Gitmo Prisoner Released to Saudi Arabia, Graduated from Jihad Rehab, Rejoined Al Qaeda: Success Story?

You've read about it: a Saudi man, Said Ali al-Shihri, had been held at "Gitmo," the Guantanamo (Guantánamo, if you insist) Bay prison for terrorists. Then, he was released, to Saudi Arabia.

As The New York Times put it this morning, "He was released to Saudi Arabia in 2007 and passed through a Saudi rehabilitation program for former jihadists before resurfacing with Al Qaeda in Yemen." At least, he's back and with Al Qaeda - according to a website used by terrorists. They may be right.

Al-Shihri was in Gitmo, because he was probably involved in a lethal bombing of the American Embassy in Yemen's capital, Sana. After he was released and went home to Saudi Arabia, he went through the desert kingdom's jihad rehab program. And released, as a successful graduate.

Well, more-or-less successful. Looks to me like Yemen is on the Arabian Peninsula, and graduates from Saudi Arabia's jihad rehabilitation program are supposed to lay off acts of terrorism - on the Arabian Peninsula. The rest of us, it seems, are fair game.

Yemen is setting up its own jihad rehab program, according to Arab News. Yemen is getting ready for the 100 or so Yemenis expected to be sprung from Gitmo, now that America has a new administration.

As Arab News put it, "The move triggered outrage among rights activists who said the government’s plan to keep the returnees in a rehabilitation center in their home country only means re-jailing them."

Judging from the Saudi example, I'd say that the 'rights activists' don't have much to worry about. Not about the Gitmo prisoners being re-jailed.

The case of al-Shihri, the jihad rehab programs, and the prisoners at Gitmo brings up an interesting point: Isn't it customary to wait until after a war is over, to release prisoners of war?

As Clive Davis said in the Spectator: "Well, let's hope this has all been thought through."

Related posts:

• "Indonesian Deradicalization Program Working: In Indonesia, at Least"
  (January 15, 2008)
• "Saudi Breakthrough! Jihadists Reformed!! Al Qaeda Members Promise No More Jihad*!!!"
  (November 27, 2007)
  *on the Arabian Peninsula, that is.
• "Jihad Rehab"
  (August 22, 2007)

News and views:

• "Report: Ex-Gitmo detainee joins al-Qaida in Yemen"
  The Associated Press (January 23, 2009)
• "Report: Ex-Gitmo detainee joins al-Qaida in Yemen"
  (January 23, 2009)
• "Yemen sets up rehab center for Guantanamo returnees"
  Arab News (January 23, 2009)
• "Guantanamo & rendition"
  Spectator.co.uk (January 23, 2009)
• "Freed by U.S., Saudi Becomes a Qaeda Chief "
  The New York Times (January 23, 2009)

Heated Foot Baths for Muslim Prisoners Necessary: Crucifix Verboten

I'm not surprised: a British prison's makeover includes a multi-faith chapel with heated foot baths for the Muslim prisoners.

An imam didn't like the idea of a crucifix being in another part of the room, so it's out.

There are Christian symbols over there, but not to worry: they can be removed "when necessary."

I'm all for sensitivity, but it does seem to go one way.

In the news:

• "Prison bans chapel crucifix to avoid offending Muslims"
  MailOnline (December 15, 2008)
  • "A prison’s new chapel will not contain a crucifix to avoid offending Muslim inmates, it emerged today.
  • "Bosses at HMP Lewes have been told the traditional Christian symbol, featuring Jesus nailed to a cross, must not be used in the Grade-II listed Victorian jail's 'multi-faith space'.
  • "The room - part of a £1million new block - has been split in two, with one half featuring heated foot baths so Muslim worshippers can wash their feet before prayer.'But the other side, dedicated to Christian prayer, contains just a simple wooden cross and portable alter - both of which can be removed if necessary...."

Related posts, on tolerance, bigotry, racism, and hatred.

Indonesian Deradicalization Program Working: In Indonesia, at Least

Good news from Indonesia: "Indonesia's success: using terrorists to fight terrorism."

At least, that's what that an op-ed piece in the "Los Angeles Times," repeated in "The Baltimore Sun," says. The 2002 Bali nightclub bombing changed Indonesia's problem with Islamic terrorism from a regional problem to a global issue for the largest Muslim nation on Earth. Now, Indonesia seems to have a solution to their internal security - and public relations - problem.

And Joshua Kurlantzick, the author, says Indonesia's approach could be used elsewhere. He could be right.

Jemaah Islamiah (JI) is a major problem in Indonesia. The country has been dealing with day-to-day terrorist threats with good police work. "Backed by U.S. training and high-end surveillance equipment, Indonesia's elite counter-terrorism squad has established an effective internal intelligence network, relying on informants to point the way to terrorist hide-outs and arresting hundreds of JI members."

Indonesia is also trying to cut off the supply of terrorists. They're sending people into prisons, to convince inmates that Islam doesn't support (most) terrorism. As the op-ed piece put it: "These are men like Nasir Abas, once a Jemaah Islamiah leader, who have sworn off most types of violence. Former fighters who agree to help the deradicalization program often receive incentives, such as reduced sentences or assistance for their families."

Success in the Islamic world

Sounds good, and the program seems to be working. Reports of Indonesian internal terrorist activity are on the way down. Indonesia isn't the only place with programs like the one Nasir Abas is involved in. The op-ed piece cites deradicalization programs, with the catchy title "enactEd Reeducation strategies," in:

• Egypt
• Singapore
• Malaysia
• Jordan
• Yemen

These deradicalization programs seem to be working. Sort of. Again, from the op-ed:

"Saudi officials say the program has been very successful. Major terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia have plummeted compared with 2004. The Saudi plan also appears to have a broader regional impact. Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, has said that the Saudi initiative may be one reason for the sharp decline in the number of foreign fighters coming into Iraq."

That's good news, as far as it goes. And, I'm glad to see that the Saudi jihad rehab program may be having an effect outside Saudi Arabia.

I think that the idea of intervening in the lives of at-risk people before they join the "death to America! death to the Jews!" crowd is a good idea. I also think that someone who used to support terrorism, and doesn't any more, is in a powerful position to argue for a less violent flavor of Islam.

As the author put it, "Even Western nations facing radical threats seem to be learning" (A condescending attitude??). He cites programs and policies in:

• The Netherlands
• Britain

As usual, government spending is taken as a measure of sincerity: The Netherlands is spending $40 million to start its deradicalization program.

But what the op ed doesn't mention is that the Saudi jihad rehab considers terrorists rehabilitated when they promise to lay off violent attacks on the Arabian Peninsula. That's great for the house of Saud, not so much for infidel nations. (I wrote about this earlier, in "Saudi Breakthrough! Jihadists Reformed!! Al Qaeda Members Promise No More Jihad*!!!" (November 27, 2007).)

I think it's one thing for a Muslim nation to convince Muslim terrorists that they shouldn't attack local Muslims: particularly when the country has an Islamic government.

I have doubts about how effective such a program would be in a secular, largely non-Muslim country like America. Or The Netherlands, or England, for that matter.

Besides, I can easily imagine the indignant protests that would happen in America, if a government program tried to interfere with the religious liberties and civil rights of Muslim inmates, and the Imams who visit them.

Particularly since most Muslim prison chaplains in America are certified by The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) or the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences (GSISS). You won't find the GSISS now: It's in Ashburn, Virginia, now, and renamed itself Cordoba University in 2005.

Those outfits follow the Wahhabi version of Islam, and are being investigated by the American government for ties to terrorism.

So What?

Hats off to Indonesia and their prison intervention program. It confirms my opinion that Islam can tolerate a culture which allows women to vote, and hold jobs other than "cultural performers" or 'sex industry professionals.'

Intervention programs like Indonesia's are promising developments. However, I take the glowing description of the Indonesian "enactEd Reeducation strategies," and Saudi Arabia's jihad rehab program with a pinch of salt. Make that a handful.

The Saudi program considers a terrorist rehabilitated when he promises not to attack people on the Arabian Peninsula. The op-ed piece doesn't mention that vital detail, which makes me slightly dubious about how wide-ranging Indonesia's reform goes.

Consider the cautiously-phrased description of the reformed terrorists as "men like Nasir Abas, once a Jemaah Islamiah leader, who have sworn off most types of violence." (emphasis mine) I can't help wonder if the author feels uncomfortable about mentioning how conditional a non-western nation's commitment to eradicating terrorism is, when the terrorists are Muslims.

Kidnapped Israeli Soldier's Wife Asked Wrong Question at UN

The United Nations: A force for peace, sort of.

At least, they can usually control a news conference.

When President Ahmadinejad on Iran was at the UN, earlier this week, the wife of someone who was captured in Iran and then dropped out of sight had an opportunity to ask a question in the august body's headquarters.

She asked the Iranian leader to explain why Iran refused to give any information about her husband: whether he was dead or alive.

Her tone was earnest, but her demeanor was composed.

President Ahmadinejad was literally speechless. With a 'what is this' gesture, he started grinning.

The wife of the missing prisoner was speechless pretty soon after that. Her microphone was cut off, and she was "escorted" out of the UN chamber.

I can understand the United Nation's actions. The Iranian president was clearly at a loss as to how to answer this embarrassing question, and, if I caught the detail correctly, her husband is (or was) an Israeli.

I walked in on a televised reply of this this little incident, and didn't catch details. Something this dramatic usually hits the news somewhere, but so far I found only one probable reference to it.

If reference to "the wife of kidnapped Israel soldier Udi Goldwasser," in an op-ed piece in "Inner City Press," is the embarras President Ahmadinejad suffered.

Apparently the entire question-and-answer session was mishandled: an unusual situation in the UN. For example, earlier that day, the French mission wanted UN officials to keep non-French journalists out of a press conference: except for approved foreigners, of course.

Given how dramatic the situation, if not the woman's demeanor, was, I'm impressed that this seems to be a non-incident that never happened, at least as far as most news outlets are concerned.

Of course, there's a lot going on right now.

You might find other details in the ICP's op-ed piece "Amid US' Nick Burns' Tough Talk on Iran, Ahmadinejad Laughs At UN Press Conference" interesting.

Related posts, on Individuals and the War on Terror.

Moral Equivalence, Prisoners, and Al Qaeda

Moral equivalence has been all the rage for the last few decades, among the better communities in this country.

"Moral equivalence" has been defined as "defining distinct and conflicting moral behaviors in similar terms." The principle of moral equivalence is behind statements like " 'all sins are equal in God's eyes,' which effectively equates ethnic cleansing with stealing a pencil."

Back in the 60s when my on-and-off affair with academia started, I learned that to be considered sensitive and intelligent the more 'sophisticated' cliques, one should believe, or at least say, that the U.S. detention of Japanese Americans (a really dumb policy) was at least as bad as Stalin's purges. Assuming that it was okay at the time to believe that the purges ever took place.

There's a pretty good discussion of moral equivalence as it relates to Amerika in Brandon Crocker's "Moral Equivalence Rides Again in a 2005 American Spectator.

I'm pretty sure that we'll soon be hearing rewrites of Senator Ted Kennedy's wisdom in reference to Abu Ghraib: "Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S. management." Amazing. I wouldn't have realized that a sustained policy of mass-murder and routine rape, mutilation, and beating of prisoners is equivalent to a few perverts taking obscene pictures.

The occasion for this display of "open-mindedness" will, I think, be yesterday's executive order relating to the treatment of prisoners.

Actions speak louder than words, but words carry weight, too. The executive order is a clear, detailed, massive collection of officialese, and Executive Order: Interpretation of the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3 as Applied to a Program of Detention and Interrogation Operated by the Central Intelligence Agency. I believe these two quotes will give you the gist of it.

"On February 7, 2002, I determined for the United States that members of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces are unlawful enemy combatants who are not entitled to the protections that the Third Geneva Convention provides to prisoners of war. I hereby reaffirm that determination."

And, "the conditions of confinement and interrogation practices of the program do not include:

"(A) torture, as defined in section 2340 of title 18, United States Code;

"(B) any of the acts prohibited by section 2441(d) of title 18, United States Code, including murder, torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, mutilation or maiming, intentionally causing serious bodily injury, rape, sexual assault or abuse, taking of hostages, or performing of biological experiments;

"(C) other acts of violence serious enough to be considered comparable to murder, torture, mutilation, and cruel or inhuman treatment, as defined in section 2441(d) of title 18, United States Code...." And so on.

Someone boiled it down to "don't be cruel."

Now, for what we'll probably be told is the moral equivalent of the U.S. position in the War on Terror (or W** ** T*****, if you're following the British PM's instructions)(see my Opinions, Freedom, and Sharia Law, and Wake Up America's British Prime Minister drops the Phrase "War on Terror".

Here's an official statement by Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, an al Qaeda spokesman, in October of 2001, as translated on BBC: "US interests are spread throughout the world. So, every Muslim should carry out his real role to champion his Islamic nation and religion. Carrying out terrorism against the oppressors is one of the tenets of our religion and Shari'ah."

I suppose I'm too poor, uneducated, and easily led to understand that "carrying out terrorism" and rebuilding sewage plants in Iraq are really the same thing.

A parting thought: Don't be So Open Minded that Your Brains Fall Out.