Ex Us Military Police, Brandon Neely, Exposes the Abuses and Crimes Against Prisoners at Guantanamo

This video statement by Brandon Neely is not new, but I've just seen it and I think as many people as possible need to hear his message. He says it how it is. He not only exposes the abuses and crimes against the prisoners at Guantanamo during his time there, but also the government and top level complicity in those crimes.



He is a brave man to speak out like this, we soooo need people like him. He also puts a much needed 'human face' on the situation he describes.

Here's also an article from the BBC dated 12 January 2010, reporting on his trip to Britain to meet two former Guantanamo prisoners.

news.bbc.co.uk...

More than one government was complicit in crimes against many innocent men, labelled 'terrorist' for heinous political reasons.

My message to my government: NOT IN MY NAME. I DO NOT CONSENT.


.

reply to post by wcitizen


Cool.. Ill care when terrorist renounce terrorism and quit cutting peoples heads off for no other reason than they arent muslim.

Ill care when they decide their goal is not an Islamic form of government under sharia law here in the US.

Maybe they shouldnt pick a fight if they arent prepared for it ya think?

reply to post by Xcathdra


Wow, brilliant contribution. You didn't refer to anything in the statement at all. Fail

To the OP... good find. I think we're coming in to a time when people realise they can come forward and be heard. Lets hope lots more like him do the same. S&F

Peace

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by wcitizen

 

Cool.. Ill care when terrorist renounce terrorism and quit cutting peoples heads off for no other reason than they arent muslim.

Ill care when they decide their goal is not an Islamic form of government under sharia law here in the US.

Maybe they shouldnt pick a fight if they arent prepared for it ya think?

edit on 24-7-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Just wanted to see if it was possible to interchange a few words to actually make some sense...

Cool.. I'll care when America renounces Invasions of Innocent Countries and quits killing women and children off for no other reason than they are collateral damage and therefore ...acceptable losses.

I'll care when they decide their goal is not a Democratic (or whatever they want to label it) form of government under US law throughout the World.

Yup! It works.

In other words, there are always 2 sides.

reply to post by wcitizen

I don't think those animals locked up at Guantanamo should have any rights. When they reject Islam, eat pork chops and grits then they can be shot.

Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer
reply to post by wcitizen

 

I don't think those animals locked up at Guantanamo should have any rights. When they reject Islam, eat pork chops and grits then they can be shot.

So where were you seated at their trials to determine their guilt...oh wait, there weren't any trials.

Sorry, I forgot that people are now automatically guilty in the eyes of the World if the MSM says so.

My mistake.

reply to post by jude11


Of course their are 2 sides... In this case the OP is referencing a person who has issues with whats going on at Gitmo..

Thats fine, as its his story to tell.

What I find humerous though is the complete and total lack of intrest that you and some others have when it comes to who these people act (al queida / Taliban / etc) and the atrocities they commit.

This leads me to the conclcusion that when you and others voice your views about the US, its done not because of concern, but because you simply hate anything and everything about the US, and look for any chance you get, like this guy in the OP, to support that agenda.

@ the others - I watched the video... and I dont really care.. The treatment they are getting is much better than several of the NGO's who were taken captive and executed simply because they are not muslim.

When you guys start caring about that, ill start caring about this.

This leads me to the conclcusion that when you and others voice your views about the US, its done not because of concern, but because you simply hate anything and everything about the US, and look for any chance you get, like this guy in the OP, to support that agenda.

Not at all.

The only thing that gets me angry is the hypocrisy of people thinking that whatever is done in the advancement of America's ideals are ok without looking at what crimes against the innocents are being committed...on both sides.

Both sides are 100% guilty of atrocities against each other in order to further their agendas and I choose to believe only 50% of what either side reports. That's it.

One side calls the deaths of innocents a necessary sacrifice while another dismisses their murders as collateral damage in the name of freedom.

Which is which?

Originally posted by jude11
Which is which?

You tell me.. To date I have not seen any people posting in this thread partake in any thread dealing with atrocities committed byt any other group / country other than the US.

So its ok for people to have their heads cut off, and its ok for the people to do that to them, except when the Us is involved, in which case the only atrocities committed are by the US.

Which is it?

Media has access to Guatanomo Bay... Do they have access to Al Queida / Taliban / Islamic extremists when they decided to cut a head off?

I am more than ready to link some videoss that would make people throw their dinner up if thats what its going to take to get through to you guys how this is going to end by not drawing a line in the sand when dealing with these morons..

13 Iranian agents executed - Graphic
Execution of 18 members of the interior ministry in IRaq
Execution of 20 abducted Iraqi soldiers
Taliban executes 2 women just because they are women

Yep most people on here are all to quick to come down on America for atrocities without acknowledging the other side. I can see a couple people in this thread that have a long post history of America bashing without bringing the other side up.

I agree they are all guilty of crimes and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Why are people sitting in GITMO at all when you know for a fact everyone there is guilty of a crime and not just rounded up and tossed in there by chance?

Originally posted by kro32
Yep most people on here are all to quick to come down on America for atrocities without acknowledging the other side. I can see a couple people in this thread that have a long post history of America bashing without bringing the other side up.

I agree they are all guilty of crimes and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

What is the "other side?" Who is the "they" that is guilty?
You and Xcath seem to be under the impression that everyone in GITMO did something bad to someone else at some point. I do not suppose you guys have any evidence or proof that people awaiting trials are already guilty of something do you?

When someone is wrongly sent to prison and mistreated in that prison, do you always take the opinion that anyone labeled prisoner deserves it anyway?

Because too many people like the op are concerned that they aren't being treated fairly and want to make sure nothing bad happens to them.

Simple as that.

Originally posted by Crapspackle
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Why are people sitting in GITMO at all when you know for a fact everyone there is guilty of a crime and not just rounded up and tossed in there by chance?

Maybe you and some of the other tree huggers can explain to me when the war on terror ended? I dont see you guys bitching about the number of prisoners held by either side during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the first or second gulf war?

They were tkane prisoner during combat operations... We are well within our rights under the Un Charter to hold them until such time as they are charged and tried, repatriated, or exchanged for other prisoners.

Absent that they can sit down and shut up. If your going to argue something, make sure you do some research on both sides of the equation. I will point out where it specifically states under UN where people are protected by the GEneva convention unless they are not signatories to it, which al queida and the Taliban are not, or if the violate any portion of it, which then opens the door for limited reprisals.

So which is it? We arent following UN charter or we are?

Originally posted by Crapspackle

Originally posted by kro32
Yep most people on here are all to quick to come down on America for atrocities without acknowledging the other side. I can see a couple people in this thread that have a long post history of America bashing without bringing the other side up.

I agree they are all guilty of crimes and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

What is the "other side?" Who is the "they" that is guilty?
You and Xcath seem to be under the impression that everyone in GITMO did something bad to someone else at some point. I do not suppose you guys have any evidence or proof that people awaiting trials are already guilty of something do you?

When someone is wrongly sent to prison and mistreated in that prison, do you always take the opinion that anyone labeled prisoner deserves it anyway?

As I said in my other response, care to point out to me where it says we are not allowed to hold people until such time they are charged and tried, repatriated as a conclusion of hostilities or exchanged for other prisoners in a swap.

Until there is an end of hoistilities, we can hold them indefinitely, just as they can hold our people indefinitely, and oh btw, they do have maerican POWS.

Funny enough though per UN its a violation to show them on TV... I dont see you guys complaining when they parade them around on video as propoganda.

IF you are going to be pissed about the situaation, then be pissed about the entire situation, and not jsut the side that comes down on American actions.

Originally posted by Crapspackle

Originally posted by kro32
Yep most people on here are all to quick to come down on America for atrocities without acknowledging the other side. I can see a couple people in this thread that have a long post history of America bashing without bringing the other side up.

I agree they are all guilty of crimes and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

What is the "other side?" Who is the "they" that is guilty?
You and Xcath seem to be under the impression that everyone in GITMO did something bad to someone else at some point. I do not suppose you guys have any evidence or proof that people awaiting trials are already guilty of something do you?

When someone is wrongly sent to prison and mistreated in that prison, do you always take the opinion that anyone labeled prisoner deserves it anyway?

Your the one that is debating the validity of the people there so i'm curious to see your proof of all the innocent people being held.

Did the US declare war on Afghanistan??

I thought that's when the Geneva Convention comes into effect..

Originally posted by backinblack
Did the US declare war on Afghanistan??

I thought that's when the Geneva Convention comes into effect..

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan vs. Rumsfield that Gitmo detainees were only allowed minimal protections under the Geneva Convention so they are applying it but not entirely. That is law and you can be upset with the Supreme Court for that but the military isn't breaking any rules.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by jude11
Which is which?

You tell me.. To date I have not seen any people posting in this thread partake in any thread dealing with atrocities committed byt any other group / country other than the US.

So its ok for people to have their heads cut off, and its ok for the people to do that to them, except when the Us is involved, in which case the only atrocities committed are by the US.

Which is it?

Media has access to Guatanomo Bay... Do they have access to Al Queida / Taliban / Islamic extremists when they decided to cut a head off?

I am more than ready to link some videoss that would make people throw their dinner up if thats what its going to take to get through to you guys how this is going to end by not drawing a line in the sand when dealing with these morons..

This is my point. You keep standing up and saying how vicious these 'Morons' are. In every post.

I state clearly that I find both sides equally guilty and yet you still go on the attack and state that no one is seeing the US side. Do you even read the posts or do you just like to argue points without actually acknowledging the other persons post? Seems that way.

You take the last line from a post that states equal guilt and run with it to yet again state your stance that every one is once again ganging up on the poor ol' USA.

Sorry, doesn't work.

How's this?

"BOTH SIDES ARE EQUAL IN THEIR ATROCITIES AND MURDER OF INNOCENT PEOPLE TO FURTHER THEIR AGENDAS."

Can it be any more clear? Hope so because I'm done.

Originally posted by backinblack
Did the US declare war on Afghanistan??

I thought that's when the Geneva Convention comes into effect..

Authorization for the Use of force against Terrorism (War on TError - Afghanistan)

The Genva convention applies ot Us forces because we are a sgintoary to the treaty. That treaty is part of the US FEderal Body of Law and is subject to Congressional as well as court actions brought by the US and her citizens.

The Taliban and Al Queida, neither of which are officaly recognized by the UN as a Government, are not subject to the Geneva convention because of that. That means any action taken that falls outside of the geneva convention can be returned in kind by opposition forces in a limited manner back towards them (all under UN law if poeple would read it).

In addition to Genvea Convetions, we are also a signatory to CAT - which again the Taliban / Al queida is not a signatory to it. The CAt has been modified under Us law as well from several court cases that made it to SCOTUS.

When people are captured during combat operations they are either held as a POW (which the taliban / al; queida do not apply because they dont meet the criteria established by the geneva convention), enemy combatant.

They can be held until they are charged and tried for a crime.
They can be held without charges until the end of hostilities.
they can be held until there is a prisoner exchange.

Its that simple....

Since there is no end of hostilities for the war on terror, we can continue to hold people without charges. Just as they are doing to some of our people.

Which I will point out people dont seem to be complaining about the American prisoners.