Physicians Report on Torture: A Questionable Case
Why didn't the press ask Physicians for Human Rights about how weak most of their evidence of torture by Americans turned out to be?
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Despite claims uncritically repeated in some media outlets, medical examinations of 11 former detainees of U.S. military prison facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Cuba advanced by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) do not provide open-and-shut examples of prisoner abuse. Instead PHR offers up one-sided accounts based largely upon allegations made by former detainees to an organization with a predefined political agenda and financed in part by Bush Administration opponent and convicted felon George Soros and his group, the Open Society Institute.
Of the eleven former detainees interviewed by Physicians for Human Rights, eight had been captured and abused or wounded in combat prior to be taken into U.S. custody, making it difficult to determine if injuries uncovered during physical examinations were the result of preexisting conditions or whether they were sustained after being transferred to American custody. Two of these eight detainees were picked up and interrogated by local forces sometime after being released from U.S custody but prior to their examinations, also leading to the possibility of post-custodial abuse before PHR’s physical and psychological reviews.
Six detainees were exposed to psychological trauma or had psychiatric issues prior to U.S. detention, including one subject that had attempted suicide twice. Several claimed physical problems resulting from abuse completely unsupported by the examinations, including one detainee claiming that he had a heart attack that later tests did not support, and another one blaming ill-fitting clothing for genital swelling. One experienced nothing that could reasonably be described as torture, suffering only abusive language and a temporary delay in medical care.
While prisoner abuse and torture have occurred during the War on Terror and have been well documented, the report by (PHR) was not a peer reviewed document and contained errors, obfuscations, and repeated charges unsupported by the evidence collected. Despite how it has been portrayed in the media, the PHR account is far from being an objective or conclusive document, as even the report’s authors are occasionally forced to admit:
It is possible that allegations of torture and ill-treatment made by the former detainees were affected by recall bias and/or intentional exaggeration or misrepresentation for personal and/or political gain. PHR could not independently investigate and corroborate all statements made by the former detainees in this report, nor assess the consistency of the detainees’ accounts. Due to logistical and security reasons, PHR was unable to obtain either 1) corroboration from any of the former detainee’s family members concerning post-detention health and functioning, or 2) prior medical records to determine prior history. Where possible, PHR sought to corroborate the former detainees’ allegations with external sources. The detention medical records of one individual and the independent medical evaluation of another former detainee were used to corroborate their accounts. Media sources and released US government investigations on allegations of detainee abuse were used to corroborate accounts by two other former detainees.
The evaluators have no baseline medical history to know if any of the 11 detainees had preexisting problems either prior to being held in American custody or afte. Instead they had an independent post-detention medical evaluation for a single detainee, and the detention medical history of another. Without pre-detention baseline readings, the claims of the detainees are little more than hearsay uncritically republished by a public policy advocacy group.
The individual cases have many data points pointing towards abuse and perhaps even torture, but such findings are not conclusive, as a review of the individual cases reveal.
“Kamal”
Captured in his home in September, 2003, he was sent to Abu Ghraib, tortured until November of 2004, released to prison tent city, and claims to have had a heart attack that was untreated (a claim that tests do not support). He was released in June, 2004. He was picked up again by Iraqi Police in January of 2005, during which time he was not tortured, but sometimes was not allowed food, water or access to toilet during prison lockdowns. Was also insulted by guards. He was released a second time in October of 2006. Physical evidence is “consistent” with the allegations, but not in any way definitive as far as proof of torture. Nor is there evidence that shows these healed wounds occurred during captivity and not in the more than 40 years of his life previously. Psychological testing shows evidence of depression, PTSD, anxiety, etc. There was no testing of his reported hearing loss.
“Hafez”
Captured November 2003 while in his 50s, he was sent to Abu Ghraib for seven months where he was tortured. Friends were reported killed by Americans during the 1991 Gulf War which made him “profoundly sad, perhaps giving him motive to exaggerate or falsify his testimony. He was injured in a 1998 bombing he attributed to the American military, giving him a second reason to carry a grudge (side note: time frame during so-called “No Fly Zone War,” when coalition aircraft typically only fired at anti-aircraft missile and radar sites, making his claims of no prior military service questionable). He claims soldiers robbed his home of money and valuables, but provides no evidence. Once again physical evidence was “consistent” with his torture claims but not definitive. He also claimed that wearing an ill-fitting suit led to genital swelling. The evaluator’s analysis admits that they were unable to determine if his psychological issues were related to his detention, if he had a pre-existing condition, or if these issues were the result of post-detention factors.
“Laith”
He was arrested October 2003, sent to Abu Ghraib, and released in June 2004. In his mid-40s, he served in the military, and was wounded fighting Iran during the 1980s. He claims he was tortured in first 35-40 days of captivity. He was diagnosed a diabetic while in Abu Ghraib, and is under medical treatment for the condition. Once again, physical evidence is “consistent” with his claims, but not definitive. Oddly, he claims he wasn’t sodomized, but shows anal scarring consistent with penetration. He claimed cigarette burns on chest but no scarring was evident. Evaluation revealed other undefined physical evidence unrelated to his arrest and detention, but these injuries, and how they are accurately separated by the evaluator from detention-era injuries is unexplained. Psychological testing indicates PTSD and severe depression, in addition to an admission of alcohol abuse. Evaluators insist his physical and psychological symptoms show he was sodomized, even though he continues to deny it.
“Yasser”
In his mid-40s, he was arrested, detained, and abused in the 1990s by Iraqi forces. He claims he suffered no physical or psychological damage from that seven-month detention, yet he claimed one unnamed preexisting condition prior to his arrest that went untreated. He suggests only the later U.S. detention at Abu Ghraib after his October 2003 arrest caused his permanent damage. He claimed he was transported by a “tank” after arrest, but as U.S. tanks do not have a layout consistent with the prone transport he describes, he was likely referring to a Bradley IFV. He was released in February of 2004 and exhibits scarring “consistent” with electric shock, but the evaluator does not provide evidence that can confirm if this happened during his U.S. detention rather than during the seven months he was held prisoner in the Saddam era. He alleges multiple acts of brutal sodomy, but brief exam did not show physical evidence consistent with this claim. Psychological testing showed signs of depression, PTSD, and related symptoms.
“Morad”
In his late 50s, he was arrested September 2003, detained for ten months and released in July 2004. Physical abuse was far milder than other claimants, as was claimed psychological abuse. He was treated with insulin (apparent diabetic) during the course of his incarceration after informing captors of his condition. Harsh language and delayed medical treatment seem to be his only claims. Based upon his relative physical and psychological well-being, I fail to see why he was included in a report alleging torture.
“Rahman”
Captured in October 2003, he was detained in Abu Ghriab and released in May, 2004. In his early 40s, he claims he was brought in for questioning by authorities in 1989 and 1994 during Saddam Hussein’s reign , but denied any abuse occurred at that time. He claimed his torture was unique from other claimants, in that there was far more use of immersion in cold water and having cold water thrown upon him, along with the hitting and kicking that seemed common among most of the men interviewed. He was “taken away” by Iraqi secret police and detained for 18 days in summer of 2006, but refuses to discuss the experience. The two prior confinements and secret police detention that he refuses to discuss once more makes physical and pyschological evidence of abuse no less valid, but difficult to ascribe to just one of his four incarcerations.
“Amir”
He was arrested in August of 2003 and remained imprisoned until January of 2005. Claims of physical abuse included forced running in addition to more typical claims of being hit, stress positions, and loud noise. He was transferred to Abu Ghraib in September of 2003, where he endured physical and sexual abuse. Was transferred to Camp Bucca in July 2004 where he suffered no ill treatment, and was released in November, 2004 after being transferred back to Abu Ghraib for two days before being released. This is inconsistent with previous claimed release date of January of 2005. Did the Physicians for Human Rights report writers mean two months, or two days in Abu Ghraib before release? If this report had been adequately peer-reviewed (or even fact-checked), such an obvious discrepancy would like have been caught before official publication. Physical and psychological examinations showed evidence of injuries “consistent” with his claims.
“Haydar”
He claims to have been captured in turn by the Taliban, Afghan forces, and the U.S. Military in Afghanistan in October or November of 2001. He was held in both Kandahar, and Guantanamo Bay until mid 2004. He had several psychological issues before his detention and attempted suicide twice before going to Afghanistan. The report apparently described delousing procedures upon arrival at Kandahar but did not explain it was a community health issue and not torture. The evaluator twice described the insertion of a finger into the anus upon arrival at both Kandahar and Guantanamo Bay. This was probably part of a medical evaluation for new arrivals or a search for contraband. The report is unclear on that point. He states he was abused and threatened with dogs shortly after arrival and claims he was at one point pepper-sprayed, though he does not explain why he was sprayed. He abused himself by slamming his head against his cell door and was medicated with Zoloft. When released to his home country, he was “interrogated extensively” by local police, but claims no abuse at their hands. A physical examination shows missing teeth consistent with beatings he says he suffered, and physical scarring, some of which he attributed to abuse. A total body scan conducted by the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT) “revealed no evidence of abnormalities.”
“Adeel”
Captured in Pakistan by Pakistani soldiers in May of 2002, he was kept for nine days in a Pakistani Intelligence safe house and claims he was not abused by them. He was sent to Baghram and later to Guantanamo Bay and was released in the fall of 2006. Once again, in-processing, including a fully body search common in all domestic prisons, was described as abuse, as was communal showering. Torture and abuse consisted of constantly being shackled, beatings, humiliations, and loud music. He refuses to provide details, but claims “somebody touched him in a humiliating manner” during a prison transfer, which could reasonably be construed as part of a search for contraband. Physically, he shows evidence of eardrum perforation and infection and other indicators of poor hygiene and restricted movement, along with an undiagnosed skin discoloration.
“Youssef”
Detained on the Pakistani border in late 2001 or early 2002, he was held and abused at a Pakistani prison before being transferred Kandahar and Guantanamo Bay. He was released in November of 2003. He claims physical abuse in the form of beatings at Kandahar, and electrocution by being pushed against a generator on on occasion. He was kept at Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay where he claims beatings were common for small infractions, though he suffered no permanent damage. While at Camp Delta, he reported no beatings, but was exposed to temperature extremes and loud music. He accused the camp psychologist of abusing doctor/patient privilege, as interrogators used his stress of missing his family against him after he shared his feelings with the psychologist. Physical evidence of abuse was minimal, and he admitted that some psychological distress existed before his capture, though it was exacerbated during his confinement.
“Rasheed”
Captured in Afghanistan in November 2001, he was incarcerated in Bagham, Kandahar, and Guantanamo Bay before his fall 2006 release. A convert to Islam, he was previously arrested on terrorism charges in his home country, and was beaten. He was was allowed to leave prison only on the condition that he would be expelled from his home country. He claims to have been a refugee for months before the nation in which he lived dumped him in Afghanistan. He claims he was captured by bandits, and sold to the Northern Alliance as a prisoner. He says he was beaten and had a medical procedure without his consent (later determined to be a hernia repair by Guantanamo Bay staff). After being transferred to Guantanamo Bay, he claimed that he faked psychological symptoms to avoid continued abuse, but the effort only led to him being heavily medicated. He claims he was still beaten on more than 300 occasions at Guantanamo Bay. Unique among the subjects, “Rasheed” provided Physicians for Human Rights with a copy of his 1,200 page Guantanamo Bay medical file that indicated his heavy prior use of alcohol and drugs and a family history of psychiatric issues. Examination of his musculoskeletal system as reported by PHR did not show extensive lingering injuries a layperson might expect in a survivor of 300 beatings.
Physicians for Human Rights goes on in their report to make other accusations and suggestions, but considering that that these conclusions are based upon questionable claims and political objectives, further review was pointless.
Bob Owens blogs at Confederate Yankee.
| Comment |  Digg This |
 del.icio.us |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
29 Comments
George:Irregardless of the ‘details’ with this as well as most other subjects of interest in the news, the average liberal has already heard the ‘gitmo torture’ comment from celebrities and therefore their minds are made up on that subject forever. Hell, John Stewart’s ‘Gitmo’ puppet is more then enough information. Wasting more then 5 words to argue a subject with a liberal is pointless. The right talking head, ad 3-6 word soundbite that sticks in their head, and the debate is over as far as they are concerned.
Jun 21, 2008 - 10:21 am Javelin:Of course, only a duly certified neo or theo con, who voted for Bush and supported the war, testimonry, evidence and allegation about torture past muster here. Anyone else is just a useful idiot, left wing Marxist Muslim, politically correct moral relativists who hates god and loves abortion and we all know those types have no intelligence or integrity.
Jun 21, 2008 - 10:35 am George:And my point is re-enforced just that quickly…
Thanks!
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:04 am George:Oh, and as a reminder, the NEW term is officially- “Bush’s failed policies”.
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:07 am Zhombre:George, the operant phrase is “Bush’s failed policies continued by McSame.”
Jun 21, 2008 - 2:39 pm gus3:Quoth Javelin:
“Of course, only a duly certified neo or theo con, who voted for Bush and supported the war, testimonry, evidence and allegation about torture past muster here.”
I didn’t vote for Bush, but I did (and still do) support our actions in Iraq. Does one out of two count?
No?
Sorry. I must have gotten my “Certificate of Neo-Con-ness” fraudulently. I’ll mail it back Monday.
Jun 21, 2008 - 4:20 pm Derrick Ogden:Are you kidding? They got a whole slew of professional medical doctors with reputations & careers to protect & you got - well …nothing. I have a hint: if you intend to do this sort of thing in future it might be wise to get a witness, preferably an expert or professional witness, but at the very least a wsitness.
Because otherwise folks will think that “Bob Owens” of PJ Media makes sh** up.
At this point I am among such folks. Hey- good think all your fans here aren’t as demanding, right? So that’s a good strategy Bob Owen: just make sure your writing is restricted circulation to shutins at mental hospitals & you could go far.
Jun 21, 2008 - 7:11 pm the webloglearner:actually information can be distorted at times and i believe in what yu say about having political agenda behind. i do not know the reality of the ultimate truth but i have observed information/data manipulation to serve some people or groups.
Jun 21, 2008 - 7:23 pm Dark Helmet:The bias of the story is in the head line ‘AP’. soros has given us 2 canidates and seeks to destroy our nation with the damn fake news.
Jun 21, 2008 - 8:46 pm NB:If a person spends time detained by Saddam era Iraq and/or Pakistan, and says no abuse occurred but at the hands of the US they were subjected to the most horrible atrocities, I’m calling shenanigans. The point of the article was not to excuse anything the US may or may not have done, it was to illuminate the fact that if one cannot verify the source or time frame of injuries, one cannot arbitrarily assign blame to the least likely of three suspects. But again, I’m trying to apply logic and fact which will immediately make me a target of ridicule from the left.
“I hate America. It’s Evil”. Seriously, you liberals need a new tune. If America’s so wretched why don’t you go live with Yasser or Kamal or Hafez. You can all sit around and hate America together. Until they cut off your head at least.
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:37 pm Rob:Derrick sez: “Because otherwise folks will think that “Bob Owens” of PJ Media makes sh** up.
At this point I am among such folks.”
Well, we know George Soros has made sh** up before. Remember the 650,000 dead Iraqis story? Plus, I don’t recall Owens trying to buy the WH before, so you’ll pardon me if I believe him over Soros.
Jun 22, 2008 - 2:04 am ern:Why didn’t the press ask tough questions? Because the press is completely lacking in critical thinking skills. And the fact that reporters probably didn’t actually read the whole report. And because the press isn’t trained in the methodology of such reports, and wouldn’t know what to look for.
This evidence is weak, for the reason NB gave above. Without a reasonable baseline, it’s impossible to tell where these injuries came from or when. And since many of these guys had spent time incarcerated by regimes we know practice torture, we can’t differentiate. At all.
And there’s probably nothing that can be done to remedy this. Medical records are spotty, and as has been pointed out, the alleged victims don’t have any incentive to provide such information.
I’m all for holding people accountable if abuses happened (and I’m pretty sure they did). But there is a certain level of evidence that is necessary before you can make broad allegations. The accusation that the US has broadly used torture as policy in the GWOT remains unsubstantiated. So far, it seems most of the men leaving custody are in better physical shape than when they entered custody. If these are the best examples that administration critics can come up with, it seems that the military is doing their job at least adequately.
Jun 22, 2008 - 5:19 am MnZ:Derrick, start using your brain.
You said:
“Are you kidding? They got a whole slew of professional medical doctors with reputations & careers to protect & you got - well …nothing. I have a hint: if you intend to do this sort of thing in future it might be wise to get a witness, preferably an expert or professional witness, but at the very least a wsitness.”
Fine. However, they study’s authors have not put their reputation on the line. Instead, say the following:
“It is possible that allegations of torture and ill-treatment made by the former detainees were affected by recall bias and/or intentional exaggeration or misrepresentation for personal and/or political gain. PHR could not independently investigate and corroborate all statements made by the former detainees in this report, nor assess the consistency of the detainees’ accounts. Due to logistical and security reasons, PHR was unable to obtain either 1) corroboration from any of the former detainee’s family members concerning post-detention health and functioning, or 2) prior medical records to determine prior history. Where possible, PHR sought to corroborate the former detainees’ allegations with external sources. The detention medical records of one individual and the independent medical evaluation of another former detainee were used to corroborate their accounts. Media sources and released US government investigations on allegations of detainee abuse were used to corroborate accounts by two other former detainees.”
In other words, the doctors who wrote the study admit their study cannot prove anything of substance. However, the PR associated with the story does not highlight this fact. Thereby, the doctors are able to protect their professional reputations by not really proving anything and Physicians for Human Rights get to claim that they did.
Jun 22, 2008 - 5:44 am bour3:It’s a bit difficult crediting comments to an article when the first word of the first comment is “irregardless.” A portion of my reading-self stays stuck on that. What is one to think of what follows? Must we pick through double negatives to discern the positives or what? Next; is sarcasm really sarcasm or just plain stupid? Neo this, neo that, I’m neo rather neo tired of neo hearing neo that neo attached to neo every neo freaking neo word. You unimaginative parrot. Then because that must be addressed, it becomes the par for the course.
Thank you for the article and for the insights. Comments to it, however, bleh.
Jun 22, 2008 - 5:52 am Dark Helmet:What would the odds be of coming up with a select group of people who come from an area where torture is the norm to have some signs of it? I seem to recall the training manual that said to tell anyone that will listen that the Americans have tortured you. What a load of garbage from so called doctors. How about a study on doctors who put out political studies? I wonder what kind of profile that would be, might be more than just one or 2 documented America haters.
Jun 22, 2008 - 6:35 am Ian:The purpose of these “studies” is to get the negative image out there, knowing that as long as there is a pseudo-scientific basis for the antiwar accusation, it becomes part of the debate about the war regardless of its validity, much like the Lancet studies.Seems clear enough that when you have studies by an avowedly antiwar organization financed by other antiwar organizations you end up with an antiwar conclusion as if it were preordained. Such niceties seemed beyond most media reports, which were more interested in the accusation than its substance or motives.
Jun 22, 2008 - 6:54 am Uncle Ralph:In 1904 Joseph Pulitzer famously predicted, “Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together. An able, disinterested, public-spirited press, with trained intelligence to know the right and courage to do it, can preserve that public virtue without which popular government is a sham and a mockery. A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself.”
JP, of course, did not reckon on a blogosphere rising to supplant “dead-tree” journalism in the latter’s days of decay. For the sake of Our Republic, this is a good thing
Jun 22, 2008 - 7:58 am Fresh Air:ern is exactly right. The media is absolutely unqualified, even afraid, to read scientific studies. Perhaps 99 percent of GA reporters have no statistical training or knowledge, and very limited understanding of forensics.
You can see this ignorance at work on a daily basis when epidemiological studies with weak relative risks are trumpeted as dispositive proof that X causesY disease. Whenever the “X” is something bad (smoking, for instance) or something they don’t understand (carcinogens in the workplace, say), the idiot Mediacrats just assume the study is too good to check. It’s only when the study concludes something they disagree with (say that IUDs cause cervical cancer), and they miraculously manage to find another “expert” to critique the studies “inadequacies.”
This formula has grown tiresome. It’s why I no longer read newspapers, and why, in part, the media’s reputation is neck-and-neck with Congress as the lowest of any institution. I will dance a jig when the last newspaper goes out of business. Pukes.
Jun 22, 2008 - 8:04 am Liar:Sorry, but when the vice president of the United States says he’s in favor of torture, and he’s the “decider” of the executive branch, I have to laugh at tendentious attempts to show that torture hasn’t been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
We’ve seen the photos from Abu Ghraib.
We’ve read the military’s own reports on the extent of torture, including the killing of a suspect at the Bagram airbase — initially explained as an accident and later, after a NY Times-led investigation, admitted as torture.
I like the breadth of Pajama’s credulity. On one page, they argue vociferously that Cheney’s approval of torture is just fine, a necessity. Then on the next page, they try to slime around the evidence to suggest that torture hasn’t taken place.
Jun 22, 2008 - 5:18 pm Jabba the Tutt:Liar wrote: “Sorry, but when the vice president of the United States says he’s in favor of torture, and he’s the “decider” of the executive branch, I have to laugh at tendentious attempts to show that torture hasn’t been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.”
For someone self-named “Liar”, this comment is appropriate. I count 4 lies in one sentence.
1. Cheney never said he was in favor of torture.
2. Bush is the “decider”.
3. Tendentious? It appears to me to be an even-handed look at the evidence of torture.
4. And it obviously wasn’t proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Liar, go back to your William Ayers Fan Club website.
Jun 23, 2008 - 6:09 am Rob Crawford:“We’ve seen the photos from Abu Ghraib.”
Taken by people who were disobeying orders, and who have been tried and punished. Their abuses were uncovered, investigated, and punished by the military.
Jun 23, 2008 - 7:56 am Fresh Air:If Liar believes what happened to the prisoners was “torture,” then he would soil himself if he saw what they do in Egyptian prisons.
Jun 23, 2008 - 3:26 pm Dave Surls:Leftoid sissies don’t even know what the word “torture” means.
“While I was removing a bayonet and scabbard from a dead Japanese, I noticed a Marine…dragging what I assumed to be a corpse. But, the Japanese wasn’t dead. He had been wounded severely in the back and couldn’t move his arms…”
“The Japanese’s mouth glowed with huge gold-crowned teeth and his captor wanted them. He put the point of his kabar (knife) on the base of a tooth and hit the handle with the palm of his hand. Because the Japanese was kicking his feet and thrashing about, the knife point glanced off the tooth and sank deeply into the victim’s mouth. The Marine cursed him and with a slash cut his cheeks open ear to ear. [He put his foot on the sufferer’s lower jaw and tried again. Blood poured out of the soldier’s mouth.] I shouted “Put the man out of his misery.” All I got for an answer was a cussing out. Another Marine ran up and put a bullet in the enemy soldier’s brain and ended the agony. The scavenger grumbled and continued extracting his prizes undisturbed.”
That’s war as waged by the libby-wibbies in the days of Roosevelt and Truman, who miracuously escaped prosecution for war crimes.
The extract is from “The War An Intimate History 1941-1945″ by Geoffery C. Ward and Ken Burns. An excellent book, btw.
Jun 23, 2008 - 7:13 pm Moe Badderman:Eleven men imprisoned for a total of nearly twenty years — with no judicial process, either civil or military — does not constitute torture, but even the most primitive knuckle-dragging mouth-breather must recognise injustice if it’s capable of reading.
# Kamal — September 2003 sent to Abu Ghraib,
# tortured until November of 2004,
# picked up again by Iraqi Police January 2005,
# released in October of 2006
That’s 35 months total imprisonment.
# Hafez — Captured November 2003, sent to Abu Ghraib
# for seven months where he was tortured
Seven months.
# Laith — arrested October 2003, sent to Abu Ghraib,
# and released in June 2004
Eight months.
# Yasser — detention at Abu Ghraib after his
# October 2003 arrest, released February 2004
Four months.
# Morad — arrested September 2003,
# released in July 2004
Ten months.
# Rahman — Captured in October 2003,
# released in May 2004
Seven months.
# Amir — arrested in August of 2003 and
# remained imprisoned until January of 2005
Seventeen months.
# Haydar — captured in turn by the Taliban,
# Afghan forces, and US Military in Afghanistan
# in October or November 2001, held in Kandahar
# and Guantanamo Bay until mid-2004
Nineteen or twenty months.
# Adeel — Captured in Pakistan by Pakistani
# soldiers in May 2002, sent to Baghram and
# later to Guantanamo Bay and was released
# in the fall of 2006
Over four years.
# Youssef — Detained on the Pakistani border
# in late 2001 or early 2002, released in
# November 2003
Nearly two years.
# Rasheed — Captured in November 2001,
# released in Fall 2006
Nearly five years.
Jun 25, 2008 - 1:02 am SGT Ted:I call it a Big Fat Lie and throw the BS flag. I know people who work and have worked at Gitmo. There ain’t any random beatings going on. This is a typical leftwing hit piece by a bunch of Marxist doctors.
You know, when I was at Abu Ghuraib, Doctors for Human Rights used to slap me around all the time for minor infractions. They also diddled little boys. I saw it with my own eyes.
I wonder if that’ll make it into the news? Nah, only if I claimed Rumsfeld was in on it.
You lefties are being taken in by anti-US propaganda. Useful idiots all.
Jun 25, 2008 - 8:48 am SGT Ted:We also held Italian and German POWs for 5 + years. Some war crime, huh? Lets dig up FDR and try him.
Jun 25, 2008 - 8:50 am Dave Surls:“Eleven men imprisoned for a total of nearly twenty years”
Thousands of Americans dead forever killed in terror attacks carried out by terrorists supported by Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan et al.
Jun 25, 2008 - 11:20 am Paul:George,
you say Liberals are incapable of debating the topic because they are blinded. But you relied on insults to try to prove your point………
Jun 29, 2008 - 12:28 am