WASHINGTON -- The Guantanamo detainee suspected of being the would-be "20th hijacker" for the Sept. 11 attacks was subjected to abusive treatment, including being forced to wear a bra and perform a series of "dog tricks" during interrogation, according to an official report made public during a Senate hearing Wednesday.
The military investigators' report recommended punishment for the commanding officer of the Guantanamo Bay jail at the time, Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, but that suggestion was overturned by a higher-ranking officer.
The report said Mohamed al-Qahtani--labeled by U.S. officials as the "20th hijacker"--was forced to stand naked before a woman interrogator for at least five minutes and was made to wear thong underwear on his head and a bra.
Qahtani also was told by interrogators that "his mother and sister were whores," according to the report, and he was led by a dog leash attached to his hand chains and made to do a "series of dog tricks" as part of the interrogation.
Female interrogators also massaged Qahtani's neck and back, and one ran her fingers through his hair and told him that resisting the questioning was futile.
A second "high value" detainee was told that he and his family would be killed if he did not cooperate.
Despite the harshness of these tactics, it is not clear that they violated any law. The Geneva Conventions prohibit sexually degrading tactics, but the Bush administration has said the Geneva Conventions don't apply to the Guantanamo detainees, saying they are suspected terrorists rather than prisoners of war.
Actually the report that was released... stated specifically that there was NO, I repeat, NO torture at Gitmo. There were a couple instances where a prison may have felt humiliated during an interogation, and a couple of instances of abuse by rogue personel... but NO Torture.shuamort said:Back in High School, I was president of the school's Amnesty International chapter. We went to the locally based Center for Victims of Torture to hear a man speak about his life as a political dissident in Argentina. He and his wife were tortured for speaking out against the governments abduction of people and putting them into prisons. He and his wife were then imprisoned and tortured in front of each other to have them name names of other dissidents. At one point that inserted a glass tube into the man's urethra and broke it with a hammer. His wife, blindfolded, burned with an iron poker, and starved, eventually died in front of him from the torture.
Torture has NEVER been proven to be an effective form of extracting information. Hearing this story and many others similar to that made it quite firm in my mind that no one should EVER be tortured.
Is it too much to ask to treat people as people and not humiliate them. Especially when they have not been CONVICTED of anything? Claiming that since they're not american citizens is the worst cop-out of all.Stherngntlmn said:Actually the report that was released... stated specifically that there was NO, I repeat, NO torture at Gitmo. There were a couple instances where a prison may have felt humiliated during an interogation, and a couple of instances of abuse by rogue personel... but NO Torture.
I'd consider it torture to be forced in a prison to have sex with a person of the opposite sex (and I'm sure you'd feel the same about having sex with a person of the same sex). Of course, this isn't an issue of sexuality, this is an issue of forced humiliation.Stherngntlmn said:by the way... if you classify the instances listed in the original post of this thread as torture, the transvestites, transexuals, and alternative sex lifestyle lovers of the Gay Marriage section might start really disliking you.
The new definitions of torture don't include this. This is now classified as mere abuse.Datamonkee said:I think that person should be thanking Allah that we don't take a page out of the Viet Cong book of torture techniques. I hear electrodes attached to various sensitive organs produce results.
This a one of the classic logical fallacies. Tu quoque is what it's called. (That link by the way has a real life example from UbL no less.)Datamonkee said:But the Americans are the inhumane ones. We are the flies in this soup.
Our current Presidential Administration has raised threshold for torure beyond what a reasonable person would define as torure.Stherngntlmn said:Actually the report that was released... stated specifically that there was NO, I repeat, NO torture at Gitmo. There were a couple instances where a prison may have felt humiliated during an interogation, and a couple of instances of abuse by rogue personel... but NO Torture.
Since when has humiliation been a Synonym for torture! Webster couldn't find it! Webster Definition So really where's the link? When did being convicted have to do with information! You do know you cannot be convicted of anything and still be with holding information. Look at the Aruba case! Food for though! :mrgreen:shuamort said:Is it too much to ask to treat people as people and not humiliate them. Especially when they have not been CONVICTED of anything? Claiming that since they're not american citizens is the worst cop-out of all.
shuamort said:Back in High School, I was president of the school's Amnesty International chapter. We went to the locally based Center for Victims of Torture to hear a man speak about his life as a political dissident in Argentina. He and his wife were tortured for speaking out against the governments abduction of people and putting them into prisons. He and his wife were then imprisoned and tortured in front of each other to have them name names of other dissidents. At one point that inserted a glass tube into the man's urethra and broke it with a hammer. His wife, blindfolded, burned with an iron poker, and starved, eventually died in front of him from the torture.
Torture has NEVER been proven to be an effective form of extracting information. Hearing this story and many others similar to that made it quite firm in my mind that no one should EVER be tortured.
shuamort said:Is it too much to ask to treat people as people and not humiliate them.
ShamMol said:So there is your alternative-see the inherent dignity in all people, no matter what they have done or had done to them.
cnredd said:If you punch them in the face, they will want to kill you...If you give them flowers and try to hug them...they will STILL want to kill you. Affording them "inherent dignity" will not change this.
Datamonkee said:I still can't get over the fact that frat pranks are considered torture. They put a thong on a prisoner. Had him stand naked in front of a woman. So far this is the same thing strippers do every day. The only torture there is not getting good tips. Stop calling it torture. It isn't. It might be humiliating. Oh frigging well, these are foreign nationals caught in COMBAT zones in Afghanistan. Someone PLEASE explain to me why innocent people would be vacationing in the mountains of Afghanistan?!? Somehow I don't think that is what they are doing. But that just me. Obviously they people are guilty of something, whether it being terrorism or stupidity, humiliate them till your hearts content!
I agree with Guns_God_Glory. When our military starts chopping heads off on internet TV spouting scriptures, that is when I will start to worry about torture.
vandree said:For those who believe that torture is an effective way to obtain info, please read this article based on an interview with Jack Cloonan, a counterterrorism FBI agent:
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=9876
Datamonkee said:They are being treated humanely. A trial doesn't prove anything or show these people anything, other than giving those bastards a chance to get away, and kill more infidels.
They should have been shot in the different combat zones that they were captured in, but we are too humane to do that.
If you give them a trial, and some bleeding heart, these are tortured people, set them free prat of a lawyer will get them free only for them to pick up an AK-47 and unload it on more of our soldiers or his own people.
Someone posts in here with a great quote in their Sig-line that fits this particular idea. "An ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure."
And so what about the burns. These people are the same ones that strap themselves with explosives and attack malls filled with women and children. Do you think, for a second, that burning themselves is beyond them? You don't think that they know they are getting an amazing amount of divisive media attention? You don't think the lawyers that are talking to them aren't telling them to sauce up their plight?
I've had a defense lawyer. One of the techniques they teach their clients is to appeal to the sympathy of the court by any means necessary. It works. It plucks the naive heartstrings of the liberal courts. "Woe is me, my people are oppressed. Woe is me, I didn't get to grow up with electricity so I'm not a smart as you are. I have to kill people the only way left to me." I wonder if the Americans would have the same view of terrorist if the African American community had had the audacity and dedication it takes to strap on homemade explosives, sit on a bus and blow everyone to kingdom come, to get the civil rights movement in the media.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?