Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Detainees Cited Abuse of Koran by Guards
Topic Started: May 26 2005, 07:53 AM (375 Views)
gvok
Unregistered

source

Quote:
 
May 26, 2005
Documents Say Detainees Cited Abuse of Koran by Guards

By NEIL A. LEWIS
WASHINGTON, May 25 - Newly released documents show that detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, complained repeatedly to F.B.I. agents about disrespectful handling of the Koran by military personnel and, in one case in 2002, said they had flushed a Koran down a toilet.

The prisoners' accounts are described by the agents in detailed summaries of interrogations at Guantánamo in 2002 and 2003. The documents were among more than 300 pages turned over by the F.B.I. to the American Civil Liberties Union in recent days and publicly disclosed Wednesday.

Unlike F.B.I. documents previously disclosed in a lawsuit brought by the civil liberties union, in which agents reported that they had witnessed harsh and possibly illegal interrogation techniques, the new documents do not say the F.B.I. agents witnessed the episodes themselves. Rather, they are accounts of unsubstantiated accusations made by the prisoners during interrogation.

On Wednesday, the Pentagon dismissed the reports as containing no new evidence that abuses of the Koran had actually occurred and said that on May 14 military investigators had interviewed the prisoner who mentioned the toilet episode to the F.B.I. and that he was not able to substantiate the charge.

The accusation that soldiers had put a Koran in a toilet, which has been made by former and current inmates over the past two years, stirred violence this month that killed at least 17 people in Muslim countries after Newsweek magazine reported that a military investigation was expected to confirm that the incident had in fact occurred.

Newsweek retracted the report last week, saying it had relied on an American government official who had incomplete knowledge of the situation.

None of the documents released Wednesday indicate any such confirmation that the incident took place.

One document released Wednesday is an Aug. 1, 2002, memorandum from an agent whose name is deleted that recounts a pair of interviews the previous month with a prisoner whose name is also deleted.

The prisoner said that "the guards in the detention facility do not treat him well," the agent wrote. "Their behavior is bad. About five months ago, the guards beat the detainees. They flushed a Koran in the toilet. The guards dance around when the detainees are trying to pray. The guards still do these things." The document does not indicate whether the agent believed the account.

The documents include several other accounts of detainees' complaints about disrespectful handling of the Koran, but none describe its being flushed in a toilet.

Bryan Whitman, the deputy Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday that the newly released document, a summary of an interrogation, "does not include any new allegations, nor does it include any new sources for previous allegations." Mr. Whitman said the source of the accusation "is an enemy combatant."

Since the Newsweek article was published, the Pentagon has been reviewing records, but "we still have found no credible allegations that a Koran was flushed down a toilet at Guantánamo," Mr. Whitman said.

Until the new batch of documents was released, no previously released F.B.I. documents were known to have mentioned abuse of the Koran of the type Newsweek reported.

Earlier complaints came in statements of inmates after they were released from custody or, more recently, in statements of current inmates to their lawyers.

Another memo released Wednesday, dated March 18, 2003, is an account by an agent whose name is deleted who writes that another detainee told him of purposely disrespectful handling of the Koran. The detainee acknowledged, according to the memo, that he did not witness any of the incidents he had discussed.

The agent reports that the detainee said the use of the Koran as a tool in interrogation had been a mistake. "Interrogators who had taken the Koran from individual detainees as a reprisal or incentive to cooperate had failed," the detainee said, adding that the only result would be "the damage caused to the reputation of the United States once what had occurred was released to the world."

Jameel Jaffer, a senior lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union who is coordinating the review of documents obtained in the group's civil suit against the military, said the documents were part of more than 300 new pages received last Thursday from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He said staff members spent days reviewing the documents.

Ken Weine, a spokesman for Newsweek, said the magazine would have no comment on the disclosures.

The disclosures Wednesday did not support the specific assertions in the original Newsweek item that military investigators concluded that a Koran had been flushed down a toilet. They do, however, reinforce the contentions of human rights advocates and lawyers for detainees that accusations of purposeful mishandling of the Koran were common.

A former interrogator told The New York Times in a recent interview that friction over handling of the Koran began with guards' regular searches of the cells. "Some of it was just ignorance," the former interrogator said, insisting on anonymity because soldiers are barred from discussing camp operations. "They didn't realize you shouldn't handle the book roughly."

Though complaints about the handling of the Koran were routine, the former interrogator said, the situation eventually escalated. "It was two things that brought the desecration issue to a higher level," the former interrogator said. "The rumor spread among detainees that a Koran had been flushed down a toilet and that some interrogators brought Korans to the interrogation sessions and stood on them, kicked them around." The former interrogator had not witnessed those occurrences.

Erik Saar, co-author of "Inside the Wire" (Penguin Press, 2005) and an Arabic language translator in 2003 in Guantánamo said in a recent interview that "the detainees actually liked to complain about how the Koran was handled because they viewed it as a cause to rally around" and one that would get the attention of the camp's authorities.

Mr. Jaffer of the A.C.L.U. said the errors in the Newsweek report had been improperly used to discredit other information about abusive practices at Guantánamo "that were not based on anonymous sources, but government documents, reports written by F.B.I. agents."

The new documents and 30,000 pages previously released were disclosed as part of a suit brought by the A.C.L.U. and other groups trying to learn whether and what kinds of coercive tactics were used at Guantánamo.

The earlier release of reports in which bureau agents recounted witnessing harsh interrogations resulted in an investigation by an Air Force general of interrogation practices. That report, which was completed at the end of March, has not yet been released by the Pentagon.

| Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
So this means Newsweek was correct, especially given that they cleared thier story through the military prior to running it in the first place. Does this mean GWB should retract his statement? :lol:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Fesarius
Member Avatar
Admiral
We are inventing some straw men here, when a simple switch of words would couch the question more invitingly.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

I find it interesting that so many Afghanis had subscriptions to Newsweek.
| Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
Quote:
 
A former interrogator told The New York Times in a recent interview that friction over handling of the Koran began with guards' regular searches of the cells. "Some of it was just ignorance," the former interrogator said, insisting on anonymity because soldiers are barred from discussing camp operations. "They didn't realize you shouldn't handle the book roughly."

Though complaints about the handling of the Koran were routine, the former interrogator said, the situation eventually escalated. "It was two things that brought the desecration issue to a higher level," the former interrogator said. "The rumor spread among detainees that a Koran had been flushed down a toilet and that some interrogators brought Korans to the interrogation sessions and stood on them, kicked them around." The former interrogator had not witnessed those occurrences.

Erik Saar, co-author of "Inside the Wire" (Penguin Press, 2005) and an Arabic language translator in 2003 in Guantánamo said in a recent interview that "the detainees actually liked to complain about how the Koran was handled because they viewed it as a cause to rally around" and one that would get the attention of the camp's authorities.

So, the mere rough handling coupled with rumors spread amongst detainees now constitutes proof?

Yeah right.

And as for the ACLU, the NYT left out some of his more controversial statements...
Quote:
 
"Unfortunately, one thing we've learned over the last couple of years is that detainee statements about their treatment at Guantanamo and other detention centers sometimes have turned out to be more credible than U.S. government statements," said ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer.

So now the ACLU is admitting they are going to take the word of people who we know were trained to lie about their treatment by Americans.

Classic useful idiot type leftism.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Administrative Response

Quote:
 
Classic useful idiot type leftism


Dwayne - I am not entirely sure what the term useful idiot is supposed to mean.

I remind you that we do not want fights breaking out over differences of opinion here. Please stick to less insulting sounding comments. People are allowed to disagree with you without being subjected to being called idiots.

End Administrative Response
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
I wonder when Newsweek got such a wide distribution in Afghanistan?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

Are they published in Pashto? I thought Afghanistan had a pretty low literacy rate anyway.
| Quote | ^
 
8247
Member Avatar
Apparently we look like this now
You know, I really dont give a damn about Koran abuse.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Dr. Noah
May 26 2005, 10:16 AM
I wonder when Newsweek got such a wide distribution in Afghanistan?

Good question. I don't even subscribe to or read Newsweek (except once in a blue moon).

Those Afghans sure have one up on this American. :lol:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
8247
May 26 2005, 10:24 AM
You know, I really dont give a damn about Koran abuse.

Would you say the same about the Bible?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
8247
Member Avatar
Apparently we look like this now
I would not like it, but I wouldnt use it as an excuse to riot, and I definately wouldnt use it as an excuse to give an enemy strength and unity that they shouldnt have.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
^^^
I agree.

Unfortunately, in the Islamic world there remains a correlation between the mistreatment of "a book" and it's perception as being the actual words of either God or His prophet. Some Christians would feel the same, but I think we are moving past that idea a bit more than those in the Islamic world.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
8247
May 26 2005, 10:36 AM
I would not like it, but I wouldnt use it as an excuse to riot, and I definately wouldnt use it as an excuse to give an enemy strength and unity that they shouldnt have.

Good answer.


<Insert Devil's advocate smiley>

However, do you not respect another's religion enough to care about the handling of their holy book?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
Minuet
May 26 2005, 09:12 AM
Administrative Response

Quote:
 
Classic useful idiot type leftism


Dwayne - I am not entirely sure what the term useful idiot is supposed to mean.

I remind you that we do not want fights breaking out over differences of opinion here. Please stick to less insulting sounding comments. People are allowed to disagree with you without being subjected to being called idiots.

End Administrative Response

Useful idiot is a term from the late 1940's that was applied to those leftists that argued in favor of the Soviet Union and/or were overt communists.

It is a term that's is describes those that in the name of one principle will support people or actions that go against other, more broadly held principles.

In the case of this article and the ACLU ... the broader principle of protecting the rights of the most vulnerable in society (ie: women forced to wear burka's, homosexual killed for simply being gay, and Jews and Christians forced to live under dhimmi status) are being pushed aside to protect the rights of the people who are exploiting women, gays and religious minorities. It would be like if the ACLU took up the cause of a Ku Klux Klan member who claimed to have been beat up in prison after raping a woman, killing a gay man and enslaving a black man.

And the comment was not pointed at anyone in this site, but at the ACLU.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus