The New York Times reports that classified documents show innocent civilians were incarcerated in Guantanamo, and that many prisioners were held years even though they had no apparent links to Al Qaeda, nor any significant intelligence value. These include a camerman for Al Jajeera, who was held for six years, not for terrorism, but so that our intelligence officials could learn more about Al Jajeera's operations in Kosovo, Chechnya, and Afghanistan.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
The dossiers also show the seat-of-the-pants intelligence gathering in war zones that led to the incarcerations of innocent men for years in cases of mistaken identity or simple misfortune. In May 2003, for example, Afghan forces captured Prisoner 1051, an Afghan named Sharbat, near the scene of a roadside bomb explosion, the documents show. He denied any involvement, saying he was a shepherd. Guantánamo debriefers and analysts agreed, citing his consistent story, his knowledge of herding animals and his ignorance of “simple military and political concepts,” according to his assessment. Yet a military tribunal declared him an “enemy combatant” anyway, and he was not sent home until 2006.
In an article entitle, "Classified Files Offer New Insights Into Detainees" CHARLIE SAVAGE, WILLIAM GLABERSON and ANDREW W. LEHREN
WASHINGTON report
A trove of more than 700 classified military documents provides new and detailed accounts of the men who have done time at the Guantánamo Bay prison in Cuba, and offers new insight into the evidence against the 172 men still locked up there.
Military intelligence officials, in assessments of detainees written between February 2002 and January 2009, evaluated their histories and provided glimpses of the tensions between captors and captives. What began as a jury-rigged experiment after the 2001 terrorist attacks now seems like an enduring American institution, and the leaked files show why, by laying bare the patchwork and contradictory evidence that in many cases would never have stood up in criminal court or a military tribunal.
President Obama's suggestion, during the primaries, that we close this base was a great idea.
I learned of this article from Cenk Ugar's interview with Ben Wizner, of the ACLU, this afternoon. Wizner describes the intitial arrests, as a "dragnet" of everyone in suspicious areas, even with no probable cause. Despite, having little grounds to hold these detainees many did not get hearings until years laters.
The first to leave: The documents offer the first public look at the military’s views of 158 detainees who did not receive a formal hearing under a system instituted in 2004. Many were assessed to be “of little intelligence value” with no ties to or significant knowledge about Al Qaeda or the Taliban, as was the case of a detainee who was an Afghan used car salesman. But also among those freed early was a Pakistani who would become a suicide attacker three years later.
Another, sad example, that will damage our international reputations even further, concerns a journalist, who was held, even though we knew he was a cameraman for Al Jazeera, but, our intelligence agents wanted to know about Al Jazeera's operations in other countries.
A journalist’s interrogation: The documents show that a major reason a Sudanese cameraman for Al Jazeera, Sami al-Hajj, was held at Guantánamo for six years was for questioning about the television network’s “training program, telecommunications equipment, and newsgathering operations in Chechnya, Kosovo, and Afghanistan,” including contacts with terrorist groups. While Mr. Hajj insisted he was just a journalist, his file says he helped Islamic extremist groups courier money and obtain Stinger missiles and cites the United Arab Emirates’ claim that he was a Qaeda member. He was released in 2008 and returned to work for Al Jazeera.
I certainly hope, this camerman, Al Jazeera, and their Arab viewers don't let this little misunderstanding taint their view, or reporting of America's activities around the world.
Sorry, to concentrate here only on the impact on our reputations around the world, but this is one important angle that seems to be too often overlooked.
Some portray the Guantanamo as one of these sad, but inevitable trade-offs between compassion, and our intelligence and national security needs.
I've come to believe that we are missing that our failure to sufficiently repudiate the Bush Administration's crimes here, is a larger cause of damage to our national security than the original terrorists could have hoped to acheive.
I'm having trouble understanding why we still maintain this disgraceful symbol of Americans violating our own most cherished espoused principles of rule-of-law.
I used to write a lot here about the Bush Administration's use of illegal tortue, violations of the Geneva Conventions, and international law. It's sad that President Obama has inherited this shameful stain on our ideals. Obama should move more rapidly to put this behind us, and reestablish our commitments to the Geneva Conventions, the American Constitution, and the traditions of the rule-of-law.