

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
For Physicians for Human Rights: Samantha Kupferman, media@phr.org, Cell: 917-679-0110
For Center for Victims of Torture: Jenni Bowring, jbowring@cvt.org, Direct: 612-436-4886, Cell: 651-226-3858
This week, the Center for Victims of Torture (CVT) and Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) released a report detailing widespread medical deficiency at the Guantanamo Bay detention center. Following an in-depth review of publicly available information related to medical care at Guantanamo - both past and present - as well as consultations with independent medical experts and detainees' lawyers, CVT and PHR found pervasive shortcomings that belie U.S. officials' claims that care for detainees is equivalent to that afforded U.S. service members - or, as one former Guantanamo commander put it: "as good as or better than anything we would offer our own soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines."
The report, "Deprivation and Despair: The Crisis of Medical Care at Guantanamo," finds systemic and longstanding deficiencies in care, including the subordination of medical needs to security functions resulting in the denial of care, patient distrust of medical professionals due to a history of medical complicity in torture, patient neglect, rapid rotation of medical professionals in and out of Guantanamo causing discontinuity of care, and denial to detainees of access to their own medical records. In conjunction with the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture on June 26, the report provides evidence of significant defects in medical care at Guantanamo and reaffirms the call to permanently close the detention facility as a necessary step toward fully addressing the human rights issues illuminated in this latest review.
"The problems at Guantanamo cannot be resolved without structural, operational, and cultural reform," said Vincent Iacopino, MD, PhD, Physicians for Human Rights senior medical advisor. "As the detainees age under these conditions, the longstanding medical and psychological impacts of their torture continue to be compounded. Given the constraints of Guantanamo's medical operations and history of care, their increasingly urgent medical needs can't be dealt with safely or effectively."
The report outlines a systemic failure by medical professionals to gather and document information from detainees regarding torture and abuse suffered at CIA black site prisons, where some detainees were held captive for years following their apprehensions, as early as 2002. Prisoners at black sites were kept naked in pitch black cells with their wrists and ankles shackled to a ring on the wall while loud music blared 24 hours a day in cells that were infested with rats and insects. Detainees experienced multiple forms of interrogation tactics, including hooding, waterboarding, the use of stress positions, isolation, exploitation of phobias, and forced nudity and sexual humiliation. The absence of documented trauma histories in detainees' medical records has led to inaccurate diagnoses and improper treatment.
"Many of the men who remain at Guantanamo are torture survivors or victims of similarly significant trauma, and all of them are either suffering from or at high risk of the additional profound physical and psychological harm associated with prolonged indefinite detention," said Scott Roehm, director of the Center for Victims of Torture's Washington, D.C. office and lead author of the report. "This trauma history is at the root of several of the medical care deficiencies we identified, and it exacerbates all of them.
"The medical care situation at Guantanamo is not sustainable and should be expected to worsen if the status quo continues and as the detainee population ages. Of course, Guantanamo should be closed, but unless and until it is, the medical care deficiencies there must be acknowledged and addressed - by Congress, the courts, and the executive branch. The system itself is broken, and so systemic change is necessary."
PHR and CVT's report reinforces previous statements from former Guantanamo commanding officers that the detention center is unprepared to address the medical needs of an aging population, especially given current U.S. laws that prohibit transferring detainees to the United States for any reason. Forty men are still held at the detention center, 31 of whom have never been charged with a crime. Five detainees have long been cleared for transfer by consensus of the executive branch's national security apparatus, which determined that the men pose no meaningful threat to the United States.
The report details case studies of Guantanamo detainees, including Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi (aka Nashwan al-Tamir), who was captured in 2006, rendered to a CIA black site, then transferred to Guantanamo the following year. In 2018, al-Tamir collapsed in his cell from a degenerative spinal condition that was diagnosed in 2010 and previously disclosed to Guantanamo medical personnel. After multiple emergency surgeries conducted at Guantanamo by off-island medical professionals to avoid paralysis, al-Tamir's condition is still unresolved. The U.S. government has continued with his prosecution proceedings, requiring al-Tamir to attend court on a gurney, take powerful pain medication during legal proceedings, and sleep in the courtroom when the predictable effects of that medication set in.
Among other recommendations, CVT and PHR are calling for the U.S. executive branch to allow meaningful and regular access to Guantanamo by civilian medical experts, including permitting such experts to evaluate detainees in an appropriate setting, without the use of restraints and outside the presence of any other personnel, and to have timely access to all medical records, subject to detainees' consent. The report calls on Congress to create a new position of chief medical officer - who would be stationed at Guantanamo but report outside the Guantanamo chain of command and who would oversee the provision of medical care to detainees - and to establish a commission comprised of independent, senior medical experts to assess, report on, and provide additional recommendations with respect to the provision of medical care at Guantanamo.
"These are hardly radical proposals," Iacopino said. "They are basic steps toward bringing medical care at Guantanamo in line with accepted standards of care. Congress has an opportunity to take these steps right now, in the context of this year's defense authorization bill. Lawmakers should seize that opportunity."
Additional PHR resources on the U.S. government's use of torture at Guantanamo Bay detention center:
Additional CVT resources on the U.S. government's use of torture at the Guantanamo Bay detention center:
PHR was founded in 1986 on the idea that health professionals, with their specialized skills, ethical duties, and credible voices, are uniquely positioned to investigate the health consequences of human rights violations and work to stop them. PHR mobilizes health professionals to advance health, dignity, and justice and promotes the right to health for all.
"Sounds like Trump preparing himself an off-ramp and trying to dump the Hormuz mess on others," said one observer.
President Donald Trump on Friday continued to send contradictory messages on his plans for the US-Israeli assault on Iran, declaring that he is not interested in a ceasefire but is nevertheless considering "winding down" the three-week war, just two days after ordering thousands more troops to the Middle East
Trump wrote on his Truth Social network, "We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran."
Separately, the president told reporters Friday that he does not "want to do a ceasefire" in Iran.
This, after the president reportedly ordered 4,000 additional US troops deployed to the Mideast. On Friday, an unnamed US official told Axios that Trump is considering sending even more troops in order to secure the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and possibly occupy Kharg Island, home to a port from which around 90% of Iran's crude oil is exported.
Sound like Trump preparing himself an offramp and trying to dump the Hormuz mess on others. But as it is Trump, who knows and this could change in short order.
[image or embed]
— Brian Finucane (@bcfinucane.bsky.social) March 20, 2026 at 2:21 PM
Trump also said Friday that the Strait of Hormuz must be "guarded and policed" by other nations that use the vital waterway, through which around 20 million barrels of oil passed daily before the war.
Some observers questioned the timing of Trump's "winding down" post. Investment adviser Amit Kukreja said on X that Trump "obviously saw the market reaction towards the end of the day," and "now once again, he’s trying to convince everyone that the war is done; just not sure if the market believes it anymore."
Others mocked Trump's assertion—which he has repeated for two weeks—that the war is almost won, and his claim that he is winding down the operation as he sends more troops and asks Congress for $200 billion in additional funds.
Still others warned against sending US ground troops into Iran—a move opposed by more than two-thirds of American voters, according to a Data for Progress survey published Thursday.
"I cannot overstate what a disastrous decision it would be for President Trump to order American boots on the ground in this illegal war and send US troops to fight and die in Iran," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Friday on social media.
Noting other Trump contradictions—including his declaration that "we're flying wherever we want" and "have nobody even shooting at us" a day after a US F-35 fighter jet was hit by Iranian air defenses—Chicago technology and political commentator Tom Joseph said Friday on X that "Trump has no idea what he’s doing."
"Call out Trump’s incompetence. This war is like a cartoon to him. He desperately needs a series of a catastrophes to distract from Epstein so he’s letting it happen," Joseph added, referring to the late convicted child sex criminal and former Trump friend Jeffrey Epstein. The war is solvable, but Trump has to go be removed from office first."
"It's unfortunate that it took this long for the Pentagon's ridiculous policy to be thrown in the trash," said one press freedom advocate.
A federal judge in Washington, DC blocked the US Department of Defense's widely decried press policy on Friday, which The New York Times and reporter Julian Barnes had argued violates their rights under the First and Fifth amendments to the Constitution.
The Times filed its lawsuit in December, shortly after the first briefing for the "Pentagon Propaganda Corps," which critics called those who signed the DOD's pledge not to report on any information unless it is explicitly authorized by the Trump administration. Journalists who refused the agreement turned over their press credentials and carried out boxes of their belongings.
"A primary purpose of the First Amendment is to enable the press to publish what it will and the public to read what it chooses, free of any official proscription," Judge Paul Friedman, who was appointed to the US District Court for DC by former President Bill Clinton, wrote in a 40-page opinion.
"Those who drafted the First Amendment believed that the nation's security requires a free press and an informed people and that such security is endangered by governmental suppression of political speech," he continued. "That principle has preserved the nation’s security for almost 250 years. It must not be abandoned now."
Friedman recognized that "national security must be protected, the security of our troops must be protected, and war plans must be protected," but also stressed that "especially in light of the country's recent incursion into Venezuela and its ongoing war with Iran, it is more important than ever that the public have access to information from a variety of perspectives about what its government is doing—so that the public can support government policies, if it wants to support them; protest, if it wants to protest; and decide based on full, complete, and open information who they are going to vote for in the next election."
The newspaper said that Friday's ruling "enforces the constitutionally protected rights for the free press in this country. Americans deserve visibility into how their government is being run, and the actions the military is taking in their name and with their tax dollars. Today's ruling reaffirms the right of the Times and other independent media to continue to ask questions on the public's behalf."
The Times had hired a prominent First Amendment lawyer, Theodore Boutrous Jr. of Gibson Dunn, who celebrated the decision as "a powerful rejection of the Pentagon's effort to impede freedom of the press and the reporting of vital information to the American people during a time of war."
"As the court recognized, those provisions violate not only the First Amendment and the due process clause, but also the founding principle that the nation's security depends upon a free press," Boutrous said. "The district court's opinion is not just a win for the Times, Mr. Barnes, and other journalists, but most importantly, for the American people who benefit from their coverage of the Pentagon."
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, also welcomed the ruling, saying that "the judge was right to see the Pentagon's outrageous censorship for what it is, but this wasn't exactly a close call. If the same issue was presented as a hypothetical question on a first-year law school exam, the professor would be criticized for making the test too easy."
"It's shocking that this sweeping prior restraint was the official policy of our federal government and that Department of Justice lawyers had the nerve to argue that journalists asking questions of the government is criminal," Stern declared. "Fifty years ago, the Supreme Court called prior restraints on the press 'the most serious and the least tolerable' of First Amendment violations. At the time, the court was talking about relatively targeted orders restraining specific reporting because of a specific alleged threat—like in the Pentagon Papers case, where the government falsely claimed that the documents about the Vietnam War leaked by Daniel Ellsberg threatened national security."
"Courts back then could never have anticipated the government broadly restraining all reporting that it doesn't authorize without any justification beyond hypothetical speculation," he added. "It's unfortunate that it took this long for the Pentagon's ridiculous policy to be thrown in the trash. Especially now that we are spending money and blood on yet another war based on constantly shifting pretexts, journalists should double down on their commitment to finding out what the Pentagon does not want the public to know rather than parroting 'authorized' narratives."
The Trump administration has not yet said whether it will appeal the decision in the case, which was brought against the DOD—which President Donald Trump calls the Department of War—as well as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell.
"When the international community didn't stop Israel as it deliberately killed nearly 75,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including 20,000 children, Israel knew they could kill civilians with impunity," said one critic.
Eighty percent of Lebanese people killed in Israel's renewed airstrikes on its northern neighbor were slain in attacks targeting only or mainly civilians, a leading international conflict monitor said Friday.
Reuters, using data provided by the Madison, Wisconsin-based Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), reported that 666 people were killed by Israeli strikes on Lebanon between March 1-16. As of Thursday, Lebanese officials said the death toll from Israeli attacks had topped 1,000.
While Lebanese authorities do not break down the combatant status of those killed and wounded during the war, Israel's targeting of civilian infrastructure, including entire apartment buildings, and reports of whole families being wiped out, have belied Israeli officials' claims that they do everything possible to avoid harming civilians.
Classified Israel Defense Forces (IDF) data leaked last year revealed that—despite Israeli government claims of a historically low civilian-to-combatant kill ratio—83% of Palestinians killed during the first 19 weeks of the genocidal war on Gaza were civilians.
According to Gaza officials, 2,700 families were erased from the civil registry in the Palestinian exclave during Israel's genocidal assault.
"When the international community didn't stop Israel as it deliberately killed nearly 75,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including 20,000 children, Israel knew they could kill civilians with impunity," Lebanese diplomat Mohamad Safa said on social media earlier this week. "The result is exactly what we're seeing in Lebanon and Iran right now."
US-Israeli bombing of Iran has killed at least 1,444 people, according to officials in Tehran. The independent, Washington, DC-based monitor Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI) says the death toll is over twice as high as the official count and includes nearly 1,400 civilians.
The February 28 US massacre of around 175 children and staff at an elementary school for girls in the southern city of Minab—which US President Donald Trump initially tried to blame on Iran—remains the deadliest known incident of the three-week war.
As Israeli airstrikes intensify and the IDF prepares for a possible ground invasion of southern Lebanon—which Israel occupied from 1982-2000—experts are warning that noncombatants will once again pay the heaviest price.
United Nations officials and others assert that Israel's intentional attacks on civilians are war crimes. Israel is the subject of an ongoing genocide case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who are accused of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza.
"Deliberately attacking civilians or civilian objects amounts to a war crime," UN High Commissioner for Human Rights spokesperson Thameen al-Kheetan said earlier this week. "In addition, international law provides for specific protections for healthcare workers, as well as people at heightened risk, such as the elderly, women, and displaced people."
As was the case during Israel's bombing of Gaza and Lebanon following the October 7, 2023 attack, journalists are apparently being deliberately targeted again. Reporters Without Borders said in December that, for the third straight year, Israel was the world's leading killer of journalists in 2025.
"This was a deliberate, targeted attack on journalists," said RT correspondent Steve Sweeney after narrowly surviving an IDF airstrike on Thursday. "There's no mistake about it. This was an Israeli precision strike from a fighter jet."
"But if they think they’re going to silence us, if they think we're going to stay out of the field, they’re very, very much mistaken," he added.