Ex-Gitmo guard recalls abuse, climate of fear

Status
Not open for further replies.

Liebling:-)))

Sussi *7.7.86 - 18.6.09*
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
30,997
Reaction score
10
Ex-Gitmo guard recalls abuse, climate of fear

Lack of clear rules for dealing with detainees created chaos, private says


updated 9:12 p.m. ET Feb. 14, 2009

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - Army Pvt. Brandon Neely was scared when he took Guantanamo's first shackled detainees off a bus. Told to expect vicious terrorists, he grabbed a trembling, elderly detainee and ground his face into the cement — the first of a range of humiliations he says he participated in and witnessed as the prison was opening for business.

Neely has now come forward in this final year of the detention center's existence, saying he wants to publicly air his feelings of guilt and shame about how some soldiers behaved as the military scrambled to handle the first alleged al-Qaida and Taliban members arriving at the isolated U.S. Navy base.

His account, one of the first by a former guard describing abuses at Guantanamo, describes a chaotic time when soldiers lacked clear rules for dealing with detainees who were denied many basic comforts. He says the circumstances changed quickly once monitors from the International Committee of the Red Cross arrived.

The military says it has gone to great lengths in the seven years since then to ensure the prisoners' safe treatment. "Our policy is to treat detainees humanely," said Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman.

After the Sept. 11 attacks and the swift U.S. military response in Afghanistan, the Bush administration had little time to prepare for the hundreds of prisoners being swept up on the battlefield. The U.S. Southern Command was given only a few weeks notice before they began arriving at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba — a locale thought to be beyond the reach of U.S. and Cuban law. The first arrivals were housed in cages that had been used for Haitian migrants almost a decade earlier.

Now President Barack Obama is committed to closing the prison and finding new ways of handling the remaining 245 detainees as well as any future terror suspects. Human rights groups say his pledge to adhere to long established laws and treaties governing prisoner treatment is essential if the United States hopes to prevent abuses in the future.

"If Guantanamo has taught us anything, it's the importance of abiding by the rule of law," said Jennifer Daskal, senior counterterrorism counsel for Human Rights Watch.

Or as Neely put it in an interview with The Associated Press this week, "The stuff I did and the stuff I saw was just wrong."

Litany of cruel treatment

Neely, a burly Texan who served for a year in Iraq after his six months at Guantanamo, received an honorable discharge last year, with the rank of specialist, and now works as a law enforcement officer in the Houston area. He is also president of the local chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War.

An urge to tell his story led him to the University of California at Davis' Guantanamo Testimonials Project, an effort to document accounts of prisoner abuse. It includes public statements from three other former guards, but Neely was the first to grant researchers an interview. He also spoke extensively with the AP.

Testimony from the other guards echoes some of Neely's concerns. One of the other guards, Sean Baker, described in an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes" how he was beaten and hospitalized by fellow soldiers in a January 2003 training drill in which he wore an orange jumpsuit to play the role of a detainee.

Terry C. Holdbrooks Jr. told the Web site cageprisoners.com in an interview this month that he saw several abuses during his service at Guantanamo in 2003, including detainees subjected to cold temperatures and loud music, and he later converted to Islam.

Neely, 28, describes a litany of cruel treatment by his fellow soldiers, including beatings and humiliations he said were intended only to deliver physical or psychological pain.

A spokeswoman for the detention center, Navy Cmdr. Pauline Storum, said she could not comment on "what one individual may recall" from seven years ago. "Thousands of service members have honorably carried out their duties here in what is an arduous and scrutinized environment," she said.

Gitmo's early days

Neely's account sheds new light on the early days of Guantanamo, where guards were hastily deployed in January 2002 and were soon confronted by men stumbling out of planes, shackled and wearing blackout goggles. They were held in chain-link cages and moved to more permanent structures three months later.

The soldiers, many of them still in their teens, had no detailed standard operating procedures and were taught hardly anything about the Geneva Conventions, which provide guidelines for humane treatment of prisoners of war, Neely said, though some learned about them on their own initiative.

"Most of us who had everyday contact with the detainees were really young," he said in the AP telephone interview.

'I just felt horrible'

Army Col. Bill Costello acknowledged that Guantanamo-specific procedures developed over time, but insisted that the guards had strict direction from the start. "This was a professional guard force," said Costello, who served as a Guantanamo spokesman during its first months and now speaks for the U.S. Southern Command in Miami, which oversees the base.

Only months had passed since the Sept. 11 attacks, and Neely said many of the guards wanted revenge. Especially before the first Red Cross visit, he said guards were seizing on any apparent infractions to "get some" by hurting the detainees. The soldiers' behavior seemed justified at the time, he said, because they were told "these are the worst terrorists in the world."

He said one medic punched a handcuffed prisoner in the face for refusing to swallow a liquid nutritional supplement, and another bragged about cruelly stretching a prisoner's torn muscles during what was supposed to be physical therapy treatments.

He said detainees were forced to submit to take showers and defecate into buckets in full view of female soldiers, against Islamic customs. When a detainee yelled an expletive at a female guard, he said a crew of soldiers beat the man up and held him down so that the woman could repeatedly strike him in the face.

Neely says he feels personally ashamed for how he treated that elderly detainee the first day. As he recalls it, the man made a movement to resist on his way to his cage, and he responded by shoving the shackled man headfirst to the ground, bruising and scraping his face. Other soldiers hog-tied him and left him in the sun for hours.

Only later did Neely learn — from another detainee — that the man had jerked away thinking he was about to be executed.

"I just felt horrible," Neely recalled.

Neely grew up in a military family in Huntsville, Texas, and said he initially saw the Army as a career. He says his experiences led him to see the treatment of detainees and the Iraq invasion as "morally wrong." He refused to return to active duty when called up from the Inactive Ready Reserves in 2007 and ignored repeated letters threatening penalties.

Neely acknowledged that by talking about his experiences, he also has broken the nondisclosure pledge he signed before leaving Guantanamo. He also says a lawyer told him the document he signed could not be enforced.

Storum said guards receive "operational security debriefings" on their way out of Guantanamo "so that personnel are mindful of their responsibilities and are made aware of what can be openly discussed in a public forum."

Interviews with former guards are rare. The military allows journalists visiting Guantanamo to interview active-duty guards at the base, but they are hand-picked by the military and speak in the presence of public affairs officers.

Neely said discussing his experience now has helped put it behind him. "Speaking out is a good way to deal with this," he said.

Ex-Gitmo guard recalls abuse, climate of fear - Guantanamo- msnbc.com

True, interviews with many guards who admitted are rare that´s what I saw them on TV.
 
His interview proves that torture was not planned for GITMO, and after the initial opening period of GITMO for detention of terrorist suspects, the mistreatment was stopped. Torture did not continue for years, and the military improved the conditions.
 
His interview proves that torture was not planned for GITMO, and after the initial opening period of GITMO for detention of terrorist suspects, the mistreatment was stopped. Torture did not continue for years, and the military improved the conditions.

Torture was started during Bush Admin. in 2002 until Obama took over Bush´s position and banned the torture.
 
I'm sorry but you still have proven us NOTHING about what you claimed.

The military says it has gone to great lengths in the seven years since then to ensure the prisoners' safe treatment. "Our policy is to treat detainees humanely," said Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman.

After the Sept. 11 attacks and the swift U.S. military response in Afghanistan, the Bush administration had little time to prepare for the hundreds of prisoners being swept up on the battlefield. The U.S. Southern Command was given only a few weeks notice before they began arriving at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba — a locale thought to be beyond the reach of U.S. and Cuban law. The first arrivals were housed in cages that had been used for Haitian migrants almost a decade earlier.

There is a HUGE HUGE HUGE difference between mistreatment and torture. You're confusing the torture of prisoners with MISTREATMENT. I understand the soldiers were very angry and bitter about what happened at WTC. Plus - there was a LITTLE oversight & no clear rules at Gitmo Camp. Nobody knows EXACTLY what to do.

Like what Reba said - the policy was created and the orders & procedures became VERY CLEAR by Bush Administration regarding the treatment of Gitmo prisoners. See 2nd paragraph of quote above - "After the Sept. 11 attacks and the swift U.S. military response in Afghanistan, the Bush administration had little time to prepare for the hundreds of prisoners being swept up on the battlefield."

1. Your post just proved our points, Liebling. Just about every posts you showed us either proved us right or proved you wrong! We cannot understand why you do not understand.
2. You showed us the pictures of alleged tortures and most of it wasn't even at Gitmo Camp!!!
3. You have NOT showed us any PROOF from International Criminal Court or War Tribunal Court or ANY SUCH court.
 
Liebling still thinks all of your pix of bad treatment are still torture. That's the point. But I do applaud your ingenious effort to give crystal-clear distinction between torture and mistreatment.
 
I'm sorry but you still have proven us NOTHING about what you claimed.

I´m sorry to say that you deny the truth and logical.


There is a HUGE HUGE HUGE difference between mistreatment and torture. You're confusing the torture of prisoners with MISTREATMENT.

Of course I know the difference between mistreatment and torture... What´s your point? I said MANY times that detainees were being treated inhumanity by Bush´s people in several threads. It´s a definition is MISTREATMENT... I also said torture many times as well... which mean is the detainees were being torture AND mistreatment by Bush´s people.




I understand the soldiers were very angry and bitter about what happened at WTC. Plus - there was a LITTLE oversight & no clear rules at Gitmo Camp. Nobody knows EXACTLY what to do.

Your post prove me right that you ADMITTED that the detainees were being treat inhumanity and also torture as well because of that...

Like what Reba said - the policy was created and the orders & procedures became VERY CLEAR by Bush Administration regarding the treatment of Gitmo prisoners. See 2nd paragraph of quote above - "After the Sept. 11 attacks and the swift U.S. military response in Afghanistan, the Bush administration had little time to prepare for the hundreds of prisoners being swept up on the battlefield."

That´s what Army Pvt. Brandon Neely view in his interview but Bush, Cleeny and Romsfeld ADMITTED official that they authorized his people to torture the detainees to get the information.

1. Your post just proved our points, Liebling. Just about every posts you showed us either proved us right or proved you wrong! We cannot understand why you do not understand.

No, you and Reba deny it.

I cannot understand why you claimed that I proved your points since I know your and Reba´s posts that you both denied and defend Bush Adminsration against the detainees when you both KNEW that most detainees have been released without any charges becaue US authorities were not able to find anything on them.

I find it quite unbelievable that anyone can think it is reasonable to 'kidnap' the people from Pakistan to Afganisation, then to Gitmo camp and hold them without trial for years. Let's see IF there´re any proof against them, then go to trial and if there´re no proof then they should be free. Why can´t they then?

I suggest you to re-read the article carefully, not just pasted the part of sentence to prove me wrong about Bush.

You think you know everything... really truth - you has ZERO clue but unbelievably hypocritical ... .. You know what, MANY americans do not deny what and how US Government authorized the torture in Gitmo camp. Of course they said that they feel amshamed as an american and said that they would refuse to follow the order IF they assigned there in Gitmo camp.


2. You showed us the pictures of alleged tortures and most of it wasn't even at Gitmo Camp!!!

The pictures, I showed is similar as in Gitmo camp because Lynnie England said in her interview with German reporter "Spiegel" that it does the same in Gitmo camp. US Government restrict from take the pictures in Gitmo camp. Many people said same thing.

3. You have NOT showed us any PROOF from International Criminal Court or War Tribunal Court or ANY SUCH court.


:laugh2: this is a feeble excuse, I ever read is your posts... toooooo weak because you knew very well that Obama admin. won´t prosecute Bush and Co. that´s why there´re no court....
 
Excuse me, Jiro and naisho.

I do not need your pictures to prove me the difference between torture and mistreatment because I know the difference..


I DID said many times in several threads that the detainees were being treated INHUMANITY by Bush´s people and also torture as well...

The both torture and mistreatment are an inhumanity because they belongs to ABUSE.
 
OK. Well, my apologies about that, Liebling. From reading Jiro and Reba's response towards you, I thought that they were saying you did not understand torture vs mistreatment so I tried to explain it in better ways, from the pictures to explain the word.

I was not trying to prove you anything, just "translating" their posts, I did not give my own opinion in this matter except say that Americans view mistreatment different from torture.
 

I am asking you respectfully to leave this thread please...

Please use your common sense when you want to disagree with me. #


Your posts doesn´t work because I learn a lot from TV interviews, etc against your denial posts.

 
I am asking you respectfully to leave this thread please...

Please use your common sense when you want to disagree with me. #


Your posts doesn´t work because I learn a lot from TV interviews, etc against your denial posts.


I'm respectfully asking you to respect your American colleagues by resigning from US Military. :ty:
 
OK. Well, my apologies about that, Liebling. From reading Jiro and Reba's response towards you, I thought that they were saying you did not understand torture vs mistreatment so I tried to explain it in better ways, from the pictures to explain the word.

I was not trying to prove you anything, just "translating" their posts, I did not give my own opinion in this matter except say that Americans view mistreatment different from torture.


No problem - apology acceptance.

Yes I know from your posts that you are very friendly and helpful person. I know you are neutral and try to help us...

I appreciate you for that.
 
I'm respectfully asking you to respect your American colleagues by resigning from US Military. :ty:

You asked me to leave US Military because I disagree with Bush Adminsration´s polities? :laugh2:

I work for US Military under US Government in Germany, that defend Germany´s country since WWII. I have MANY open-minded American co-workers who can talk openly why we agree to disagree how and what our country´s polities did... I see the problem is your is too closed minded to accept my disagreement toward Bush Adminsration.


Please grow up!


 
Now folks...let's play nice and stay on topic.

Thanks.
 
So, ok, wait. I'm not understanding what is the problem here..

Pro-Gitmo side is saying:

  • Gitmo is made for jailing very bad terrorists and serious criminals (like 9/11 criminals)
  • Gitmo is detention facility, created to observe and patrol the jailed
  • Gitmo was improved over the years since it was created
  • Keep prisoners from going to jails in USA
  • 9/11 and other criminals may have info that USA may need


Anti-Gitmo saying:

  • Gitmo going to be closed
  • Prosecute war crimes for Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, US officials
  • Waterboarding is unhumane
  • Mistreatment of prisoners needs justice


Did I cover everything?

If you think of it... Both sides are actually on the same sides, except they have special views they want it to conclude.
 
You asked me to leave US Military because I disagree with Bush Adminsration´s polities? :laugh2:

I work for US Military under US Government in Germany, that defend Germany´s country since WWII. I have MANY open-minded Americans who can talk openly why we agree to disagree how and what our country´s polities did... I see the problem is your is too closed minded to accept my disagreement toward Bush Adminsration.


Please grow up!

yes. I'm trying very very hard to get you to understand what and who you're working for.

From your posts from all over threads, you're anti-war. You do not largely believe in American Foreign Policy which we have been doing for many years. and yet... for 8 years, you worked for Bush Administration and you got paid by Bush Administration. For past 23 years, you worked for and got paid by previous Administrations who were in dirty business where many lives have been lost and lives continue to be lost.... and yet you have no problem collecting American blood money.

You preach about wonderful thing about what German military did while scolding American military. Why aren't you working for German military then? UN? Peace Corps? Red Cross? Amnesty International? They are doing EXACTLY the way you agree with. They don't bomb people or torture people or keep terrorists in jail for years.

My point is - I understand your deep passion about peace and love for human beings and I respect you for that. If you work for peaceful organization as listed above in red print, I can understand your POV and I would respect your POV but I don't respect you at all because WHY ARE YOU WORKING FOR US MILITARY that is AGAINST your belief??? We're not in business of peace and love. We're in a very very dirty, ugly business with guns and bombs because the world is ugly. Loss of lives is part of business. So is aggressive interrogation. I don't have a problem with that but you have a problem with it and yet you work for US Military.

What do you want our US Military to be? Be like Swiss Army? I'm sorry but even Obama Administration is not going to do that. Obama or not, we'll still be in same dirty business - guns and bombs. loss of lives. aggressive interrogations (this time - you won't even know about it because it's classified and yes aggressive interrogation will occur under Obama Administration because it's for the sake of national security and our life)

Do you understand now? :wave:
 
So, ok, wait. I'm not understanding what is the problem here..

.............

Did I cover everything?

If you think of it... Both sides are actually on the same sides, except they have special views they want it to conclude.

I do not dispute the fact that we have conducted "aggressive" interrogation methods on prisoners.
I do not dispute the fact that prisoners were mistreated.
I do not dispute the fact that some prisoners at Gitmo Camp are/were innocent.
I do not dispute the allegation that some may have went too far.

But what I have problem with Liebling is:
1. her outrageous accusation is that our Gitmo Camp is set up as "Torture Camp"
2. her belief that terrorists do apply to Geneva Convention
3. her opinion that due process for terrorists should be same as common criminals
4. her opinion on how US Military should conduct the wars against terrorists
5. and lasty - her strong personal belief does not LARGELY agree with US Military and American Foreign Policy but works for USA anyway :scratch:

so Liebling and Reba/I need to come to mutual agreement/understanding of FACTS & REALITY about USA Government & Military at some point....
 
From your posts from all over threads, you're anti-war.

For Iraq war only, I am an anti-war. I assume that you read my post over Iraq war a lot but you didn´t know my posts over past war issues before US started Iraq war.

You do not largely believe in American Foreign Policy which we have been doing for many years. and yet... for 8 years, you worked for Bush Administration and you got paid by Bush Administration. For past 23 years, you worked for and got paid by previous Administrations who were in dirty business where many lives have been lost and lives continue to be lost.... and yet you have no problem collecting American blood money.

Well, it´s not just past administrations who did dirty but around the world including many business owners, employers as well - many employees work for them... So? Many Americans co-workers/friends and I have the right to say something against Bush Admin. because Bush Admin. did is too far. We also CAN disagree with Obama admin. as well.. Example of all is not want to prosecute Bush & Co..

You preach about wonderful thing about what German military did while scolding American military. Why aren't you working for German military then? UN? Peace Corps? Red Cross? Amnesty International? They are doing EXACTLY the way you agree with. They don't bomb people or torture people or keep terrorists in jail for years.

:confused: I really have no idea what you are saying that I said that German military did wonderful? I do not see anything that I said about them... :confused: As far as I know that I said that German Government were against for send German soliders to Iraq, that´s all.

My point is - I understand your deep passion about peace and love for human beings and I respect you for that. If you work for peaceful organization as listed above in red print, I can understand your POV and I would respect your POV but I don't respect you at all because WHY ARE YOU WORKING FOR US MILITARY that is AGAINST your belief??? We're not in business of peace and love. We're in a very very dirty, ugly business with guns and bombs because the world is ugly. Loss of lives is part of business. So is aggressive interrogation. I don't have a problem with that but you have a problem with it and yet you work for US Military.

The soliders around the world want peace and defend their country, not attack other countries for no reason. We work for military casernes to defend our countries and help people from other countries against enemies... I support Soliders fully what they beleive in. Sorry to say that Bush is the worst of all presidents history.

What do you want our US Military to be? Be like Swiss Army? I'm sorry but even Obama Administration is not going to do that. Obama or not, we'll still be in same dirty business - guns and bombs. loss of lives. aggressive interrogations (this time - you won't even know about it because it's classified and yes aggressive interrogation will occur under Obama Administration because it's for the sake of national security and our life)

Are you assume that Obama would do that? I only know that Obama doing his best to make peace what he can... It´s too early to say anything about him since he took over Bush´s position at month ago.


Get it?
 
I do not dispute the fact that we have conducted "aggressive" interrogation methods on prisoners.
I do not dispute the fact that prisoners were mistreated.
I do not dispute the fact that some prisoners at Gitmo Camp are/were innocent.
I do not dispute the allegation that some may have went too far.

I have seen your many posts that you dispute all the list above to defend Bush Admin..

But what I have problem with Liebling is:
1. her outrageous accusation is that our Gitmo Camp is set up as "Torture Camp"
2. her belief that terrorists do apply to Geneva Convention
3. her opinion that due process for terrorists should be same as common criminals
4. her opinion on how US Military should conduct the wars against terrorists
5. and lasty - her strong personal belief does not LARGELY agree with US Military and American Foreign Policy but works for USA anyway :scratch:


All what you said about my posts is misinterpretation and twist.

so Liebling and Reba/I need to come to mutual agreement/understanding of FACTS & REALITY about USA Government & Military at some point

I don´t see anything but deny that the detainees were being treat inhumanity by Bush´s people and keep saying... "where´s proof".... "I don´t beleive Detainees´s stories" and accused me for defend suspect terrorists against US soliders, etc. etc. etc. It´s nothing do with defend suspect terrorists... all what I keep saying that I beleive in justice... that they should go to trial if there´re proof against them, if not then let them free... instead of hold them for years in Gitmo camp without trial and charge.
 
Well, it´s not just past administrations who did dirty but around the world including many business owners, employers as well - many employees work for them... So? Many Americans co-workers/friends and I have the right to say something against Bush Admin. because Bush Admin. did is too far. We also CAN disagree with Obama admin. as well.. Example of all is not want to prosecute Bush & Co..

I see that you keep saying about that. Here's a big difference between you and the employees.

Employees and EVERYBODY gripe about their employer. BTW - "gripe" means complain. We complain about being underpaid and overworked. We complain about our boss taking private jet to Miami.

But you... you have a very strong belief about human rights, wars, and innocent people.... and yet you work for US Military who are in business of wars, killings, bombings, interrogations, etc. This is not about a General taking a military plan to Hawaii at taxpayer's expense. This is not about a General riding around in Mercedes Benz at taxpayer's expense. This is about something that you are STRONGLY against because of your belief.

For example - John works for McDonald and he's a HUGE HUGE animal lover. He heard about McDonald's HORRIBLE treatment of animals. In John's POV - what McDonald did was a case of animal cruelty and illegal even though the law says it's legal... The animals were kept at small, crowdy cage and they butcher/boil the animals alive. But all of those are LEGAL under government law. But!!!! John doesn't like how McDonald raises and butchers the animals. But John continues to work at McDonald. John keeps telling people for years that what McDonald did to animal was WRONG & IMMORAL but.... John continues to work at McDonald.

See anything wrong with this picture?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top