Revealed: the full story of the Guantanamo Britons

Status
Not open for further replies.

w4rma

member
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
724
Location
United States of America
The Observer's David Rose hears the Tipton Three give a harrowing account of their captivity in Cuba

Sunday March 14, 2004
The Observer


Three British prisoners released last week from Guantanamo Bay have revealed the full extent of British government involvement in the American detention camp condemned by law lords and the Court of Appeal as a 'legal black hole'.

Shafiq Rasul, Ruhal Ahmed and Asif Iqbal, the so-called 'Tipton Three', speaking for the first time since their release at a secret location in southern England, have disclosed to The Observer the fullest picture yet of life inside the camp on Cuba where America continues to hold 650 detainees.

After more than 200 interrogation sessions each, with the CIA, FBI, Defence Intelligence Agency, MI5 and MI6, America has been forced to admit its claims that the three were terrorists who supported al-Qaeda had no foundation.

But fearful of reprisals - the extreme right wing BNP has a stronghold in their hometown of Tipton in the West Midlands, and their families have warned them they may not be safe back at home - they all declined to be photographed, and are choosing a new location in which to rebuild their lives.

During an extraordinary 12-hour interview with The Observer last Friday, two days after their release from Paddington Green police station where they were held after being flown home from Cuba, the three men revealed that they were interrogated by MI5 almost immediately after first arriving at Guantanamo Bay - in the cases of Iqbal and Rasul, on 15 January 2002, and in Ahmed's case three weeks later.

The British Government has repeatedly claimed it has been trying to use diplomatic pressure to introduce more legal process at Guantanamo, including an opportunity for detainees to show that imprisonment is unjustified.

But the picture painted by the three released prisoners is of a Security Service which saw them as mere 'interrogation fodder', and questioned them repeatedly throughout their 26-month stay.

Among other disclosures, the three men revealed:

· How early in their ordeal they survived a massacre perpetrated by Afghanistan's Northern Alliance troops who herded hundreds of prisoners into lorry containers and locked them in, so that people started to suffocate. Iqbal described how only 20 of 300 prisoners in each container lived, and then only because someone made holes in its side with a machine gun - an action which killed yet more prisoners;

· The existence of a secret super-maximum security facility outside the main part of Guantanamo's Camp Delta known as Camp Echo, where prisoners are held in tiny cells in solitary confinement 24-hours a day, with a military police officer permanently stationed outside each cell door. The handful of inmates of Camp Echo include two of the four remaining British detainees, Moazzem Begg and Feroz Abbasi, and the Australian, David Hicks;

· That they endured three months of solitary confinement in Camp Delta's isolation block last summer after they were wrongly identified by the Americans as having been pictured in a video tape of a meeting in Afghanistan between Osama bin Laden and the leader of the 11 September hijackers Mohamed Atta. Ignoring their protests that they were in Britain at the time, the Americans interrogated them so relentlessly that eventually all three falsely confessed. They were finally saved - at least on this occasion - by MI5, which came up with documentary evidence to show they had not left the UK;
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,13743,1169147,00.html
 
Uh-huh... and these detainees sell their story exclusively to anti-UK-establishment and anti-US newspapers, all tell conveniently the same thing (wonder how long they spent in conference before they spoke to the media?), and directly contradict the International Red Cross's own report on detention conditions, the facility, etc. And you don't smell a rat here? Puh-leeze!

:fire: :banghead: :mad: :rolleyes:
 
4 more years! God Bless America

1_WTCSouthTower.jpg
 
I saw this the other day

and my first thought was "How long 'til W4 posts it on THR?"

I was only off by a day.
 
I read it a few days ago from Drudge, but decided that I didn’t want to circulate this tripe. Does anyone REALLY believe anything this goon says? Everyone else who has been released provided MUCH more believable stories
 
Last edited:
The reason this is so maddenning is that w4rma apparently supports three (3) persons of unknown character which were held for nearly two (2) years at a detention facility for enemy combatants and were primarily identified as "hardcore" AL Qaeda/Taliban from Afghanistan. The hatred of Bush is so overwhelming in the hard left that we are to believe persons of unknown character parrot what the left has been saying, but could not prove, in opposition to a clean Red Cross report. I am not even sure that this is related to Bush directly anyway. He sets policy and others carry it out. Are you implying that "we should let them all go if anyone of them is innocent" (even though it is highly unlikely that they are "innocent"). If so, then w4rma, you are naive.
 
I'd like to ask these three what they were doing in Afghanistan at that time and in circumstances that caused them to be arrested.
 
Silly me, here I thought the "full story revelation" would have included how these poor British tourists were wrongly caught up in a dragnet by the evil Northern Alliance and US Special Forces determined to cut short their vacations in an Afghani war zone. Or did the United States and its allies simply snap these guys up off of the streets of Britain and spirit these guys over for a two year, all expenses paid, sabbatical to Cuba?

These guys are lucky to be talking at all. They should have "disappeared."
 
MicroBalrog wrote

claims that the three were terrorists who supported al-Qaeda had no foundation.

They fought with the taliban, and there is no question that they (the taliban) supported al-Qaeda.

even if they were just innocent delusioned idiots fighting for a cause they personally believed in and had no idea whatsoever that the taliban was sheltering and aiding al qaeda (yeah right :rolleyes: ), they are guilty by association.
 
I'd like to ask these three what they were doing in Afghanistan at that time and in circumstances that caused them to be arrested.
They were handing out shiny new pennies to all the poor children silly.
So why were they released, and not tried for their supposed "crimes"?
My guess would be that sometimes it's more fun to let low level scumbags like these guys out, so they can be watched. The real fun is to see which Al Qaeda morons try to meet with them first. And should Al Qaeda decide to make them permanently silent, then so much the better. Saves us 3 bullets.
 
They were handing out shiny new pennies to all the poor children silly

I don't care what they were doing - obviously, since the .gov doesn't try them under an honest, open trial, and prove that guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, well, geez, they had THREE years to find the evidence, and if the FBICIAMI5MI6 couldn't find the evidence in THREE years, it probably doesn't exist.
 
in this country we have a concept of "innocent until proven guilty", apparently they were afforded that same courtesy. There simply wasnt enough to press charges, i guess.

America has been forced to admit its claims that the three were terrorists who supported al-Qaeda had no foundation.

there was definatly foundation to those claims, the author's (and your's, it seems) anti american stance said there wasn't, not the US gov't. Otherwise they would'nt have been detained. duh.
 
MicroBalrog Wrote

doubt, well, geez, they had THREE years to find the evidence, and if the FBICIAMI5MI6 couldn't find the evidence in THREE years, it probably doesn't exist.

actualy, it was 2 years 2 months or

But the picture painted by the three released prisoners is of a Security Service which saw them as mere 'interrogation fodder', and questioned them repeatedly throughout their 26-month stay.
 
I must have missed something--are interrogations illegal, or are they immoral?

And if interrogatiosn are not illegal or immoral, what is the big deal about captured enemy fighters being "interrogation fodder?" Why would it be bad if they were "questioned nearly every day?" Do they have evidence that the questioning was conducted unlawfully? For instance, was torture or deprivation involved?

Is this really a screaming anti-American story based on the fact that prisoners were questioned?

These are people who torture and execute prisoners, even non-combatants (remember Pearl?) and we're not allowed to question them?


Oh, wait, my mistake. They were also kept in solitary confinement. Ooooohhhh. Ze life of ze Taliban soldier, she is not all ze easy beheadings of ze womens, no?
 
then you dont understand it

They were detained with more probable cause than you can shake a stick at, but they were never tried, proven guilty and punished.
 
Here and I thought they were prisoners of war all this time. It turns out they were just British tourists caught in a mind warp of immense proportions. How many German or Japanese WWII POW's were released on their own cognizance prior to the end of hostilities allowing them to go home and say evil and nasty things about their horrid captors?

It's not likely these guys had uniforms on and all, or that the Taliban fighters even had uniforms or were even truthful to the hated Great Satanic demons who captured them while they were walking across the street in Kabaul minding their own business. British tourist? Right. Sure. Can't tell the players from the tourists without a program.

Now its... Oops. Sorry. Towers. War and all. Over-reaction. You can go home now. Play nicely with your friends.

At least they're alive and able to tell their stories. Me? I'd probably write a book and see if I could sell the movie rights to Michael Moore. 26 months in Gitmo, Seeing Cuba courtesy of Uncle Sam.
 
whatever dude...

Probable cause means SUSPECTED guilt. guilt is not determined until after a fair trial.

why all the tinfoil conspiracy/ USA = bad sentiment?
 
Probable cause =/= guilt.
Probable cause equals detained until the investigation is complete and individual is sent to trial (military in this case) or released. No difference than a person arrested in the US being remanded until tried. Saddam hasn't been convicted of anything either. Wanna release him too?:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top