They Used Threat of Prison Rape to Scare Omar Khadr
As Spencer reports from Gitmo, the first interrogator to question Omar Khadr at Bagram told him a story suggesting that if he lied, he’d be sent to an American prison where he’d be likely to get raped.
“I told him a fictitious story we had invented when we were there,” Interrogator #1 said. It was something “three or four” interrogators at Bagram came up with after learning that Afghans were “terrified of getting raped and general homosexuality, things of that nature.” The story went like this:
Interrogator #1 would tell the detainee, “I know you’re lying about something.” And so, for an instruction about the consequences of lying, Khadr learned that lying “not so seriously” wouldn’t land him in a place like “Cuba” — meaning, presumably, Guantanamo Bay — but in an American prison instead. And this one time, a “poor little 20-year-old kid” sent from Afghanistan ended up in an American prison for lying to an American. “A bunch of big black guys and big Nazis noticed the little Afghan didn’t speak their language, and prayed five times a day — he’s Muslim,” Interrogator #1 said. Although the fictitious inmates were criminals, “they’re still patriotic,” and the guards “can’t be everywhere at once.”
“So this one unfortunate time, he’s in the shower by himself, and these four big black guys show up — and it’s terrible something would happen — but they caught him in the shower and raped him. And it’s terrible that these things happen, the kid got hurt and ended up dying,” Interrogator #1 said. “It’s all a fictitious story.”
It may have been a fictitious story, but it was an implicit threat, and a very plausible one when you consider it was told to a Canadian likely to be aware of America’s atrocious record of prison rape of both men and women.
The fate of Khadr–whose further interrogations all followed this implicit threat–is one issue. But the fate of American prisoners exposed to rape is equally timely. There are just four days left to a comment period on new standards that would mitigate many of the underlying problems that allow prison rape to happen.
The U.S. Attorney General is currently reviewing national standards aimed at preventing and addressing this type of abuse. Until May 10, these measures are open for public comments.If fully implemented, the national standards will spare countless Americans the horror of sexual abuse. But the standards are under threat. The reason: Prison officials claim that it will be too expensive to implement them – too expensive to prevent staff from raping detainees.
[snip]
In 2003, Congress recognized that the victimization of inmates constitutes a national crisis and so it unanimously passed the U.S. Prison Rape Elimination Act.
The national standards currently under review by Attorney General Eric Holder were developed by a bipartisan federal commission through extensive consultation with corrections officials, criminal justice experts, advocates and prisoner rape survivors. They are basic, common-sense measures, highlighting the need to train staff, identify likely rape victims and likely predators and ensure that prisons are subjected to independent audits.
By law, Attorney General Eric Holder has until June to review the standards and codify them as federal regulations, making them binding on detention facilities nationwide.
Sadly, it now looks like Holder will not meet his deadline. The delay is due, in large part, to a problematic cost projection study commissioned by the Justice Department in response to pressure from corrections leaders.
In addition, there’s a petition calling on Holder to implement the new measures quickly.
It’s really appalling they used such a threat to scare Khadr. But it’s equally appalling that the threat is so plausible because rape is so common in our prisons.
And we may be a lot closer to doing something about the latter than we seem to be able to do about the former.
I wonder if it is just a prison problem.
You mean it might be a “philosophical” problem?
It is said that Obama and Holder are “pragmatists”.
As all “corrections leaders”, if they wish to keep their jobs, claim to be, as well.
Is it justice or expediency which appeals to the pragmatist?
If Congress passed a law in 2003, then such “limitations” as it has built into it must be set to soon run out (for reasons of political “expediency”, doubtless).
“Oh yes, we would like to stop all these nasty things, really, truly, we would, but we simply haven’t the money.”
So this is really about money?
“Isn’t everything?”
No.
“Wha …? Did you hear that? Everybody knows that money is all that matters. Ain’t that right?”
DW
Yes a philosophical one.
Additionally, a military one. I suspect there is a systemic problem of this nature. Therefore, no one blinked at the threat being made.
Very important convergence of facts about American military and civilian prisons, EW. Thanks for highlighting the prison rape comment period so quickly. [A couple of minor typos, FYI: Add a “to” after ‘Canadian likely’ in your second paragraph, and maybe change “do” to “be” four words from the end of the post.]
This threat by military interrogators – drawing on a real fact of life in America’s prison system, often dramatized by Hollywood – really struck me. At first, I assumed Spencer’s reporting was referencing an American military prison in Afghanistan, but how telling is it that the American military thought the threat of incarceration in prisons in the “homeland”- for foreign Muslims, in particular, even English-speaking ones – had more currency with the captives they were trying to intimidate and cow, than even further confinement by the military where they were.
As you say, it’s appalling on every level.
Thanks for the typo fixes.
And yeah, particularly the specificity of the story: black guys and Nazis (as if they’d be accomplices?) both.
OT
Cement condom at the scene of the spill.
I have been corrected. It should be con-dome.
This is genius. He’s told he’ll be raped in prison, then he’s told if he cooperates he’ll get prison rather than Gitmo. And our interrogators are confused as to why this doesn’t work.
In a real court, this would mean the evidence is inadmissable and the interrogators would at least be up on administrative charges.
Instead, interrogator gets to testify under a pseudonym. And they actually have to discuss if this is good evidence!
I’m more cynical about Holder than you are. You say it’s money holding him back, I say ObamaLLP is still using threat of rape in field interrogations and he doesn’t want anything to interfere with that.
Boxturtle (Threat of rape leaves no visable marks to explain away)
This interrogator actually WAS courtmartialed (though for abuse on other prisoners).
*sigh* I must have missed a post. Research states he pled guilty, and was sentanced to two months. I see no record of a bad conduct discharge.
I suppose it’s better than nothing.
Do I recall a line from the show trial manual that witness testimony could not be used against them in general? Or was that an unnamed whitehouse source?
Boxturtle (There I go, looking backward again)
On top of everything else:
“a bunch of big black guys and big nazis”?
Who ARE these “people”?
The black guys are probably the Crips or the Bloods. The nazi’s are likely Aryan Bortherhood. Both are common in our prisons.
I’d have threatened to put him in the cell with Charles Manson. I’ll see your bunch of big blacks and raise you one REALLY creepy little white guy.
Boxturtle (Oh, you meant the torturers? They’re soulless sadists, employed directly by Satan himself)
Guess that wasn’t too clear… :-}
The threat of sexual violence, explicit or implicit, is a war crime.
Interrogator #1’s name is well known in Canada, and in fact it’s in Wikipedia. Should I refrain from naming him here?
Interestingly, Michelle Shephard of the Toronto Star doesn’t name him in today’s report, although she has interviewed him in the past.
He was one of the “interrogators” tried for the murder of Dilawar; he was sentenced to five months for that. His excuse for all that:
I’m catching up, but I’m also busy blaming Tony Blair for a bit.
No, you’re free to use it. According to Spencer, the prosecutors have been bitching that journalists have been using the names of interrogators even if they’re in the public record. Shephard will probably be fine using it once she leaves Gitmo. But until then they’re not going to let her use it.
I guess that is her concern — she’s there, and she can’t risk the access.
Joshua Claus is the guy. Omar apparently calls him “the skinny blond.” Interesting, given that one of the other interrogators we’ve heard from, a great hulking guy who has “Monster” tattooed on his chest (or somewhere — need to look that up), turns out to be a sensitive fellow (now has PTSD) whose testimony should work to help Omar. (I do have sources for all this stuff, but I’m a bit cross-eyed at the moment.)
Of course, this is abuse, this is a threat of rape, even, as the story goes, of death. But notice that the interrogators learned Afghans were terrified of homosexual rape. Well, how did they learn that? Did somebody inform them about cultural fears? And what a surprise that the Afghan people would be afraid of rape!!! My god, they might be human!
Sickening, a story truly wrung out of the heart of modern America, a dark and pitiless heart. I tremble for all of us what things we will suffer for this.
I’ll be contrary here and say that the threat wasn’t prison rape.
It was a threat of prison rape and death.
The story about prison rape recounted to this teenager was about another teen who’d been raped until he died of injuries, not just raped.
I’m not getting the sense that anybody has really done a solid job of pointing out this is an implied mortal threat against someone who would be deemed an impressionable child in this country, either.
You nailed it. This is a threat of death. Thus, the law was broken twice in this threat. The latter threat, death, being the greater violation of law.
So, how many of the EIT’s were “set-up” with the verbal threat of death? I bet all. So if all were, “mock burial” would not seem so “mock” after all.
Lawsuit Against Khadr’s Family Estate
.
● VIDEO: Omar Khadr Gitmo Interrogation Tapes