Guantanamo guards “getting their kicks in” before prison’s closure
Abuse of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay has worsened sharply since President Barack Obama took office as prison guards “get their kicks in” before the camp is closed, according to a lawyer who represents detainees.
Abuses began to pick up in December after Obama was elected, human rights lawyer Ahmed Ghappour told Reuters. He cited beatings, the dislocation of limbs, spraying of pepper spray into closed cells, applying pepper spray to toilet paper and over-forcefeeding detainees who are on hunger strike.
The Pentagon said on Monday that it had received renewed reports of prisoner abuse during a recent review of conditions at Guantanamo, but had concluded that all prisoners were being kept in accordance with the Geneva Conventions.
“According to my clients, there has been a ramping up in abuse since President Obama was inaugurated,” said Ghappour, a British-American lawyer with Reprieve, a legal charity that represents 31 detainees at Guantanamo.
“If one was to use one’s imagination, (one) could say that these traumatized, and for lack of a better word barbaric, guards were just basically trying to get their kicks in right now for fear that they won’t be able to later,” he said.
Comments are closed.
Unbelievable.
Mr. Minion: It sure is. So why would you believe it?
Sackcloth and ashes seem appropriate.
A.Z.- we believe it because it is consistent with the history of oppressors and their mistreatment of prisoners.
j. edwards – Agim has been around these parts before, proclaiming his kerygma of faith in our priestly boys in uniform. He always seems to ask how dare we pass along such reports, for his saints would never do such things. His faith is in them, and not in the cross, i.e. the victims of history.
You are right to mention sackcloth and ashes. The fact that this story was reported on Ash Wednesday should send off alarm bells for Catholics. The ongoing involvement of the united states of america in the practice of torture is indeed a contemporary way of the cross.
I do believe it because a friend of mine was a prison guard in Guantanamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Getting hit by an IED wasn’t the main thing that caused her PTSD. Mind you, Guantanamo is “Club Fed” compared to other places.
Here some of the things she’s said to me “I don’t know how I’ll ever forgive myself”. “What Geneva Conventions ?”, “Everything you’ve heard in the media is nothing compared to reality”. “Beating them up is part of standard procedure.” “Nobody tells you what happens out in the desert.” “I just want something that will make me forget.” And, mind you, she was not even working one of those “secret prisons”.
From a broken family, no money, she tried to “get away from it all”, “see the world”, “serve your country.” She’s still in “de-programming”. She’s lost 14 people she was in boot camp with. It’s so much harder for someone who was there to wake up to the pointlessness of it all. I just listen to it and can’t even understand the first thing about it. Imagine being 19 years old, sent to hell, ordered to do things you never imagined you’d ever do. And all this time all the lies you’ve been brainwashed with in this country keep you deluded until it all becomes too much and breakdown follows. And still, you want to go back to help your buddies. That none of you should be there in the first place takes a while to realize. Identification with mission is crucial to maintain your insanity, which is what the military counts on. It’s unappreciably harder for a soldier to realize the lies. Just another poor girl off to fight a rich man’s war.
Now that the physical wounds are healed, the government keeps paying her shame money – they’re apparently quite ashamed at $2500 a month or so. And mind you, she was a “perpetrator”, one of the “good guys”. Imagine how the victims feel. Of course, there are plenty of people who do the same things and remain unfazed. The military is an ideal playground for sociopaths and sadists, after all.
But, at least Mr. Bush didn’t “compromise his soul.”
1. I don’t see Americans as oppressors. Therefore behavior consistent with that term does not influence my judgment of them.
2. The Reuters report is a second-hand claim made by a man paid to do everything in his power to gain sympathy for his clients.
3. The claim is that guards who know they are being watched have decided to behave even more badly then they are alleged to have behaved before just as scrutiny of their behavior is increasing, and to do so for no reason other than pique and, presumably, some sort of innate depravity. While this claim might end up being true it is extraordinary and it seems a good rule to require strong proof of extraordinary claims before believing them.
4. The accusation is attributed to prisoners that, whatever support you might wish to give them in their jihad against the West, cannot be assumed to be reliable witnesses under these circumstances for a number of reasons. It is an accusation (or the report of the repetition of an accusation) by an interested party.
There is no way to know whether the report is true so I don’t see how an objective person could possibly see this as established fact. I do believe American military personnel are the most disciplined and morally scrupulous in history but all men are sinners. I neither have a blasphemous faith in their holiness, nor do I default to thinking of them as sadists and sociopaths. I don’t think I’m the one who can’t see past his own preconceptions on this matter. If the accusation turns out to be true, then arrest and prosecute, but in the mean time the psychological speculations of a terrorist’s lawyer don’t strike me as dispositive. The story looks like hooey and I can’t see any reason for a rational person to get worked up over it.
3. The claim is that military guards (who are under even more scrutiney now than earlier) have decided to behave even more badly then they are alleged to have behaved before, and to do so for no reason other than pique and, presumably, some sort of innate depravity.
4. The accusation is attributed to prisoners that, whatever support you might wish to give them in their jihad against the West, cannot be said to be reliable witnesses for a number of reasons. It is an accusation by an interested party.
There is no way to know whether the report is true so I don’t see how an objective person could possibly see this report as established fact. I do believe American military personnel are the most disciplined and morally scrupulous in history but all men are sinners. I neither have a blaphemous faith in their holiness, nor do I default to thinking of them as sadists and sociaopaths.
I don’t think I’m the one who can’t see past his own preconceptions on this.
Sorry for the mess. Bad cut & paste job.
“I do believe American military personnel are the most disciplined and morally scrupulous in history…”
Of course. No doubt every patriot feels that way about their country’s military. Is this your example of how to be objective?
Vox victimarum, vox Dei
Today AG Holder described Gitmo as a “well run and professional facility.” This guy was nominated by Obama, right?
It is true that the American military employs its power more scrupulously than other world powers would have. Claim to fame ? Uh, no. Sorry you’re dead but we REALLY TRIED to miss you.
So,we should disbelieve Obama’s AG when he describes the place as “well run and professional?”
So,we should disbelieve Obama’s AG when he describes the place as “well run and professional”
If by “we” you mean critically-thinking Catholics, then yes.
I like Obama but I don’t kid myself that American government apparitchiks aren’t paid to lie.