British Guantanamo detainee details abuse claims

#1
What fcuking abuse? :evil:

From reuters.

LONDON (Reuters) - A British man held at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba says he was shackled so long he wet himself and was forced to clean up his own urine, the Guardian has reported.
Martin Mubanga, 31, said an interrogator had stood on his hair and he was subjected to extreme temperatures rising to 36 degrees centigrade (97F).

The alleged abuse of Mubanga, one of four Britons held at the camp, was detailed in a letter from the Foreign Office to the prisoner's family, the paper said on Saturday.

The allegations were made by Mubanga to a Foreign Office official during a welfare visit in June.

"Martin told the official ... he had been interrogated, shacked and not allowed to go to the toilet," the paper quoted the letter as reading.

"He said he had wet himself and had been forced to clean up the mess himself. Martin said that in another incident in June, he had been put in a room with the temperature at 97F ... he knew the temperature because he saw the dial."

The letter continued: "Martin said that there had been a struggle and he had had his hair stood on by the interrogator."

In a later visit by a Foreign Office official on October 3, Mubanga was shackled by his feet to the floor for the entire 60 minutes of the interview, the paper said, citing an official record of the meeting.

Mubanga, from London and a former motorcycle courier, was arrested in Zambia in 2002.

His allegations echo those made earlier this year in a letter by another British Guantanamo prisoner, Moazzam Begg, who said he had been tortured and abused during his detention.

More than 600 people have been held without charge or access to lawyers at Guantanamo, some for more than two years.

The prison camp was set up in January 2002 to hold combatants captured in Afghanistan and others suspected of association with al Qaeda.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman told Reuters: "We have raised with the U.S. authorities the allegations of maltreatment raised with us by Mr Mubanga during a welfare visit.

"The U.S. authorities have investigated them and their response is that they are without merit.

"Our position about the Guantanamo detainees remains that in the absence of the prospect of a free trial they should be returned to the UK," she added.

© Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.


Is it just me or is this a complete non story? Talk about sh1te journalism or what. :roll:
 
#4
So lemme get this straight:

It's hot (well, duh, it's in Cuba)
He was shackled (well, duh, he's a prisoner)
He wasn't allowed to go to the toilet (just like in school in the old days)
There was a struggle (i.e. was he resisting the guards?) and someone stood on his hair. Poor baby!

And this counts as abuse? Perhaps his guards should tazer him on the hour every hour just to teach him what abuse actually is! (joke)
 
#6
Ord_Sgt said:
What fcuking abuse? :evil:

From reuters.

LONDON (Reuters) - A British man held at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba says he was shackled so long he wet himself and was forced to clean up his own urine, the Guardian has reported.
Martin Mubanga, 31, said an interrogator had stood on his hair and he was subjected to extreme temperatures rising to 36 degrees centigrade (97F).
fcuk em. i couldn't care if they made him drink his own urine, the scummy little traitor. i personally think they should leave em to the yanks, serve them right.

:twisted:
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#7
Whatever our feelings towards these Brits who we suspect fought against their own nation, the fact is that the US demonstrated a blatent disregard for all internationally agreed standards with the setting up of the primitive facility at Guantanamo Bay.
These men were held for many months, in some cases a couple of years, without charge, without legal representation and without the most basic of human rights afforded them.
The British goverment must of course share its part of the responsibilty for this by being the nodding dog of the Bush government that perpetrated this heinous behaviour.
This is Britain.We used to have standards. Let us not condone illegal behaviour by any government.
 
#8
pompeyboys said:
These men were held for many months, in some cases a couple of years, without charge, without legal representation and without the most basic of human rights afforded them.
Such as?

Fact is, these men did this to themselves. Traitorous scum.
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#9
Corporal said:
pompeyboys said:
These men were held for many months, in some cases a couple of years, without charge, without legal representation and without the most basic of human rights afforded them.
Such as?
Fact is, these men did this to themselves. Traitorous scum.
Proven by which court?
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#11
Corporal said:
Answer my question first. Which of "the most basic of human rights" are they not being afforded?
This from a man raised in a country that holds men and women for years on death row in a culture of retribution rather than rehabilitation...of revenge rather than repentance and then restoration. We may speak the same language but until recently our nations were many miles apart in mind. This, I fear, is changing. That you cannot even recognise the wrong done by your government and condone it is the scariest aspect.

Earlier this week, a letter from FBI counter-terrorism official Thomas Harrington to the US Army's provost marshal, Major General Donald Ryder, recounted "highly aggressive interrogation techniques" used on detainees.

Detainees held in cages, kneeling shackled, handcuffed, masked and blindfolded, shuffling to interrogations, or being wheeled there on mobile stretchers. Denied their rights under international law and held in conditions which may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, the detainees faced severe psychological distress for months and years on end.

One of the old men had no teeth and required a cane to walk. Another, Faiz Mohammed, told the media that he was over 100 years old. He said US and Afghan troops captured him in late 2001 when he was visiting a local village in his native Oruzgun province, ignoring his protests that he had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

They had no access to their families or lawyers and the detainees were being held in contravention of the Geneva Convention, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the US Constitution.
Camp Delta prisoners were permitted to leave their tiny cells for only two 15-minute shower and exercise sessions per week. This means they were confined to their non air-conditioned cells in fierce tropical heat for all but 30 minutes each week, unless they were called to an interrogation session, which can happen at any time of the day or night. The so-called exercise yards consisted of 25 x 18 foot cages, with prisoners only allowed to exercise alone, wearing manacles.

Amnesty International described the conditions at Camp Delta as “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in violation of international law” and called for all interrogations to be halted until the detainees are given the opportunity to consult lawyers. These appeals, needless to say, were brushed aside by the Bush administration.

Worldwide opinion eventually caused changes to be made but for many many months the US Government was guilty of the war crime that is Guantanamo bay.
 
#12
Corporal said:
Answer my question first. Which of "the most basic of human rights" are they not being afforded?
Errrm.... from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
 
#13
pompeyboys said:
This from a man raised in a country that holds men and women for years on death row in a culture of retribution rather than rehabilitation...of revenge rather than repentance and then restoration. We may speak the same language but until recently our nations were many miles apart in mind. This, I fear, is changing. That you cannot even recognise the wrong done by your government and condone it is the scariest aspect.
Now tell me, how did you gleam all this out of my asking for details to your statement?

Do I think the men held in Gitmo are scum? Yes. Sorry, but just being old and saying "I didn't do anything' doesn't cut it with me.

Do I think they are being held in inhumane conditions? Not in the least. Just because it is hot doesn't mean you have a basic human right to air conditioning.

Do I think it is wrong to hold these men for years without a trial? YES! There was a good arguement for detaining these men at first for intelligence gathering purposes, but that has long passed. Since 9-11 the Bill of Rights has been under constant assualt, and it is very scarey. Don't get me started on The Patriot Act, I'm liable to have a stroke.


And as far as being raised in a country that "holds men and women for years on death row in a culture of retribution rather than rehabilitation...of revenge rather than repentance and then restoration", you will be happy to know that I am anti death penality. Two reasons: it is far more costly to execute a prisoner than to keep him in prison for life and there have been at least 22 people executed in the US since 1900 that were later proven to be inocent.
 
#14
They were rounded up on the field of battle, they were not fighting for the Afghan govn't but were engaged in hostile actions against coalition troops; there for they are not POWs. There legal status is not clear, under international law, and to let them free would put civilians and soldiers at risk.

There is no evidence that they are being tortured.
They are being detaineed, feed, sheltered and clothed. They are being treated far better then those their likes capture, which do wind up being tortured and then having their heads cut off of followed by their corpses being mutilated.

The feckers can sit and rot for all I care.
 
#15
ctauch said:
They were rounded up on the field of battle, they were not fighting for the Afghan govn't but were engaged in hostile actions against coalition troops; there for they are not POWs. There legal status is not clear, under international law, and to let them free would put civilians and soldiers at risk.

There is no evidence that they are being tortured.
They are being detaineed, feed, sheltered and clothed. They are being treated far better then those their likes capture, which do wind up being tortured and then having their heads cut off of followed by their corpses being mutilated.

The feckers can sit and rot for all I care.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
 
#16
Doesn't apply to those detained on the field of battle.

The Geneva Convetion dictates the handling of detainee's. Let's not confuse the issue, these were not individuals milling around Harrod's, snatched up and shuttled away to Gitmo. These were combatants, not wearing uniforms of a sovreign govn't [violation of the Geneva Convention], not employeed by said govn't, and not even in most cases citizens of said country, engaging in hostile activities against coalition forces and Afghan civilians.

People are rather quick to point out the alleged human rights violations perpetrated by the US against those detained in Gitmo, but turn a blind eye to what the Taliban and AQ engaged in. Or overlook what is happening in the Sudan, Ivory Coast, or any other third wolrd shyte hole.

Gitmo detainees are being treated well, are not being abused and are there of their own doing. They have no legal standing in international law, because their violations of international law is what got them to Gitmo in the first place.
 
#18
Big boys rules, they were combatants they were captured... tough.

Besides that, at least one of the two mentioned in the article is IMO in no way innocent. In fact the US DOES occupy the moral high ground on this, they are treating the detainees very well. Abuse absolute rubbish "its too hot... I pissed myself" fcuk off.

The US could have held them in some sh1tty third world contry on the quiet and the locals could have tortured the terrorists (because that what they are) until the cows came home. The article in question is simply seeking to bash the US with the weakest possible allegations, what next lunch was served late?
 
#20
Reuters

...subjected to extreme temperatures rising to 36 degrees centigrade (97F).
Thirty six C, extreme? 8O. FCUK OFF.

"He said he had wet himself and had been forced to clean up the mess himself.
The prisoner's steward was off that day.

Mubanga, from London and a former motorcycle courier
A motorcycle courier who never ever had a slash in his leathers :wink:


PompeyBint said

Worldwide opinion eventually caused changes to be made but for many many months the US Government was guilty of the war crime that is Guantanamo bay.
Worldwide opinion? Pot calls kettle in most cases. Third world dictators wag finger at the Great Satan. Great Satan is supposed to feel chastised. I'd rather be held by the cousins in Guantanamo that held by the types that held and murdered Margret Hassan and Ken Bigley etc. That's abuse.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top