, and God does not need anyone to fight in His name. God knows how to put to death whoever He wants to. No one is the representative of God in the domain of death.

Pro-life Socialim

 Pro-Life from a socialist perspective

By Jessica R. Dreistadt

The Socialist Party, like many left-wing political parties in the United States, supports a woman’s choice to have an abortion. The party’s analysis of this issue is grounded in solid Marxist theory and represents the consensus of party members.

However, some Socialists and other progressives disagree with this predominant position; we also base our beliefs on leftist ideology and a desire to promote and create a socialist society.

Unfortunately, the perspective of pro- life Socialists is sometimes met with ridicule and contempt. The purpose of this essay is to dismantle the dominance and dogma of some pro-choice Socialists and to encourage discussion and diversity within our movement.

This essay represents only the opinion of its author and is not meant to characterize the beliefs of all pro-life Socialists. The information presented here is offered in the spirit of a friendly reminder to all comrades that we should accept and love one another despite our differences of opinion.

A radical view and call to action

As a Socialist woman, I stand in solidarity with all who are oppressed including people who are poor, people of color, people with disabilities, and the unborn.

Women and children are relegated to an inferior social status throughout the world. Capitalist societies, in particular, determine the worth of women and children based on their contribution or relation to economic production and growth. However, the worth of women and children cannot be measured by any man. Women and children are intrinsically valuable and deserve every opportunity and privilege available to men and women of means.

Abortion reinforces this imposed inequality. Pregnant women who do not have adequate social and economic support become alienated in our capitalist society. As Socialists, we must support all women in need by addressing the root causes of gender and economic inequality.

Women often choose to have abortions because they feel stuck in an undesirable situation. We must work to change the conditions that lead women to have abortions rather than encouraging the women themselves to change and adapt to their situations.

The pro-choice worldview reduces women and children to material objects whose value in the home and society is based, in large part, on male desire and convenience. When a woman chooses to end a life because of lack of male support, she and her child are victim to the patriarchy. Men who support a woman’s right to choose are also taking advantage of their ability to use women’s bodies and abuse their relationships.

A woman who has an abortion materializes and assumes ownership of her child to justify her right to end his or her life. Mainstream feminists, now free from male domination in many ways, put our children in an inferior social position - similar to the one women once held.

When a woman chooses to have an abortion, she is subjugating the needs of her child and society to her own individual desires while supporting the opportunistic, money-driven abortion industry. These are the hallmarks of a capitalist society.

Abortion negates women’s ability to create life, reducing the societal value of our unique physical abilities because they are considered ‘inferior’ to the physical capabilities of men. Manipulating nature and its resources is detrimental to environmental harmony and disrespectful to the essence of womanhood. Abortion disrupts the natural flow and process of life and rejuvenation.

Many Socialists are pacifists and as such we condemn unnecessary violence. The taking of a life or the possibility of human life, especially when it involves pain, dismembering, and mutilation of a baby and emotional turmoil of a mother, cannot be reconciled with a belief in nonviolence. Being pro-choice and pacifist are incompatible positions.

Abortion is sometimes defended because the fetus is of a different age, appearance, and physical capacity than a ‘normal’ human being outside the womb. When the value of human life, and its right to continue living, is based on these subjective qualities, the floodgates to discrimination and domination are opened.

Abortion is always a compromise. Women and children deserve, and must demand, real choices that unconditionally meet our needs.

ACCEPT NO COMPROMISES!!

The abortion controversy will only be resolved through the elimination of all forms of violence, sexism, discrimination, income inequality, abstinence-only programs, and corporate controlled healthcare (and everything else) along with support for safe homes and communities, equitable resource distribution,
respect and opportunities for all, adequate childcare, comprehensive sex education programs, and easy access to birth control. A socialist society is the only solution.

In Guantanamo, Justice Denied

In Guantanamo

By David Miller

The Inside Story

By Yvonne Ridley

Guantanamo Bay is, without doubt, the world’s most notorious prison, which has left an indelible stain on the Bush administration.
One of the first acts of U.S. President Barack Obama was to order its closure and there is speculation that some of the detainees may now be offered asylum in Wales.

I am one of the few journalists to visit the sprawling naval base.

I traveled there with filmmaker David Miller, whose documentary “Guantanamo: Inside the Wire” is to be screened tomorrow.

I was invited by the U.S. military to Cuba to see the camp from the inside for myself… it was an offer I could not refuse.

The immediate reaction when I told people about my assignment was: Why on earth did they let you, of all people, in there?

A valid question, indeed. Why would the American military extend such an invite to an anti-war activist, peace campaigner, journalist, and vociferous critic of the War on Terror?

In truth I don’t have an answer, but I am eternally gratefully that the Joint Task Force did let me spend four days at their U.S. Naval Base and, more importantly, let me out again!

I suppose it all began last year when Birmingham neurologist Dr. David Nicholl expressed his concerns about the medical ethics and challenges faced by the doctors employed inside the prison during a discussion show I was presenting for Press TV.

As part of my research I telephoned the base and asked to speak to a senior doctor, but the press officer at JTF-GTMO said this was impossible. A heated conversation ensued as I dropped in the words “torture and water-boarding” and from there we moved to discuss the Hippocratic Oath and medical ethics.

Clearly irritated at my challenging questions, he then read out, in a very loud voice, the entire contents of the oath which is signed by every newly qualified doctor around the world.

After making it clear I was singularly unimpressed, he then barked the invite: “Well why don’t you come over and see the medical facilities for yourself and talk to the doctors?”

Once he made clear it was not going to be a one-way ticket and I could take a cameraman, I agreed. And so, after five months of personal vetting, I and filmmaker David Miller boarded a pea-shooter of a plane run by Air Sunshine at Miami, destination Guantanamo.

We had read and filled in lots of forms before setting off, forms which would make any self-respecting journalist balk, but the option was simple -- no signature, no ticket.

By signing one particular document I guess we signed away all our rights to the contents of David’s camera.

The first night we stayed in comfortable accommodation, segregated, on the naval base and then the next day we started our mission after being given more rules and regulations.

I was told: The ground rules are established to ensure protected information such as classified information, intelligence collections capabilities, and sources and methods are not compromised and to protect the security of commission participants by preserving anonymity.

It was also made perfectly clear what would happen if the rules were breached: expulsion. In addition, disclosure of classified information could result in a criminal prosecution. Let’s face it, David and I had no option but to comply.

We could not film or identify any staff without their permission -- some of the guards genuinely believe Al-Qaeda will track them down to their civilian homes and kill them and their families.

Security is as heightened as the paranoia, real or imagined, of all those serving at JTF-GTMO.

Section 8 of the media ground rules states:

The following media activities are prohibited and may be subject to embargo:

a. No front facial shots of detainees may be taken at any time, even with the intent of distorting or hiding facial images during production and broadcast. Front facial shots at distances are prohibited. Photos of other features considered distinguishing that could lead to the identity of a detainee may be prohibited by the Public Affairs Officer on scene and embargoed if discovered during the security review.

b. No audio, video recordings, photographs or other electronic images, or drawings, sketches or likenesses may be rendered of any detainee when that image or recording may reveal that detainee’s identity or nationality. Identities and nationalities of any detainee will not be disclosed unless previously released by OASD (PA).

Each evening David Miller went through the agony of replaying every single frame that he had shot during the day to a civilian officer who would then censor the contents if he felt it breached the rules.

For someone who has filmed and worked in Iraq under the watchful Saddam regime and the ever-controlling states of Saudi Arabia and Syria, I have to say I had never before experienced this degree of scrutiny.

Nor did I have as many military minders as I did when I made my way around Guantanamo. It was a reflection, I believe, of the general state of paranoia which is evident across American society as a result of whipping up fear over George W. Bush’s seemingly never-ending War on Terror, and I felt very sad that this fear was having such an impact in a country which used to boast about civil rights, freedoms, and liberties.

Hopefully, the new man in the White House will engage his people through empowerment and not use the politics of fear.

Of course, I know what you really want me to write about is what I saw inside the prison itself. Well, I can tell you that despite all the restrictions, I did get into Camp Delta and was given unprecedented access to camps 4, 5, and 6, the last two being part of the shining new, maximum security facility.

Our film goes out tomorrow, so I don’t want to give too much away before it premieres, but we did see some detainees, and heard the painful cries of others in the so-called “non-compliant” wing.

We were not allowed to talk to or interview them, nor were we allowed to film their faces. Our media minder told us that the Department of Defense policies prohibit the filming/recording of detainees in a way which would identify them.

Our mission is to ensure the detainee is protected under this policy, explained one of our minders.

Bizarrely, some of the most stringent security presented itself when we went to Camp Justice (trust me there is no irony when these names are created). At first we were told the area was off-limits and then we were allowed to film a tight shot of the sign but were forbidden from taking a camera, any camera, inside the court room where the military tribunals are taking place.

This place is already defunct after the new U.S. president ended the military tribunals with immediate effect. Too late for the Yemeni Salim Hamdan, who has already been tried and sentenced for his role as Osama bin Laden’s driver.

For two days we were shown around the detention facilities and in to the medical and library wings. One of the most popular books on loan is from the Harry Potter series and the National Geographic magazines are also highly prized.

The intellectual content of the detainees’ library is a sharp contrast to the contents of the on-base shop, which offers such picture-led magazines and videos with titles including Hooters and Debbie Does Dallas. We were not allowed to film the reading material of the off-duty military.

As I walked through the old Camp X-Ray, I had to tear away at the creepers and leafy tentacles which held the cages tightly closed -- most are now overgrown with weeds and vines.

The only occupants are snakes and banana rats, so named because of the curious shaped droppings these large nocturnal rodents leave behind.

My minders told me that they are most keen the rest of the world forgets the images of orange-clad detainees being wheeled around the cages of Camp X-Ray to the interrogation block, which was open from January to April 2002.

And they felt that by giving us access to the new prison nestling on the edge of a bay and surrounded by razor and barbed wire, that we would go away satisfied that the treatment of the detainees was humane and had improved.

I’m sorry, but what I saw did not make me rest easy at all. In some ways the supermax-style prison is grotesque and an affront to civilized society. Every part of the supermax cell is designed to dehumanize and degrade the occupant.

Although I’m not sure who is more humiliated in the non-compliant wing when asking for toilet roll -- the guard who has to count out around eight sheets of tissue paper or the detainee who stands there and watches him do this.

I did get a chance to interview the medical staff and was slightly concerned to learn that more than two thirds of the detainees had undergone colonoscopies -- a medical procedure to examine the inside of the large colon and small bowel using a fiberoptic camera. It is a procedure used mainly on older patients which does not fit the profile of the detainees.

The doctor I spoke to vehemently denied that the detainees were being used as human guineau pigs to enhance their own medical CVs for when army personnel move to civvy street.

I requested an hour to sit down and interview the rear admiral who is in charge of the whole facility. The interview began quite well and he even offered me his pips and resignation if he thought anything untoward was going on during his watch.

But there were a few silences and uneasy pauses as my questions about human rights became more and more challenging. The session was brought to an abrupt end by an overly protective PR man as I got into the arena of the now defunct Camp Iguana where children as young as 12 were once held.

I was assured all the children have long gone, but as Birmingham-based ex-detainee Moazzam Begg told me: “No Yvonne, some of the children are still there, but now they’ve grown up into young men like Omar Khadr.”

My documentary covers the haunting case of Canadian citizen Omar, the last Westerner to remain in Gitmo. I defy anyone to watch the footage we later obtained which shows the child weeping over his blindness and injuries and crying for his mother during an interrogation.

Moazzam Begg is probably the best known prisoner to emerge from the cages of Cuba, but others have also chosen to break their silence for the first time by talking to me on the record for the documentary. Their candid interviews are also included in our film, although some still insisted on remaining in the studio shadows.

Rear Admiral Mark Busby has now moved on from Guantanamo, promoted earlier this month in the last few days of the Bush administration.

The most striking thing which emerged during my interviews with ordinary soldiers right up to the bossman himself was their total commitment to the mission in Guantanamo. I’m curious about their gut reaction to Obama’s swift decision.

They were clearly shocked, almost wounded, when I told them that politicians around the world were calling for its closure --including those sitting in the White House. It was as though they were wrapped in their own cocoon, sealed off and protected from world opinion.

“Honor bound to defend freedom. That is our mission and that is what we believe in,” said one lanky Marine as he stooped to hiss the words slowly in my ear when I questioned the point of the facility and its long-term future.

“Honor Bound” is embellished on virtually every notice board and signpost around Guantanamo Bay. It’s on the coffee mug I was presented with -- bought from the souvenir shop on the base where you can buy everything from a t-shirt to a baseball cap or key ring.

Some notice boards carry a special “value word” which is changed every week. When I was there, the buzzword was: RESPECT. There are still more than 200 men languishing in the facility while hundreds more have passed through the facility, including children.

I know there has been talk that some of the detainees could be given a new home and fresh start in Wales as asylum seekers because it is not safe for them to return to their country of origin. There is a twist of irony that the U.S. has refused to return 16 Uyghurs to China over the issue of human rights.

More than 100 countries have been approached to try to find them a new home where they can resettle. Those countries that refused to accept detainees are now more open to requests from the Obama administration.

What I saw and what David Miller filmed in Guantanamo will haunt us both for the rest of our lives and our “Gitmo experience” lasted only four days, but there are other, more secret prisons around the world.

Lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, who we also feature, reckons there are still around 20,000 prisoners held in U.S. custody, beyond the rule of law, at various locations, including Bagram Air Base, where 680 prisoners are held without any due process.

It is worth remembering that 95 percent of those held in Guantanamo were not picked up from a battlefield, but many were sold like slaves for bounties of $5000; a fact acknowledged in Pakistani General Pervez Musharraf’s autobiography In The Line of Fire.

I hope that our film will move all of you who watch it, and if detainees are released to come and live near you, I also hope you will extend the hand of friendship and not point a finger of suspicion.

Workers at Apple Supplier Commit Suicide

Apple supplier in China treats workers without dignity

By Martin Hickman

The American electronics giant Apple was investigating damaging allegations last night that Chinese workers making its new iPad device were subjected to such "inhumane" treatment that some of them took their own lives by jumping off factory roofs.

The company has been embarrassed by publicity surrounding 11 suicide attempts at the vast Foxconn facility near the southern boom city of Shenzhen, where the iPad is made, which threatens to overshadow the global launch of the touch-screen computer tomorrow.

Yesterday a "saddened and upset" Apple promised to investigate whether the plant, which employs 300,000 people who earn around 30p an hour, should continue to make its products, which sell for hundreds of pounds each.

Women of Afghanistan Imprisoned for being raped

7 Years After Operation Enduring Freedom was launched, women in Afghanistan still imprisoned for rape.

China Bites Back With Report On; US Police' use of unrestrained violence

China redirects blame

By Patrick Martin

Last year, 315 police officers in New York City were subject to internal supervision due to “unrestrained use of violence. 7.3 million Americans [predominantly black] were banged up in the prison system, more than in any other country.

On March 13, China’s Information Office of the State Council published a report titled, “The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2009.”

This document was clearly intended as a rebuttal to the annual US State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009, released two days earlier.

The Chinese report quite legitimately notes that the US government “releases Country Reports on Human Rights Practices year after year to accuse other countries.

The US takes human rights as a political instrument to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, defame other nations’ image and seek its own strategic interests. This fully exposes its double standards on the human rights issue…”

The Chinese report is an eye-opening document—factual, sober, even understated, drawn entirely from public government and media sources in the United States, with each item carefully documented.

It presents a picture of 21st century America as much of the world sees it, one which is in sharp contrast to the official mythology and American media propaganda.

Not surprisingly, the report went unmentioned in the US mass media.

The 14-page report is divided into six major sections: Life, Property and Personal Security;

Civil and Political Rights;

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;

Racial Discrimination;

Rights of Women and Children;

US Violations of Human Rights Against Other Nations.

The cumulative picture is one of a society in deep and worsening social crisis.

A few of the facts and figures cited on violence and police repression in the United States:

• Each year, 30,000 people die in gun-related incidents.

• There were 14,180 murders last year.

• In the first ten months of 2009, 45 people were killed by police use of tasers, bringing the total for the decade to 389.

• Last year, 315 police officers in New York City were subject to internal supervision due to “unrestrained use of violence.”

• 7.3 million Americans were under the authority of the correctional system, more than in any other country.

• An estimated 60,000 prisoners were raped while in custody last year.

On democratic rights, the report notes the pervasive government spying on citizens, authorized under the 2001 Patriot Act, extensive surveillance of the Internet by the National Security Agency, and police harassment of anti-globalization demonstrators in Pittsburgh during last year’s G-20 summit.

Pointing to the hypocrisy of US government “human rights” rhetoric, the authors observe, “the same conduct in other countries would be called human rights violations, whereas in the United States it was called necessary crime control.”

The report only skims the surface on the socioeconomic crisis in the United States, noting record levels of unemployment, poverty, hunger and homelessness, as well as 46.3 million people without health insurance. It does offer a few facts rarely discussed in the US media:

• 712 bodies were cremated at public expense in the city of Los Angeles last year, because the families were too poor to pay for a burial.

• There were 5,657 workplace deaths recorded in 2007, the last year for which a tally is available, a rate of 17 deaths per day (not a single employer was criminally charged for any of these deaths).

• Some 2,266 veterans died as a consequence of lack of health insurance in 2008, 14 times the military death toll in Afghanistan that year.

The report presents evidence of pervasive racial discrimination against blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans, the most oppressed sections of the US working class, including a record number of racial discrimination claims over hiring practices, more than 32,000.

It also notes the rising number of incidents of discrimination or violence against Muslims, and the detention of 300,000 “illegal” immigrants each year, with more than 30,000 immigrants in US detention facilities every day of the year.

It notes that the state of California imposed life sentences on 18 times more black defendants than white, and that in 2008, when New York City police fired their weapons, 75 percent of the targets were black, 22 percent Hispanic and only 3 percent white.

The report refers to the well-known reality of unequal pay for women, with median female income only 77 percent that of male income in 2008, down from 78 percent in 2007. According to the report, 70 percent of working-age women have no health insurance, or inadequate coverage, high medical bills or high health-related debt.

Children bear a disproportionate burden of economic hardship, with 16.7 million children not having enough food at some time during 2008, and 3.5 million children under five facing hunger or malnutrition, 17 percent of the total.

Child hunger is combined with the malignant phenomenon of rampant child labor in agriculture: some 400,000 child farm workers pick America’s crops.

The US also leads the world in imprisoning children and juveniles, and is the only country that does not offer parole to juvenile offenders.

US foreign policy comes in for justifiable criticism as well. A country with so many poor and hungry people accounts for 42 percent of the world’s total military spending, a colossal $607 billion, as well as the world’s largest foreign arms sales, $37.8 billion in 2008, up nearly 50 percent from the previous year.

The Chinese report notes the documented torture of prisoners in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, the worldwide US network of military bases, the US blockade of Cuba (opposed by the UN General Assembly by a vote of 187 to 3).

And the systematic US spying around the world, utilizing the NSA’s “ECHELON” interception system, as well as the US monopoly control over Internet route servers.

The report also points out the deliberate US flouting of international human rights covenants.

Washington has either signed but not ratified or refused to sign four major UN covenants: on economic, social and cultural rights; on the rights of women; on the rights of people with disabilities; and on the rights of indigenous peoples.

The report does not discuss the source of the malignant social conditions in the United States and the causal connection between poverty, repression and discrimination and the operations of the capitalist profit system.