Leaky Gitmo

Long gone are the days when government whistle-blowers passed documents directly to journalists at the New York Times; now the honorable and/or disgruntled can simply navigate over to Wikileaks.org and anonymously post government documents to the site (the homepage features prominently a quote from Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the Pentagon Papers). Wired reports that a sensitive—though not classified—manual detailing "day-to-day procedures" at Guantánamo Bay, including "comfort items" for cooperative prisoners and how to deal with hunger strikes, was recently posted to the site. The 200-plus page document seems to have disappeared from the site (as of this writing, the entire site seems to have disappeared), though a quick Google search reveals that it has already made the inevitable jump onto various BitTorrrent trackers. From Wired's account:

A never-before-seen military manual detailing the day-to-day operations of the U.S. military's Guantánamo Bay detention facility has been leaked to the web, affording a rare inside glimpse into the institution where the United States has imprisoned hundreds of suspected terrorists since 2002. The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003. It is unclassified, but designated "For Official Use Only." It hit the web last Wednesday on Wikileaks.org.

The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003. It is unclassified, but designated "For Official Use Only." It hit the web last Wednesday on Wikileaks.org.

Nothing sensational in the document, but a few suggestive bits, according to an ACLU spokesman that combed the document:

"What strikes me is the level of detail for handling all kind of situations, from admission to barbers and burials," says Jamil Dakwar, advocacy director of the ACLU's Human Rights program. Dakwar was in Guantánamo last week for a military-commission hearing.

Dakwar sees hints of Abu Ghraib in a section instructing guards to use dogs to intimidate prisoners. He also raises concerns over a section on the International Committee of the Red Cross, or ICRC, which indicates that some prisoners were hidden from Red Cross representative.

Last year, Jacob Sullum wondered if there were any innocents among those held at Guantanamo.

Comments

Muhammad the Apostate | November 15, 2007, 2:48pm | #

yawn

ed | November 15, 2007, 2:49pm | #

A great way to spread disinformation as well.

Kolohe | November 15, 2007, 3:02pm | #

What strikes me is the level of detail for handling all kind of situations.

Gitmos guards don't take a dump without a plan, son.

Ethan Hunt | November 15, 2007, 3:11pm | #

How hard do you think it would be to get someone to leak a copy of the NOC list?

Kittridge | November 15, 2007, 3:22pm | #

If the NOC lists gets out in the open, all our agents in Eastern Europe will be compromised.

Elemenope | November 15, 2007, 3:30pm | #

Hold the fuck on...wikileaks is down? Perhaps it was slashdotted, but if not, that would be the bigger story, no? Does anyone know what's up with that?

Taktix® | November 15, 2007, 3:44pm | #

Hold the fuck on...wikileaks is down? Perhaps it was slashdotted, but if not, that would be the bigger story, no? Does anyone know what's up with that?

This kinda reminds me of the ONDCP employees who were deleting criticisms of their own agency on wikipedia.

Dammit Jim Wales, get on this one, man!

R C Dean | November 15, 2007, 4:31pm | #

The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003.

And we know its genuine, how? Because it was on teh intertubes?

Bob | November 15, 2007, 6:12pm | #

Does it have the section on Code Red?

Rick Barton | November 15, 2007, 8:30pm | #

(as of this writing, the entire site seems to have disappeared)

Is this being investigated? Is the government behind this?

He also raises concerns over a section on the International Committee of the Red Cross, or ICRC, which indicates that some prisoners were hidden from Red Cross representative.

WTF? We need an investigation so that anyone responsible for the abuse of detainees at Gitmo, regardless of how far up the chain of command, can be prosecuted and punished for their crimes.

Rimfax | November 16, 2007, 1:06am | #

"For Official Use Only" or "FOUO" is one of several markings considered "sensitive but not classified". It's the kind of thing that no one can get in any serious trouble for leaking, but it might be career-limiting for an officer.