Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: feared they'd shoot me, Hicks said before gag

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,786

    feared they'd shoot me, Hicks said before gag

    Mark Coultan Herald Correspondent at Guantanamo Bay and AAP
    April 3, 2007

    DAVID HICKS feared he would be shot if he did not co-operate with US interrogators, the Australian prisoner says in an affidavit for an English court case.

    And his Australian lawyer says he was tortured during his time at Guantanamo Bay, contradicting Hicks's plea bargain statement, in which he said he had not been mistreated by the US.

    Hicks, who has spent five years in the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, after he was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001, last week pleaded guilty to a charge of giving material support to terrorists.

    In the plea bargain document, Hicks said: "I have never been illegally treated by any person or persons while in the custody of the United States."

    But the ABC's Four Corners last night reported that Hicks had recently signed an affidavit for an English court setting out ill treatment.

    "I realised that if I did not cooperate with US interrogators, I might be shot," the ABC quoted Hicks as saying.

    In the affidavit Hicks also claims that he was slapped, kicked, punched and spat on in Afghanistan, the ABC reported.

    He could hear other detainees screaming in pain, saw the marks of their beatings and had a shotgun trained on him during interrogation.

    Hicks says in the affidavit that by early 2003, he "felt that I had to ensure that whatever I did pleased the interrogators to keep from being physically abused, placed in isolation and remaining at Guantanamo for the rest of my life", the ABC reported.

    He also details twice being taken off a US warship, flown to an unknown location and physically abused by US personnel for a total of 16 hours, although two US investigations have found that claim unsubstantiated.

    The allegations were made in a document which was to have been presented to an appeal in London against the British Government's refusal to grant him citizenship.

    In this he says he had been repeatedly hit on the back of a head with a rifle, slapped on the head, spat on, kicked, stepped on by troops and punched in the temple. He also claims that a piece of plastic had been forced into his rectum "for no apparent reason".

    Hicks's Australian lawyer, David McLeod, made the torture allegation when asked about further interrogations that Hicks has agreed to undergo before he left Guantanamo Bay.

    As part of his plea bargain, Hicks signed a document saying he would co-operate "fully, completely and truthfully in post-trial briefings and interviews".

    Asked on Sunday about these interviews, Mr McLeod said: "Steps were taken this morning to introduce David to the interrogators here at Guantanamo and there will be a process which will unfold before he leaves. He will be asked to co-operate in a number of issues, but we don't see any problems."

    When asked if this would take the same format as his previous interrogations, Mr McLeod said: "Well, hopefully without the torture this time."

    His statement was provocative, given that Hicks is still waiting to be transferred to Australia.

    Mr McLeod was able to speak more freely than Hicks's American lawyers because he was not a signatory to the plea bargain. Only US lawyers are allowed to represent the detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/...366158416.html

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Another cut and paste without any comments. Thanks for the insight, Dawgg.

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,814
    The most interesting part of Hicks plea agreement is Hicks is not to speak to the media for a year. I have never heard of that as being part of a criminal plea bargain. That is strange.

  4. #4
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    I fully expect every single prisoner statement coming out of every single US Millitary Prison to include the word "torture" from here out. It's the ultimate excuse for all things, and instant "he must not be really guilty, he says (and it must be true) that he was tortured" excuse. And the media believes it and reports it. And generally speaking, the Liberal side of the isle belives it 100% right off the bat.

    This is only the beginning on this one.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,814
    There seems to be a lot of people that think torture is great, well unless we don't agree with the results.


    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    I fully expect every single prisoner statement coming out of every single US Millitary Prison to include the word "torture" from here out. It's the ultimate excuse for all things, and instant "he must not be really guilty, he says (and it must be true) that he was tortured" excuse. And the media believes it and reports it. And generally speaking, the Liberal side of the isle belives it 100% right off the bat.

    This is only the beginning on this one.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    I fully expect every single prisoner statement coming out of every single US Millitary Prison to include the word "torture" from here out. It's the ultimate excuse for all things, and instant "he must not be really guilty, he says (and it must be true) that he was tortured" excuse. And the media believes it and reports it. And generally speaking, the Liberal side of the isle belives it 100% right off the bat.

    This is only the beginning on this one.
    The problem is that these prisoners can legitimately make this claim (whether it's true or not) because of our newly instated public policies.

  7. #7
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly
    The problem is that these prisoners can legitimately make this claim (whether it's true or not) because of our newly instated public policies.
    One could equally say the "problem" is that some of our people care more for the treatement of captured combatants than they do the safety of American Soldiers in the field, and American Civilians at home.

    Kinda comes back to the discussion Ken and I were having the other day about Rightiousness vs. Nationalism.

  8. #8
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    One could equally say the "problem" is that some of our people care more for the treatement of captured combatants than they do the safety of American Soldiers in the field, and American Civilians at home.

    Kinda comes back to the discussion Ken and I were having the other day about Rightiousness vs. Nationalism.
    You would have a good point if the policy was realistically an effective tool in increasing the safety of Americans. I would be curious to see an unbiased study of the effectiveness of torture as part of an interrogation process. In addition to the negative longterm effects, my gut tells me that torture more often than not gives us false information.

  9. #9
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,786
    Quote Originally Posted by HDCentStOhio
    Another cut and paste without any comments. Thanks for the insight, Dawgg.
    Why is there no comment about that when CBTNY does that?

    The double standard at play. STFU

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,786
    I just don't like the idea of torturing the enemy. How much value is there in getting anything useful?

    What did Hicks say that helped us here? How much did it help? We are still at war and getting ready for another one

    Finally in WWII, the Marines took few prisoners in theathers like Iwo Jima. Why all of a sudden are we babysitters of enemies?

  11. #11
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly
    You would have a good point if the policy was realistically an effective tool in increasing the safety of Americans. I would be curious to see an unbiased study of the effectiveness of torture as part of an interrogation process. In addition to the negative longterm effects, my gut tells me that torture more often than not gives us false information.
    Trouble is my friend, neither you nor I am in any position to SAY how effective it has been. Neither of us know what intel has been gained, or to what use that intel has been. Neither you nor I know if intel gained, from true violent torture (beatings, stabbing, shooting, hanging, etc), or what I (and others) think of as more "making a prisoner exceedingly uncomfortable and unhappy for a long period of time" has shown dividends or not.

    Nor are either of us really in a position to judge how often a confession or piece of intel given under duress is valid or not. You find it reprehensable (and strictly speaking, it may be) so you trust without backing that it is invalid. Fact is, we don't have enough REAL facts to know.

    And those that do....sure aren't telling any time soon.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,814
    What were your first thoughts when you saw the Brits wrote letters of apology?

    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    Trouble is my friend, neither you nor I am in any position to SAY how effective it has been. Neither of us know what intel has been gained, or to what use that intel has been. Neither you nor I know if intel gained, from true violent torture (beatings, stabbing, shooting, hanging, etc), or what I (and others) think of as more "making a prisoner exceedingly uncomfortable and unhappy for a long period of time" has shown dividends or not.

    Nor are either of us really in a position to judge how often a confession or piece of intel given under duress is valid or not. You find it reprehensable (and strictly speaking, it may be) so you trust without backing that it is invalid. Fact is, we don't have enough REAL facts to know.

    And those that do....sure aren't telling any time soon.

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    Trouble is my friend, neither you nor I am in any position to SAY how effective it has been. Neither of us know what intel has been gained, or to what use that intel has been. Neither you nor I know if intel gained, from true violent torture (beatings, stabbing, shooting, hanging, etc), or what I (and others) think of as more "making a prisoner exceedingly uncomfortable and unhappy for a long period of time" has shown dividends or not.

    Nor are either of us really in a position to judge how often a confession or piece of intel given under duress is valid or not. You find it reprehensable (and strictly speaking, it may be) so you trust without backing that it is invalid. Fact is, we don't have enough REAL facts to know.

    And those that do....sure aren't telling any time soon.
    You are 100% correct. We have absolutely no way of knowing the absolute effects of torture one way or the other. What we do know is that our country has survived and prospered for quite some time without the need to include torture as part of our official policy.

    Realistically speaking, I am not naive enough to think that there are absolutely no positive effects that can come out of torture, and I understand that under certain circumstances there may not be any other feasible options. However, the fact that it is an accepted part of our official and public policy is sickening. If it MUST be done, then it should be done in secret, and if the torturing party is ultimately caught, then they should face legal ramifications for conducting this immoral act.

  14. #14
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726
    What were your first thoughts when you saw the Brits wrote letters of apology?
    Given the atmosphere of late? Fear. Fear of criticism and lumping in with the US as "torturers".

    Let me ask a purely theoretical question:

    --I get arrested for Pot Posession, although they claim I threw the Pot bag out the window (it isn't located).
    --Cops pull their guns on me during the arrest, when they find my 100% legally owned hunting rifle in the trunk before they take me into custody.
    --During the ride to the Station, I can see both their service weapons and their car shotgun from the backseat.
    --During my interogation, all of the officers presant are armed openly.
    --When walking through teh station, I see all the officers are armed.

    I feared I might be shot if I didn't confess, after seeing all....those.....guns. Please note, I wasn't actually shot at any time.

    The question...... Was I tortured in this scenario?

  15. #15
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly
    You are 100% correct. We have absolutely no way of knowing the absolute effects of torture one way or the other. What we do know is that our country has survived and prospered for quite some time without the need to include torture as part of our official policy.
    Only thing I would say is that we also don't really know what torture was or was not carried out in past wars. Secrecy back then often stayed secret, especially on very important things. And of course, the People were not as concerned back then about such things, not as informed generally speaking.

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    He was SLAPPED????!???? I am OUTRAGED!

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,814
    I am not familiar with VA state law, but in PA state law Police can not search your trunk without written consent or a search warrant. Secondly, how are you to be charged with possession for something the police failed to find? If this did happen no DA would be able to charge you.
    Next, were you read your Miranda warnings if you were questioned? Or did you just yell it out on your own? Were you told you may leave at any time? Were you handcuffed and placed in a locked room and not mirandized?
    Your question is not a simple one.

    Here is a theoretical question for you:
    If you were pulled over for marijuana possession and the police came to the conclusion it was actually a load of heroin from the Taliban and you were going to sell it and give the Taliban the profits. The Police then turned you over to DOD and shipped you off to gitmo, because now you are aiding and in a conspiracy with a terrorist organization. No, you would not be allowed any discovery and you are given a gov't attorney and oh yea, you will get a tribunal in about 5 years. No constitutional rights because you are now a terrorist. Do you still feel you should be given your constitutional rights?
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    Given the atmosphere of late? Fear. Fear of criticism and lumping in with the US as "torturers".

    Let me ask a purely theoretical question:

    --I get arrested for Pot Posession, although they claim I threw the Pot bag out the window (it isn't located).
    --Cops pull their guns on me during the arrest, when they find my 100% legally owned hunting rifle in the trunk before they take me into custody.
    --During the ride to the Station, I can see both their service weapons and their car shotgun from the backseat.
    --During my interogation, all of the officers presant are armed openly.
    --When walking through teh station, I see all the officers are armed.

    I feared I might be shot if I didn't confess, after seeing all....those.....guns. Please note, I wasn't actually shot at any time.

    The question...... Was I tortured in this scenario?

  18. #18
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726
    I am not familiar with VA state law, but in PA state law Police can not search your trunk without written consent or a search warrant. Secondly, how are you to be charged with possession for something the police failed to find? Arrested, detained and questioned, not charged. If this did happen no DA would be able to charge you.
    Next, were you read your Miranda warnings if you were questioned? Sure, right after they fiund the gun. Or did you just yell it out on your own? Were you told you may leave at any time? Nope, I was arrested (in this hypothetical) Were you handcuffed and placed in a locked room and not mirandized? Yes, handcuffed and yes mirandized.
    Your question is not a simple one.
    Indeed, but you still seem to be avoiding the heart of the question....is thinking one might be shot (but is not shot) "torture". Teh OP article makes it seem like yes, it is. I wondered if others agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by cr726
    Here is a theoretical question for you:
    If you were pulled over for marijuana possession and the police came to the conclusion it was actually a load of heroin from the Taliban and you were going to sell it and give the Taliban the profits. The Police then turned you over to DOD and shipped you off to gitmo, because now you are aiding and in a conspiracy with a terrorist organization. No, you would not be allowed any discovery and you are given a gov't attorney and oh yea, you will get a tribunal in about 5 years. No constitutional rights because you are now a terrorist. Do you still feel you should be given your constitutional rights?
    As an American Citizen, I am entitled to a specific and well detailed set of rights under our COnstitution and our laws governing treatment of citizens. So yes, I would say such treatment would have clearly broached my rights, yes.

    My two questions is response: Is there an American citizen this happened to? How does this relate to the OP or the Austriailian gent being discussed?

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,814
    You could claim mental torture. You would be laughed out of the building.
    Here is an article about an American citizen.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2037444.stm



    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish
    Indeed, but you still seem to be avoiding the heart of the question....is thinking one might be shot (but is not shot) "torture". Teh OP article makes it seem like yes, it is. I wondered if others agreed.


    As an American Citizen, I am entitled to a specific and well detailed set of rights under our COnstitution and our laws governing treatment of citizens. So yes, I would say such treatment would have clearly broached my rights, yes.

    My two questions is response: Is there an American citizen this happened to? How does this relate to the OP or the Austriailian gent being discussed?

  20. #20
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726
    You could claim mental torture. You would be laughed out of the building.
    Here is an article about an American citizen.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2037444.stm
    Oh aye, I am aware of Padilla. Poorly handled by the Govt in my view, although the guy hardly earns much pitty, all things considered. And he was (finally) charged.

    Is he the only one? I hadn't heard of others in his situation, but I could be wrong or ill informed on that.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us