torture in guantanamo bay

[giuliano]

Ex-detainees allege Habib and Hicks abused
By Fergus Shiel
Law Reporter
August 5, 2004

link

Australian terror suspects Mamdouh Habib and David Hicks have been physically and mentally abused and denied medical treatment by their American captors, according to three former Guantanamo Bay detainees from England.

Human rights activists in Britain and the United States will today release a 115-page joint statement by the Britons in which they recount conversations they claim to have had with Habib and Hicks in Guantanamo Bay and make observations about the Australians' mental and physical condition.

They allege Mamdouh Habib was denied medical attention despite being in "catastrophic" mental and physical shape after being tortured in Egypt.

"(Habib) used to bleed from his nose, mouth and ears when he was asleep... He got no medical attention for this. We used to hear him ask but his interrogator said that he shouldn't have any," they say.

They allege that David Hicks, "a tiny white guy no more than five feet three inches (160 centimetres) with a lot of tattoos", was hooded and beaten by Americans on a ship and later denied medical attention for a hernia unless he co-operated with his interrogators.

They say Hicks was told he would get prostitutes if he worked with his interrogators, but would never go home if he didn't.

According to the men, Hicks was treated more aggressively than other detainees, was moved repeatedly and kept in isolation for months. They believed he was forced to make admissions.

The allegations follow those of two other Britons released from Guantanamo Bay, Tarek Derghoul and Jamal al-Harith, who have claimed that Habib was tortured by Egyptian agents and later subjected to beatings by US soldiers in Guantanamo Bay.

Separate claims have been made that Hicks has been mistreated in US custody.

Hicks, accused of working with terror network al-Qaeda, is due to appear before a military commission on August 23.

An Australian Government spokesman said last night that Canberra had asked the US for assurances that Hicks and Habib had been treated properly and was awaiting a response.

In March, the Pentagon dismissed allegations by the Britons of mistreatment and said they would not be investigated because they lacked credibility.

"These allegations are fabrications. These are lies," Major Michael Shavers, a Pentagon spokesman, was reported as saying. "All the detainees were treated humanely and ...consistent with military necessity in accordance with the third Geneva Convention of 1949."

Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal and Rhuhel Ahmed allege they were interrogated at gunpoint, kicked, hit with rifle butts, threatened with snarling dogs and weakened by lack of food, water, sleep and medical care. Their joint statement will be released by noted civil rights lawyer Gareth Pierce in London and by the Centre for Constitutional Rights in New York.

The men say they wrote the statement to let the world know the truth about what is happening in Guantanamo Bay. They say their intention is that human rights groups and lawyers may use the information to ensure fairness for prisoners there.

US-based Australian human rights lawyer Richard Bourke, who first accused US forces of torture in October, said the men's statement highlighted the accountability of the Australian Government for failing to protect its citizens, despite its call for assurances from the US Government.

"We have seen the photos and read Donald Rumsfeld's directives, but the accounts of these men provide a chilling new insight into the depravity of America's war on terror and the shocking price to be paid when we lower our defence of basic rights and freedoms," he said.

Mr Bourke said it had been proven that the three men, from Tipton in England's West Midlands, had falsely confessed to meeting Osama bin Laden as a result of their appalling treatment, and it was no surprise that this was the same charge levelled against David Hicks.

The men, who were detained in northern Afghanistan in November 2001 and freed without charge this year, allege they were held by Northern Alliance troops - under the supervision of US forces - for 18 hours with scores of dead and dying detainees in shipping containers riddled with machine-gun fire to ventilate them. They say they had pistols put to their heads during interrogations by US and British intelligence officers and were told they would be shot if they moved.

They say they were left naked, hungry, dehydrated, sick and wounded in freezing conditions after their capture.

These images of interrogation techniques, allegedly used by US soldiers on detainees in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, accompanied the statement by the three former detainees from Britain.

The Englishmen also say they were forcibly kept awake, left filthy for weeks, isolated for long periods, kept squatting without water in scorching Cuban heat for hours, denied toilet facilities and not allowed to pray. Guards threw copies of the Koran into toilets, they say.

They say hundreds of their fellow detainees in Guantanamo Bay tried to commit suicide.

One detainee was brutally assaulted by up to eight guards and others were held in isolation for more than a year, they say. Detainees were forcibly injected with unknown drugs.

The former detainees say they were repeatedly hooded, stripped, cavity-searched, shaved, photographed and videotaped.

Mr Iqbal says he was once left shackled in a room at Camp Delta while a dance version of an Eminem song played loudly over and over and lights strobed.

[gr8fuldaniel]

I am convinced, we need to demand accountability for crimes against humanity. Pirates and barbarians will be Damned by God. Impeach the bastards, TODAY !!

The Guardian US abuse could be war crime Red Cross says Tipton Three may have case Vikram Dodd and Tania Branigan Thursday August 5, 2004 The Guardian Repeated abuses allegedly suffered by three British prisoners at the hands of US interrogators and guards in the Guantánamo Bay detention camp in Cuba could amount to war crimes, the Red Cross said yesterday. The organisation, which maintains a rigidly neutral stance in public, took the unusual step of voicing its concerns in uncompromising language after the former detainees, known as the Tipton Three, revealed that they had been beaten, shackled, photographed naked and in one incident questioned at gunpoint while in US custody. Their vivid account of the harrowing conditions at the camp, as told to their lawyers and published for the first time in yesterday's Guardian, has reignited the debate about the treatment of prisoners and the British government's role in their questioning and detention. Last night the Red Cross was joined by the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture, which argued that if the allegations were true they indicated systematic abuse, amounting to torture. Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrats' deputy leader, called for the Foreign Office to mount a "searching investigation" into what British officials had seen or been told when they visited Guantánamo Bay. The Tipton Three were captured in Afghanistan and held at the US military base in Cuba for two years, before being released in March without charge. One man, Rhuhel Ahmed, alleged that an SAS soldier had interrogated him for three hours in Afghanistan while an American colleague held a gun to his head and threatened to shoot him. The trio also said that they had repeatedly complained of abuse to British consular officials. "Some of the abuses alleged by the detainees would indeed constitute inhuman treatment," said Florian Westphal, spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva. "But we can't comment on this publicly since this type of allegation is raised directly in discussion with the detaining authority. "Inhuman treatment constitutes a grave breach of the third Geneva convention and these are often also described as war crimes." The organisation is allowed to visit the detainees to ensure they are treated in accordance with the Geneva conventions as long as it does not disclose information about conditions there. It can breach confidentiality in limited circumstances, most importantly, if going public would be in the best interests of the prisoners. Sherman Carroll, spokesman for the Medical Foundation, said the report rang true in light of revelations about techniques of interrogation and torture elsewhere. He added: "If [the detainees] had used the word torture, I would agree with that. This is more than 'torture-lite' [stress and duress techniques] ... Guantánamo Bay should be closed down." But Major Michael Shavers, the Pentagon spokesman on Guantánamo Bay, said the US operated "a safe, humane and professional detention operation". He added: "All detainees are treated humanely, appropriately and in accordance with the principles of the third Geneva convention. "We have investigated all the allegations of abuse at Guantánamo Bay and have dealt with them. They have been resolved." A spokesman for the Foreign Office said the government had always prioritised the welfare of British detainees and had given them the opportunity to express concerns about their treatment. He added: "During these welfare visits, neither Mr Ahmed, Mr Iqbal nor Mr Rasul has ever alleged to us that they were systematically abused. "And although, since returning to the UK, none of the three men has raised allegations of mistreatment with the British government, we have nevertheless taken up their concerns with the American authorities. At our request, the United States is examining the allegations in detail and intends to respond to them fully."

[Dieval]

Originally posted by giuliano, They allege Mamdouh Habib was denied medical attention despite being in "catastrophic" mental and physical shape after being tortured in Egypt. .... The allegations follow those of two other Britons released from Guantanamo Bay, Tarek Derghoul and Jamal al-Harith, who have claimed that Habib was tortured by Egyptian agents and later subjected to beatings by US soldiers in Guantanamo Bay. Separate claims have been made that Hicks has been mistreated in US custody.

They seem to jump around alot with this story, first they were tortured in Egypt, then beaten in Guantanamo....for prisoners they sure do travel alot - more than I do in fact.
Who was doing the torture in Egypt? Was it US troops? Was it even torture? What was done?
Why were they beat in GB? Was there an uprising that needed to be supressed by what they claim were "beatings"?
It sounds like their trying to imply that US soldiers tortured people unnecessarily.... but the question should be - how many people were saved by the information retrieved?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Originally posted by Dieval, They seem to jump around alot with this story, first they were tortured in Egypt, then beaten in Guantanamo....for prisoners they sure do travel alot - more than I do in fact.

All part of the game, they tell them they are going home, the war is over. To build up hope so they have something to squash.

Who was doing the torture in Egypt? Was it US troops? Was it even torture? What was done?

They were in our custody, does it matter who we contracted the dirty work to? My guess is it was Ashcroft in leather bra and panties. Or Haliburton.

Why were they beat in GB?

ummm, because they were there?

Was there an uprising that needed to be supressed by what they claim were "beatings"?

Now, why didnt I think of that? The tortured victims were actually the aggressors and the guards were only defending themselves. :rolleyes:

It sounds like their trying to imply that US soldiers tortured people unnecessarily.... but the question should be - how many people were saved by the information retrieved?

IMHO, it is never "necessary to torture". That is the point we become who we are fighting. And I sincerely doubt any lives were "saved" by torturing.

[Melvyn]

History does not record a time when human beings under the complete unreviewed control of other human beings were not abused. Often the abuse takes the form of unjustly harsh punishments. Some of the worst abuse takes place during interrogations in which interrogators are convinced they have a justified mission. Sometimes the abuse is simply the exercize of the power of some individuals over others for personal gratification. We see this as perversion, but it is a natural consequence of this kind of situation.

If America aspires to be the beacon of freedom for the rest of the world, then we cannot permit these conditions to exist. There can be no situation in which prisoners are denied appeal. There can be no situation in which outside monitoring is prevented. There can be no situation in which interrogation by torure is permitted. The greatest most powerful nation in the world must survive without it.

We are far from those goals. Even before the patriot act, INS could hold people incommunicado indefinitely. With the Patriot act there are more situations in which people can be held under these conditions. It should not matter whether an individual is a U.S. citizen or an enemy combatant captured in battle, that individual must be treated with a modicum of respect and due process. That due process must include inspections from outside monitors which have the power to demand humane treatment.



Mel - Blogging at http://radio.weblogs.com/0137954/

[Mr.Vicchio]

I aske dmy Grandfather about his thoughts on all this torture.. he served in WWII, Battle fo the Bulge, his unit entered one of the northern concentration camps first.. real nasty stuff.

His opinion is that the world is blind stupid. Torture? No its not norture, torture was what they do to us. I asked him what HIS unit did with german prisoners.

"Shot them. Unless we had the means to send them somewhere."

[Paavo]

No disrespect to your Grandfather, but if we haven't moved on from the barbaric warfare tactics of the second world war - what did they fight for?

[Paavo]

Oh, and shake his hand for me and say "thank you". WWII vets are a dying group, I just hope they die knowing that there are people who are very thankful for their efforts.

[Mr.Vicchio]

I brought this up to show what people that have seen real war, real horror and pain, real hell think of the "torture" the USA is acccused of today.

WWII, different time, different era.. I agree that today shooting people just wouldn't fly, but its all in perspective.

We have people screaming torture... its all in perspective.

[giuliano]

Originally posted by Mr.Vicchio,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mr.Vicchio,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I aske dmy Grandfather about his thoughts on all this torture.. he served in WWII, Battle fo the Bulge, his unit entered one of the northern concentration camps first.. real nasty stuff. His opinion is that the world is blind stupid. Torture? No its not norture, torture was what they do to us. I asked him what HIS unit did with german prisoners.[/b]

that doesn't strike me as a very good definition of torture. more like a double standard.

<!--QuoteBegin-Mr.Vicchio,
"Shot them. Unless we had the means to send them somewhere."[/quote]
i walked the kokoda trail in new guinea last year, where australian and US troops held off the advancing japanese army in ww2. the guide was a historian who over 10 days described in detail what we know about the battles that took place there.

the aussie troops were certainly brutal, there were no japanese prisoners taken. where were they going to put them in the middle of the jungle?

forgive me if this is confronting, but for at least some of the starving japanese troops, any 'kills' were also a meal.

war is hell. as paavo said tho, it's important to hold ourselves up to higher standards today. it's called progress. guantanamo bay is regression.