Lawson for Congress

In November 1898, The News and Observer encouraged people to travel from all over the state of North Carolina to participate in what would become the Wilmington race riots — the only time in American history a municipal government has been overthrown in a coup d’état. Josephus Daniels, editor of The News and Observer and a Democratic activist, was successful at fanning the flames of racial hatred to oppose Black and White Republicans sharing power in Wilmington, and advancing a community where economic and social opportunity included men and women of both races.

Jumping forward to the present, it’s unfortunate to see that the News and Observer has found a new and innovative way to dispense racially-charged propaganda for profit. This weekend’s bundling the DVD “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West” is an attempt by the Clarion Fund with the assistance of the News and Observer to spread race hatred and xenophobia against Muslims in our community.

There is no doubt there are a small minority of people who call themselves Muslims who would like to kill us. All religions have fundamentalists who seek to harm those who disagree with their narrow minded beliefs. However, attempting to demonize Muslims in general by portraying them and their beliefs as “Nazi” is both obscene and a poor attempt at historical revisionism.

The Holocaust did not arise among Muslim people. Muslims were not the SS guards at Auschwitz, nor were they participating in the genocide of European Jewry. These atrocities was done by people who may have called themselves “Christian,” but by whose actions proved to be nothing of the sort.

To grossly stereotype any group, whether it is by race, creed, or nationality, is wrong. We despise it when it happens to us, so rightly we should stop doing it to others. Our nation was founded on the ideal that all are created equal, with certain unalienable rights — while we have struggled to live up to that ideal, the principle of due process demands that each of us deserves to be judged according to our own actions rather than the actions of others.

If we allow ourselves to demonize Muslim Americans who contribute greatly to our country, then the terrorists of al-Qaeda and other purveyors of hate will have won. Instead, defeating al-Qaeda requires Muslims who reject extremist philosophies, and who themselves isolate and prosecute terrorists for the criminals against humanity that they are. As a recent Economist editorial noted:

Some lump together all forms of Islamism as a deadly enemy, akin to fascism and communism. A more accurate analysis, and a better strategy, would be to disaggregate the problems. The rhetoric of the “global war” on terrorism only strengthens global jihad. As the West learns the limits of force, it is Muslims, not foreign soldiers, who will defeat al-Qaeda.

The News and Observer is certainly free to distribute whatever propaganda it likes in its newspaper. Indeed, it does so on a daily basis. Time will tell, however, if people are more inclined to read The Economist in 2008, or the News and Observer intent on re-enacting 1898.

In recent months a lot has been said about the seemingly ever increasing list of potential terrorist threats we call the “terrorist watch list.”

The Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB), better known as the terrorist watch list, is operated by the National Security Branch of the FBI. The list is mainly compiled from names and aliases from the National Counterterrorism Center, which provides international terrorist information, and the FBI, which provided domestic terrorist information. The TSDB, terrorist watch list, was created to “provide ‘one-stop shopping’ so that every government screener is using the same terrorist watch list.”

Many of you have probably heard the numerous stories of delays, interrogations, and canceled flights from legitimate, law-abiding U.S. citizens whose name happens to match or resemble a name on the Federal Government’s terrorist watch list.

James Robinson is a commercial airline pilot and a retired brigadier general with the Air National Guard. Despite his credentials as a commercial pilot, he is forced to jump through hurdles to board his own plane because his name matches that of another on the watch list. This story is made more ironic by the fact that he is held up by the TSA, the same administration which certified him to carry a weapon in the cockpit of his plane.

I highlight this story to draw attention to the inadequacies of the current terrorist watch list, not to advocate its removal. I believe that a properly functioning watch list is vital to domestic safety in America’s terminals and ports as well as at the local level. While I feel safer flying knowing that James Robinson, the pilot, will be checked to insure he is not James Robinson, the terrorist, the simple fact that more than 1,000,000 names and aliases comprise this list deters its effectiveness.

In July of this year the watch list, which was created after 9/11, reached the million mile marker. The sheer size of the list is counterproductive to its mission. As the list continues to grow, more and more innocent citizens are having their rights impeded upon. I am in no way advocating that individuals with names on the list should be ushered through airport terminals around the country, but I am advocating changes to the system.

Nelson Mandela, recipient of America’s highest civilian award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, as well as the Nobel Peace Prize was on the terrorist watch list until he was recently removed by a bill signed by George W. Bush. When men such as Nelson Mandela and Jim Robinson, head of the Justice Department’s criminal division during the Clinton administration, are on the terror watch list it seems there is gross negligence in the system. If notable characters like these are hassled by the current system of the terrorist watch list, you can imagine its ramifications for ordinary citizens.

More important than the delays and hassles at the airport caused by such a list is its encroachment on the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Is the Due Process clause of this Amendment being adhered to when the government can place practically anyone on the list? The Terrorist Screening Center explains its guidelines for who is included on the list by staing, “Per HSPD-6, only individuals who are known or appropriately suspected to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism are included in the TSDB.” Looking through the hazy vagueness of what defines “appropriately suspected,” it apparent that anyone can placed on the list without being formally charged. The lack of legitimacy to whose is named on the list is furthered by the fact that “the TSC (Terrorist Screening Center) cannot reveal whether a particular person is in the TSDB.” The fact that you cannot determine if you are on the list is of little importance because the TSC does not accept redress inquires for removing names from the list directly from the public.

I wish to close with a few facts from the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) report on the terrorist watch list from an article in USA Today.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) could not specify how many people on its no-fly list, which is a small subset of the watch list, might have slipped through screening and been allowed on domestic flights.

Homeland Security has not done enough to use the list more broadly in the private sector, where workers applying for jobs in sensitive places such as chemical factories could do harm.

TSA data show “a number of individuals” on the no-fly list passed undetected through screening and boarded international flights bound for the United States. Several planes have been diverted once officials realized that people named on the watch lists were on board.

Be sure to check out the ACLU’s Watch List Counter and read a few stories of the innocent individuals who have found themselves running into problems because of the Federal Government’s terrorist watch list.

Also, take at the article, Feds Set to Take Over Airline Watch List Checking, Again, on the Wired Blog Network.

Matt Barber is a junior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a volunteer with Lawson for Congress. He is working towards a double major in Political Science and Business Administration.

Physicians for Human Rights has launched a campaign Broken Laws, Broken Lives to document medical evidence of torture, and raise awareness of torture experienced by detainees in American custody. The Preface to their report is written by Major General Antonio Taguba (USA, Ret), who led the US Army’s official investigation into the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal and testified before Congress on his findings in May, 2004. From his Preface:

This report tells the largely untold human story of what happened to detainees in our custody when the Commander-in-Chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture. This story is not only written in words: It is scrawled for the rest of these individuals’ lives on their bodies and minds. Our national honor is stained by the indignity and inhumane treatment these men received from their captors.

The profiles of these eleven former detainees, none of whom were ever charged with a crime or told why they were detained, are tragic and brutal rebuttals to those who claim that torture is ever justified. Through the experiences of these men in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, we can see the full scope of the damage this illegal and unsound policy has inflicted—both on America’s institutions and our nation’s founding values, which the military, intelligence services, and our justice system are duty-bound to defend.

The full report is deeply troubling, and recommended reading. How can we, as Americans, reach a point of desperation such that we accept, rationalize, and even encourage subhuman behavior? Is there any evidence that information obtained through torture is accurate, or valuable? How is American security enhanced by our abandoning respect for basic human rights?

How have Americans handled the need for intelligence gathering in the past? Is there precedent for interrogations conducted by men and women who respect human rights, and understand the importance of setting a principled example both globally and individually?

Fortunately, yes. As a contrast to horrendous torture tactics that we must reject, an article last October provided an opportunity for the veterans of P.O. Box 1142, a top-secret World War II installation, to speak out about their experiences interrogating Nazi prisoners:

For six decades, they held their silence.

The group of World War II veterans kept a military code and the decorum of their generation, telling virtually no one of their top-secret work interrogating Nazi prisoners of war at Fort Hunt.

When about two dozen veterans got together yesterday for the first time since the 1940s, many of the proud men lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.

Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners’ cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them.

“We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture,” said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler’s deputy, Rudolf Hess.

The interrogators had standards that remain a source of pride and honor.

“During the many interrogations, I never laid hands on anyone,” said George Frenkel, 87, of Kensington. “We extracted information in a battle of the wits. I’m proud to say I never compromised my humanity.”

Interesting concept — a battle of wits. Interesting ideals — never compromising one’s humanity.

I believe we need more physicians in Congress. Politicians and bureaucrats are far too eager to engage in linguistic gymnastics to “define” torture. For physicians who honor their Hippocratic oath, definitions are unnecessary. Physicians seek to cure illness, and ease suffering. While there is no question that self-defense is a fundamental human right, imposing suffering on those in custody is un-American, and inhuman.