In the last decade, the United States has increasingly become a symbol of hypocrisy as a nation that has violated many international principles that it helped create after 9-11. That record was reinforced this week after the Afghan government (not exactly the paragon of civil liberties) refused to adopt indefinite detention rules pushed by the Obama Administration. Of course, President Obama has continued the indefinite detention of the Bush Administration and the operation of the Guantanamo Bay facility over the objections of civil libertarians. We recently saw the death of a detainee who was found years ago not to be a national security risk and never proven to be guilty of a single crime. Yet, in its effort to create a “new Democracy” in the Afghanistan, the Obama Administration was insisting that it replicate our own indefinite detention rules. In the meantime, a federal court has stayed a prior court order that enjoined the provision on indefinite detention under the Obama Administration’s 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.
A judicial panel ruled that administrative detention runs counter to the country’s laws. Yet the Obama Administration said that unless the country adopted this authoritarian measure, it may not turn over prisoners to Afghan officials. We are still holding more than 600 Afghans.
The death of Adnan Latif, a Yemeni, has become the latest symbol of our abusive policy of detention. As early as 2004, the military determined that he should be released but never told his lawyers until years later. In 2010 a federal court ordered his release. He would never live to see freedom.
Source: Guardian
Lawyer for Ratif:
“Many thanks to those of you countering the rampant misinformation in this comment thread about the alleged recidivism of Guantanamo detainees. As the DNI’s most recent report (two weeks ago) shows, less than 28 percent of released GTMO prisoners are “confirmed” or “suspected” of “reengaging” in “terrorism.” (I use scare quotes because the definitions of these words, if provided at all, are hopelessly vague, ambiguous, and in some cases nonsensical — e.g., how can one “re”engage in the absence of any credible proof that one had initially “engaged.”)”
****************************
Tell me how we might explain to the family of a deceased US serviceman or servicewoman that by releasing a detainee who then rejoins the terrorist movement and who acts alone or in concert to kill their loved one is in furtherance of our law and ideals? “An enormously low rate” is the thinnest of gruel and the coldest of comfort to people who bear the sacrifice in defense of our rights. Those people picked up on the battlefield are presumed combatants and are entitled to a status hearing. Beyond that they have no greater rights than any other captured combatant and get to sit out the war. Imagine the death and destruction wrought by Mohammed Nayim Farouq AFTER his release from Guantanamo).
Your advocacy and compassion for your client is commendable; your concern for the young American men and women still in harm’s way and fighting a savage enemy with no remorse for killing and maiming them–not so much.
Here are the most recent figures of Guantanamo recidivism:
Recidivism rises among released Guantanamo detainees
Mon, Mar 5 2012
By Mark Hosenball
(Reuters) – The proportion of militants released from detention at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay who subsequently were believed to have returned to the battlefield rose slightly over the last year, according to official figures released on Monday.
In a summary report, the office of the Director of National Intelligence said that 27.9 percent of the 599 former detainees released from Guantanamo were either confirmed or suspected of later engaging in militant activity.
The figures represent a 2.9 percent rise over a 25 percent aggregate recidivism rate reported by the intelligence czar’s office in December 2010.
The increase in the apparent recidivism rate, while not large, comes at a delicate time for President Barack Obama, and could further complicate his attempts to negotiate a peace deal with Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan.
As a “confidence building” measure, the Taliban have insisted on the release of five specific Taliban leaders currently held at Guantanamo. The Obama administration has been working on a plan under which the detainees could be transferred to the Persian Gulf state of Qatar but still held in detention.
Lawmakers, mostly Republicans, have indicated they will try to block the release of senior Taliban detainees, and the latest recidivism statistics could add fuel to their efforts.
They will also bolster criticisms from Republican legislators that Obama’s unsuccessful effort to close the Guantanamo facility have increased the likelihood of future militant attacks on U.S. targets.
Releases from Guantanamo have slowed considerably recently; the last took place over a year ago.
Not all of the cases of former detainees joining the fight against U.S. and allied troops might constitute recidivism. News reports have revealed that the original Guantanamo detainee population included individuals who posed no threat to the United States. Some may have been radicalized by their experiences there.
As presented by the DNI, the figures appear to show that the rate of recidivism among detainees has dropped since Obama took office, compared to the rate under former President George W. Bush.
According to a breakdown released with the latest raw figures, 92 of the 532 Guantanamo detainees released before January 22, 2009 – two days after Bush left office – were confirmed to have returned to the battlefield and 70 were suspected of having done so – an aggregate recidivism rate of 30.5 percent.
RECIDIVISM DOWN UNDER OBAMA
By contrast, the new statistics show, only three of the 67 detainees released from Guantanamo since Obama took office are confirmed to have rejoined militants, with another two suspected of having done so – an aggregate recidivism rate of 7.5 percent.
Overall, the statistics showed that, of the 599 detainees who were released as of December 29, 2011, 95 were confirmed to have re-engaged in militant activity or to have been in contact with militants. This comprises 15.9 percent of the total released.
Another 72 militants are “suspected of re-engaging” in militant activity after they were freed from Guantanamo. This constitutes an additional 12 percent of all released detainees.
Lieutenant Colonel Todd Breasseale, a Defense Department spokesman, said the distinction made in the statistics between militants whose recidivism is “Confirmed” versus “Suspected” was particularly relevant “because there was confusion in some early media reports conflating the two.”
“To be sure, ‘Confirmed’ is more consistent with our actual intelligence data and ‘Suspected’ is a much lower bar, triggering an additional review that is really more akin to a sort of ‘early watch’ system. Someone on the ‘Suspected’ list could very possibly not be engaged in activities that are counter to our national security interests,” Breasseale said.
He added that a total of 171 detainees are still being held at Guantanamo.
A U.S. intelligence official familiar with the process by which the statistics are put together added that the evidentiary standards for listing a detainee as “suspected” of having returned to the battlefield are vague.
But another official noted that there is often a lengthy lag between the time that a detainee is released and the time that U.S. agencies receive information indicating that the individual is confirmed or suspected of having returned to the battlefield. Hence, the official said, the latest statistics might not provide an accurate picture of the consequences of the Obama administration policy on Guantanamo releases.
(Additional reporting by David Alexander; Editing by Warren Strobel and Eric Walsh)
Many thanks to those of you countering the rampant misinformation in this comment thread about the alleged recidivism of Guantanamo detainees. As the DNI’s most recent report (two weeks ago) shows, less than 28 percent of released GTMO prisoners are “confirmed” or “suspected” of “reengaging” in “terrorism.” (I use scare quotes because the definitions of these words, if provided at all, are hopelessly vague, ambiguous, and in some cases nonsensical — e.g., how can one “re”engage in the absence of any credible proof that one had initially “engaged.”) That’s an enormously low rate — significantly lower than any domestic prison in the U.S. Moreover, simply being counted as a recidivist does not mean a former detainee has killed or injured a single person. In addition, the report that a GTMo detainee was involved in the Libya attack is just that a — a report, anonymously sourced — and has been contradicted by other anonymous reports saying that the gentleman in question had no involvement. (This just goes to show how reliable such intelligence reports aren’t, especially when it comes to trying to justify the indefinite detention of a man against whom there is no other credible evidence.) Finally, even if the former detainee in question were actually involved, he was released by President Bush, not President Obama.
So in answer to “what do you do with them” — you let them go unless you can prove that they were actually engaged in hostilities against U.S. force or that they actually committed a crime (war or otherwise). They are human beings — persons, with constitutional due process rights no less than U.S. citizens or any other person held by our government. And you never, never again think yourself so far above the law that you can presume to be judge, jury and executioner over entire groups of people simply because you come from America.
Let everybody in Gitmo go. Get out of that part of the world. If the Asians want their oil they can have it, and they can secure it.
When pirates operate on the sea it is simple to identify all who are on a pirate ship and when captured to throw them overboard and drown them. That way they do not repeat their piracy. Pirates on land present a more varied identification problem. Yes, I was in that bunker that you captured but I was a hostage or just a worker or just a juvenile and did not know nuthin bout burthin babies. A terrorist working on land for iran or some other government but in sheeps clothing is out of uniform. According to the laws of war they can be shot for conducting war out of uniform. A turbin dont cut it as a uniform, anymore than a pirate hat. Our forces should follow the admonition: Take no prisoners!
Gitmo is a mistake. If you dont have evidence to try them and convict them then why did you arrest them? If you have the evidence then conduct the trials. If you dont then let em go.
It’s sad when a borderline Islamic theocracy has a better handle on due process than our own secular Enlightenment based republic.
nick spinelli,
With the bounty system paid by the CIA and reported in the “news,” I find item (4) above the most telling.
What do you think?
nick spinelli,
The two link spam filter on this blog is irksome, so here is one more link you should read.
It builds off of Jill’s noting of Seton Hall’s work on this issue in her 9:30 pm post.
The proffered link is a direct .pdf download of a paper published by Seton Hall Law Review – Volume 41, dated January, 31, 2012 and is entitled:
REPORT ON GUANTANAMO DETAINEES: A Profile of 517 Detainees through Analysis of Department of Defense Data
http://erepository.law.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1399&context=shlr
In this document the authors claim that:
1. 55% of the Guantanamo detainees, ” are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.”
2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.
3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably.
Eight percent are detained because they are deemed “fighters for;” 30% considered “members of;” a large majority – 60% — are detained merely because they are “associated with” a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.
4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody.
nick spinelli,
Your position on the issue offered in this thread is not current with known facts, but rather harks back to the paranoia of 2001-today where the assumption of guilt is, well, assumed.
Do you not remember the news reports circa 2004-2006 of the CIA offering bounties ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 to anyone in Afghanistan and Pakistan that could turn in a “terrorist?”
Even if you don’t, others do, such as the former president of Pakistan, Musharraf, who stated, “in his 2006 memoir, In the Line of Fire, that, in return for handing over 369 terror suspects to the US, the Pakistani government, ‘earned bounty payments totaling millions of dollars.’”
http://wikileaks.org/gitmo/#
And here’s a news article that was originally published by the Associated Press (AP) in 2005 discussing the bounty method of “terrorist roundups” of which has long disappeared from their archives yet is still available to read at CommonDreams dot org:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0531-10.htm
Dave S,
Fascinating two-dimensional oversimplification of three political philosophies. How Ayn-Randian of you!
Two legs bad
Four legs good
Nick,
Seton Hall Law school has done a lot of work on detainees. Andy Worthington has as well. Please read what really happened. It’s quite different than what we’ve all been told.
http://law.shu.edu/programscenters/publicintgovserv/policyresearch/guantanamo-reports.cfm
What has happened in Gitmo and Bagram and other black sites we have yet to learn is much different than what the govt. says.
lottakatz 1, September 20, 2012 at 7:58 pm
From the thread: “David McCullough Opens New Constitutional Center With Warning Over The Passivity Of Citizens”:
“[David] McCullough spoke about the greater need to teach history in this country because “we are raising a generation that is historically illiterate and have a very sketchy, thin knowledge of the system on which our entire civilization is based on. It is regrettable and dangerous.”
Could there be a better illustration than this thread?
==========================================
Now you’re talking. I was an electrician before I was an accountant.
From the thread: “David McCullough Opens New Constitutional Center With Warning Over The Passivity Of Citizens”:
“[David] McCullough spoke about the greater need to teach history in this country because “we are raising a generation that is historically illiterate and have a very sketchy, thin knowledge of the system on which our entire civilization is based on. It is regrettable and dangerous.”
Could there be a better illustration than this thread?
nick spinelli 1, September 20, 2012 at 12:59 pm
bettykath, Please just Google rerleased Gitmo detainees and you will see a long list of those who have killed soldiers and civilains. Let’s @ least have an intellectually honest discussion here.
————-
Ok by me. First of all, I’m suspicious of any government produced list. Second, I saw a tv report that Saudi Arabia accepted a number of released detainees who were given help in reestablishing their lives and they haven’t killed anyone.
Whatever those who have been released have done or not, what does that have to do with those who haven’t even been charged but have been detained for years? Does this mean that if you and I are both arrested, not necessarily at the same time or place, I’m released and go on a killing spree that you have to stay in jail indefinitely, without being charged, because you might go on a killing spree?
==========
Jill, We could have handled the detainees the way FDR handled the Nazi saboteurs.
————–
At least the Nazi saboteurs had a trial. I think the detainees would appreciate that courtesy. They would also appreciate being set free if there is no reason to hold them, at least Latif, would have appreciated it.
anonymously posted-
Thanks for the link to the Aljazeera discussion- it was very interesting. Far better than the usual CNN, MSNBC, Fox News “discussion” consisting of a Republican Party hack and a Democratic Party hack shouting platitudes at each other. And, can you imagine a 46 minute discussion on ANY American cable or broadcast network? How sad that we are given only two points of view on American television.
Bruce-
Neither the German spies nor the Rosenbergs were sold to us for $5,000 like Adnan Latif was. This man has done nothing wrong. He is a victim of one of the worst violations of human rights in the history of the United States. Where was President Obama while this was going on? The lesser of two evils indeed!
That goes for the cold war also, I’m pretty sure two Russian spies were executed for stealing atomic secrets.
During WW2 people that were caught out of uniform and dealing in espionage were considered spies and executed. Gitmo or death?
may god continue to bless the USA.
Dead Gitmo Prisoner’s Tragic Letter About Why He Gave Up on Life
Adnan Latif suffered at the hands of the US government in ways that most people can’t begin to comprehend.
By John Knefel
September 13, 2012
http://www.alternet.org/dead-gitmo-prisoners-tragic-letter-about-why-he-gave-life
Excerpt:
Adnan Latif was found dead in his cell on September 10th, 2012, just a day before the eleventh anniversary of 9/11. He was 32. Latif, a Yemeni citizen, had been detained at Guantanamo Bay for over a decade, despite a 2010 court ruling that ordered the Obama administration to “take all necessary and appropriate diplomatic steps to facilitate Latif’s release forthwith,” due to lack of evidence that he had committed any crime. He suffered at the hands of the US government in ways that most people can’t begin to comprehend, and his death should be a reminder that the national shame that is Guantanamo Bay lives on and now enjoys bipartisan support.
Reexamining a letter he wrote to his lawyer David Remes in December of 2010 shows the depths of his despair near the end of his life. His letter begins simply. The first paragraph is just one devastating sentence: “Do whatever you wish to do, the issue is over.” He then goes on to describe Guantanamo as, “a prison that does not know humanity, and does not know [sic] except the language of power, oppression, and humiliation for whoever enters it.”
“Anybody who is able to die,” Latif writes, “will be able to achieve happiness for himself, he has no hope except that.”
He continues:
“The requirement…is to leave this life which is no longer anymore [sic] called a life, instead it itself has become death and renewable torture. Ending it is a mercy and happiness for this soul. I will not allow any more of this and I will end it.”
Latif attempted suicide in 2009 by slitting his wrists, and his attorney, David Remes, has said that he tried to kill himself on other occasions as well.
A car accident in 1994 left Latif with a head injury, which he was attempting to get treated in Afghanistan when he was captured near the border by Pakistani authorities. In January, 2002, he was sent to Guantanamo, with the unfortunate distinction of being one of the first detainees. According to the ACLU, Latif was cleared to be released in 2004, 2007, 2009, and again in 2010 by US District Court Judge Henry Kennedy. The Obama DOJ appealed the 2010 decision, in part because of a policy of not transferring detainees to Yemen, and so Latif remained in custody – not because of what he had done (which was nothing), but because of where he was born. The decision to appeal his release wasn’t a holdover from the Bush era. That was an affirmative decision made by the Obama administration, and any supporters who hoped Obama would close Guantanamo Bay should understand that fact.
Latif is far from the only prisoner still held at Guantanamodespite being okayed for release. “Over half of the people left in Gitmo have been cleared for years,” said Cori Crider, Legal Director at Reprieve in charge of managing litigation on secret prisons,who has represented clients detained at Guantanamo. Crider went on to say that although conditions at the prison are better than they were in 2002, indefinite detention is enough to break people. “That young man, who was, say, twenty when he is seized, is thirty. He sees his life slipping away from him with no sign of release. Hopelessness takes lives at Gitmo now.”
Poems from Guantanamo
Amnesty International Magazine
Fall 2007
by Marc Falcoff
I first met Adnan Farhan Abdul Latif soon after I filed a habeas corpus petition on his behalf in late 2004. We were sitting in an interview cell really a retrofitted storage container at Camp Echo in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Across the table, Latif sat with his arms crossed and his head down. The guards had removed his handcuffs, but when he shifted his weight his leg irons clanged and echoed in the bare room. The irons were chained to an eyebolt on the floor. Guards were stationed outside the door, and a video camera was visible in the corner.
Latif, a small, thin Yemeni man with a scraggly beard, had been in the prison for nearly three years. Upon his arrival in Cuba, he said, he was chained hand and foot while still in the blackout goggles and ear muffs he had been forced to wear for the flight. Soldiers kicked him, hit him, and dislocated his shoulder. Early on, interrogators questioned him with a gun to his head. Latif spent his first weeks at Camp X-Ray in an open-air cage, exposed to the tropical sun, without shade or shelter from the wind that buffeted him with sand and pebbles. His only amenities were a bucket for water and another for urine and feces.
“This is an island of hell,” he told me. Punishment for minor infractions of rules, such as squirreling away lunch food, included solitary confinement. No comfort items. No mattress. No pants.
“They take away your pants and leave you wearing only shorts. This is to prevent the brothers from praying. It would be immodest to pray uncovered. They do it to humiliate us,” said Latif. Dressed in a pullover shirt and cotton pants dyed iconic Gitmo orange, he looked pale, weak and much older than his 28 years. He had been seeking medical treatment in Pakistan for a 1994 head injury when Pakistani forces detained him and turned him over to the United States for a $5,000 bounty. His health was deteriorating at Guantánamo.
Despairing of ever being released, Latif had sent a number of poems in his letters to me and other lawyers representing Guantanamo detainees. The Pentagon refuses to allow most of them to be made public, but it did clear “Hunger Strike Poem,” which contains the lines:
They are artists of torture,
They are artists of pain and fatigue,
They are artists of insults
and humiliation.
Where is the world to save us
from torture?
Where is the world to save us
from the fire and sadness?
Where is the world to save
the hunger strikers?
The military won’t let you read the rest of Latif’s poetry.