iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Daphne Eviatar

Daphne Eviatar

Posted: January 7, 2011 05:34 PM

Shortly after taking office, President Obama announced he'd close CIA prisons and end abusive interrogations of terrorism suspects by U.S. officials. But the Obama administration has notably preserved the right to continue "renditions" -- the abduction and transfer of suspects to U.S. allies in its "war on terror," including allies notorious for the use of torture.

Although the Obama administration in 2009 promised to monitor more closely the treatment of suspects it turned over to foreign prisons, the disturbing case of Gulet Mohamed, an American teenager interrogated under torture in Kuwait, casts doubt on the effectiveness of those so-called "diplomatic assurances." It's also raised questions about whether the "extraordinary rendition" program conducted by the Bush administration has now been transformed into an equally abusive proxy detention program run by its successor.

On Thursday, The New York Times reported that a Somali-American teenager from Virginia traveling with a valid U.S. passport was placed on a U.S. government no-fly list because he had previously traveled to Yemen and Somalia. He was detained, interrogated and severely beaten in Kuwait. In a telephone interview with Times reporter Mark Mazzetti, Gulet Mohamed, a 19-year-old living in Alexandria, Virginia, said he was beaten, hit with sticks, threatened with electric shocks, forced to stand for hours at a time and warned that his mother would be imprisoned if he didn't say more about his trips to Yemen and Somalia in 2009, his knowledge of the U.S.-born cleric Anwar al Awlaki, and his relatives in Somalia. At one point during the interrogation he was visited by three FBI agents who asked similar questions and agreed to "facilitate" his release if he would provide them information. If he didn't, they said, they could not help him.

Mohamed has consistently said he traveled to Yemen to study Arabic, has never met with militants and is a good Muslim. "I despise terrorism," he told Mazzetti.

According to Salon's Glenn Greenwald, who also interviewed Mohamed and wrote about this on Thursday, Mohamed had valid visas for all the countries he visited and has never been arrested nor had any interaction with law enforcement, until his detention by the Kuwaitis two weeks ago. Mohamed was never even questioned by U.S. or foreign authorities until he moved to Kuwait to live with his uncle and continue his Arabic studies.

The FBI, State Department and Kuwaiti embassy all refused to respond to the Times' requests for comment, although they confirmed that Mohamed was placed on the no-fly list.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. Last January, Sharif Mobley, an American citizen living in Yemen, was abducted on the streets of the Yemeni capital of Sana'a in January 2009, just two days after he'd gone to the U.S. embassy seeking a passport for his new baby so the family could return to the United States. According to his lawyer, Mobley was shot in the process, then blindfolded and taken to a hospital. There, while chained to a hospital bed, he was interrogated by two agents who identified themselves as U.S. government officials. He says they told him he would never see his family again and that he would be raped in a Yemeni prison. Over the next two weeks, Mobley says. he was beaten severely by Yemeni security forces while being moved between detention facilities after interrogations. He was not allowed to speak to U.S. embassy officials. He eventually tried to escape, and is accused of shooting his Yemeni guards in the process. He faces death by firing squad if found guilty.

Mobley has never been accused of terrorism, either in the U.S. or in Yemen. And like Mohamed, he was not even questioned by U.S. authorities until after he was living in Yemen and indicated a desire to return with his family to the United States.

These are just two of several incidents in the past year where Americans abroad have been arrested and interrogated about their travels to Yemen, where U.S. authorities believe terrorist plots have originated or been inspired by Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S.-born cleric now on a U.S. government hit list. The United States in the past year has more than doubled its military aid to Yemen to encourage the Yemeni government to crack down on terrorism. Perhaps the Yemens now feel pressure to have something to show for it.

Meanwhile, many Americans with ties to Yemen have reportedly been placed on a no-fly list while abroad, detained and questioned, and then unable to return home even after their release.

Yahya Wehelie, for example, a 26-year-old Muslim American, was stopped after he left Yemen while changing planes in Egypt on his way home to Virginia last May. FBI agents told him he was on a no fly list and questioned him. Although eventually released without charge, he was then stuck in the Egyptian capital and unable to return home because of his placement on the no-fly list. He offered to fly home in handcuffs accompanied by air marshals, but was refused.

The U.S. reportedly almost doubled the number of names on its no-fly list after the attempted Christmas Day bombing on a plane bound for Detroit in 2009, from 3400 to about 6000 names.

This all raises some disturbing questions. While the U.S. may legitimately ask questions of passengers flying to or from Yemen, is it outsourcing those interrogations to countries known to engage in torture? Although publicly condemning abusive interrogation methods, has the U.S. created a new proxy detention system that amounts to extraordinary rendition-lite? And what criteria is the U.S. using to place such individuals on the no-fly list? Is that status being used as unofficial permission to foreign governments to detain and interrogate such individuals in whatever manner they see fit?

Mobley's lawyer, Cori Crider from the UK-based organization Reprieve, has asked similar questions. In a Freedom of Information Act request sent in July she asked for information about U.S. agencies' involvement in Mobley's abduction, incommunicado detention and abusive treatment. Crider has asked for records pertaining to the "wider pattern of U.S.-sponsored sweeps and proxy detention in Yemen from January 2010, of which Mr. Mobley's seizure is a part."

The U.S. government has so far refused to provide any responsive documents.

Gulet Mohamed's lawyer, Gaddeir Abbas from the Council on American Islamic Relations, has asked similar questions. In a letter to the Department of Justice posted by Greenwald, Abbas asked whether his client's abduction was at the behest of U.S. authorities and whether they were aware that Mohamed was being tortured. Abbas has requested a full investigation.

The case of Mohamed, Mobley and others suggest that a thorough investigation is needed, not only of each of these cases but of whether the United States has a new policy of outsourcing abusive investigations to foreign countries, where U.S. citizens and others suspected by U.S. authorities cannot assert their basic rights.

If so, this new U.S. interrogation policy is disturbingly similar to those that the Obama administration early on so staunchly disavowed.

 

Follow Daphne Eviatar on Twitter: www.twitter.com/deviatar

Shortly after taking office, President Obama announced he'd close CIA prisons and end abusive interrogations of terrorism suspects by U.S. officials. But the Obama administration has notably preserved...
Shortly after taking office, President Obama announced he'd close CIA prisons and end abusive interrogations of terrorism suspects by U.S. officials. But the Obama administration has notably preserved...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 38
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
02:42 AM on 01/11/2011
I think we all got shortCHANGEd.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Coinyer101
King of Doobiestan
08:20 AM on 01/09/2011
Nothing has 'changed'. Nothing will change.
It will likely be impossible for me to vote for President Obama again......,
 
Too bad, too. I like him as a person.....,
 
 
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
VirginiaJeff
Waiting for the "Jennifer Government" movie
06:51 PM on 01/09/2011
 
I feel the same way.  A few months ago I sent him a letter explaining why I would not vote for him again.  Among my complaints, his human rights record, including his continuation of rendition.
04:07 AM on 01/09/2011
Nope. Not Extraordinary Rendition Lite. It's Extraordinary Rendition Stealth.
12:22 AM on 01/09/2011
Well at least we can say that we don't torture people.
10:11 AM on 01/10/2011
LOL, because having someone else to do the dirty work it is so much more moral than getting our hands dirty.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Chris1962
NYC
03:22 PM on 01/08/2011
Why is this considered "news"? Obama's overseas "interview" of suspects, conducted by the Pakistanis so Obama's hands stay clean, was reported months ago. And why in the world does anyone believe a word out of his mouth? "Change you can believe in," my foot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PwqSCJmbxk
03:42 PM on 01/08/2011
Change (for the worse) you CAN believe in.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Valentine
Retired SEIU Member
11:20 AM on 01/08/2011
America, America ... God have mercy on us.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
arkymorgan
Nobody knows the trouble I've been...
08:17 AM on 01/08/2011
I think people _are_ getting scared of what could happen to them, if they were to object to their government removing the civil rights of a particular group. It could be them next, right? But maybe, if they stay quiet, it won't go any further than this group, and 'we aren't them, so we don't need to worry'. Plus, 'if we block our ears and shut our eyes tight, we won't _actually_ know what's happening to those people' - it might not be 'realio-trulio' true.

Let me see...where have we seen this before?

Oh, right. The prelude to that little economy-saving brouhaha over in Europe.
08:27 AM on 01/08/2011
Worse, I think many do not even begin to make the connection between the loss of one group or person's civil rights and the security of their own civil rights. They seem to magically think that such things could only happen to Other People.

They simply do not get it that when even one person's civil rights are stolen, EVERYONE'S civil rights are imperiled--including their own.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:18 PM on 01/08/2011
I wish I could favorite this twice.

I wish people would read this.
10:22 AM on 01/10/2011
Don't forget prior Progressive Presidents, Woodrow (He kept up out of war, until he got reelected) Wilson imprisoned people for the crime of criticizing the Government and even reading the Constitution in public , then segregating Federal employment.
Or FDR, Imprisoning all those people for the crime of Japanese ancestry for their own safety. Apparently allowing them to lose everything they owned also helped make them safer.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whitemellon
06:15 AM on 01/08/2011
Very few post here. Are we afraid of being tortured. Just do as your told and don't ask questions and you'll be OK. Maybe.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:36 AM on 01/08/2011
maybe .........but not really.
07:31 AM on 01/08/2011
Many are actively refusing to know what the President we hoped would change these sorts of things is actually doing. Actively refusing to know.
hagenjr
Shovel ready freeborn son of the Republic
03:46 AM on 01/08/2011
We have lived as if in a trance.

We have lived as people in fear.

And now—our rights and our freedoms in peril—we slowly awaken to learn that we have been afraid of the wrong thing.

Therefore, tonight have we truly become the inheritors of our American legacy.

For, on this first full day that the Military Commissions Act is in force, we now face what our ancestors faced, at other times of exaggerated crisis and melodramatic fear-mongering:

A government more dangerous to our liberty, than is the enemy it claims to protect us from.



Orginally spoken in 2006, but as true today as it was back then.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FilthyHarry
Expletive Deleted
12:28 AM on 01/08/2011
Given that the Obama administration has reserved the right to execute American citizens without even charges much less a trial I don't think you can really apply the qualifier 'lite'.
photo
Chopin
Multiply the truth. Speak truth through power.
03:19 AM on 01/08/2011
The most frightening and worrisome aspect of these extra judicial measures reveal President Obama to be a person demonstrating through actions and decisions a profound lack of strong core beliefs in morality and firm convictions in the democratic Constitution. With such mindset and shallow convictions, in times of real national crisis, one cannot rule out this administration sliding down a slippery slope towards the most extreme virulent anti-democratic trashing of Constitutional principles and protections for anybody.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:20 AM on 01/08/2011
I agree very strongly. He is after all a Constituti­onal Lawyer. He knows exactly what he is doing.
08:08 AM on 01/08/2011
Indeed.
11:47 PM on 01/07/2011
Hell, the Israelis shot a young American in the head - point blank - on international waters. No one in this administration seemed to care. Obama lied when he said he'd close the foreign prisons and stop the institutionalized torture. It's that simple. Look at the pattern.
10:14 PM on 01/07/2011
The free-market speaks... Privative the torture industry.
photo
Never Again
It makes no difference which 1 of us u vote for...
10:10 PM on 01/07/2011
We are sending detainees to countries which the State Department annual report acknowledges as states that torture. But they promise not to...
photo
Never Again
It makes no difference which 1 of us u vote for...
09:53 PM on 01/07/2011
There are also reports of abuse at "secret" prisons in Afghanistan.
09:41 PM on 01/07/2011
I'm not sure which disturbs me more: the continuous streams of reports like this or just how few of us seem to be paying attention and howling our outrage.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
kemstone
Just another opinionated nobody.
07:14 AM on 01/08/2011
It is extremely disturbing. When a Republican president does these things, there are loud cries of protest. When a Democratic president does the same things, silence.
07:27 AM on 01/08/2011
One of the reasons I'm an ex-Democrat after many, many decades as an activist Democrat.

Silly me, I think torture is torture, Constitution-stomping is Constitution-stomping, International Law-ignoring is International Law-ignoring, and war crimes are war crimes--no matter who is doing them.

Frighteningly, many of my friends who still think the Democrats are somehow better than the Republicans, all but stick their fingers in there ears and sing, "La-la-la, I can't hear you", when I try to point out these sorts of things. They want to believe that President Obama has ended all of the heinous practices and legal pretzlings of G.W. Bush and company and simply refuse to acknowledge the literal mountains of evidence that he has not only continued most of them, but has expanded upon some.

When I posted a list of civil rights/ civil liberties violations under President Obama, (drawn from the ACLU and CCR websites) I was accused of getting my information from Beck! So beyond bizarre.... especially considering that the Right thinks these sorts of things are all perfectly fine.