Relations between waking and prisoners in Guantanamo Bay range from cooperative too dangerous.
WASHINGTON said Mohammed Alam Shah, a 24-year-Afghan, as teenagers, a leg lost, said interrogators in the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, he was conscripted by the Taliban as a driver had before, were imprisoned in 2001. He had caught were he said as he tried, "his to save younger brother of the Taliban.",.
This article is based on a huge treasure trove of secret government documents leaked last year for the anti-secrecy organization of WikiLeaks, and to the New York Times from a different source on condition of anonymity made available.Editors and journalists, who edited this article will choose you answer questions about the coverage of the material.Military analysts believed him. Mr Shah, which doctors was fitted with a prosthesis of prison, was "cooperative" and "made has 2003 assessment known not thoughts of violence or made threats to the United States or their allies, a sympathetic". Their conclusion: "prisoner represents not a future threat to the United States or U.S. interests."
So in 2004 Mr Shah was - sent back to Afghanistan where he promptly revealed Abdullah Mehsud, a militant Pakistan born, and began plotting mayhem. He admitted jihadist videos, organized a Taliban force against American forces, planned an attack on Pakistan's Minister of the Interior, the 31 people killed, the kidnapping of two Chinese engineers and finally exploded a bomb supervised suicide in 2007, such as the Pakistani army closed. His martyrdom was celebrated in an audio message by none other than Osama bin Laden.
The Guantanamo's analysts complete misinterpretation of Abdullah Mehsud was included hundreds of classified reviews submitted by prisoners in the prison in Cuba, obtained by the New York Times. The unredacted reviews give the fullest public image date from the prisoners in Guantanamo in the past nine years. They show that the United States has hundreds of men for years without trial arrested based on a difficult and remarkably subjective evaluation of who they were, what they had done in the past and what could they do in the future. 704 Evaluation documents use the word "may" 387 times, "unknown" 188 time and "misleading" 85 times.
With judge, the documents of judgments on the legal challenges of prisoners show that the analysts ignored sometimes serious flaws in the evidence - for example, that the information from other pinned their mental illness was made them unreliable. Witnesses who say they saw a prisoner at a camp run by Al Qaeda but omit the witnesses record of falsehood or misidentification quote some reviews. Other government documents showing that the later often abusive treatment or torture statements attributed to have been withdrawn include admissions of prisoners without confirmation.
A growing suspicion
Written between 2002 and 2009, the reviews reflect a growing suspicion of Guantanamo analysts. From the outset, the reports are only one or two pages and often sanguine in tone. Of 2008, are prisoners reviews after searing advertising of released Al-Qaeda prisoners and the reduction of the prison population to hard core, was decidedly more cautiously.
In each case an Abdullah Mehsud - someone incorrectly assessed a minimal threat - there are several cases in which prisoners were rated "high risk" have published and not involved in misconduct. Murat Kurnaz, a German resident of Turkish origin, would be in a review 2006 Member of the Al-Qaeda, in the most dangerous category were addressed: "high risk" and "likely that endanger the United States, their interests and their allies."
Yet American authorities, under pressure from Germany and Turkey, overruled the analysts and Mr Kurnaz home Germany three months later. He joined not the global Jihad, but instead was a prominent critic of the Guantanamo, to write a book and the countless media appearances, which condemned American prison.
Under the most revealing who is leaking documents a 17-page guide for analysts, obviously from military intelligence instructors, how to measure the risk of a prisoner prepared. It lists large clusters of prisoners give, including the so-called dirty 30, the bodyguards were Mr bin Laden, as well as the large group of accused Al Qaeda activists captured with Abu Zubaydah, a key terrorist facilitator, with two guest houses in FaisalabadPakistan, 2002. It nine mosques with Al-Qaeda are associated in Quebec, Milan, London, Yemen and Pakistan.
The guide shows the smallest details such as a potential litmus test for risk taken up as analysts. If a prisoner had a watch Casio F91W, it could be an indication he attended make bombs had given a Qaeda course, where such watches have been - even though this model is sold to this day all over the world. (As well as the review of the Yemeni prisoners suggests a dire use for his calculator: "calculators can be used calculations of indirect fire such as audible warning for artillery fire.")
Caught a prisoner, without travel documents? Mean it could be that he had trained, identification make it more difficult to discard, explains how the Guide. A prisoner who claimed to be a simple farmer or cook in the honey business, or looking for a woman? Stories cover the common Al Qaeda and Taliban were, the analysts said.
And a classic catch 22: "Refusal to cooperate," says in the manual, is a technique, Al Qaeda resistance.
The Guide obviously still the product of years of experience most trying bits proof of different reliability in a conclusion to make. In particular, it is called as a cautionary tale of the early misconception about Abdullah Mehsud, the Pakistani suicide bombers, had claimed he was forced to join the Taliban. He was "an example," in the manual says, "Of a prisoner, the successful military cover story as a means to his release from US custody advertised."
Scott Shane reported from Washington and Benjamin Weiser from New York. Reporting was contributed by Charlie Savage from Washington, and William Glaberson, Andrew W. teachings and Andrei Scheinkman from New York.
没有评论:
发表评论