The Senate is set to vote soon on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” – but a right-wing barrage of emails and calls opposing repeal is already well underway.

We need your help to drown them out and show that a majority of Americans wants this discriminatory law repealed – once and for all.

We have a chance to make history here. Please, send your message today.

Click here to act now.

Related posts:

1. TAKE ACTION: Pressure Senators to Ask HHS Nominee Kathleen Sebelius about the HIV Ban Help lift the HIV immigration ban...
2. TAKE ACTION: Help Keep Shelters Open and Expand Services to Survivors of Domestic Abuse The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, a vital source...
3. TAKE ACTION: Tell the President to ban landmines (HRW) President Obama has an opportunity to get US landmine policy...

Accused of throwing a grenade that killed Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer and participating in a terrorist conspiracy beginning when he was only 10 years old, Khadr literally has grown up at Guantánamo. Now 23, the full beard Khadr has grown since his imprisonment in 2002 obscures the fact that he was only 15 at the time he was shot and captured by U.S. forces.

Khadr has now spent a third of his life at Guantánamo, and after five years in the discredited military commissions, his trial began today. Khadr faces charges of murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, providing material support to terrorism, and spying. He faces a maximum life sentence if convicted.

Khadr’s is the first trial in the illegitimate military commissions under President Obama. The trial of an alleged child soldier who was abused in U.S. detention is a terrible case for the administration to open with, and yet here we are, in the middle of jury selection.

Guantánamo’s youngest prisoner, Khadr is the only one of the 176 remaining detainees who was a juvenile when transferred here. A Canadian, he’s also the only Westerner remaining at Gitmo. Khadr’s case is also unique because it will be the first prosecution in history for murder in violation of the laws of war (murder isn’t a recognized war crime; like the charges of spying and material suppport for terrorism that Khadr also faces, the charge was fashioned out of whole cloth for the purposes of the military commissions).

Omar Khadr’s trial flies in the face of international law and policy that recognizes child soldiers as victims and candidates for rehabilitation. The U.N. Special Representative on Children in Armed Conflict said in a statement today that Khadr’s trial sets a dangerous precedent that could endanger child soldiers around the world. She also said “juvenile justice standards are clear—children should not be tried before military tribunals.”

Since World War II, there hasn’t been a war crimes prosecution of a child soldier—until today. And that’s not because children don’t commit war crimes. Children committed some of the most heinous abuses of the Sierra Leonean civil war in the 90′s, including murder, rape, and amputation of limbs. But the U.N. war court convened to prosecute those responsible for wartime atrocities chose not to prosecute anyone under 18 at the time of their crimes, and instead entered these child soldiers in rehabilitatation programs and used them as witnesses in the war crimes trials against the adults who recruited or used them during the war.

The former chief prosecutor of the Sierra Leonean war court, former Defense Department official David Crane, has said that Khadr’s trial is “morally and legally wrong.” Author Ishmael Beah, a former child soldier from Sierra Leone who, like Khadr, was captured when he was 15, has also criticized Khadr’s prosecution. Beah admits that during the civil war he killed “too many people to count,” but since a stint in a rehabilitation center he has written a best-selling memoir, graduated from Oberlin, and served as a UNICEF ambassador. Beah has said he struggles to understand the dramatic difference between the compassion shown him and the lack of compassion shown Khadr.

(Originally posted on Daily Kos.)

Related posts:

1. What We Stand For Yesterday was a stark reminder that instead of closing the...
2. Standing before history Royal Dutch Shell brought to New York court over rampant...
3. A Win Against Warrantless GPS Tracking On Friday, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of...

Related posts:

1. United States Signs U.N. Declaration for GLBT Rights ...
2. TAKE ACTION: Tell the President to ban landmines (HRW) President Obama has an opportunity to get US landmine policy...
3. VIDEO: A Measure of Our Humanity ...

The US participated in the “Ottawa Process” that created this international treaty, but the Clinton administration decided at the last moment against signing and instead set 2006 as the objective for the US to join. In February 2004, the Bush administration reversed course and announced that it did not ever intend to join the Mine Ban Treaty.

The United States is already compliant with the key provisions of the Mine Ban Treaty. It has not used antipersonnel mines since 1991, has had an export ban in place since 1992, and has not produced since 1997. The US is already the world’s largest contributor to global mine clearance and victim assistance programs. Acceding to the treaty would reinforce President Obama’s stated commitment to international humanitarian law, protection of civilians, arms control and disarmament, and multilateralism.

Tell President Obama that you support the landmine ban and want to see the United States join the Mine Ban Treaty without delay.

Photo: Angola’s four-decade war ended in 2002. Parties to the conflict mined roads, high-voltage electricity pylons, reservoirs and dams. © Gervasio Sanchez

Related posts:

1. TAKE ACTION: Help Raise the US HIV Travel Ban at HHS Senate Confirmation Hearings Act to end the US ban on the entry of...
2. TAKE ACTION: Pressure Senators to Ask HHS Nominee Kathleen Sebelius about the HIV Ban Help lift the HIV immigration ban...
3. TAKE ACTION – March 30: National call-in day to ban cluster bombs Call your Representative and Senators and ask them to co-sponsor...

It’s acceptable that Americans show sensitivity to what has become hallowed ground – the area of destruction from the greatest terrorist attack on United States soil – given the name of “ground zero.”  It’s natural that many Americans will question the construction of an Islamic Center that will stand close to the hallowed ground – natural but not correct.

Those who view the attack on the World Trade center as being a symbol in a struggle of ‘right vs. wrong’ should recognize that there is no absolute right or wrong; “ground zero” is a symbol of how the world too often goes wrong.

A century of western interference in Middle East nations, dominating their resources, delineating their borders, deciding their rulers, destabilizing their political frameworks, waging dubious wars which have resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, occupying their lands and generally creating havoc and misery don’t seem to have bothered western leaders. A conditioned mind reacts automatically, senseless, irrational and often to its own detriment.

Two city blocks north of ‘ground zero,” and two blocks south of the Warren street mosque, the Cordoba House, which contains a mosque, is mainly a mixture of learning, art and culture with a 500-seat auditorium, swimming pool, art exhibition spaces, and bookstores. The well publicized antagonism to the Cordoba House follows the Pavlov reaction, salivating at the sound before the food is delivered, but contains other inglorious activity.

Odd that a mosque already exists two blocks from the proposed Cordoba House and has not aroused comment. Since mosques allow Muslim worshipers to find a place to genuflect rather having them lay a prayer rug on a NYC street and disturb the City’s financial district’s wall to curb pedestrian traffic, which is reported to sometimes occur outside an overflowed Warren Street mosque, another mosque would be welcome. However, this building is more than a mosque. It’s a testimonial that Muslims swim, read, think and eat fast foods, just like all Americans.  Since another mosque already exists close to ‘ground zero,’ evidently it is Cordoba House’s added features that have aroused resentment. Perhaps it seems exaggerated, but there is a lingering feeling that the antagonism to the Cordoba House includes the ultimate of anti-Semitism; “We don’t want you Semites to be part of us. You are Semites and you will remain Semites.”

A bewildering aspect of the Mosque discussion is the involvement of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the pro-Israel J Street lobby, both of whom published highlighted opinions of the Cordoba House. These organizations represent a minority of a minority of Americans, and behave as if their words have super importance. Who cares what they have to say?

The ADL reacted negatively to the Muslim building, arguing that it is too close to ‘ground zero.’

Statement On Islamic Community Center Near Ground Zero

New York, NY, July 28, 2010 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today issued the following statement regarding the proposed Islamic Center near Ground Zero in Manhattan:

Proponents of the Islamic Center may have every right to build at this site, and may even have chosen the site to send a positive message about Islam.  The bigotry some have expressed in attacking them is unfair, and wrong.  But ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right.  In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain – unnecessarily – and that is not right.

“Cause some victims more pain?” Evidently,although poorly expressed, the ADL must mean surviving relatives rather than the already dead. How revealing! The ADL believes by supposition, or is it transference, without describing any polls, that the opinion of a few (or how many?) Americans (Muslims also died in the 9/11 tragedy) have precedence over seven million Muslim Americans in determining where Cordoba House should be constructed. Digest that and then answer the question: Isn’t that the most extreme prejudice; the opinion of several non-Muslim Americans is worth more than the want of millions of Muslim Americans.

This is the same ADL, which has been sued on several occasions for violating privacy rights and assisting in false charges of anti-Semitism.

Counter Punch, February 25, 2002 The ADL Spying Case Is Over, But The Struggle Continues

By Jeffrey Blankfort, Anne Poirier and Steve Zeltzer Plaintiffs in the of ADL Spying Case

In 1993, the District of Attorney of San Francisco released 700 pages of documents implicating the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that claims to be a defender of civil rights, in a vast spying operation directed against American citizens who were opposed to Israel’s policies in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza and to the apartheid policies of the government of South Africa and passing on information to both governments.

Jewish Daily Forward, 2001
Judge Slams ADL for Hurting Couple Tarred As ‘Anti-Semites’

by Marc Perelman, Forward Correspondent

Upholding most of a $10 million defamation suit against the Anti-Defamation League, a federal judge in Denver has lambasted the organization for labeling a nasty neighborhood feud as an anti-Semitic event. The judge’s opinion confirmed a verdict reached last April by a federal jury, which essentially accused the Denver chapter of the ADL and its regional representative, Saul Rosenthal, of falsely portraying William and Dorothy Quigley as anti-Semites. Mr. Quigley, an executive of the United Artists theater chain, said his career in the “predominantly Jewish and close-knit” film business had stalled after the incident.

Detractors have accused the ADL of being a spokesperson for the foreign nation of Israel, using its influence to promote Israel’s agenda and attacking those who criticize the agenda.

Haaretz Service 28.03.10
ADL: Carter has reverted to anti-Israel stance, despite recent apology

Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter’s apology to the Jewish community over his anti-Israel views should not be taken seriously, an Anti-Defamation League statement said Sunday, claiming that Carter had continued attacking Israel even after sending an apologetic letter to the leaders of the U.S. Jewish community.

J Street took a positive stance to the Islamic center.
July 30th, 2010,

J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami released the following statement:

The principle at stake in the Cordoba House controversy goes to the heart of American democracy and the value we place on freedom of religion. Should one religious group in this country be treated differently than another? We believe the answer is no.

Why are the statements by ADL and J Street significant? Should Muslim organizations also express their attitudes on synagogues and churches constructed in the U.S.?  Let’s face it; if that happened, almost all Americans would either smirk or be confounded. Such is the power of conditioning.

Nevertheless, there is a significance to these patronizing expressions of egotism and self importance. The explanation might sound somewhat conspiratorial, but where Israel is involved conspiracies are unlimited.

ADL and J Street exhibit the ‘bad guy’ and ‘good guy” approach that characterizes Israeli politics – the Party in office is the ‘bad guy’ with oppressive policies; the Party out of office is the ’good guy’ who will undo the oppressive policies once it gains office. After gaining office, the ’good guy’ continues the same policies and the merry-go-round starts once again.

ADL’s grim stance reflects a brighter light on J Street, the ‘good guy’ during this moment.

Realize also that it is in Israel’s interests to present the local Israeli/Palestinian conflict (actually an oppression that creates innumerable crises) as a conflict between western democracy and a violent Islam. In this contest, Israel is the sacrificing vanguard holding off the Muslim hordes. By expressing themselves, the Israel oriented organizations create the appearance that the Cordoba House is related to this argument,and since Israel poses itself as a Jewish state, the Jews of the world are central to the decision on the Islamic Center’s fate  Each of the organizations popularizes the Clash of Civilizations, letting it churn in populace minds. To enhance a debate, they approach the argument from opposite sides, one being recalcitrant and the other willing to compromise. Conditioning prevents the reality that both organizations are patronizing and condescending.

There is a violent struggle between Fundamentalist Muslims and what they perceive as corrupt oligarchs and those who they claim assist in the corruption.  Basic facts and simple logic reveal there is no conflict between Islam and the western world..

Indonesia is the largest Muslim nation. Extremely devout, it is well integrated into the west. Few of the Muslim nations show excessive antagonism to the western world, and those who do, such as Libya can cite grievances.

Terrorism occurs all over the world, and Muslims play major roles; in India, China and Russia. Nevertheless, none of these nations consider the threats as part of an overall conspiracy. It’s not Asia vs. Islam or Russia vs. Islam. Only the conditioned U.S. represents  the attacks as a Clash of Civilizations.

The irony of it all is that the U.S. is the principal instigator of any Islamic threat. As U.S. manufacture of essential products declines, manufacture of terrorists increases. America’s main friends in the Middle East are Saudi Arabia, the ultimate terrorist breeding ground, Pakistan, whose government previously supported the Taliban and has elements still suspected of providing sustenance to  Al Qaeda fighters, and Israel, whose oppressive  policies against the Palestinians and actions in Jerusalem have disturbed the Muslim world and generated terrorists as fast as Katyusha rockets can be produced. Add the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and their areas of vast destruction by U.S. forces, including civilian deaths, and what can the U.S. expect other than violent reactions?

Those interested in demeaning the Islamic world, such as the Religious Right, can take advantage of the situation. Condition Americans to identify Islam with the reactive violence and they won’t realize the proactive instigation. U.S. relations  with the Arab world are based on economic interests. U.S. relations with the Islamic world are a result of conditioning. Since it is difficult to recondition an already conditioned view, not much can be done to change Americans’ opinions of Islam.  However, since ill conditioning leads to blind actions and serious consequences, it behooves the U.S. to make certain the new generation is not conditioned to automatically reject or accept any persuasion. Start with Cordoba House.

Related posts:

1. On New York’s new Islamic Center, I stand with Russell Simmons As you may have heard, an Islamic cultural center is...

If we think about all the details of our lives that would be exposed by tracking all of our movements for the past month, it might seem obvious that the Fourth Amendment should protect our privacy in that information. The government had argued, however, that under a Supreme Court decision from over a quarter of a century ago in which the police used a primitive beeper to help them follow a car during a single trip between two locations, individuals never have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements on public streets.

In a friend-of-the-court brief, the ACLU of the National Capital Area and the Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that times and context have changed since then. The court agreed. The GPS technology that is now available permits the police to easily and inexpensively track people’s movements 24 hours a day for indefinite periods of time, allowing them to watch over the totality of people’s lives as they move from place, to place, to place. And by tracking many people and plotting their movements on a map — as is now technologically possible — the government could easily learn whose lives intersect with whose, and when and where. The resulting invasion of privacy is far greater than that from the visual surveillance practices of the past. It’s truly a specter of Big Brother.

Friday’s decision is important because it strikes the right balance between technological progress and privacy by requiring the police to obtain a warrant to use GPS devices — and its reasoning should apply also, for example, to cellular technology that the police can use to track people’s whereabouts using their cell phones. The decision also recognizes that the whole package of data about us implicates greater privacy interests than the sum of its parts. This is a significant victory for privacy in the digital age, where more and more pieces of information about us are available in the public sphere.

Related posts:

1. What We Stand For Yesterday was a stark reminder that instead of closing the...
2. Making History Khadr has now spent a third of his life at...

Monday was Day One of the sentencing hearing in the case of Sudanese detainee Ibrahim al-Qosi. Al-Qosi was the first detainee to be convicted under President Obama, in a plea deal entered this June in which he admitted to being an al Qaeda cook and occassional driver. Yesterday sawjury selection of senior military officers, who would deliver a formal sentence in al-Qosi’s case. If the jury delivers a sentence longer than what was agreed to in the plea bargin, it will be moot. Unless the jury delivers a shorter sentence, al-Qosi’s true sentence will be what was hammered out in the plea agreement.

But in an unprecedented move, military judge Air Force Lt. Col. Nancy Paul ordered today that al-Qosi’s true sentence will be kept secret until he’s released. The judge said the government requested that the sentence be kept secret.

A fellow observer of the military commissions here, former Marine judge and law of war expert Gary Solis, here to monitor the commissions for the National Institute for Military Justice, says he has participated in 700 courts-martial and has never heard of a secret sentence.

Last month, the Al-Arabiya satellite news network cited two sources who have seen the plea agreement and say the plea deal would cap al-Qosi’s sentence at two years (beyond the eight years he’s already served). I’ve heard speculation here at Gitmo that the reason for concealing al-Qosi’s sentence from the public is to prevent political attacks portraying the Obama administration as weak on terrorism before the November mid-term elections. (There have been only three other convictions by the military commissions — all under former President Bush — and two of the three have already been released. Former Guantánamo detainee Salim Hamdan’s 2008 sentence of five months on top of time served drew fierce criticism from some.)

This country deserves more than election-year charade, in which a jury delivers a show sentence and the true sentence is concealed from the public because some may perceive it as too lenient.

A final pretrial hearing also took place Monday in the case of Canadian Omar Khadr, who will start trial today as the first test trial of the military commissions under President Obama. In a summary decision of only a few words, and with no explanation, the military judge in Omar Khadr’s case, Col. Patrick Parrish, denied defense motions to exclude self-incriminating statements Khadr made to interrogators because of torture and other abuse. The judge will issue a written decision, certainly after the trial begins and possibly after it’s ended, but for now he’s offered no explanation.

It boggles the mind that the military judge could find that Khadr was not coerced and gave these statements to interrogators voluntarily. Khadr, then 15 years old, was taken to Bagram near death, after being shot twice in the back, blinded by shrapnel, and buried in rubble from a bomb blast. He was interrogated within hours, while sedated and handcuffed to a stretcher. He was threatened with gang rape and death if he didn’t cooperate with interrogators. He was hooded and chained with his arms suspended in a cage-like cell, and his primary interrogator was later court-martialed for detainee abuse leading to the death of a detainee. During his subsequent eight-year (so far) detention at Guantánamo, Khadr was subjected to the "frequent flyer" sleep deprivation program and he says he was used as a human mop after he was forced to urinate on himself.

In closing arguments before the judge’s ruling, Khadr’s sole defense lawyer, Lt. Col. Jon Jackson, told the judge, "Sir, be a voice today. Tell the world that we actually stand for what we say we stand for."

Though President Obama promised that coerced evidence would not be used against detainees in the military commissions, today’s ruling suggests that as a country, we stand for abusing a 15-year-old teenager into confessing, and using those confessions against him in an illegitimate proceeding.

Not just Omar Khadr, but also the United States, is on trial starting tomorrow. We should show the world that we can provide a fair trial to Omar Khadr, after what is known about what we’ve done to him. But that simply is not going to happen in a Guantánamo military commisison designed to ensure quick convictions at the expense of due process and transparency, and structured to prevent the revelation of abusive interrogations engaged in by the U.S. government.

(Originally posted on DailyKos.)

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this post stated that Gary Solis “presided over 700 courts-martial.” That was incorrect. Solis presided over 400 cases as a judge, but participated in 760 as a lawyer or judge.

Related posts:

1. Making History Khadr has now spent a third of his life at...
2. On New York’s new Islamic Center, I stand with Russell Simmons As you may have heard, an Islamic cultural center is...
3. A Win Against Warrantless GPS Tracking On Friday, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of...

Maybe Asian people would have an easier time participating in democracy if their names weren’t so darn tricky. That was the suggestion of one Texas legislator at a hearing on a proposed voter identification law.

Though supporters argue that the legislation—which would follow similar measures in Georgia and Florida—would enhance “confidence” in the voting system, and opponents say it would chase after a nonexistent problem by disenfranchising certain poor and marginalized groups, including immigrants (who, incidentally, might be more inclined to vote Democrat).

State Rep. Betty Brown, Republican of Terrell, was miffed when a representative of the Organization of Chinese Americans warned that some voters of Asian descent would have trouble complying with the regulations because their official name translated from their native language would differ from the name used on common identification forms, such as a driver’s license. Brown commented,

No related posts.

Responding to the International Committee of the Red Cross report documenting the involvement of medical personnel in torture and abuse of detainees, the Times concludes:

The report underscores the need to have a full-scale investigation into these abusive practices and into who precisely participated in them. Only then will we know whether indictments or, in the case of physicians, the loss of medical licenses, are warranted.

An investigation into torture and abuse is not merely supported by both law and medical ethics, it is an imperative. The legal prohibition against torture, which includes attempt, complicity and participation, imposes the duty to investigate alleged abuse. The ethical principles enshrined in the Declaration of Tokyo, adopted by the World Medical Association and the American Medical Association, prohibits participation of physicians in torture and all forms of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. This includes providing “knowledge” to “facilitate the practice of torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.” It also prohibits the physician’s presence when any of these practices take place.

Continued inaction by Congress, the President, health professionals and American citizens makes a mockery of the rule of law, human rights and medical ethics. As evidence mounts and calls for accountability go unheeded, the shroud of torture hangs heavy.

Related posts:

1. Further Evidence of Medical Monitoring of CIA Torture Mark Danner, an attorney and journalist, revealed in yesterday’s New...
2. Bush Administration Engaged in a Conscious Policy of Torture As more pieces of a very ugly mosaic fall into...
3. VIDEO: Campaign to Ban Torture ...

The justices’ ruling was unanimous.

Here is a beautiful excerpt from the decision:

Society benefits, for example, from providing samesex couples a stable framework within which to raise their children and the power to make health care and end-of-life decisions for loved ones, just as it does when that framework is provided for opposite-sex couples.

Amen.

Contrary to the homophobe propaganda, it’s not about special privileges for same-sex couples, it’s about equal privileges for all citizens (not just the straight ones). In other words, in Iowa, same-sex couples are no longer second-class citizens. In America there should be no second-class citizens. Everyone should share the same set of civil rights.

And, contrary to the homophobe propaganda, marriage is first and foremost a civil contract, above and beyond any religious recognition of such a union. Our founding fathers wrote the establishment clause into the first amendment for good reason.

And, in Iowa, reason has prevailed.

>> Read the full decision.

>> Learn more about Varnum v. Brien.

Related posts:

1. Rights Groups Defend Voting Rights Act Before Supreme Court NAACP Legal Defense Fund and partners take voting rights case...
2. Defense of Marriage Act Challenge Filed – What Does it Mean for Binational Couples? Immigration Equality congratulates Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)...
3. Obama to sign UN gay rights declaration The AP reports that the Obama Administration will endorse a...