Guantanamo Torture

A recent article by the Telegraph has exposed that doctors at Guantanamo Bay were involved in the torture endured by some of the detainees. This has come to light as a result of the recent leak of Guantanamo Bay files. Many inmates were mentally unstable, some suffering from mental illnesses such as; schizophrenia, bipolar, depression etc.  Several inmates had, supposedly, tried to commit suicide as well.

The reason the prisoners illnesses were seen to cause such a stir, was because they could not be expected to give any kind of useful information while not of sound mind. The prisoner files were released as a result of WikiLeaks, the files showed many cases of unexplored cuts, bruises, injuries obtained by the patients. According to the Telegraph; ‘Researchers at Physicians for Human Rights, a campaign group which analysed the prisoner files, claimed that they found evidence of physical and psychological injuries consistent with abuse, such as sexual assault, mock executions and water boarding, which they alleged that medical staff failed to investigate’ (Telegraph, 2011). This shows the poor treatment of the inmates which has been exploited by WikiLeaks. Some of the files recently released have suggested that many inmates were innocent; also some of the detainees were mentally ill which meant that they were in the wrong facility to deal with their wrongdoings and/or illness.

It is quite shocking reading about the injuries some of these prisoners have acquired. I am fully aware that one does not get sent to Guantanamo Bay without a reason, but is torture really the answer? It’s like Mahatma Ghandi said ‘an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind’. Maybe the American government have a few things to re think.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8475577/Guantanamo-Bay-doctors-complicit-in-torture.html

Plots revealed.

An article from the Washington Post has stated that military files released by WikiLeaks disclose potential al-Qaida plots against the U.S. With relation to the recent Guantanamo Bay cables, the files have unveiled full names of potential al-Qaida members, which have now been printed in newspapers, websites, blogs etc.

The article reveals a few plots – which were never executed – by the detainees, including one to cut the cables of the Brooklyn Bridge! The Pentagon said that ‘the leaked files may or may not represent the current view of a given detainee’ (Washing Post, 2011), which conveys that the files are not necessarily representing the present opinions and/or motives of the current Guantanamo prisoners. For example, one prisoner named Jose Padilla was initially arrested through plots to blow up a building with a ‘radioactive dirty bomb’ (Washington Post, 2011), the claims were then dropped and he was later arrested for something completely unrelated.

These files have clearly brought to light many controversial issues, which in turn have raised many underlying and/or hidden matters. For example, questions of anonymity – whether it was just for the newspapers to reveal potential terrorists full names. Also the revelation that many Guantanamo detainees were not, actually, held with just cause. These underlying issues seem to arise with each article I find, but then I suspect that with 300+ cables released this would be inevitable.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/paper-leaked-documents-describe-potential-al-qaida-plots-discussed-by-guantanamo-detainees/2011/04/26/AFgUNcmE_story.html

Government to tighten security?

Today I have found an article from the Washington Post, which argues that the case of the Guantanamo Bay cables is possibly one of the largest leaks in history. Michael. J. Narve (a former lieutenant commander in the U.S Navy) suggested that “though the series of document leaks made to WikiLeaks cumulatively appears to be one of the largest in history, their significance in terms of damage is less than, say, the leaks to Russia by convicted spy Robert Hanssen” (Washington Post, 2011). This proposes that WikiLeaks has not actually caused that much damage – yet, but has the potential to cause as much harm as the leaks to Russia.

The article suggests that ‘the tensions between the public’s right to know and the government’s duty to protect the nation’s security are as strong as ever’ (Washington Post, 2011). As a result the Government are said to be becoming more secretive in their discretions; “Honestly we don’t yet know what the full impact is” of the release of the cables. “But governments have told us that they’re going to share less information with us.” (Washington Post, 2011). This is obviously an effect of WikiLeaks, which poses the question; is media transparency helpful to the general public? Because, it now seems that due to these leaks the government are now becoming even more closed, which means it will be harder for websites such as WikiLeaks to expose confidential files.  

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/weighing-the-damage-of-the-wikileaks-disclosure/2011/05/02/AFJoBmrF_story.html

WikiLeaks and the death of Osama.

The Canberra Times have explained that the plan to find, and kill, Osama Bin Laden was brought forward due to the Guantanamo Bay leaks. The government have refused to comment on whether this is true or not. However, it has been revealed that some of the Guantanamo detainees were a link in finding Bin Laden. Apparently, although not confirmed, the government believed that the release of the cables could jeopardise their plans to find Bin Laden. The government seem to remain very secretive over ideas that WikiLeaks has helped in the hunt for Osama Bin Laden.

The Canberra Times explained that; ‘the Government would not say if it had been briefed more recently about the WikiLeaks Guantanamo Bay files or if the bin Laden operation was affected by them’ (Canberra Times, 2011). This spurs from ideas that Obama had information on Bin Laden’s whereabouts presented to him over the summer last year, but had to bring his plans to a head earlier than expected because of the cables, also because the government seemed to act fairly fast after the cables had been released into the media.

Could these files have pushed forward the date of Osama’s demise? Either way, it seems like a coincidence that within a week of the release Bin Laden was shot dead by U.S forces.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/world/world/general/embassy-silent-over-wikileaks-bin-laden-connection/2152097.aspx

Classified information.

The New York Times has been mentioned in most of the Guantanamo Bay articles that I found on the Guardian website. Apparently, the NY Times, the Guardian and WikiLeaks have worked together in the release of the Guantanamo Bay cables.

I found, in a New York Times article, that a lawyer went to court sometime last week in order to obtain access to the files released by WikiLeaks, but with a view to discuss them in order to represent one of the prisoners in court. The documents were said to be ‘classified by law’ (New York Times, 2011) and must be handled in ‘accordance with all relevant security precautions and safeguards’ (New York Times, 2011). This meant that any information they find out would be restricted by security guidelines. The lawyers were concerned that if they openly discussed their findings from the files it could jeopardise their careers.

Obviously, this is a risk that WikiLeaks takes with every file release; there will always be some sort of backlash concerning their published documents. The reason WikiLeaks has been so successful is because they keep all of their sources anonymous, which means that any classified information they gain access to is given to them by a source and they submit with the idea of ‘freedom of speech’ (WikiLeaks, 2011), something, which is within all of our basic human rights.

http://www.wikileaks.ch/About.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/us/28gitmo.html?scp=7&sq=guantanamo%20bay&st=cse

Many at Guantanamo NOT dangerous?!

A BBC article titled; ‘Wikileaks: Many at Guantanamo ‘Not dangerous’, states that 220 of the prisoners were deemed dangerous terrorists, whilst the other 150 were innocent people from Pakistan or Afghanistan. Obviously, this has meant that these people were locked in one of the most dangerous prisons in the world for, as it would seem, no reason. The American government perhaps had cause to believe these people to be dangerous, but as WikiLeaks has exposed, these beliefs were found to be false. However, the Pentagon has argued that ‘the files released could damage anti-terrorism efforts’ (BBC, 2011). They believed that the detainees were hoarding information about Al Qaeda troops.

It is inevitable that the American government would be unhappy about the release of these cables. The cables expose that many of the detainees were held due to being ‘in the wrong place at the wrong time’ or ‘mistaken identity’ (BBC, 2011). Worringly, in some cases, US commanders admitted to having ‘no reason recorded for transfer’ (BBC, 2011), which shows that even the commanders did not know why some of the prisoners had been detained!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13184845

Journalism combining.

According to a Guardian article, published online May 2^nd 2011, the WikiLeaks organisation has been ‘extraordinary on so many levels’ (WikiLeaks, 2011). The Guardian is referring to the sheer scale of cables produced by the site, and/or the effect it has had on media outlets. The article focuses mainly on the Guantanamo Bay cables, and suggests that certain news outlets were anxious to be the first one to release the cables into the media jungle.

The cables were said to have caused quite a stir because people were openly named in them, which happened because a large amount of the cables were released unedited. The reason that many cables had not been edited was because news outlets were eager to have their story released before other news organisations. Although I mentioned that the cables sparked a varied response, the Guardian only received ‘two letters of complaint about the investigation’ (Guardian, 2011).

The advent of the Guantanamo cables has caused much coverage from the media. I find that many articles seem to centre on the people either behind the release of the documents (WikiLeaks, the Guardian and the New York Times), or about the people affected, i.e. the prisoners. Something I find most interesting is the way in which three different organisations cooperated (the organisations mentioned above), they worked together in order to process the cables and compromised about the release. I believe this could be quite a big step in the world of journalism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/02/open-door-guantanamo-files-wikileaks?INTCMP=SRCH