A SOLDIER'S PERSPECTIVE
THE WEB'S LEADING MILITARY BLOG SINCE 2004
It’s been a long time since I’ve called anyone a moron, but I can’t think of a better person to whom I should apply the label than Brandon Neely. I almost feel sorry for IVAW that this guy is actually going around wearing their shirts and making a complete ass out of himself.
Again, instead of turning himself in to the military, he waits until six years after the fact, three years after leaving active duty service, and after he’s been released from IRR status to come forward. Brandon Neely is a complete coward! He waited until he thought it was safe to speak up and couldn’t be sucked back into the Army system to answer for his war crimes.
He can’t speak in complete sentences and looks like he’s about to have a heart attack because that evil corporation, McDonald’s, stuffed too many Big Macs down his 30 inch, Samoan wanna-be neck! He apparently didn’t take any of the military focus on proper diet and exercise with him into the real world.
Here’s the point of my disrespectful attitude towards Neely: He got good men killed, period! The actions at Gitmo directly contributed to an insurgency with a new purpose to avenge those detainees who were abused at the camp. Just like Abu Ghraib, these Soldiers should have been charged with 2nd degree murder and hung publicly. At the very least, they should be imprisoned with a burly redneck named Bubba whose best friend was a goat on the outside. They got my friends killed because they weren’t men enough to stand up for what’s right when faced with a moral delemma.
Now we have idiots like Rachel Maddow (who hates the military anyway) broadcasting his cause without questioning him on his own actions! It’s a media that failed to do its job in telling the whole story!
Again, for the sake of illiterates like Neely who couldn’t comprehend the simple precepts of my last post blasting him, I’m not denying that abuses took place at all. What I’m saying is that these issues were addressed as soon as they became evident that Soldiers weren’t doing their job! The entire camp got a bad rap because of girly men like Neely who didn’t have the balls to stand up for his values. And, again, I hold Brandon Neely directly responsible for the deaths of my brothers and sisters in arms in 2003-2004 when this became public.
Update: Folks, Brandon Neely is STILL a Moron in 2010.
(96) Readers Comments
Leave a Reply
![[UPDATE] The “Face” of Military Dating Scams – The Wall of Shame](http://militarygear.com/asp/wp-content/themes/LondonLive/thumb.php?src=http://militarygear.com/asp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/2.jpg&w=53&h=41&zc=1&q=100)
Anatomy of a Military Dating Scam
I got a phone call from CapitalCargoCourier@hotmail.com today at 7:48
Anatomy of a Military Dating Scam
For Rachel Green: I do believe that was a scam. Military men do not n
CG of 3rd Infantry Division Targeted in Nigerian Scams
Ladies, beware, Sgt Calvin Clerance is also Paul Graves, Sgt51 on MyDa
SSgtJ
CJ, you get a great big AMEN from this corner!
LE GUERRE
AS FAR AS YOUR AMEN GOES YOU NEED TO SPEND MORE TIME EDUCATING YOURSELVES
GENEVA CONVENTION III Adopted 1949
Part II : General protection of prisoners of war
ARTICLE 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited
SO NEELY IS A WHAT FOR SPEAKING OUT?
CJ
Exactly! Neely needs to be prosecuted for war crimes! Thanks for proving my point.
John Lilley
I think that what Brandon did was very courageous and obviously the product of the fight between what he felt his conscious was telling him was right and his own government’s policy. It was obviously made easier for him by the instinctively considerate and caring nature of his British ex-inmates. This is an experience that all American’s can learn from as they consider poking their noses into the affairs of other sovereign states. The clarion call of ‘Yanks go home’ has never been louder.
kathleen bernal
There is one man for sure in Guant. who is innocent. Shakar Aamer. This man was not involved in any acts of war etc. He is married to an English Citizen and has 4 children. This man has been brutally treated. He needs to go back free to his family immediately. He has been held prisoner for almost 10 years now.
Old Blue
He should be prosecuted, but that’s not going to happen. He is too “useful.”
I’d like to see a prosecutor grow a pair and charge him. It’s great that he wants to tell on himself; but if he has committed crimes, if he is truly sorry he will pay the price. That is how he can demonstrate that he’s not just being useful to a cause.
We are all responsible for our own actions. I’ve had that briefing many times. I’ve given that briefing. I’ve reminded Soldiers in combat that we are responsible for our actions, and that when the fog of war lifts the actions of each man remain.
LE GUERRE
PROSECUTED? YOU MEAN THE MAN WHO GAVE THE ORDER FOR NEELY AND THE OTHERS TO DO THESE THINGS TO THESE PRISONERS.
Geneva Convention III Adopted in 1949
Part II : General protection of prisoners of war
ARTICLE 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited
CJ
The man who gave the order, the men who followed the order, and the men who failed to report the order! Absolutely! You’re getting smarter with each comment.
Mickey
all i can say HE IS TRASH.
LE GUERRE
Mickey,
You say he is trash. Are you referring to his 1st, 2nd or 3rd tour. And please, list your tours so we can judge you as well.
CJ
Mickey doesn’t need to quantify her sacrifices in this war. She’s given more than ANY man or woman with 2, 3, 10, or 30 tours! Mind your language Mr. Le Guerre. You’re talking to a Gold Star Mom and I won’t put up your attempts to silence her!
Mad Dawg
CJ
Thsanks for the article. I’m amazed at the idiots who think that terrorists who never signed onto the Geneva Conventions and who violate them daily are entitled to the protection of those conventions. I’m also amazed at the cowardice of the opposition. As someone said, they ARE consistent with their values: they behave dishonestly and in a cowardly way. Fortunately those values are not those of the vast majority of service personnel. It remains to be seen whether the American people prefer the inarticulate mumbles of the integrity-free to the ideals of honesty and courage.
Robin
CJ,
I have to disagree with you. He stood up for his values by not doing the right thing. Some people’s values aren’t the same as yours and mine.
Respectfully,
Robin
CJ
True, he has a screwed up value system. But, he violated his ARMY values! Those aren’t mine or his, but a code he lives by as a Soldier.
yankeemom
What is it with these people in the IVAW? Did their DI yell at them too hard and hurt their feelings?
Apparently, Maddow has not read Inside Gitmo by Lt Col Cucullo (who is not in the IVAW). But then we can’t let facts or vetting get in the way of the anti-military agenda.
This is just so much shite.
Our troops there at Gitmo have put up with so much abuse from the prisoners – because it’s in their teachings at the terrorist camps about being taken prisoner. Lie, cry abuse, commit suicide to make the military look bad, have another detainee rough you up so you tell your American lawyers that you’ve been beaten and attack every soldier, medic etc. that you can.
I notice no one mentioned the female medic that needed 28 surgeries on her face to put it back together after one of these “shaky” detainees slammed her face into the bars till he broke near every bone in her face.
I wonder if Maddow will do a story on the latest review that says that Gitmo is in accordance with the Geneva Conventions…
I’m with you, CJ, these cowardly, honorless people have blood on their hands – and it’s not the detainees’ blood either.
LE GUERRE
Miss Yankee mom,
You might need to do a little research prior to spouting off about these IVAW.By the way how many tours did you do? 4 or at least 3 like Neely did.
Geneva Convention III Adopted in 1949
Part II : General protection of prisoners of war
ARTICLE 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited
CJ
Le Guerre, you question how many tours one of my readers has again and it’ll be the last question you ask on this blog. Understood?
hulagirlatheart
It’s issues like this I have to catch up on after spending nearly three weeks without electricity and regular access to news due to an ice storm. I feel so out of touch and behind.
Thanks for stopping by my blog and sharing your thoughts on the upcoming concert. I think it will be fun.
Albert
This a link a Brian Neely’s interview with UC Davis’s Center for the Study of Human Rights in the America’s.
http://humanrights.ucdavis.edu/projects/the-guantanamo-testimonials-project/testimonies/testimonies-of-military-guards/testimony-of-brandon-neely
Critical Facts
Wow! The truth does sting at times, eh?
JD
The truth? These people can’t handle the truth. The truth is that the Guantanamo detention facility is an abomination. The truth is Bush’s so-called “war on terror” is a lie. The truth is we have no business occupying Iraq and Afghanistan.
Critical Facts
jd:
I agree with everything you say; excepting, however, Afghanistan. Bush’s biggest mistake was to take his eye off the prize (Afghanistan) and foray into his awesome little adventure in Iraq. Big mistake!!
Greyhawk the cruel
“I remember seeing all the post housing the BX (or Base Exchange), McDonald’s, bowling alley, the gym. I remember thinking “Man! This is going to be a really nice deployment. We have all we need.”"
– Neely, from his “testimony“.
All he needed was the gym. He wanted the Big Macs.
sue05
I found it interesting that through out the interview as he was talking about what he did and saw he was looking up and to the left. For those of you who are drinkin at the Kool Aid Bar again, that means he was makin stuff up.
I hope now that we have his miserable “confession” on tape that his cowardly sorry butt will be prosecuted to the fullest extent. He is no hero. He is no “whistle blower”. He is a miserable coward and all he wants is 15 minutes of fame. He is a LOSER with capital letters, and he belongs in jail if all those things are true.
And it still amazes me that there are those who are so incredibly ignorant that they do not recognize the seriousness of the threat to our way of life posed by terrorism, because they are so blinded by the hatred of one man. Grow up.
Critical Facts
sue:
Are you referring to the “terrorism” that basically sprang up from nowhere following the ill-advised invasion of Iraq and the creation of prisons at Bagram and Gtmo? Yes? Then I agree with you!
SSgtJ
CF, so you think we invaded Iraq before 9/11/2001?
Come on, I know you can tell time better than that!
CJ
I’m convinced that you really are ignorant and can’t help it. Before, I thought maybe you just chose to look foolish, but now I see it may just be a genetic thing. Only a complete and utter moron would say what you just said. Yeah, terrorism was invented on March 19, 2003. Keep on believing that.
Critical Facts
cj:
For someone who abhors ad hominem attack, you seem awfully forgetful at times – “moron,” “ignorant buffoon” “a genetic thing”??? Are these terms you learned from listening to Rush L.? If I use the same terms to refute topics I don’t agree with here at ASP, will I be allowed to continue visiting?
At any rate, of course, I realize that terrorism occurred prior to 9/11, and your suggestion that I understand otherwise is really quite pathetic, or at least puzzling.
Regardless, what you refuse to acknowledge, at least publicly, while obviously acknowledging it privately (evidenced by the apparent need for ad hominem) is that Iraq, Bagram and Gtmo provided a rallying cause for terrorism of a kind that would otherwise never have occurred. That is the overwhelming brand of terrorist mind set that we are dealing with today – the kind that we created by not staying in and focusing on Afghanistan when it might have made a difference.
CJ
“If I use the same terms to refute topics I don’t agree with here at ASP, will I be allowed to continue visiting?” Not at all. So you’re free to leave voluntarily if you can’t live with that.
I call you an ignorant baffoon because it’s my perception of truth, not ad hominem. I’ve PUBLICLY said on many occasions what you just said I only do privately. Unfortunately, your intellect doesn’t allow you to notice it. Killing terrorists is naturally going to rally more terrorists. That doesn’t mean you run from them.
Again, if you can’t stomach that I think you’re ignorant and an “utter moron” because you just DON’T UNDERSTAND our realities, I’m sure HuffPo is looking for more readers there since her numbers are dropping since the election. I don’t need you here. But, you’re free to stay.
I’ve tried numerous times to contact you via email, but amazingly you don’t use an email in your comments to which I can reply privately. So, I’m forced to do so publicly.
Critical Facts
The e-mail account for my login at asp has long since expired. Sorry. But feel free to use my other account for offline discussion; you used it once before.
CJ
If you send me an email with the email you’d like to use, I’ll update your account. Are you referring to the one I used when you made your donation for Girl Scout cookies?
sue05
NO, I was referring to the 1993 car bomb attack on the World Trade Center, the 1995 v-bed attack in Riyadh, the 1996 booby trapped truck that blew up the Khobar Towers, the simultaneous car bombs at the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Tanzania, as well as the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole. 9/11 occurred somewhat after all the OTHER acts of terrorism that I have just mentioned. But I guess they just sprang up from no where too huh?
CJ
Sue, all those events were our fault. The terrorists KNEW we were going to invade Iraq “one day” and so in CF’s mind, that’s probably why those particular attacks took place. Remember, America is the enemy in CF’s mind. Those poor terrorists were just lashing out, victims of American imperialism!
Critical Facts
sue:
You mean al Qiada, then, correct? The guys primarily from Saudi Arabia, or that were funded by elements within Saudi Arabia, who trained and camped in Afghanistan at the pleasure of the Taliban? The ones who hated Saddam and had nothing to do with Iraq? Those terrorists? That’s what I thought.
Condescend all you like, and ad a dose or two of ad hominem, too, if it makes you feel better. At the end of the day, however, let’s all agree that there is substantial evidence that compels the conclusion that the so-called terrorists from Iraq didn’t exist until the invasion of Iraq and the majority of those terrorists were perfectly content going about their non-terrorist ways until the call to jihad post 3/03.
CJ
CF, this is why I call you ignorant. I’ve explained more times than I care to about the AQ’s links and ties to Iraq. The problem here isn’t that you’re ignorant. It’s that you’re willingly ignorant.
AQ, while having started in Saudi Arabia, isn’t even CLOSE to being a Saudi Arabian terrorist organization. But, you wouldn’t know this because your BDS gets you hung up on Iraq, where AQ was also found. There is no “compelling evidence” they didn’t exist because that would directly contradict the evidence and facts that they DID! But, I’m not going to rehash old news. Grow a pair and do some actual research. Although I know you have, but you choose to ignore that which doesn’t fit your BDS arguments.
BostonSluggo
What response then? Do nothing? we needed to take actio. Gitmo was necessary becuase of the nature and legal status of the detainees. They were illegal combatants and from countries and movements that do not recognize or even attept to adher to any convesntions of the civilized world. They’re lucky they wern’t given two in the hat; what treatment do you thinks our folks have gotten by AlQuaeda. I am not saying that the detainees should not have been treated humanely; Neeley should pay for the crimes he committed or observed and failed to report. I call cow’s husband on the whole thing.
BostonSluggo
I need a spell check…
Neely: look, if you have a problem with you conscience…go see a priest….
Thomas Folan
From Today’s Washington POST:
Detainees ‘Return To The Fight’
As Many As 60 Released From Guantanamo Suspected Of New Terrorism
(Washington Post, February 23, 2009, Pg. 11)
How many other Guantanamo Bay detainees have committed terrorist acts after being released? According to Pentagon officials, the number could be as high as 60. The Defense Intelligence Agency concluded in January that 17 former Guantanamo inmates, in addition to Abdallah Saleh al-Ajmi, have “returned to the fight,” and it suspects, but does not have conclusive proof, that 43 others have as well.
C.J. : KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
Sincerely, Thomas Patrick Folan,
Former Seaman, U.S. Naval Reserve
Chad
I would have to say that describing that guy as having a Samoan size neck is pretty insulting to a Samoan.
flyonthewall
I confess. I’m ignorant of the pre-war facts in Iraq. If “history” is written by the victors, how many civilians murdered by Hussein’s regime didn’t get to be contributing authors?
The American Warrior
Comments deleted for profanity. – CJ
The American Warrior
Well at least you read them CJ.
Hope
Just the fact that he waited so long to report abuses, invalidates his story. In the military (I am certain) as well as in the public sector, when one is involved with the care of individuals, they automatically become “mandated reporters”. Meaning, when you take the job this is stated in a crystal clear manner, that if you do not report abuses as they happen, so that corrective measures can be implemented, you are as guilty as the person that you are covering up for. It is automatically assumed that if you did not report promptly, you have complied with what ever occurred.
This guy who is trying to clear his conscience now, failed in his duties at the time, if only by not reporting what he allegedly saw and engaged in. Sure, it takes guts to stand up. But clearly, he lacked courage at the time, and lacks courage now, by not clearing his conscience in a more appropriate setting and via more appropriate means.
I have been in a lot of situations when I was frightened by a person who was clearly unpredictable (read floridly psychotic, hallucinating and expressing homicidal ideations) but at no time do you break protocol. At no time do you allow abuses to occur, or engage in them. This includes situations when someone needs to be restrained or escorted.
Brandon should take his guilty conscience to a psychologist.
Thanks Brandon, for contributing and supporting the maligning of the best that our nation has to offer, our armed forces, I suspect for your own personal profit.
Karl Baxter
I watched Brandon’s interview and really never heard anything that disturbing! He should let a terrorist give his interview about cutting off heads or burning bodies of civilian Iraqis or American soldiers. Now that is disturbing! For some reason he needs to wake up! He needs to think who’s prison he would rather be in ours or the Terrorist’s! It would not take me long to decide!
1st cav
I agree with the ffact that this man is a coward. If he truly had problems with the things he was doing and had a problem with the things his fellow soliders were doing then why come forward now. Why use this as a way to gain a little fame…there is a support system in the Military for those reasons If you truly have a problem with what is going on then use your chain of command…if you can’t get it done at a low level there is always a way to move up the chain till you find someone who will get something done. Instead with the closure of Gitmo and all the media Hype he started telling this story.
GeorgeF_Kennan
Critical Facts has it right.
Because of the courage of Brandon Neely, other guards are stepping forward, proving that the Auschwitz excuse of “just following orders” won’t wash anymore.
It is a fantastic lie to say, as Dick Cheney did on the Rush (“pack o’ lies”) Limbaugh show, that what remains in Guantanamo is the “worst of the worst.” The fact is that innocent teenagers, vindictively framed people, and common cab drivers have been thrown into a pit with our government denying the very mechanism that can sort out the guilty from the innocent.
Any true American patriot (not a “Deer Hunting with Jesus” sucker) owes Mr. Neely a debt of gratitude.
Tom Folan
THE REAL GITMO 100% HUMANE
HAVING just re turned from leading a con gressional delegation to the terrorist-detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, I am more convinced than ever that President Obama’s executive order to close Gitmo by next Jan. 22 is wrong and misguided and, if fully implemented, will threaten American security at home and abroad.
To be fair, the president deserves much credit for a series of key decisions he has made in the war against terrorism: 1) launching predator missiles against Taliban and al Qaeda locations in the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater; 2) detaining, without trial, enemy combatants captured and imprisoned overseas, and 3) invoking the “state secrets” privilege to block a lawsuit on CIA renditions (the practice of allowing other nations to interrogate non-US citizen terror detainees).
Unfortunately, his Gitmo decision undercuts these positive actions.
It has become an article of faith among the MoveOn.org crowd and the Democratic Party’s liberal base to denounce Guantanamo as a symbol of inhumane treatment and torture. (Indeed, in his address to Congress on Tuesday, the president announced the closing of Guantanamo in the same paragraph in which he said “that is why I can stand here tonight and say . . . the United States of America does not torture.”)
Yet that symbolism doesn’t square with the real Gitmo.
Detainees at Guantanamo are treated far better than most American prisoners in the US jails and prisons I’ve inspected over the years. The unfounded accusations that are so regularly and cavalierly made about Guantanamo are a slander against the brave men and women of our armed forces, who perform their duties at that facility so professionally and under such duress.
If there’s any scandal at Guantanamo, it is that the detainees are treated too well. Consider what I observed:
* Detainees get three full meals a day with a choice of menu.
* Each detainee receives a Koran and a prayer rug.
* Arrows throughout the facility point toward Mecca.
* Detainees receive full medical treatment – including psychiatric services. There is one medical personnel for every two detainees.
* Detainees who comply with regulations are allowed out of their cells for 16 to 20 hours a day and participate in various recreational and educational activities including soccer, language training and art classes.
* Noncompliant detainees – including the hardest of the hard core – are allowed out of their cells for four to seven hours a day. (It was particularly galling to observe a vicious terrorist reclining in the sun like a Palm Beach retiree.)
* Detainees have access to live TV, books and two daily Arab newspapers plus USA Today. (I suppose it would be inhumane to subject them to The New York Times.)
* Detainees are allowed to confer to discuss courtroom strategy.
* Guards within the facility are not armed and are regularly subjected to abuse and harassment, including having human feces and urine thrown at them.
These are not just my conclusions. The Defense Department has just finished its review of Guantanamo as ordered by President Obama and determined that conditions comply with the Geneva Conventions: “No prohibited acts were found and conditions are humane.”
We are at war with Islamic terrorism. Gitmo is a major front in that war. Closing Guantanamo could well mean releasing deadly Islamic terrorists overseas or bringing them to American soil. It would be craven surrender to left-wing groups and uninformed, self-righteous world opinion. We must do all we can to convince President Obama to reverse his decision.
Rep. Pete King (R-LI) is the ranking member on the House Homeland Security Committee.
LE GUERRE
WHERE’S THE EDUCATION IN YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS FELLOW BLOGGERS? ANYONE GOT A MEMORY?
Now that Pres. Obama is doing something with GITMO the media is all of a sudden wanting to finally listen to these Iraq war VETS.It took more time than this for us of the Vietnam generation to get heard.Makes the NAM VETS cowards who spoke up about the Mylai massacre according to your rational.
How many tours did you serve? Anyone serving less than 3 tours has no right to speak out(the only way to brand someone a coward or an idiot is to be faced with the same decisions and act differently-most of you all served less than 3 tours so how can you judge Neely.)Unless of course you are saying that he has no freedom of speech and you do?
Their are idiots in this blog who have stated that that he should have spoken out. Has anyone ever heard of insubordination and a place called Leavenworth?What type of soldier would you apparently make?
Lastly, who thinks that you get to an age and the army can’t touch you is a fool. When war comes Uncle Sam can do anything he wants because- HE CAN. He can also make you do ANYTHING he wants.
CJ
Le Guerre, not sure which cave in Afghanistan you’ve been hiding, but the media has given plenty of press to those Soldiers and civilians who have spoken out. This has NOTHING to do with closing GITMO but is, in fact, part of what led to that decision.
As for your assertion of anyone serving less than 3 tours has no right to speak out, you are gravely mistaken, sir. You’re saying that those Soldiers who are no longer deployable due to injuries sustained during their first and only deployment aren’t worth anything. I can guarantee you that anyone who has served ONE tour has served one more tour than 99% of this country!! Don’t come in here trying to set arbitrary limits to what opinions are valid. It’s a quick ticket to non grata land.
Neely is a coward. He lacked the intestinal fortitude to speak up against fellow troops committing war crimes and instead participated in them. Now that he is free of the military noose, he speaks up! Coward! He absolutely has a freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom of consequences. That’s no different than saying, “I killed my neighbor” and not being expected to be punished for it. That’s no different than shouting “FIRE!” in a crowded theater and not being punished for it. It’s an ignorant argument.
I have no idea what the hell your second to last paragraph even means, so I can’t comment on that. As for the last paragraph, wrong. Uncle Sam cannot FORCE me to commit war crimes. It’s a personal decision.
SSgtJ
As someone who DID speak out and testify in an actual court martial while still in theater, I find your comments insulting. Unlike your friends who want to tarnish the reputation of all veterans, I chose to name names to put the blame on the actual CRIMINALS.
You say “Their are idiots in this blog who have stated that that he should have spoken out” Well this “IDIOT” says YES HE SHOULD HAVE SPOKEN OUT! This veteran HAS already walked the walk …
LE GUERRE
SSgtJ,
You are totally correct when correcting me on my “Their are idiots …..” Upon rereading my comments I see that I copy and pasted the wrong sentence and eliminated the right one. If you feel that my error was tarnishing yours or any vets service I have the highest regard respect and thanks to every vet,guard, and family of. I screwed up my point of regarding insubordination.
My reference was to those who commented upon someones right to speak out and how he should be viewed for his freedom of speech. I’ll proofread myself next time.
SSgtJ
Are you saying that he was afraid to report a crime? I believe that failure to report a crime is another crime according to the UCMJ. I don’t think insubordination has anything to do with it.
As far as freedom of speech … CJ has it right. Freedom of speech comes with responsibilty. If he (Neely) is going to tarnish all veterans instead of naming the names of the FEW who actually commit crimes, then I say he is a coward, a fraud and A MORON.
Thomas Folan
The facts on Gitmo:
This was written in the Weekly Standard:
Second Thoughts
The ‘most transparent administration in history’ buries a Gitmo report.
by Stephen F. Hayes & Thomas Joscelyn
03/16/2009, Volume 014, Issue 25
At 12:01 P.M. on January 20, 2009, minutes before Barack Obama was sworn in as president, the first post went up on the Obama White House website. It included a reiteration of a campaign promise Obama repeatedly made: “President Obama has committed to making his administration the most open and transparent in history.”
Two days later, Obama ordered the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay closed. And two days after that, on January 24, Newsweek’s Michael Isikoff wrote about a Pentagon study that will provide an early test of this promise: “The report, which could be released within the next few days, will provide fresh details about 62 detainees who have been released from Guantánamo and are believed by U.S. intelligence officials to have returned to terrorist activities.”
The report was not, in fact, released within the next few days. On February 2, Commander Jeffrey Gordon, the Pentagon spokesman who handles inquiries about Guantánamo, told us that the report would likely be released later that day. We were told to consult the website–defenselink.mil–that afternoon. No report. When we asked where it was, Commander Gordon wrote:
“Nothing today, please check back with me in a couple days.” We did. No report.
This pattern has repeated itself for a month. So what explains this failure to produce the report?
According to Gordon:
there may be a misunderstanding between when the updated threat analysis was delivered from DIA and the completion of an interagency review process prior to public release.
Right. So a report that was to have been released on February 2 was suddenly and inexplicably withheld.
The most transparent administration in history apparently realized that releasing a report about the recidivism of Guantánamo detainees could only complicate its effort to shut down the facility. The approximately 247 detainees still held there are the worst of the terrorists captured by the United States since 9/11. Those thought to have been low-risk releases have already been let go. And many of them turned out not to have been low-risk at all. Saudi Arabia recently published a list of its 85 most wanted terrorists; 11 of them had been detained at Guantánamo Bay.
Said Ali al-Shihri, who disappeared from his home in Saudi Arabia after spending months in a Saudi jihad rehabilitation program, recently showed up in a video posted on a jihadist website. He is now the deputy leader of al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch, which bombed the American embassy in Sana’a in September 2008. That attack killed 13 civilians, as well as six terrorists.
Mohammed Naim Farouq was released from Gitmo in July 2003. In 2006, the Defense Intelligence Agency listed him as one of the 20 most wanted terrorists operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Abdullah Saleh al Ajmi, a Kuwaiti, was detained at Gitmo, released, and then blew himself up in Mosul, Iraq, in March 2008. The attack killed 13 Iraqi soldiers and wounded dozens more.
Ibrahim Bin Shakaran and Mohammed Bin Ahmad Mizouz were both transferred from Guantánamo to Morocco in July 2004. In September 2007, they were convicted of being recruiters for Al Qaeda in Iraq.
These are detainees that the U.S. government determined were good candidates for release.
The ones who remain in Guantánamo are not. “In some cases, we do know that they’ll return to the battlefield because they’ve told us they will,” says Juan Zarate, counterterrorism czar in the Bush White House.
The question for the new president and his advisers is what is an acceptable level of risk. “They may say ‘These guys are dangerous but it’s better than keeping them,’ ” says Zarate. But “the government needs to be very clear and honest about who these guys are and take any such step to release them with our eyes wide open.”
Being clear and honest means sharing with Congress and the American public as much information as possible. Democratic senator Joseph Lieberman is calling for the report’s release: “We know that a number of detainees who have been released have returned to the battlefield to attack Americans and American interests abroad. The American people need to know what is in the report so that Congress can make an informed decision on what to do with the detainees currently held at Guantánamo and with combatants captured in the future in the war on terror.”
Thomas Patrick Folan
C.J. ,One last thing about GITMO:
I think Ralph Peters sums it all up:
LISTEN TO THE GITMO FIVE
WASHINGTON WONKS IN DENIAL KSM: TELLING US EXACTLY WHAT HE BELIEVES.
by Ralph Peters
AS White House staffer Jane Austen put it to Sen. Darcy: “It is a truth univer sally acknowledged that a single terrorist in possession of a good bomb must be in want of patient understanding.”
Unfortunately for Washington wonks determined to deny that Islamist extremists are motivated by extremist Islam, the pride and prejudice of Allah’s butchers were on public display (again) this week.
Framed in florid quotations from the Koran, the Gitmo Five – hard-core terrorists, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed – proclaimed in a filing released by a brave military judge that “We are terrorists to the bone” who regard the charges resulting from “the blessed 11 September operations” as “badges of honor.”
Desperate to placate its blame-America supporters, the Obama administration has clamped down on news from Guantanamo. Why? After their lurid criticisms of Gitmo, the Dems now have the world’s worst killers on their hands.
And they don’t know what to do. Responsibility sucks.
At the core of our inability to cope with Islamist terrorists lies Washington’s denial that fanatical Islam is even a factor. Yet refusing to accept that Islam Gone Wild is behind the actions of al Qaeda or the Taliban is akin to insisting that sex has nothing to do with making babies.
Other factors may intensify or accelerate a terrorist’s will to slaughter the innocent. But the dark heart of the matter is that these men believe they’re on a mission from their god to punish the godless (including fellow Muslims who don’t measure up).
Yet, no matter how fiercely our enemies declare that their faith compels them to kill, our elected and appointed officials continue to insist that the terrorists don’t understand themselves – that they’re really driven by economic factors or our own foreign-policy missteps, that their savage interpretation of Islam is only a ploy . . .
Shouldn’t we pay just a little attention to what our enemies say about themselves?
Radical Islam isn’t just a smokescreen. Jihad is real. And it ain’t about who got the Coca-Cola franchise in Khartoum.
As I seethe through DC meetings (always careful to wash thoroughly afterward), I’m continually disheartened by the contortions of “experts” determined to prove that enemies who regard death as a promotion aren’t really devout, that they just need hugs and massive amounts of aid.
A few weeks back, I spoke to a roomful of senior military officers. In response to my suggestion that we should listen to what terrorists are only too glad to tell us, a foreign “counterinsurgency expert” insisted that religion simply isn’t a factor.
To buttress his claim, he cited the survey every Muslims-R-Us analyst trots out: In questioning 138,000 prisoners who passed through US hands in Iraq, barely 10 percent claimed to be motivated by Islam, while 60 percent of the violent actors said they did it for money. (The rest were just in a bad mood.)
Even if every Iraqi told the complete truth, that misses the point. This isn’t about quantity, but the quality of commitment. Terrorist movements never field a majority or even a significant minority of a population. At most, a few hundred fanatics were behind 9/11.
Anyway, who paid the did-it-for-cash bunch? The religious fanatics.
Even in ethnic struggles, such as those in the Balkans in the 1990s, the violence begins with less than 1 percent of the population armed and determined. The ranks of the violent swell for various reasons, but it’s the hard-core believers in the supremacy of their blood or faith who instigate the destruction of troubled societies.
To counter that carpetbagger’s statistics, I pointed out that a sampling of 138,000 German POWs in 1945 would have shown that fewer than 5 percent were unrepentant believers in Nazi ideology. But subtract Nazism from the German political equation, and there would’ve been no World War II in Europe. True believers shatter worlds.
As for the argument that not every terrorist lived in a state of perfect religious purity before jumping into jihad, that utterly misses the point: A society’s prevailing sense of right and wrong is shaped by centuries of religious culture. American atheists conform to behavioral values ingrained in us all by thousands of years of Judeo-Christian authority.
In the Greater Middle East, even lackadaisical Muslims have been molded by the legacy of 13 centuries of Islam. Thus Mom thinks it a splendid thing that her son strapped on a bomb and became a martyr by murdering 40 innocents in a market.
Her culture admires that “sacrifice.” Ours doesn’t.
Listen to the Gitmo Five. Unlike our Washington pols, they have intellectual integrity. They’re telling us honestly who they are and why they seek to kill us.
Our response? “They don’t know what they’re talking about.”
Thomas Patrick Folan
Taliban Lieutenant Is Former Detainee
[Washington Times, March 11, 2009, Pg. 2]
U.S. officials said the Taliban’s new top operations officer in southern Afghanistan is a former Guantanamo detainee. Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul was among 13 prisoners released to the Afghan government in 2007.
Thomas Patrick Folan
C.J. One more thing About GITMO:
Thoght readers would be interested in this:
Obama Administration to Release Bin Laden Associate from Gitmo
The U.S. Justice Department has decided to release another detainee from Guantanamo, a Yemeni named Ayman Saeed Abdullah Batarfi. It is not entirely clear why Batarfi has been cleared for release. But we can be reasonably sure, based on Batarfi’s own freely given testimony, that he was no innocent swept up in the post-9/11 chaos of Afghanistan, as his lawyers claim.
Batarfi first traveled to Afghanistan in 1988 to fight the Soviets. The government claims he was trained at the Khalden camp, which graduated hundreds of al Qaeda members, but Batarfi denies this. Batarfi has admitted to participating in at least one nighttime raid against Soviet forces. This is important because it shows that he was willing to participate in hostilities from a young age–and was not merely a humanitarian adventure seeker in Afghanistan.
Batarfi then went to Pakistan, where he became an orthopedic surgeon. From there, things get really interesting.
There are at least three aspects of Batarfi’s testimony given before his administrative review board hearings at Gitmo that are noteworthy. Keep in mind that these hearings were not interrogations, and the detainees had the option of not participating, or simply issuing blanket denials, as some detainees did.
First, Batarfi admitted that he was an employee of al Wafa, a charity that has been designated a terrorist organization. Al Wafa is discussed in brief in the 9/11 Commission’s report as an al Qaeda front. The unclassified documents released from Guantanamo are littered with references to the organization. It is clear that al Wafa actively supported al Qaeda and the Taliban in a variety of ways–from transporting jihadists to Afghanistan (often through Iran) to purchasing sophisticated weaponry. Al Wafa was not a real charity–it was a terrorist front group, and Batarfi admitted to working for the group for several months in 2001. He says he left the organization after it was designated as a terror-supporter, but this was most likely just Batarfi’s way of trying to explain away his al Wafa ties. As we will see below, he was at Tora Bora when the designation on al Wafa came down.
Second, Batarfi admitted that he met with a “Malaysian microbiologist†and authorized the purchase of medical equipment for this individual. As I have written previously, this microbiologist is most certainly Yazid Sufaat. Batarfi denies knowing that Sufaat was working on anthrax when they met in 2001. Over and over again, Batarfi claimed that he just happened to run into and consort with terrorists without knowing who they were.
Third, the best example of this last point is Batarfi’s admitted ties to Osama bin Laden. Batarfi admitted that he met with bin Laden in the Tora Bora Mountains in November 2001. But he claimed that he sent a letter to someone (he does not say whom) asking to meet with the “head of the mountain†and, somewhat magically, he just happened to get a face-to-face sit down with the world’s most wanted terrorist…at Tora Bora…in November of 2001…you know, when the whole world was looking for him. This was the second time Batarfi claims to have accidentally met bin Laden. The first time came at a funeral in Kabul when, again, bin Laden just happened upon the scene.
Batarfi and his attorneys have apparently been able to sell this story to the DOJ. On its face, it does not make any sense. And there is much more to Batarfi’s story and the unclassified files on him. He admitted he purchased cyanide, but claims it was for dental fillings. He admitted he stayed at various al Qaeda and Taliban guesthouses, but says he didn’t realize they were facilities associated with Osama bin Laden at the time. Batarfi met the Taliban’s health minister in 2001 because, well, that’s just the sort of thing an al Wafa employee would do.
Remember, all of the above comes from his hearings at Guantanamo, not his interrogations. He could have just said, “I deny everything.†But he didn’t. He came up with not-so creative excuses instead. (For an analysis of excerpts from his hearings, go here.)
Batarfi has been cleared for release even though the Obama administration is not sure where to send him. They are still looking for a host country. This is eerily similar to the president’s ordering Guantanamo shuttered by January of 2010 before his administration had even reviewed any of the detainees’ files. That is, the president and his staff were not even sure who is down at Guantanamo when the president ordered the facility closed.
Batarfi’s case was reportedly reviewed by a DOJ board that is going through all of those files. I think it is safe to say the board is off to an inauspicious start.
Posted by Thomas Joscelyn on March 31, 2009
brandon neely
what the hell, this guy is ruining my good name!!
brandon neely
now that i actually read everything on here, it just sounds like a bunch of holier than thou idiots on here talking, the only credible person on here is rachael maddow. Opinions are like assholes, and this blog is filled with both!
brandon neely
most the stuff i read about on here i like a lot, but not this. not so much the article and exerpt, but the opinions. I hate hearing opinions on government stuff. no one knows.
Charles
Remarkable how a simple act of conscience and compassion can become so vilified.
Dignity?
Honour?
Courage?
Where are these without conscience and compassion?
Brandon Neely is a brave man. His courage reaches even beyond the bravery of the soldier. His is the bravery of the righteous and caring man; indeed a lonely, lonely road. Even brave brothers at arms turn their back; they cannot go there. It is too far.
CJ
Wow, the UK is representing now! Neely is a “brave man” for waiting until he got out of uniform to report supposed abuses? What’s brave about that? Where was he when this was going on (if it was going on)? Real bravery is standing up when the odds are against you, not this drivel. Neely is a moron.
Michael North
Brandon has done a lot more for the long-term good of humanity than the immature, binary debate on here.
Humanity, true humanity, transcends politics and religion. Brandon you’re courageous and it doesn’t matter that it’s long after the event. Plenty of your peers will never even dare face up to the wretched position you were put in by the Bush administration.
CJ
Okay, Michael, please explain what “good of humanity” Brandon has done. This I have to hear.
For everyone else, Michael is from the UK, so I expect this sort of thought process.
Michael North
Hey CJ,
Thanks for letting me reply to this.
It’s progressive, isn’t it?
In World War II, there were plenty of German SS exterminating Jews and probably felt what they were doing (by way of an executive order) was probably wrong.
But it’s only through reflecting over time that your conscience either detects that or it doesn’t. When it does, you can either stay silent and live with it, or have the courage to speak out. Speaking out goes some way to ensuring that history doesn’t make the same mistakes again.
Brandon is garnering attention in the UK right now because he came here to speak to two former prisoners about his actions in Gitmo. (Have a look at Newsnight). What was more interesting than his apology, was seeing how it was accepted by the two former prisoners.
Most radical Muslims in the UK at the moment are angry and still misdirecting their anger at the West. The discourse between Brandon and these prisoners was the first time I’ve ever seen genuine dialogue and mutual respect between two faiths.
I can assure you that it discourses like this probably bring us closer towards peace, than waging anymore wars will.
Cheers, Mike
PS – Respect your right to disagree. It’s your blog after all!
wordsmith from nantucket
I watched the Newsnight segment. Maybe I missed it, but was there any mention of Brandon Neely’s association to IVAW?
JM
This ‘debate’ is pure comedy!
Idea
You are insane !!! That man is a hero – do you know anything about torturing?
Come on man – think once again and rewrite!
CJ
Do you?
Brandon Fan Club
Brandon Neely is a hero! A man taking responsability for his actions, while our elected officials will not.
Guantanamo Bay: Jailer and jailed remember camp opening
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8451797.stm
Marcus
Brandon Neely is not a hero. A hero would have come forward immediately when the crimes took place. He would have taken punishment from the Army for his crimes instead of hiding until the Army couldn’t touch him. He is a coward, a criminal, and quite frankly, a little bitch. We havea term for guys like him in the military. Blue Falcons. Not to be trusted under any circumstance.
Michael North
Marcus. I can guarantee that even if Brandon had spoken out at the height of Gitmo in 03-05, your opinion of him would be exactly the same.
Marcus
The only guarantee you can make is that you have no clue of my opinion of Brandon Neely.
The facts are that he didn’t. Your little what if game is really of no use, but I’ll play along and pretend that Brandon Neely came forward with all his information right when it happened. I still don’t believe that Gitmo detainees have been “abused” like Brandon Neely claims. But that isn’t the debate so let’s continue your little what if game.
Coming forward after the “crimes” wouldn’t make him a coward, he would have been brave to stand up for those that he himself had done wrong against and those around him as well. He wouldn’t be a little bitch for hiding from the Army until they can’t punish him. He’d still be a criminal, though, and he could hold his head high in the brig knowing he did the right thing instead of what he really did. The complete wrong thing.
CJ
Michael, I can tell you that my opinion would have been vastly different! Why? Because when I saw abuses of detainees in Fallujah, I didn’t sit on my ass and take part in it. I reported the Soldiers involved. It took guts being in a combat zone where the people you’re reporting are armed, but that’s what Personal Courage is. Brandon doesn’t understand that and neither do the people that support his cowardly stance.
Stephanie
I think your a moron. I think Brandon had a lot of courage to admit what he did and witnessed was wrong.
Marcus
Courge would have been to report it when witnessed and not take part. Cowards wait years and participate.
CJ
Where was that courage when it was happening? Brandon had the power to STOP the abuse from happening, but said nothing! Heroism is defined as a “courageous action.” Please tell me what is courageous about keeping your lips shut WHEN the abuse is taking place and waiting until he gets out of the Army to suddenly feel okay to bring it up. Stephanie, if Brandon is a person you look to for an example of courage, you’ll never see true courage!
Pingback: Brandon Neely is STILL a Moron | A Soldier's Perspective
Tabitha Morel
Just dropped into this wonderful farce of a ‘debate’ when I Googled Brandon Neely’s name having seen him in the BBC programme.
I only really have one question, for all of you, from CJ to Michael et all. That is why do you feel the need to publish your opinions? They are neither intelligent, articulate, balanced or even interesting. And even if they were, the same truth would exsist…that being that they are totally and utterly irrelevant.
Ta ta,
Tabitha
CJ
Tabitha, did you have a point? You didn’t anything here except you don’t think people should be free to express their opinion. What is irrelevant here is you non-comment.
Tabitha Morel
CJ, it’s not what I said but actually in truth, I don’t think people should freely express their opinions, not publically in any case. Not only can it be extremely and unnecassarily inflammatory but it really doesn’t serve any purpose to simply bellow your opinions on everything that takes your fancy, unless you are truly interested in another person’s perception of the same issue and you can understand and respect their right to have an opinion that differs from your own. A difference of opinion which, when considered, you may or may not be swayed by or which you may or may not try to change towards your own with the use of intelligent argument rather than insults. And I’ve seen little evidence of anything other then everyone’s bombastic repetition of their original viewpoint(pro and anti Brandon and all he does or doesn’t stand for)on this page. So if you’re not going to listen to what another person is trying to say and they’re not going to listen to you, talking to each other like this is all really rather pointless isn’t it and therefore utterly irrelevant?
CJ
Well, then stay there in the UK where you all are moving towards that Socialist agenda and I’ll stay here in America where I’m free to be public with my speech. The bottom line is that you’re in my house now, so I’ll pretty much say whatever I want and regardless of where you live, you’re free to read it…or not.
Tabitha Morel
As I said CJ, pointless and irrelevant…you’re the perfect example of my point.
CJ
And your continued response tells me quite the opposite. If it’s so “pointless and irrelevant” surely you’d stop wasting your time. I appreciate the attention though. It gives me motivation that my opinions are needed out there after all!
Tabitha Morel
Touche. But you see, now you’re engaging with me and my argument instead of repeating dogma and that’s always more interesting.
CJ
Why keep saying the same thing about the moron that is Brandon Neely over and over. I think our case has been made that he’s a coward and has done more for the Al Qaeda publicity machine than Osama Bin Laden has been able to accomplish in years!
Tabitha Morel
It’s a very good question you’re asking and I presume you’re asking it of yourself rather than me but what I wanted to ask you now that we’re talking, is why do you say Neely is a Moron and a Coward, exactly? Do you really believe unreservedly that a courageous person has to act instantly to classed as such or can someone, with time, realise he was part of something that was wrong and try to atone for it later in his life, despite the vilification that may come his way.For example have you ever been part of something or done or said something you felt you should not have done and regretted it, even if that was only privately and then wanted to do something to right whatever wrong it was you felt had passed?
And why do you say he’s a Moron, which I must admit was an eye-catching headline but one which I’m struggling to balance with the ascertain that he’s also a Coward. Surely a Coward knows what’s happening but is unwillingly to do something about the situation but a Moron wouldn’t know the difference between torture or a tea party?
These are genuine questions and not necessarily related to Neely, who I really don’t know enough about to have a true opinion of. As I said, I saw the BBC programme and was impressed by one or two parts of it but on the whole I doubt very much is was as accurate or as carthitic as it promised to be.
CJ
I’ve already answered your questions in my blogs. No need to rehash.
Tabitha Morel
Gotta hit the sack CJ but thanks, I’ve enjoyed this debate and if I’m perfectly honest I can see there may be some relevance to all this self blogging after all (shock horror). And at least you’ve had the balls to publish our comments without censoring them and then to respond to them which is a darn site more than you an say for the mainstream press.
All the best for 2010.
wordsmith from nantucket
I just listened to some of his testimony.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zx1UdhKh3g
So…..where’s the torture? I don’t get his personal testimony given. It amounts to nothing.
Love how he concludes that as he “read more” (Daily Kos? Moveon.org? MSNBC?), he turned against the war and the real terrorists are George Bush and Dick Cheney.
Tax Payer Patriot
CJ, get a [expletive deleted] job, you welfare [expletive deleted]. The US [expletive deleted] military is where dumb [expletive deleted] go who can’t find honest work you section 8 [expletive deleted]tard. Take you and your parasite kids leave America since you [expletive deleted] hate patriots like Neely who finally got himself a real job you [expletive deleted] thief.
Marcus
Leave it to someone from LA California to come a leave a pile of turds. Thanks for visiting and we hope to see you again soon!
Nick
Brandon you are the best of America and good luck to you.you have not let your great country down in it’s noble fight against the ruthless terrorists who are trying destroy our lives and our system.That does not mean that a country like yours couldn’t make mistakes and if they do then then US must be courageous enough to admit it,then they will have the respect of all countries.
CJ
Yes you did Brandon. You let your country down when you turned a blind eye to torture you say you witnessed and said nothing about.
John Mclaren
Hey- nice way to continue the scapegoating of the lowest rank people for what was policy coming down from the Bush administration. Great way to support troops. Command always give themselves plausible denial. Maybe some guys on the ground don’t even realize they are doing what’s expected. McCrystal knew what was happening in Abu Graib. Men testified he was there and several similar places in Iraq. Abu Graib was not the only one, plus we had secret little prisons in several countries- probably even Syria. It was bizarre. So call the guy a moron. Just listen to his testimony and realize he was a small pawn in much larger picture that does not end with him. Gitmo was the cleaner image for public consumption. How many Gitmo prisoners were transferred out to some other prison never to return?
CJ
John, you just wasted a lot of breath and keystrokes here. You said nothing. You provided nothing we didn’t already know, including the usual Bush bashing. Congratulations for adding to the discussion! NOT. A few questions:
How do you know McCrystal knew what was happening in Abu Ghraib?
How do you know we had secret prisons in Syria?
Where are these other “Abu Ghraib”-type atrocities you speak of?
You present nothing but empty rhetoric and conspiracy theory. I was in Iraq during the Abu Ghraib timeframe and ran a detention facility, so I can say with assurity that you are also a moron.
Will
To CJ and all who get this far…
I have read the whole blog and watched the footage and have found it most intriguing. Though I have to say my knowledge of the events that have occurred here is limited i don’t even wish to express any particular opinion on any moral stance, Instead I am seeking them. One thing still remains today… Guantanamo!
I know sometime has past now since the last comment and am even debating wether or not this will get any response…. But here it goes, does anyone out there have any ideas of what to do with the place if (and hopefully more a case of when) Gitmo decommissioned?