|
The
War Profiteers - War Crimes, Kidnappings, Torture and Big Money |
|
The U.S. Department of Defense - The Guantánamo Bay
Concentration Camp |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Newest media report: George W. Bush Could Pardon Spies
Involved in Torture (15/11/2008/Daily Telegraph) Newest government report: Human Rights Annual
Report 2007 (9/7/2008/U.K. Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee) Newest legal document: Opinion of the Court (12/6/2008/Boumediene
et al vs. Bush et al) |
|||
|
|
|||
|
“[…] ‘I was in extreme pain and so weak that I could barely stand. It
was freezing cold and I was shaking like a washing machine. They questioned
me at gunpoint and told me that if I confessed I could go home. “‘They had already searched me and my cell twice that day, gone
through my stuff, touched my Koran, felt my body around my private parts. And
now they wanted to do it again, just to provoke me, but I said no, because if
you submit to everything you turn into a zombie. “'I heard a guard talking into his radio, ‘ERF, ERF, ERF,’ and I knew
what was coming - the Extreme Reaction Force. The five cowards, I called them
- five guys running in with riot gear. They pepper-sprayed me in the face and
I started vomiting; in all I must have brought up five cupfuls. They pinned
me down and attacked me, poking their fingers in my eyes, and forced my head
into the toilet pan and flushed. They tied me up like a beast and then they
were kneeling on me, kicking and punching. Finally they dragged me out of the
cell in chains, into the rec yard, and shaved my beard, my hair, my
eyebrows.’ “Tarek Dergoul, a British citizen born and brought up in east London
and released without charge after almost two years at Guantanamo Bay, was
describing one of many alleged assaults he says he suffered in American
custody. […] Dergoul’s testimony suggests that Guantanamo hides another
terrible secret - proof, in the shape of hundreds of videos shot by US
guards, that here, too, America’s war against terror has led to wanton
brutality against helpless detainees. […]” Excerpt from an article
of the “Observer” from May 16th, 2004. |
Camp Delta at the Guantánamo Naval Base |
||
|
|
|||
|
November 15th, 2008 - George W. Bush Could Pardon Spies
Involved in Torture 1 news
article by Daily Telegraph November 10th, 2008 - Obama Plans US Terror Trials
to Replace Guantanamo 1 news
article by the Associated Press October 15th, 2008 - CIA Tactics Endorsed In
Secret Memos 1 news
article by the Washington Post September 4th, 2008 - Mexico Drug Plane Used for
US ‘Rendition’ Flights: Report 2 news
articles by Agence France Presse & CounterPunch August 18th, 2008 - Marine Lawyer has Sought
Judicial Reform 1 news article by
the San Diego Union-Tribune June 22nd, 2008 - Inside a 9/11 Mastermind’s
Interrogation 1 news article by
the New York Times June 13th, 2008 - Justices Say Detainees Can
Seek Release 2 news articles by
the Washington Post & Agence France Presse June 6th, 2008 - British Judge Sets Hearing on
Evidence for Detainee 1 news article by
the New York Times May 24th, 2008 - US Secretary of State Rice
Defends Torture at Google Event 1 news article by
World Socialist Web Site April 21st, 2008 - Torture Victim’s Records
Lost at Guantánamo, Admits Camp General 1 news
article by the Guardian April 2nd, 2008 - U.S. and Britain at Odds
Over Guantánamo Inmate 1 news
article by the New York Times February 6th, 2008 - AP Confirms Secret Camp Inside
Gitmo 1 news
article by the Associated Press January 14th, 2008 - Joint Chiefs Chairman: Close
Guantanamo 1 news
article by the Associated Press October 4th, 2007 - Secret U.S. Endorsement of Severe
Interrogations 1 news article by
the New York Times July 21st, 2007 - Court Tells U.S. to Reveal
Data on Detainees at Guantánamo 2 news
articles by the New York Times June 5th, 2007 - Military Judges Dismiss
Charges for 2 Detainees 1 news
article by New York Times May 31st, 2007 - Death of Guantanamo Detainee
Is Apparent Suicide, Military Says 1 news
article by the Washington Post April 30th, 2007 - Guantanamo Lawyers Predict
More Suicides 1 news article by
the Associated Press February 20th, 2007 - Guantanamo Detainees Can’t
Challenge Cases in U.S. Courts 1 news
article by the Washington Post February 14th, 2007 - Bush Order Allows Guantanamo
Trials to Move Ahead 1 news
article by Reuters February 3rd, 2007 - Life Harsher in New Guantanamo
Unit 1 news
article by the Associated Press January 4th, 2007 - Pentagon Says Abuses Already
Investigated 1 news
article by the Associated Press January 3rd, 2007 - FBI Details Possible Detainee
Abuse 1 news article by
the Associated Press December 16th, 2006 - Military Taking a Tougher Line
With Detainees 1 news article by
New York Times November 17th, 2006 - U.S. Military Plans New
Compound for Trials 1 news article by
the Associated Press November 4th, 2006 - U.S. Seeks to Silence Terror
Suspect 1 news
article by the Associated Press October 18th, 2006 - Regret and Resentment at
Guantanamo 1 news
article by BBC News October 17th, 2006 - Bush Signs Bill Setting Detainee
Rules 2 news
articles by the New York Times & Reuters October 17th, 2006 - U.S. Faces Obstacles To
Freeing Detainees 2 news
articles by the Washington Post & Reuters October 15th, 2006 - Marine Corps Issues Gag
Order in Detainee Abuse Case 1 news
article by the Los Angeles Times October 15th, 2006 - Expecting U.S. Help, Sent to
Guantánamo 1 news
article by the New York Times October 13th, 2006 - Southern Command to Probe
Gitmo Charges 3 news
articles by the Associated Press (2) & the Washington Post October 7th, 2006 - Pentagon to Probe Gitmo
Beatings Claim 2 news
articles by the Associated Press & the Los Angeles Times October 6th, 2006 - Prisoner Abuse by U.S.
Guantanamo Guards Described 2 news
articles by Reuters & the Associated Press October 1st, 2006 - Detainee Memo Created Divide
in White House 2 news
articles by the New York Times & Bahrain Daily News September 29th, 2006 - Senate Approves Broad New
Rules to Try Detainees 3 news
articles by the New York Times, the Associated Press & Reuters September 22nd, 2006 - Top Republicans Reach an
Accord on Detainee Bill 1 new article by
the New York Times September 16th, 2006 - Military Lawyers Caught in
Middle on Tribunals 1 news
article by the New York Times September 10th, 2006 - At a Secret Interrogation,
Dispute Flared Over Tactics 1 news article by
the New York Times July 13th, 2006 - White House Prods Congress to
Curb Detainee Rights 1 news article by
the New York Times June 29th, 2006 - Supreme Court Blocks Bush, Gitmo
War Trials 2 news articles by
the Associated Press and the Washington Post June 18th, 2006 - How US hid the suicide secrets
of Guantanamo 1 news article by
the Observer June 12th, 2006 - Prisoners’ Ruse Is Suspected at
Guantánamo 3 news articles by
the Guardian, New York Times and Al Jazeera June 11th 2006 - Three Prisoners commit Suicide
at Guantánamo 2 news articles by
the New York Times and the Washington Post May 16th, 2004 - US Guards ‘Filmed Beatings’ at
Terror Camp 1 news
article by the Observer |
|||
|
July 9th, 2008 - Human Rights Annual
Report 2007 Report by the U.K.
House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee “[…] 74. The FCO report states that it is the Government’s position that
the circumstances in which detainees are held indefinitely are ‘unacceptable’
and that it firmly believes the detention facility ‘should close’. It
welcomes ‘President Bush’s commitment to close the detention facility as soon
as practicable’. However, Human Rights Watch’s submission notes that ‘in
fact, President Bush has now stated that he will not do so, and that he will
leave Guantánamo for the next President to deal with’. The FCO report notes
some outstanding concerns with the US Military Commissions Act 2006 (which
aims to bring about the trial of some of the detainees), particularly
relating to habeas corpus and the treatment of those acquitted. In what was
seen as a coded criticism of the United States, the Foreign Secretary
commented in February 2008 that ‘it’s very, very important that we always
assert that our system of values is different from those who attacked the US’
on 9/11. […] “77. We conclude that the European Union can and must do more to help
the United States in bringing about the overdue closure of the detention
facilities at Guantánamo Bay. We welcome the Government’s representations on
behalf of the five British residents in Guantanamo Bay. Given its decision to
intervene in their cases, we recommend that the Government should express
particular concern over the prospective trial of Binyam Mohamed under the
Military Commissions Act and lobby strongly against any use of the death
penalty if he is found guilty. We recommend that the Government should
continue to press for the return of Binyam Mohamed and Shaker Aamer to the
UK. […]” May 2008 - A Review of the FBI’s
Involvement in and Observations of Detainee Interrogations Report by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General (6,1 MB) “[…] Our report found that after FBI agents in GTMO and other military
zones were confronted with interrogators from other agencies who used more
aggressive interrogation techniques than the techniques that the FBI had
successfully employed for many years, the FBI decided that it would not
participate in joint interrogations of detainees with other agencies in which
techniques not allowed by the FBI were used. “Our review determined that the vast majority of FBI agents complied
with FBI interview policies and separated themselves from interrogators who
used non-FBI techniques. In a few instances, FBI agents used or participated
in interrogations during which techniques were used that would not normally
be permitted in the United States. These incidents were infrequent and were
sometimes related to the unfamiliar circumstances agents encountered in the
military zones. They in no way resembled the incidents of detainee
mistreatment that occurred at Abu Ghraib. “However, FBI agents continued to witness interrogation techniques by
other agencies that caused them concern. Some of these concerns were reported
to their supervisors, which sometimes resulted in friction between FBI and
the military over the use of these interrogation techniques on detainees.
Some FBI agents concerns were resolved directly by the agents working with
their military counterparts, while other concerns were never reported.
Ultimately, however, the DOD made the decisions regarding which interrogation
techniques could be used on the detainees in military zones. In our report,
we describe the types of techniques that FBI employees reported to their
supervisors. […]” February 6th, 2008 - Detainee Operations - JP
3-63 Military
Doctrine by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff (1,2 MB) “[…] 4. Detainee Categories “The DOD definition of the word ‘detainee’ includes any person
captured, detained, or otherwise under the control of DOD personnel
(military, civilian, or contract employee) […]. It does not include persons
being held primarily for law enforcement purposes except where the United
States is the occupying power. As a matter of policy, all detainees will be
treated as EPWs until some other legal status is determined by competent
authority. During the course of operations classified by the United States as
international armed conflicts, captured opposition personnel who satisfy the
criteria enumerated in the GPW will be granted the appropriate status as a
matter of law. Detaining officials must recognize that detained enemy
combatants who have not satisfied the applicable criteria in GPW will have a
status as unlawful ECs, but are still entitled to humane treatment. The inhumane
treatment of detainees is prohibited and is not justified by the stress of
combat or deep provocation. “a. Enemy Combatant. In general, a person engaged in hostilities
against the United States or its coalition partners during an armed conflict.
The term ‘enemy combatant’ includes both ‘lawful enemy combatants’ and
‘unlawful enemy combatants.’ “(1) Lawful ECs, who are entitled to protections under the GPW,
include members of the regular armed forces of a state party to the conflict;
militia, volunteer corps, and organized resistance movements belonging to a
state party to the conflict, which are under responsible command, wear a
fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry their arms openly,
and abide by the laws of war; and, members of regular armed forces who
profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the
detaining power. Lawful combatants are EPWs upon capture, and are entitled to
‘combatant immunity’ for their lawful pre-capture warlike acts. They may be
prosecuted, however, for violations of the law of war. If so prosecuted, they
still retain their status as EPWs. “(2) Unlawful ECs are persons not entitled to combatant immunity, who
engage in acts against the United States or its coalition partners in
violation of the laws and customs of war during an armed conflict or who
support such acts. For purposes of the war on terrorism, the term unlawful EC
is defined to include, but is not limited to, an individual who is or was
part of or supporting Taliban or al Qaeda forces or associated forces that
are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition
partners. “b. Enemy Prisoner of War. Individual under the custody and/or control
of the DOD according to Articles 4 and 5 of the GPW. […]” July 20th, 2007 - Interpretation of the
Geneva Conventions Common Article 3 Executive Order by
the U.S. White House February 14th, 2007 - Executive Order Trial of
Alien Unlawful Enemy Combatants by Military Commission Press Release by
the U.S. White House October 17th, 2006 - President Bush Signs
Military Commissions Act of 2006 Press Release by
the U.S. White House September 28th, 2006 - Military Commissions Act
of 2006 Act of U.S.
Congress proposed to the U.S. President for acceptance September 6th, 2006 - Summary of the High Value
Terrorist Detainee Program Report by the
Office of the Director of National Intelligence September 5th, 2006 - The Department of Defense
Detainee Program Directive by the
U.S. Department of Defense September 2006 - FM 2-22.3 Human
Intelligence Collector Operations Field Manual by
the U.S. Department of the Army May 15th, 2006 - List of Individuals
Detained at Guantánamo Bay from Jan 2002 through May 15, 2006 Report by the U.S.
Department of Defense February 15th, 2006 - Situation of Detainees at
Guantánamo Bay Report by the
Commission on Human Rights, United Nations “[…] 25. Many of the detainees held at Guantánamo Bay were captured in
places where there was – at the time of their arrest – no armed conflict
involving the United States. The case of the six men of Algerian origin
detained in Bosnia and Herzegovina in October 2001 is a well-known and
well-documented example,24 but also numerous other detainees have been
arrested under similar circumstances where international humanitarian law did
not apply. The legal provision allowing the United States to hold
belligerents without charges or access to counsel for the duration of
hostilities can therefore not be invoked to justify their detention. […]” March 28th, 2003 - Camp Delta Standard
Operating Procedures (SOP) Report by the
Joint Task Force - Guantanamo (JTF - GTMO) (4,3 MB) “[…] a. This standard operating procedure (SOP) provides policy,
procedures, and responsibilities for the security, administration, and
treatment of detainees in custody at Camp Delta. This SOP also establishes
procedures for transfer of custody from Camp Delta. […]” March 14th, 2003 - Re: Military Interrogation
of Alien Unlawful Combatants Held Outside the U. S. Memorandum by U.S.
Department of Justice (5,9 MB) “[…] You have asked our Office to examine the legal standards
governing military interrogations of alien unlawful combatants held outside
the United States. You have requested that we examine both· domestic and
international law that might be applicable to the conduct of those interrogations. “In Part I, we conclude that the Fifth and Eighth Amendments, as
interpreted by the Supreme Court, do not extend to alien enemy combatants
held abroad. In Part II, we examine federal criminal law. We explain that
several canons of construction apply here. Those canons of construction
indicate that federal criminal laws of general applicability do not apply to
properly authorized interrogations of enemy combatants, undertaken by
military personnel in the course of an armed conflict. Such criminal statutes,
if they were misconstrued to apply to the interrogation of enemy combatants,
would conflict with the Constitution’s grant of the Commander in Chief power
solely to the President. […] “Third, we examine the applicability of customary international law.
We conclude that as an expression of state practice, customary intemational
law cannot impose a standard that differs from U.S. obligations under CAT, a
recent multilateral treaty on the same subject. In any event, our previous
opinions make clear that customary international law is not federal law and
that the President is free to override it at his discretion. […]” |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Interrogation Reports January 2nd, 2007 -
Documents related to
internal Guantanamo Bay Inquiry Report by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (5,2 MB) June 7th, 2002 - Investigative FBI Report
on Prisoner Abuse at Camp Delta “[…] [censored] was interviewed at Camp Delta, present for the
interview were SA [special agent] FBI, SA [censored] Naval Criminal
Investigative Service (NCIS) [censored] linguist [censored] provided the
following information, translated by: “[censored] stated he had been beaten unconscious approximately three
or four weeks ago when he was still at Camp X-Ray. According to [censored] an
unknown number of guards entered his cell, unprovoked, and started spitting
and cursing at him. The guards called him a ‘son of a bitch,’ and a
‘bastard,’ then told him he was crazy. “[censored] rolled on his stomach to protect himself, [censored]
stated a soldier named [censored] jumped on his back and started beating him
in the face. [censored] then choked him until he passed out. [censored]
stated that [censored] was beating him because [censored] is a muslim, and
[censored] is christian. [censored] indicated there was a female guard named
[censored] who was also beating him and grabbed his head and beat it into the
cell floor. “[censored] stated that all the soldiers were aware of his [censored]
problems, and he was taken to the hospital following the beating, where he
received an IV and treatment for his facial wounds. [censored] claimed the
camp warden, who is a tall african american male, visited him at the hospital
and told the doctors to immediately return him to the camp. [censored]
reported the aforementioned incident to two Red Cross representatives at Camp
Delta, who he identified as [censored] and [censored]. [censored] stated he
did not do anything to cause the guards to enter his cell, and did everything
they instructed him to do. [censored] had what appeared to be a recent wound
on the bridge of his nose. “[censored] stated that he was put in an isolated cell after he was
involved in a dispute over food givent to him. [censored] stated that he is
unable to eat certain foods, and was placed in isolation after arguing with a
guard. […]” |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Legal Documents June 12th, 2008 - Lakhdar Boumediene et
al vs. George W. Bush et al - Opinion of the Court U.S. Supreme Court “[…] Petitioners are aliens designated as enemy combatantsand detained
at the United States Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. There are others
detained there, also aliens, who are not parties to this suit. “Petitioners present a question not resolved by our earlier cases
relating to the detention of aliens at Guantanamo: whether they have the constitutional
privilege of habeas corpus, a privilege not to be withdrawn except
inconformance with the Suspension Clause, Art. I, § 9, cl. 2. We hold these
petitioners do have the habeas corpus privilege. Congress has enacted a
statute, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), 119 Stat. 2739, that
provides certain procedures for review of the detainees’ status. We hold that
those procedures are not an adequate and effective substitute for habeas
corpus. Therefore § 7 of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA), 28 U. S.
C. A. §2241(e) (Supp. 2007), operates as an unconstitutional suspension of
the writ. “We do not address whether the President has authority to detain these
petitioners nor do we hold that the writ must issue. These and other
questions regarding the legality of the detention are to be resolved in the
first instance by the District Court. […]” February 20th, 2007 - Lakhdar Boumediene
et al vs. George W. Bush et al - Opinion U.S. Appeals Court
for the District of Columbia June 29th, 2006 - Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, et al - Opinion U.S. Supreme Court “[…] Pursuant to Congress’ Joint Resolution authorizing the President
to ‘use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations,
organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or
aided’ the September 11, 2001, al Qaeda terrorist attacks (AUMF), U. S. Armed
Forces invaded Afghanistan. During the hostilities, in 2001, militia forces
captured petitioner Hamdan, a Yemeni national, and turned him over to the U.
S. military, which, in 2002, transported him to prison in Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba. Over a year later, the President deemed Hamdan eligible for trial by
military commission for then-unspecified crimes. After another year, he was
charged with conspiracy ‘to commit ... offenses triable by military
commission.’ […] “The military commission at issue lacks the power to proceed because
its structure and procedures violate both the UCMJ and the four Geneva
Conventions signed in 1949. […] (a) The commission’s procedures, set forth in
Commission OrderNo. 1, provide, among other things, that an accused and his
civilian counsel may be excluded from, and precluded from ever learning what
evidence was presented during, any part of the proceeding the official who
appointed the commission or the presiding officer decides to ‘close.’ Grounds
for closure include the protection of classified information, the physical
safety of participants and witnesses, the protection of intelligence and law
enforcement sources, methods, or activities, and ‘other national security
interests.’ Appointed military defense counsel must be privy to these closed
sessions, but may, at the presiding officer’s discretion, be forbidden to
reveal to the client what took place therein. “Another striking feature is that the rules governing Hamdan’s
commission permit the admission of any evidence that, in the presiding
officer’s opinion, would have probative value to a reasonable person.
Moreover, the accused and his civilian counsel may be denied access to
classified and other ‘protected information,’ so long as the presiding officer
concludes that the evidence is ‘probative’ and that its admission without the
accused’s knowledge would not result in the denial of a full and fair trial.
[…]” |
|||
|
Photo Credits 1) Guantánamo Bay, Camp Delta - April 5th,
2006 - Brennan Linsley/AP; 2) Guantánamo Bay, Camp Delta - June 25th, 2005 - Haraz Ghanbari/AP; |
|||
|
|
|||
