Former Guantánamo Guard Tells All

Categories: Chelsea Green News, From the Editor
Posted on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 at 2:46 am by dpacheco

I have seen and done many horrible things, either at Guantánamo or in Iraq, and I know what it is like to try and move on with your life. It’s hard.

—Spc. Brandon Neely, from the UC Davis Guantánamo testimonials project

Harper’s Magazine‘s Scott Horton takes a look at the prisoner abuse perpetrated at Guantánamo, as described by Private Brandon Neely, a guard with firsthand knowledge of what took place there. It’s as bad as you think.

Army Private Brandon Neely served as a prison guard at Guantánamo in the first years the facility was in operation. With the Bush Administration, and thus the threat of retaliation against him, now gone, Neely decided to step forward and tell his story. “The stuff I did and the stuff I saw was just wrong,” he told the Associated Press. Neely describes the arrival of detainees in full sensory-deprivation garb, he details their sexual abuse by medical personnel, torture by other medical personnel, brutal beatings out of frustration, fear, and retribution, the first hunger strike and its causes, torturous shackling, positional torture, interference with religious practices and beliefs, verbal abuse, restriction of recreation, the behavior of mentally ill detainees, an isolation regime that was put in place for child-detainees, and his conversations with prisoners David Hicks and Rhuhel Ahmed. It makes for fascinating reading.

Neely’s comprehensive account runs to roughly 15,000 words. It was compiled by law students at the University of California at Davis and can be accessed here. Three things struck me in reading through the account.

First, Neely and other guards had been trained to the U.S. military’s traditional application of the Geneva Convention rules. They were put under great pressure to get rough with the prisoners and to violate the standards they learned. This placed the prison guards under unjustifiable mental stress and anxiety, and, as any person familiar with the vast psychological literature in the area (think of the Stanford Prison Experiment, for instance) would have anticipated produced abuses. Neely discusses at some length the notion of IRF (initial reaction force), a technique devised to brutalize or physically beat a detainee under the pretense that he required being physically subdued. The IRF approach was devised to use a perceived legal loophole in the prohibition on torture. Neely’s testimony makes clear that IRF was understood by everyone, including the prison guards who applied it, as a subterfuge for beating and mistreating prisoners—and that it had nothing to do with the need to preserve discipline and order in the prison.

Read the whole article here.

Digg!
Share

Leave a Reply


Follow us
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com