Innocent Muhammad Jawad Released From Guantanamo Bay after 6 Years

Mohammed Jawad, one of the youngest detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is photographed at a family home in Kabul on August 25, 2009, the morning after he returned to Afghanistan.

Here we have another proof of the great judicial system of the United States of America – the case of young Afghan, Muhammad Jawad.

Jawad was accused of throwing a grenade on a US army tank in 2002 that wounded two U. S. soldiers. Jawad was twelve years old when arrested and taken to the notorious US detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. To cover up their barefaced injustice, the Pentagon has argued that Jawadâ€™s bone scans indicated that he was an adult at 18 years when he was arrested.

For six long years, Jawad was tortured day and night along with the other inmates.

“There was a lot of oppression when I was in Guantanamo and these inhumane actions were not for just one day, one week or one month,” Jawad told Reuters.

“I was oppressed the whole time until I was released. They tortured prisoners very badly and did not allow prisoners to sleep, did not give enough food,” he said.

Jawadâ€™s lawyers say that he was treated very severely and forcefully kept awake and regularly shifted from cell to cell. Reuters reported that his age was never even given a thought.

“They knew I was underage but they did not care about my age,” Jawad said.

“They insulted our religion and our Holy Quran, they insulted us and behaved in an inhumane way,” he said.

A weary-looking Jawad stood and stretched his hands behind his back to show how he had been bound sometimes by his captors.

He said he and other prisoners were told to eat with their hands bound behind their backs, bending over and putting their mouths into plates of food.

In July, a US judge ordered that Jawad be set free as his confession was got hold of under the circumstances of great affliction.

“I remember the US government lawyer provided evidence against me but could not prove anything and in the end, the judge said: ‘no charge against Mohammad Jawad can be proved and he is innocent’,” Jawad said.

Some might be in awe of the US government for delivering justice to the innocent boy but at the cost of six years. Such six years of torture that will forever leave a mark on him.

All-hail the US government that stabs and then comes arrogantly with a well-worn first-aid kit.

Posted

August 26, 2009

Current Affairs, World

Seemeen Yousufzai

Tags:

Comments

24 responses to “Innocent Muhammad Jawad Released From Guantanamo Bay after 6 Years”

Hamid Majid Abbasi

September 1, 2009

@momina
her case is no less than a stain on the free world charter,,,,,,,,
in an inhuman way you destroy a happy family…………she might be accused(not proved guilty) but why her children suffered the ordeal……….that was against any charter that you get hold of accused without going through a trial………..being in jail for years do turn u wild………..so o surprise if US court proves her guilty and sentences her to whatever they want………….wrong is wrong no matter what path you follow to commit it

Reply
James Killian Spratt

September 1, 2009

Sorry, my last post is redundant; timing’s a little off here.

Reply
James Killian Spratt

September 1, 2009

@Momina: I don’t know much about the real facts of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s case, but since you ask, it seems to me that she turned herself into a deadly weapon of mass destruction with her education in bio-engineering, then turned on her trainers, as it were. The problem seems to be what to do with such persons to keep them out of mischief. We don’t lobotomize or mind-wipe, so the only solution seems to be containment. Once super-bright people learn such deadly skills, they can’t be “untaught;” that’s probably why the occasional atom-bomb scientist is found rotting in a swamp.

Such knowledge as Dr. Siddiqui obtained must be used with great responsibility and caution. Wouldn’t such study be “haram” anyhow?

Reply
James Killian Spratt

September 1, 2009

@Momina: Well, I’ve never met the lady and can’t make any factual statements about any of her story. I’d rather chosen not to comment for that reason, but you asked, so I’ll tell you what I honestly feel about it.

My read on Aafia Siddiqui is that via her advanced education in bio-engineering, she had turned herself into a potentially deadly weapon of mass destruction. When she started hanging out with an apparently dangerous crowd, and hiding, she made our authorities worried, highly unwise. She had betrayed our trust in letting her learn such deadly skills, ostensibly for benign research purposes, but easily misapplied to create much death. The main idea of the Hippocratic Oath is “Do no harm,” but I don’t know if she was the kind of Doctor required to take that oath. But that doesn’t matter in this case; she’s a smart girl and should have known better. Bio-engineering is probably “haram” anyway.

The problem with such knowledge is that once learned, it can’t be “unlearned” and there’s no way to stop an individual so endowed if they reveal evil intentions short of physical confinement. Apparently, once caught, she remained defiant, aggressive and unapologetic, therefore still dangerous. We don’t lobotomize or “mind-wipe” people like her, so the quandary is what to DO with her? That’s probably why the odd atom-bomb scientist is found rotting in a swamp now and then–they “turned,” like she did.

I believe she’s the one who put her children at risk by getting involved with these guys. Where was her husband?

Reply
James Killian Spratt

September 1, 2009

@Hend: Probably the biggest problem was and is that the Taliban don’t wear uniforms and are impossible to distinguish from civilians, and soldiers are disinclined to check ID’s and attitudes with bullets whistling past their heads. Anyone left standing when the shooting stops is assumed to have been involved. In many previous wars such civilian-dressed “partisans” caught after attacking soldiers have been summarily shot on the side of the road, and by that light, young Mr. Jawad can consider himself fortunate.

American disgust at Gitmo and other such prisons was that our “authorities” had apparently written themselves a HIGHLY ILLEGAL AND IMMORAL license to snatch anyone from anywhere for any reason, even an American off any American street, with no explanation and no *habeus corpus* or announcement or legal recourse. That doesn’t wash here, PERIOD, and if not for us, not for you either. We are human, and we know you and the rest of the world are, too. I agree with you; Bush/Cheney/Rummy SHOULD be prosecuted. The whole truth should be aired, but when has it ever been?

Reply
Momina

September 1, 2009

@JKS: I just want to know what do you say about the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui?

Reply
Hend

August 31, 2009

I am still not convinced how people caught in a war can be held as ‘enemy combatants’ thus bypassing the Geneva convention on POWs and also the American judicial system till recently. This whole thing was illegal and Bush/ Cheney/ Rumsfeld need to be prosecuted in ICJ.

Reply
hamid majid abbasi

August 29, 2009

@james
thats why we say……….
uncle sam haz its own way around

Reply
James Killian Spratt

August 29, 2009

@Hamid: He didn’t prove his innocence; they couldn’t prove his guilt. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. I believe it’s about money. The American legal system, among all the others, are the biggest cash cows on the planet, and if you don’t have a pile of money for them to steal, you get put to the end of the line. Justice, anywhere, is mostly a charade, for sale.

I once was in a US courtroom and watched an American Indian, accused of picking ginseng, an allegedly medicinal plant, from the grounds of an Indian reservation. The judge gave him a five hundred dollar fine and thirty days in jail, and laid the judgment paper aside on his desk. The very next prisoner was also an American Indian, accused of the exact same violation–picking ginseng on the Reservation.

But the second Indian had hired a lawyer (certainly at least a $500 fee.) The second Indian’s lawyer had discovered a statute that allowed Indians to pick ginseng on Indian reservations. The judge dismissed the charges against the second Indian and he was free to go.

At this point the judge LOOKED at the paper of the first Indian, and I thought he would recall him and recant the sentence of 30 days and fine, but instead he laid the second Indian’s judgment on top of it and yelled “NEXT CASE!” I was floored and extremely disillusioned by this.

The young man has a very thoughtful look on his face. I wonder what his NEXT six years will be like? America only took four of my best years. No, not in prison, but I didn’t want to be where they sent me, and some of it was truly mentally torturous. I came out ok in the end; hope he does, too. I doubt that you’ll ever be able to surprise or shock him again.

Reply
Hamid Abbasi

August 27, 2009

@momina
1 is amazed by the pattern of US justice…………..an innocent like him takes 6 year to prove his innocence while a notorius hardliner like Abdullah Mehsud gets back within a year………………..dats what we call super power intelligence………….hats off to FBI and CIA

Reply