- DIHQ'S CELEBRITY BOXING POLL -> American torture in Iraq

Start A New Topic | Reply

Post Info

TOPIC: American torture in Iraq

Posted By: Dionysus Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 303	American torture in Iraq I'm going to cut and paste a story I've just read in The Guardian newspaper here in the UK of how American soldiers have been torturing Iraqis. It's a disturbing piece, as it is shocking the way that these American soldiers have been acting. It's not to make a general statement about all US Forces, but what do Americans on this board think of these events? Blair 'appalled' by Iraq prison torture Matthew Tempest, political correspondent Friday April 30, 2004 Downing Street today said the prime minister was "appalled" by pictures that emerged last night of Iraqi prisoners being tortured by American soldiers. No 10 said the behaviour shown - with Iraqis stripped naked and hooded and being tormented by their captors - was in "direct contravention of all policy under which the coalition operates". Mr Blair's official spokesman said: "The US army spokesman has said this morning that he is appalled, that those responsible have let their fellow soldiers down, and those are views that we would associate the UK government with." Asked if the prime minister was appalled, the spokesman replied: "The government view is the same as that of the US army." Earlier this week the prime minister had gone out on a limb to unequivocally defend the US army and its controversial tactics during the seige of Falluja, which is estimated to have left around 800 civilians dead. The US strategy has provoked intense criticism from his own backbenchers, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. The pictures - believed to date from November or December last year, but only broadcast last night - show a hooded prisoner with a noose around his neck and electric wires attached to his hands, naked hooded male prisoners with their hands behind their heads, grinning male and female US soldiers behind a pile of live hooded prisoners, and a smoking female soldier pointing at the genitals of a naked, hooded male prisioner. Amnesty International said today it had received numerous other reports of torture by coalition forces, of which "virtually none ... has been adequately investigated by the authorities". The human rights organisation said: "Our extensive research in Iraq suggests that this is not an isolated incident. It is not enough for the USA to react only once images have hit the television screens." "There must be a fully independent, impartial and public investigation into all allegations of torture. Nothing less will suffice." This morning Mr Blair's human rights envoy to Iraq, Ann Clwyd, also branded pictures of American troops torturing Iraqi prisoners "absolutely terrible" - but insisted the abuses were "only a small number of cases". Ms Clwyd, whose passionate denunciation of the Saddam Hussein regime helped win over many Labour backbenchers ahead of last year's vote on the war, revealed she had visited the jail in question, Abu Ghraib, last year. She told the BBC that a "very senior" White House official had told her US troops did not abuse Iraqi prisoners. She added that: "The people in charge did not know this was going on." And she insisted: "On a small number of cases, horrible that they are, you cannot compare that with the tens of thousands of people that Saddam Hussein was responsible for executing and torturing." She said she had raised criticisms with the general in charge of the prison during her recent visit, she revealed. She told the Today programme: "I was particularly concerned that so many prisoners are being held there over a long period of time, that their families quite often don't know they are even there." The Labour MP John McDonnell, who opposed the war, said that the US-led occupation of Iraq was now discredited. He told the programme: "They [the pictures] are very, very shocking. I think this is further evidence which builds up on top of the attack on Falluja which is discrediting the American occupation of Iraq." The Conservative shadow foreign secretary, Michael Ancram, called the behaviour "unacceptable and very damaging to building confidence in Iraq". He welcomed the "swift and firm" action apparently being taken against those responsible. Ms Clywd's group Indict, founded in 1996, campaigned for an international tribunal to try Saddam's Ba'thist regime for war crimes, and first made public the allegations of a shredder at the Abu Ghraid prison. Claims of prisoners being fed feet first through the industrial shredder made headlines around the world ahead of the war have since been called into question by journalists - although they have not doubted that the prison was used for torture and executions by the former regime. Dio
Posted By: legion Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 299	RE: American torture in Iraq What is your psychological assessment of the mentality of these fine soldiers? What makes them do these cruel things to other human beings and then laugh about it, stand around yukking it up like Josef Mengele passing out the soap? Is it similar to the mentality that would cause people to fly airplanes into tall buildings? Why yes, I believe it is. Good point Legion.
Posted By: alfonsothefan Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 295	RE: American torture in Iraq Glad you brought it up, Dio. Appalling, actually. Disgusting, nasty, immature idiocy that makes ALL Americans look bad. Kinda the sorta thing that Saddam did, mnus the actual killing. But no, Einstein of the North: This does NOT equate to taking an airplane and flying it into a building. U.S. reaction does NOT equate to peeps in the mid-east jumping up and down and laughing and celebrating over the deaths of others, as I know of no American who are for this. btw, I DO hope that these morons -- these knuckle dragging neanderthals -- get some heavy duty jail time for their deeds. Anyway, I will be thrilled when we exit Iraq and are spared these "incidents." Answer your question? atf
Posted By: Tangler100 Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 286	No excuse for any of it. The Great Fonz has said it all. War crimes [which is really very oxymoronic; like, what if all the captured farktard Nazi prisoners left over in Allied POW camps after WWII were NOT guilty of "crimes against humanity" ???...So what ???...Does that mean their farktard asses should have been spared the gallows ???...In my humble opinion: HELL, NO. They should have ALL been sent to the execution chamber with a vengeance, instead of keeping some of them inprisoned at Spandau Prison in Berlin after the war for life. What in the hell Rudolf Hess' damn ass was doin' in there till the b a s t a r d died in '87 is beyond me. We learned about that prison in history class, and I thought that all those farktard Nazi's were DEAD already, for Christ's sake. Much to my amazement did I learn that, after over 40 damn yrs. since the Allied Victory, one of 'em was still alive. I wouldn't have given a farkdamn HOW OLD that geezer (or any of the others in there since '45) were. If I had had the chance and if I had possessed it, I'd have put my good ole pal Leege's .32 Winchester to damn good use right on the spot (with pleasure)]. True, prisoners must be taken care of with at least minimal standards of humane treatment, and not be abused at all. You can't expect the other side to abide by that unless you set the example with the prisoners YOU take captive. Those who fail in their obligations towards POW's are guilty and should be relieved of duty and, if need be, punished. One possible factor to consider: The supervision of POW's should be done with Military Police or Officers who have NOT served in the front lines. It's too psychologically demanding for regular Army soldiers who have seen their buddies die and get mangled by the enemy to be expected to now show decency to those of the enemy who were "lucky enough" to get captured. Addtionally, even though there's a chain of command, at least two Generals should ALWAYS be present at the prison, directly overlooking everything on a day-by-day basis. That way, with another ranking General always present as a witness, there would be less incentive to tolerate prisoner abuse and look the other way. Come July 1st, it'll be open huntin' season on 'Murkins, and every last damn one of our troops (and the U.K.'s, and all the rest) should be physically OUTTA THERE. Of course, if required (as they probably will be) they can be stationed in willing, neighboring countries (like Israel, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia), or, Shrub can order a fleet of aircraft carriers or troop transports to stay in the Persian Gulf. By then, if the Iraqi's have to shoot, let 'em shoot each other, not any more 'Murkins, British, or anyone else. The only Baghdad Barbecues I want to hear about after that (if I happen to hear at all), are the one's where the prime rib is a side of Iraqi flesh. (Make the PM's day--Fax my post and all the others over to the editorial page of "The Guardian".) Tang
Posted By: legion Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 282	RE: you can't handle the truth Oh here we go, there going to blame 'lack of training' again in what they normally call the worlds biggest and bestest trained military. Same old excuse they used when that Rambo psychopatriot Murkin pilot dropped bombs on Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, and got off without even a slap on the wrist. Big surprise. Of course, I've known about this for quite a while because I read all the conspiracy 'fringe lefty kook' sites on the internet, rather than the 'reliable' news sources who knew all about this but sat on it for a month before 'breaking' the big story. THE WAY THINGS REALLY ARE: The Abu Ghraib prison was a symbol of Saddam's horrific tyranny: electrodes hanging out of the walls, floors stained with the blood of god-knows-how-many victims, bodies dangling from meat-hooks, like in some cheap Grade-B horror flick. So when the Americans came and "liberated" the place, the long-suffering Iraqi people were supposed to be grateful. After all, the sadistic torturers of the Ba'athist regime were gone, and it was a new day – or was it? Well, not all that new, according to a shocking report broadcast by CBS the other night. 60 Minutes II showed photos taken of American soldiers guarding the prison torturing their charges. The images show the American "liberators" liberating their own perverted libidos, posed next to naked prisoners who were being forced into simulating sex with each other. In one macabre shot, a hooded prisoner stands precariously perched on a pedestal, with electrodes attached to his arms: he is reportedly told that if he falls, he'll be electrocuted. There are several photos in which naked prisoners are stacked in a pyramid, and one with a slur written on his skin in English. Photos in the possession of the military authorities show a prisoner whose genitals are attached to wires. In one, a dog is shown attacking an Iraqi prisoner. The authorities are investigating the account of an Iraqi who alleges that a translator, hired by the Americans to work at Abu Ghraib, raped a male juvenile prisoner: "They covered all the doors with sheets. I heard the screaming. ...and the female soldier was taking pictures." Included in this photo-montage of Operation Iraqi Freedom is a picture of a badly beaten corpse. "In most of the pictures," Dan Rather reports, "the Americans are laughing, posing, pointing, or giving the camera a thumbs-up." This is how we're "liberating" Iraq. Last month, 17 American soldiers, including the brigadier general in charge of all detention facilities in occupied Iraq, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, were relieved of their duties: 6 face charges. The sickening details were kept secret, by journalists as well as the U.S. military, until the photos began to circulate independently of both. When CBS finally stopped sitting on this story, they spun it so that it was framed in terms of an apologia, as articulated by Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, deputy director of coalition operations in Iraq, who avers: "So what would I tell the people of Iraq? This is wrong. This is reprehensible. But this is not representative of the 150,000 soldiers that are over here. I'd say the same thing to the American people... Don't judge your army based on the actions of a few." We're supposed to believe that these are just a few rotten apples, that the overwhelming majority of U.S. occupation troops are regular Boy Scouts, busy building schools and helping little old ladies cross streets. To which one can only reply: Baloney! Two competing narratives about the American occupiers are now vying for attention. One the one hand, we have Pat Tillman, the football hero who enlisted shortly after 9/11, with his square clean visage, almost a caricature of idealized American manhood, a selfless martyr who gave his all for a righteous cause. And on the other hand we have the grinning leering perverts of Abu Ghraib. Which is the real face of the American occupiers: John Wayne in "Flying Leathernecks" or John Holmes in "Freaky Leatherboys"? Just ask the Iraqis, who, according to the latest Gallup poll, see their American occupiers as "uncaring, dangerous and lacking in respect for the country's people, religion and traditions." USA Today reports: "Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll." And that was before the Abu Ghraib outrage . The CBS News piece is in many ways almost as outrageous as the events it describes. To begin with, the entire story is framed by General Kimmitt's apologia: it also gives a lot of time to the craven excuses of one of the accused soldiers, who blames his disgusting behavior on a lack of "training." Army Reserve Staff Sgt. Chip Frederick is so typically contemporary American in his whining refusal to take responsibility that it would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic: "We had no support, no training whatsoever. And I kept asking my chain of command for certain things...like rules and regulations. And it just wasn't happening." We'll have to take Frederick at his word that he required "training" in order to be restrained from acting like a mad dog. What a surprise that, in "real" life, he's a prison guard in Virginia, described by his boss as "one of the best." One supposes that's why he needs "rules and regulations" to prevent him from literally f*cking over his charges. As contemptible as he is, Frederick is performing a great service in exposing the responsibility of his superiors, and demonstrating that this wasn't the exception that proves the rule of American beneficence. Frederick's testimony shows that his actions amounted to the implementation of an informal policy: "Frederick says Americans came into the prison: 'We had military intelligence, we had all kinds of other government agencies, FBI, CIA ... All those that I didn't even know or recognize.' Frederick's letters and email messages home also offer clues to problems at the prison. He wrote that he was helping the interrogators: "'Military intelligence has encouraged and told us 'Great job.' They usually don't allow others to watch them interrogate. But since they like the way I run the prison, they have made an exception. We help getting them to talk with the way we handle them. ... We've had a very high rate with our style of getting them to break. They usually end up breaking within hours.'" The CBS report adds: "The Army found that interrogators asked reservists working in the prison to prepare the Iraqi detainees, physically and mentally, for questioning. " Will any of these interrogators, who are civilians and supposedly not subject to military authority, face charges? Gen. Kimmitt says he hopes so, but that remains to be seen. However, whatever action is taken, or not taken, the conclusion that we are dealing here with the results of a deliberate policy, and not an exceptional case, is inescapable. The role played by CBS in all this is far from admirable. True, they exposed it, and broadcast a very few of the horrific photos. They also covered it up for at least a month, and might have done so indefinitely if not for the fact that the story was beginning to leak out: "Two weeks ago, 60 Minutes II received an appeal from the Defense Department, and eventually from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Myers, to delay this broadcast – given the danger and tension on the ground in Iraq." One wonders if the "danger and tension on the ground in Iraq" was the Defense Department's main concern: after all, the Iraqis surely know what is happening to them. Abused detainees have families, and friends, and word travels fast. More likely it is the "danger and tension" on the ground in this country, the growing outcry on the home front against a futile and increasingly ugly war, that worries not only the Pentagon bureaucrats but their bosses in the White House. If they succeed in riding out the storm, it will be with the invaluable help of the American media: "60 Minutes II decided to honor that request, while pressing for the Defense Department to add its perspective to the incidents at Abu Ghraib prison. This week, with the photos beginning to circulate elsewhere, and with other journalists about to publish their versions of the story, the Defense Department agreed to cooperate in our report." If the truth was going to come out anyway, then better it should be as seen through the prism of the American commander, a whiney spineless automaton who needs "rules and regulations" to tell him how to act like a human being, and Frederick's lawyer, one Gary Myers, who declares: "The elixir of power, the elixir of believing that you're helping the CIA, for God's sake, when you're from a small town in Virginia, that's intoxicating. And so, good guys sometimes do things believing that they are being of assistance and helping a just cause. ... And helping people they view as important." Okay, let's see if I get this straight: the inhabitants of small towns in Virginia are entirely bereft of any moral sensibility. Rural life, we are supposed to believe, leads to a blatant disregard for human dignity and decency. Such rubes as Sgt. Frederick are so easily intoxicated by power, or proximity to it, that they cannot contain their inherent animality, and cannot be held responsible for their actions – any more than a cougar can be accused of murder for hunting its prey. Them city slicker lawyers, what'll they think of next? It's an interesting theory, not because it's clever but because it is profoundly and offensively stupid. I doubt it will hold up in a court of law – especially not an Iraqi one. You can bet your bottom dollar, however, that the Iraqis will never be allowed to sit in judgement of Sgt. Frederick and his fellow sadists. Not even when they are handed back their "sovereignty" on June 30. Mr. Myers has a point about "the elixir of power," however, although not in the way he intended. This poisonous brew is what we have quaffed in Iraq, a potent mixture of high-sounding hubris and militant megalomania. Is it any wonder that its effects are to inspire a kind of madness? Our policy of perpetual war is not so much a foreign policy as a form of collective insanity. We went in to "liberate" the people of Iraq, and wound up torturing them. If supporters of this disastrous war have some kind of explanation for that, I'd love to hear it. Meanwhile, a note to the "mainstream" media: let's start interviewing the victims, rather than the perpetrators, of these heinous acts, to get some idea of what really happened. It is also necessary to start naming names. Unless we want to encourage more such incidents in the future, public shaming can act as a deterrent. – Justin Raimondo (antiwar.com)
Posted By: Dionysus Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 272	For balance: Bush's response Bush 'disgusted' at torture of Iraqi prisoners Matthew Tempest and agencies Friday April 30, 2004 George Bush today expressed his "disgust" at pictures that emerged last night showing Iraqi prisoners being tortured and humiliated by American soldiers. The US president was asked about a series of photographs, one showing Iraqi prisoners naked except for hoods covering their heads, stacked in a human pyramid, which have led to criminal charges being brought against six US soldiers. "I share a deep disgust that those prisoners were treated the way they were treated," he said at a press conference one year after his speech proclaiming the end of "major combat operations" in Iraq. "Their treatment does not reflect the nature of the American people. That's not the way we do things in America. I didn't like it one bit." Earlier, Downing Street said Tony Blair had been "appalled" by the actions shown in the photographs. No 10 said the behaviour shown was in "direct contravention of all policy under which the coalition operates". Mr Blair's official spokesman said: "The US army spokesman has said this morning that he is appalled, that those responsible have let their fellow soldiers down, and those are views that we would associate the UK government with." Asked if the prime minister was appalled, the spokesman replied: "The government view is the same as that of the US army." Earlier this week the prime minister had gone out on a limb to unequivocally defend the US army and its controversial tactics during the seige of Falluja, which is estimated to have left around 800 civilians dead. The US strategy has provoked intense criticism from his own backbenchers, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. The pictures - believed to date from November or December last year, but only broadcast last night - show a hooded prisoner with a noose around his neck and electric wires attached to his hands, naked hooded male prisoners with their hands behind their heads, grinning male and female US soldiers behind a pile of live hooded prisoners, and a smoking female soldier pointing at the genitals of a naked, hooded male prisoner. Amnesty International said today it had received numerous other reports of torture by coalition forces, of which "virtually none ... has been adequately investigated by the authorities". The human rights organisation said: "Our extensive research in Iraq suggests that this is not an isolated incident. It is not enough for the USA to react only once images have hit the television screens." "There must be a fully independent, impartial and public investigation into all allegations of torture. Nothing less will suffice." This morning Mr Blair's human rights envoy to Iraq, Ann Clwyd, also branded pictures of American troops torturing Iraqi prisoners "absolutely terrible" - but insisted the abuses were "only a small number of cases". Ms Clwyd, whose passionate denunciation of the Saddam Hussein regime helped win over many Labour backbenchers ahead of last year's vote on the war, revealed she had visited the jail in question, Abu Ghraib, last year. She told the BBC that a "very senior" White House official had told her US troops did not abuse Iraqi prisoners. She added that: "The people in charge did not know this was going on." And she insisted: "On a small number of cases, horrible that they are, you cannot compare that with the tens of thousands of people that Saddam Hussein was responsible for executing and torturing." She said she had raised criticisms with the general in charge of the prison during her recent visit, she revealed. She told the Today programme: "I was particularly concerned that so many prisoners are being held there over a long period of time, that their families quite often don't know they are even there." Ms Clywd's group, Indict, founded in 1996, campaigned for an international tribunal to try Saddam's Ba'athist regime for war crimes, and first made public the allegations that prisoners were fed feet first into an industrial shredder at the same prison, during Saddam's regime. The Conservative shadow foreign secretary, Michael Ancram, called the behaviour "unacceptable and very damaging to building confidence in Iraq". He welcomed the "swift and firm" action apparently being taken against those responsible. responsible. The Labour MP John McDonnell, who opposed the war, said that the US-led occupation of Iraq was now discredited. He told the programme: "They [the pictures] are very, very shocking. I think this is further evidence which builds up on top of the attack on Falluja which is discrediting the American occupation of Iraq."
Posted By: Harry Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 270	RE: American torture in Iraq Atf. and Tangler said it all. I have nothing else to add.
Posted By: Tangler100 Posted On: Apr 30, 2004 Views: 269	We CAN handle the truth, and deal with it. I'm actually gonna say somethin' here, dear Leege, that I never thought I'd say: I'm actually gonna commend you for posting that nugget of journalistic gold. Having said that, we 'Murkins are not gonna just let this slide and throw this under the Humvee. So, I wanna say "Tanks" for your expose (pronounce that with an accent mark over the "e" so it rhymes with the musical note "re" as in "doh-re-mi"). Shrub has already forcefully come out and issued a strong condemnation, a full investigation, and swift correction (and that doesn't just mean a slap-on-the-wrist) of those responsible for these flagrant injustices. Not to do so, or to backslide or be slack about it, would only add fuel to the fires that are already being shown front and center in the Arab news media. Heads will roll. True, the damage has been done, and we will have to suffer the consequences in image, as no doubt we should. If there's anybody who has egg on his face big-time over the furor this is generating, WE do. It just means that we have to admit that when we're tryin' to be a civil restorer, a POW/prison system manager, AND a military maintainer SIMULTANEOUSLY, sometimes we have to whip our own butts, big-time. WE WILL, and DEAL with it, accordingly. Yeah, I already KNOW what you're thinkin': This is only the tip of the iceberg. Hey, if it is, don't be gun-shy--(as if you ever were)--about blowin' the farktard (hell, can't ya' just tell I love that word !!!) whistle around here. 'Murkinville ears aren't deaf. Yeah, I also know you're sayin' it still never should have happened in the first place; and you're right, it shouldn't have. The only step to take now is to go FORWARD and make damn sure we don't allow this to happen again. In addition to punishig those who are culpable, full restitution as much as possible should be given to those who have been victimized. (BTW--Although to me it's "ancient" history, I do wanna thank you Canadians--and I mean this sincerely (no crap)--for rescuing several of our 'Murkin hostages from the Iranian takeover of the 'Murkin embassy in Teheran, Iran, way back in '80, during the Iranian Revolution. A lot of us 'Murkins remember that. Just don't ever say we 'Murkins don't give thanks and credit where thanks and credit are due.) 'Murkinville Morals don't go on holidays according to the "Golden Rule" (meaning: Them that has the "gold", makes the "rules"). Company dismissed.
Posted By: JSK Posted On: May 1, 2004 Views: 246	RE: American torture in Iraq I quickly flipped through the posts here so ofcourse I'll be speaking without reading what you all thought. (I will go back and read it after I post) I just want to explain what I think before hearing the comments of others. HERES WHAT I THINK- What a Kodak moment !!!! (ok, thats a horrible joke) I think its very distasteful that anyone does that to anyone. Especially our troops doing that to the "enemy". But, just look at what they did to our people. When were these pics taken? Was it around the time weeks, months after seeing what our people had to live through while being held captive? Not like that matters, but you'll see this one both sides. When your a POW your family, country , anyone doesn't know where you are. The reasoning for them being held is because they are or were the "enemy". What difference is it to show them grabbing their cocks or shooting them point blank in the face? Either way I don't agree with what our Murkin's did. Most American's infact all that I've talked to were sickened by it. Your looking at the same ones doing this. The chick and that dude. Some day they'll be famous .... sadly. BUT,whos to say what they saw or had been through? Just be glad they are not slicing their throats and showing it on world wide tv like "they" did to a reporter of ours. Infact, I haven't even heard the full report and only saw the pictures they keep showing. Leege now you'll have more images for reprutwaaaaaa. BTW what a hell of a bikini pic. I'm not sure if its da weed, beer or that pic that's leaving me writtingless. I'm saying its the pic. To answer Dio's question it really doesn't bother me at all. I don't know the whole story. Maybe they were all a gangload of flamers they caught and simply caught them in the act on film. MY KID DOES NO WRONG=our soldiers aswell JSK
Posted By: JSK Posted On: May 1, 2004 Views: 245	RE: American torture in Iraq Actually one of the pics looks like "Right said fred" with bags over their heads : )~ Look at the pose and tell me it aint so! JSK

http://