Bush, Obama, Rumsfeld Mind Control, Satanic Ritual Abuse Accounts Will Make You Sick To Your Stomach

(Before It's News)

A federal appeals court this week dismissed a civil lawsuit brought by six men formerly held at Guantánamo Bay who were wrongly detained and abused there. The suit, one of the last remaining Guantánamo damages suits, was brought against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other military officials for torture, religious abuse and other mistreatment of plaintiffs, some of which clearly meet criteria of mind control and  ritual abuse.

Such ritual abuse, somtimes torturing to death, is a hallmark of dictators and rogue nations. Ritual abuse is a.k.a. Cult Related Abuse, Ritual Abuse, Ritualized Abuse, Sadistic Ritual Abuse, Organized Sadistic Abuse, etc. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/sra.htm)

Mind control and ritual abuse are typically used against targeted individuals, including innocent detainees captured as prisoners of war by the American military, according to its definition. 

In dismissing their claims, the D.C. Circuit stated that the torture and religious humiliation these men endured—even after being cleared for release by the military—were incidental to the “need to maintain an orderly detention environment,” “appear[ed] to be standard for all” U.S. military detainees in Guantanamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and “was certainly foreseeable [by the government] because maintaining peace, security, and safety at a place like Guantanamo Bay is a stern and difficult business.”

“It is deeply disturbing and disappointing that the court has refused to hold those in the military command responsible for the abuse and prolonged detention of individuals who were determined not to be enemy combatants. Torture and religious humiliation are unacceptable wherever they occur,” said Russell P. Cohen of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, who argued the case. “When it is directed at individuals known not to be our enemies, it defies comprehension. This decision regrettably leaves these plaintiffs with nothing for their abuse.” 

In a number of previous cases, the D.C. Circuit ruled that immunity doctrines apply to shield actions of government officials who abused Guantánamo detainees while supposedly suspected of being enemy combatants. The Supreme Court has thus far declined to hear appeals from those holdings. Unlike prior cases, three of the plaintiffs in this case were abused even after they were found to not be enemy combatants. In fact, the government negotiated with allies to resettle some of the men as refugees, even while continuing to abuse them in detention.

“If the court is correct that torture and religious humiliation are par for the course for detainees in the custody of our armed forces, that is an indictment of the way the United States treats its military detainees,” said Shayana Kadidal, counsel for CCR in the case and Senior Managing Attorney of the Guantanamo project at CCR.

Plaintiffs are considering their options for further appeal, including to the Supreme Court, which has refused to hear and decide a Guantánamo case since 2008.

One Uzbek plaintiff, Zakirjan Hasam, was subject to all the worst abuses inflicted on Guantánamo detainees after found by a military (CSRT) panel to not be an “enemy combatant”: he was placed in solitary confinement (against a military psychologist’s advice), subjected to sleep deprivation, prevented from praying, forcibly shaved, and medicated against his will. When finally sent to Albania as a refugee, 23 months after the military panel’s ruling, he was sent shackled and bound to his seat. He continues to live in poverty there.

Another plaintiff, Sami Allaithi, could walk when brought to Guantánamo, but left in a wheelchair. He was routinely beaten. His Koran was desecrated, beard shaved, and religion mocked — all after he found to not be an “enemy combatant” by a military panel. Now with family in Egypt, he remains immobilized and in great pain.

The other plaintiffs are an Algerian doctor, taken from his pregnant wife and five children in Pakistan in 2002 and eventually sent to Albania as a refugee in 2006 (two years after his military panel found he was not an “enemy combatant”), and three Turkish men released before the military even provided CSRT panels to detainees.

CCR’s co-counsel on the case are Russell P. Cohen, Jason Cabot, Bob Rosenfeld, and Howard Ullmann of Orrick LLP’s San Francisco office. The case was argued by Mr. Cohen. For more information on this case, visit CCR’s case page.

 

 

The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.

For more information on ritual abuse, see Stop Mind Control And Ritual Abuse (S.M.A.R.T.)  newsletters. They are published to help stop secretive organizations and groups from abusing others and to help those who allege they have been abused by such organizations and groups. This newsletter is not a substitute for other ways of recovering from ritual abuse. Readers should use caution while reading this newsletter. If necessary, make sure other support systems are available during and after reading this newsletter. See S.M.A.R.T.

Published by Freewill