Half-Head Bob is locked up! Are you sleeping better? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-29-2002, 02:07 PM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 03:13 AM
Half-Head Bob is locked up! Are you sleeping better?

One prisoner was transferred because he was Arab by birth and had once fought for the Taliban, thereby meeting two key screening criteria. But before the war he had sustained such a massive head injury that he could utter little more than his name and was known by interrogators at Guantanamo Bay as "half-head Bob."

"He had basically had a combat lobotomy," the interrogator said. "Every [intelligence report] on him from Afghanistan said, 'No value, no value, don't send him.' "


Quote:
THE WORLD

Many Held at Guantanamo Not Likely Terrorists

Dozens of detainees pose no real threat, but U.S. policies make it nearly impossible to get names off lists. There's also fear of freeing '21st hijacker.'

By Greg Miller
Times Staff Writer

December 22 2002

WASHINGTON -- The United States is holding dozens of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay who have no meaningful connection to Al Qaeda or the Taliban, and were sent to the maximum-security facility over the objections of intelligence officers in Afghanistan who had recommended them for release, according to military sources with direct knowledge of the matter.

At least 59 detainees -- nearly 10% of the prison population at the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba -- were deemed to be of no intelligence value after repeated interrogations in Afghanistan. All were placed on "recommended for repatriation" lists well before they were transferred to Guantanamo Bay, a facility intended to hold the most hardened terrorists and Taliban suspects.

Dozens of the detainees are Afghan and Pakistani nationals described in classified intelligence reports as farmers, taxi drivers, cobblers and laborers. Some were low-level fighters conscripted by the Taliban in the weeks before the collapse of the ruling Afghan regime.

None of the 59 met U.S. screening criteria for determining which prisoners should be sent to Guantanamo Bay, military sources said. But all were transferred anyway, sources said, for reasons that continue to baffle and frustrate intelligence officers nearly a year after the first group of detainees arrived at the facility.

"There are a lot of guilty [people] in there," said one officer, "but there's a lot of farmers in there too."

The sources' accounts point to a previously undisclosed struggle within the military over the handling of the detainees. Even senior commanders were said to be troubled by the problems.

Maj. Gen. Michael E. Dunlavey, the operational commander at Guantanamo Bay until October, traveled to Afghanistan in the spring to complain that too many "Mickey Mouse" detainees were being sent to the already crowded facility, sources said.

One senior Army officer described Dunlavey's visit as a "fact-finding" mission. But another who met with Dunlavey said the general's purpose was more direct: "He came over to chew us out," the officer said. Dunlavey, an Army reservist, declined to comment.

The sources blamed a host of problems, including flawed screening guidelines, policies that made it almost impossible to take prisoners off Guantanamo flight manifests and a pervasive fear of letting a valuable prisoner go free by mistake.

"No one wanted to be the guy who released the 21st hijacker," one officer said.

While that concern remains a legitimate one, the fact that dozens of the detainees are still in custody a year or more after their capture has become a source of deep concern to military officers engaged in the war on terrorism around the globe.

Many fear that detaining innocents, and providing no legal mechanism for appeal, can only breed distrust and animosity toward the U.S. -- not only in the home countries and governments of the prisoners but also among the inmates.

"We're basically condemning these guys to long-term imprisonment," said a military official who was a senior interrogator at Guantanamo Bay.

"If they weren't terrorists before, they certainly could be now."

Moreover, he said, even amid the tight security there is significant indoctrination of prisoners by radical Islamists among them.

The Afghan and Pakistani governments have raised the issue with Washington. A Pakistani embassy official, who declined to be identified, said his government is convinced that many of the 58 Pakistanis known to be in custody "probably joined the Taliban but didn't know how to spell Al Qaeda."

Even some prisoners red-flagged by the screening guidelines were clearly of no intelligence value and should not have been sent, military intelligence sources said.

One prisoner was transferred because he was Arab by birth and had once fought for the Taliban, thereby meeting two key screening criteria. But before the war he had sustained such a massive head injury that he could utter little more than his name and was known by interrogators at Guantanamo Bay as "half-head Bob."

"He had basically had a combat lobotomy," the interrogator said. "Every [intelligence report] on him from Afghanistan said, 'No value, no value, don't send him.' "

Others were grabbed by Pakistani soldiers patrolling the Afghan border who collected bounties for prisoners, sources said. One such prisoner was captured at a restaurant near the border where he claimed to have lived and worked for 20 years.

"He had the mental capacity to put flatbread in an oven and that was the extent of his intellect," the interrogator said. "He never got trained on a rifle, never got pressed into service. But he was Arab by birth so he was picked up and sent away."

Pentagon officials declined to discuss individual cases, but insist that the U.S. has reasonable grounds for holding all the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

"All are considered enemy combatants lawfully detained in accordance with the law of armed conflict," said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Barbara Burfeind, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Southern Command, which oversees operations at Guantanamo Bay.

Several senior military officers responsible for transfers of prisoners also defended their decisions.

"Everybody that was sent met the conditions that were sent down from our higher headquarters," said Army Col. Michael T. Flynn, the top intelligence officer in Afghanistan when many of the detainees were transferred. "We were sending the right folks."

According to classified Pentagon guidelines, Guantanamo Bay was meant to be a long-term detention facility for Al Qaeda operatives, Taliban leaders, "foreign" fighters and "any others who may pose a threat to U.S. interests, may have intelligence value, or may be of interest for U.S. prosecution."

But from the beginning, prisoners who didn't meet those criteria were sent, sources said. In some cases, military police seemed to have more influence over flight lists than intelligence officers, lobbying commanders to ship out troublesome detainees.

Other detainees seemed to get caught up in the military's bureaucratic machinery. In many cases, low-value prisoners caught early in the war were placed at the bottom of prioritized lists. But as planeloads of prisoners were sent to Cuba, names at the bottoms of the lists drifted to the top, and some started showing up on flight manifests.

Once they appeared on the manifests, sources said, removing them proved almost impossible. Doing so required senior intelligence officers in Kuwait or Afghanistan to work through thickets of military red tape. It also required them to trust the judgment of junior intelligence officers, something they were loath to do given the stakes.

Through much of the war, the decisions were made far from the battlefield, by commanders in Kuwait or back in the United States. Intelligence officers in Afghanistan became increasingly dismayed at the number of low-level detainees on the manifests.

"We saw it as having huge potential for eroding public trust," one officer said. In a conflict dependent on the cooperation of local Afghans, he said, "winning the hearts and minds was our greater concern."

To call attention to the problem, some began circulating lists of prisoners they believed were being improperly placed on Guantanamo Bay flight manifests. The lists were seen by senior intelligence officers in Afghanistan, Kuwait and the United States.

One of the lists covers 49 Afghans and 10 Pakistanis who were held at Kandahar air base until the Afghan facility was shut down in June, prompting their transfer to Guantanamo Bay, sources said.

The list describes detainees' occupations, the circumstances of their captures, summaries of interrogations and alibis they provided. The prisoners range in age from 16 to 50, most with little or no education. None was deemed to have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

A typical entry describes a 30-year-old Afghan farmer captured by Afghan forces who "seemed most interested in stealing his car and money."

Another describes a 22-year-old Afghan who sold firewood at a bus station in the city of Kunduz and was picked up by Northern Alliance forces while he and six others were traveling to Kabul, the Afghan capital.

"He answers all questions quickly and fully," interrogators concluded. "His story is plausible and consistent, and there is no evidence that he has ever worked for or had any knowledge of the Taliban or Al Qaeda."

Not all of the detainees' stories are so tidy. Many admitted to being fighters for the Taliban, although often as low-level soldiers conscripted when they couldn't afford payments required by the Taliban to avoid service -- often amounting to six months' wages.

Among the Pakistanis on the list was a 16-year-old who traveled to Afghanistan at the start of the war to help the Taliban, but quickly had second thoughts and was captured by the Northern Alliance while trying to flee. "He showed no signs of deception," interrogators noted. "He never fought for the Taliban."

Another Pakistani, a 33-year-old taxi driver, was captured near the city of Mazar-i-Sharif.

"The fact that the detainee's taxi car broke down was a deciding factor for him to leave home and fight the Jihad," according to his file.

"Detainee is a low-level fighter with no tactical intelligence. Recommend repatriation."

These detainees would almost certainly have been repatriated had they not been captured early in the war, before screening systems were overhauled to make releasing low-level prisoners easier, sources said.

By midsummer, military officials took to withholding the names of new inmates from prison rosters until they could be evaluated. That way, they didn't officially exist and, if deemed harmless, could be released before their names got caught up in the system.

"The same people who created this huge bureaucratic monster came up with a way to thwart it," one Army interrogator said, "which is never enter people into the system."

At Guantanamo Bay, the presence of dozens of low-value prisoners drained resources. The facility, known as Camp Delta, was also plagued by other problems.

A chronic shortage of military police meant interrogations were shut down at 9 p.m., sources said, denying interrogators the often effective tactic of subjecting detainees to marathon interview sessions.

There was also a confusing command structure that hampered information sharing. Guantanamo Bay was controlled by the Southern Command -- whose territory includes South America -- even though the war on Al Qaeda was principally the purview of the U.S. Central Command.

Intelligence reports often got tied up in transit between the two commands, sources said, sometimes delaying delivery for days. And intelligence officers at Southern Command who edited reports out of Guantanamo Bay knew far more about Colombian rebels than Al Qaeda terrorists.

The White House has classified prisoners at Guantanamo Bay as "enemy combatants," a murky status in which detainees are not allowed hearings or legal representation.

In July, a federal judge considering a lawsuit filed on behalf of 14 Kuwaiti detainees ruled that prisoners at Guantanamo Bay have no right to appear in U.S. courts and can be held indefinitely.

In March, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld acknowledged that the prison population at Guantanamo Bay went beyond the "hard-core" cases for which it was constructed.

"The first people who were brought down were the hardest of the hard-core," Rumsfeld said. "Now it is a mix. They run pretty much across the spectrum.... Some may be transferred to other countries, some may be released, some may be held for the duration, some may be tried in one or more of the various mechanisms that are available."

But nine months after Rumsfeld's comments, only five prisoners have been released from a population that totals about 625 and represents 43 nations.

The first prisoner released, in April, was so mentally unstable he was known by interrogators as "Wild Bill."

"He would eat his own feces, dump fresh water from his canteen and urinate in it and drink it," the senior interrogator said. CIA, FBI and psychiatric experts "concluded he was insane."

Four others were released at the end of October, including three Afghans and one Pakistani. Among them were one low-level Taliban conscript and two men who appeared to be in their 70s and said they had never served the Taliban.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 04:32 PM   #2
War Child
 
Sparkysgrrrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: under the table and screaming
Posts: 754
Local Time: 03:13 AM
Why dosen't this surprise me?


Quote:
"If they weren't terrorists before, they certainly could be now."
__________________

__________________
Sparkysgrrrl is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 06:00 PM   #3
War Child
 
CannibalisticArtist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Coast babyeee
Posts: 511
Local Time: 03:13 AM
when will people learn, violence only leads to more violence. it's a vicious circle that just won't break.
__________________
CannibalisticArtist is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 06:32 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:13 AM
I thought our guests at Gitmo were being held for information purposes, not that they were likely terrorists. Given the post 9/11 climate for information gathering, its better to be over-inclusive, rather that under-inclusive.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 07:27 PM   #5
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 06:13 AM
Yes we should be cautious but at what price? The US government is holding 1,182 Americans for "information purposes" but only 4 have actually been charged with crimes. The others are imprisoned because they are "suspicious" a.k.a. they're Arab. John Ashcroft is a dangerous guy who has been given way too much power by attaching the word "terrorism" to things.

This whole thing reminds me of a poem by a priest during the Holocaust about how the Nazis came for the Jews and he didn't say anything, they came for the Poles and he didn't say anything and when they came for him, there was no one to speak up.

We should be cautious, we should potect this country, but we should not have the sacrifice our own freedom to do so.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 08:18 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:13 AM
Without security, one can never be free. My freedom is compromised when my government does not do what is necessary to provide for the security of the nation. The detentions and interrogations have the potential to prevent all kinds of terrorist attacks there by saving thousands of lives. Why some people here are more concerned about returning to the unnecessary free wheeling days before 9/11 than what actually happened on 9/11 is strange. Are military, and government are working hard every day to prevent the next terrorist attack. Terrorist attempt to hide in the civilian world to better conceal their efforts to kill others. In order to catch them, it is necessary to cast are nets far and wide. It must be done to help prevent another 9/11 or event 10 times worse than 9/11. The fact that mistakes will happen is a given, but the current course of action is clearly justified given the magnitude and potential of the problem.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 08:32 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:13 AM
Wasn't it the Bible that stated that it was better to have ten guilty people go free than have one innocent person pay for a crime? Or is that book only for reactionary, bigoted intolerance?

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 09:39 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 04:13 AM
u know what?
weve been drunk on our civil rights for a too long .

Apparently we needed a Homeland Security Office before 9-11 and better communication between differnt agencies.
This woulda averted a terrorist attack.

For now were winning the War On Terror.
I think it a victory everyday we wake up and that we havnt had a major attack on our country since since 9-11.
So please shut up.

that said-

For us to throw up are arms like little girls everytime there is a percieved misstep and claim were marching towards a totalitarian govt is qwite lame.

Grow up.
Get ready for the long haul ppl.
We still are the freeist country in the world that offers the most goodness.
We will continue to be so, as we proceed forward stomping out these maggots and cowards and placating our own naysayers as we do so...

thank u-

Diamond


Godspeed.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-29-2002, 11:01 PM   #9
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 07:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
u know what?
weve been drunk on our civil rights for a too long .
Over two hundred years of inebriation on freedom and justice for all! End the madness!
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 12-30-2002, 01:57 AM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Wasn't it the Bible that stated that it was better to have ten guilty people go free than have one innocent person pay for a crime? Or is that book only for reactionary, bigoted intolerance?

Melon

Does the Bible tell us when to set them free? Seriously, it could be that they are set free at the end of the War on Terror. Hopefully for the innocent, it will be sooner rather than later.

As for all of the people in who fought for the Taliban, the Bush Doctrine of you are either with us, or you are against us in the war on terror is in full application here. They were clearly against us.


Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-30-2002, 02:25 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 04:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora


justice :
keyword here=justice

not-"hidebehindaloophole"

thank u-

DB9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-30-2002, 02:29 AM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:13 AM
Melon,

Most people have so far just been detained, not convicted of a crime. Many of them may very well be released in the future. Again you have to look at the cost. Who ever wrote that passage of the bible might have a different view in light of the context in which the release of those that may be guilty could lead to thousands of INNOCENT dead people. Take the number of innocent people that may have been detained and compare that to the number of people that could be killed in a 9/11 attack or something much worse, if the government is not aggressive in detaining and catching terrorist. Current government action means that some innocent people may have been detained. IF the government does not do what it is doing now, thousands of innocent people could be killed. Which government action harms innocent people more?
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-30-2002, 02:30 AM   #13
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 04:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
We still are the freeist country in the world that offers the most goodness.

Sure you are!!!
Shut up man you say such crap sometimes. The most goodness i love it!!!
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 12-30-2002, 02:38 AM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 04:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by bonoman



Sure you are!!!
Shut up man you say such crap sometimes. The most goodness i love it!!!
ok fine
sexygoodness

canucks do not understand sexiness.
good ppl..? yes.
sexy, i dont think so..

thank u-

DB9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-30-2002, 02:41 AM   #15
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 04:13 AM
Pam anderson???
__________________

__________________
bonoman is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com