this is appalling, abuse of Iraqi prisoners - Page 14

Me too. He wrote a book about it, devoting at least a chapter to the concept of "torture warrants." I haven't read it-- but I just thought it was important to tell you about it and to agree that "yeah...hmm" he does have an interesting position to say the least. Contradictory at worst, paradoxical at best, but controversial regardless...

An explanation.

Some of the provisions are a bit 'quaint' . . . such as, all prisoners are to recieve a stippend in Swiss Francs

General Karpinski, who is being suspended from duty, claims she was "set up"
Article (reg required: LA Times)

Looks like the Israelis have been involved in the torture and abuse:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...4/131401.shtml

(Newsmax is a conservative pro-Bush news outlet).

Don't say that! It's "anti-semitic"!!!!!!

Jesus. I just went back and read page 13 of this thread. I will never again argue with NaplesX. Whenever he posts something horribly cruel and insensitive, I will send a PM to the mods to ban him. He is an undeniably sick fuck. I am so angry right now, I wouldn't hesitate to break his jaw, were I in his presence.

Scott I would have a shoutfest with over ten pints of whatever brew he prefers before laughing it all off and pathetically chasing some wagging tail in tandem.

Okay. I'm not angry enough to break someone's jaw now, but I would certainly consider doing my best to try and make him "piss his pants" like a true patriot would.

This just in: note the last paragraph which I bolded

From the Salon War Room:

"Widespread pattern of abuse
"An Army summary of deaths and mistreatment involving prisoners in American custody in Iraq and Afghanistan shows a widespread pattern of abuse involving more military units than previously known," the New York Times reports.

"The cases from Iraq date back to April 15, 2003, a few days after Saddam Hussein's statue was toppled in a Baghdad square, and they extend up to last month, when a prisoner detained by Navy commandos died in a suspected case of homicide blamed on 'blunt force trauma to the torso and positional asphyxia.' Among previously unknown incidents are the abuse of detainees by Army interrogators from a National Guard unit attached to the Third Infantry Division, who are described in a document obtained by The New York Times as having 'forced into asphyxiation numerous detainees in an attempt to obtain information' during a 10-week period last spring."

" ... The details paint a broad picture of misconduct, and show that in many cases among the 37 prisoners who have died in American custody in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army did not conduct autopsies and says it cannot determine the causes of the deaths. In his speech on Monday night, President Bush portrayed the abuse of prisoners by American soldiers in narrow terms. He described incidents at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, which were the first and most serious to come to light, as involving actions 'by a few American troops who disregarded our country and disregarded our values.'"

Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports that a former military police officer posing as an uncooperative prisoner during a training session at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, last year says he was beaten so badly by four American soldiers that he suffered a brain injury."

What exactly did I say that would get this kind of reaction. i went back and reread my posts on page 13 to see what it was. Maybe I don't see it, so please, tell me.

Just so we are all clear, about this whole issue, terrorists and non-uniformed combatants are not afforded the Geneva Conventions. those are for Uniformed state sponsored armies and their personnel.

Again, I don't condone abuses, however I think it is important to take into consideration the mentality of those we are dealing with. Sometimes extreme measures need to be taken to save lives.

I think that many of you complaining would be the same to rapidly point out that a terrorist was let go to wreak death and destruction. As a matter of fact, if memory serves me, I remember something along those lines here before. I will have to do a little research on that.

The majority of these people in custody would turn on their captors in a second a slice a throat, or worse, even before these allegations. I don't think we are dealing with sheepish Gandhi types. Struggles happen, tempers flare, unforeseen circumstances inflict everyone. It is not like the guards are in a "perfect" situation, either. There is also human error to take into consideration. Miscalculations happen all the time. Noone here knows all the facts.

This is why I can't just start pointing fingers as most here seem very comfortable with. I'm sorry if that offends some here. Really.

in fact . . the red cross and many others have stated that 'the majority of these people" have been arrested by mistake!!!

Um, OK but your own government thinks differently, namely those in charge over there in Iraq.

Do you as president pflam order potential terrorists be loosed based solely on what the Red Cross says.

I would hope not.

Loose?

I didn't say let anybody go.

and what about that "prisoner" who was merely a test subject and in reality another American soldier?!?!

Don't you get it!!!! That shows that these people are acting far below the standards that America should hold itself up to!!!

read the Gore speech . . read the whole thing it is very good!

I disagree with the notion that all soldiers are acting that way. Some yes, but not all. These people have the awesome responsibility of trying to save lives. I would put forth that they have and the sad part is, that is the part of this we will never know about because so many people focus only on the negative. Or maybe it's just that the results are just expected. Who knows.

Which means that they were being trained to beat peole and doing so in such a way that even in training they were causing seriouse injury!!!

the problem with talking to you is that you don't care about the torture: you don't care that up to 37 deaths, that we know about, have happened in our custody

so, it is apparent that you think that torture is ok . . . . you make me sick!!

and you wonder why tonton said what he did . . . .

Where did I say that? I am simply asserting that this not as black and white as you all want to make it. There are a LOT of factors and facts at play here. You want to paint it with a broad "it's the neo-cons fault" brush. I just don't agree with your conclusions.

I keep saying I don't approve of torture, yet you keep saying I do. How can I say any differently. Come on. I don't wanna make you sick. So we disagree, we can continue on.

No one is arguing that all soldiers are acting that way.


No. These are MPs and PROFESSIONAL PRISON GUARDS who there to detain prisoners. Don't try to argue that they were being shot at or that they were traumatized. These are, for the most part, professional prison guards who did this.


There's a positive? You're upset because no one is reporting about all the prisoners we didn't strip down naked and force to simulate (or actually commit( sex acts? All the prisoners we didn't rape? All the dead bodies our soldiers didn't pose with?

You need to face facts, mate. There was, apparently, a systematic torturing of prisoners at multiple detainment facilities. The question now is who knew about it, for how long, and why it was covered up. Heads need to roll for this, and it looks like the soldiers are doing the right thing and taking down everyone with them.

Aside: I snicker every time someone says "The behavior of these few soldiers does not represent 99% of the soldiers in Iraq." That means that it is reflective of the behavior of around 1350 of our soldiers.

I can go along with most of that, except these were not just shoplifters. These were violent and bad people.

I agree heads should roll, the right heads, but as usual it has turned into a witch hunt.

I am one example: I point out that these were murderers and suspected terrorists, and I am said to be OK with torture and murder and am no better than the terrorists or the abusers. I am a witch, according some here.

I am not convinced that the systematic label applies, yet. I think that force was used many times without checks and balances to keep soldiers from going too far. That is a bit different than systematic torture.

Come on, who would have thought that there would be an outcry over mistreatment of terrorists? That is kind of an oxy-moron, no? Look at any action movie previous to 9/11 and you will see a systematic torture of terrorists and potential terrorists much to the delight of vast audiences. I feel this aside was not even considered.

The good news is that this problem will go away because of constant improvement, that is the way the American people are. That is something you don't see in most other governments.

With respect, you do not and cannot know that all or even a majority of the people in this prison are guilty of the charges brought against them, and the world will never know, because unlike normal criminals, they don't have to be charged, face committal proceedings, etc. The US Army has to arrest them in order for them to be there. That's it. No explanation; no outside accountability.

Branding them all as "murderers and suspected terrorists" is naïve at best, and ignorant at worst.

I never said that they weren't bad people. Not that it makes any difference, really. Even a murderer doesn't deserve to get raped in prison.


As opposed to what? It's an orderly inquiry into the situation. The only other option is to just ignore it.


No. You're said to be OK with it when you imply that merely being in jail means you ought to expect to be raped and otherwise tortured. The stats I've seen are that a HUGE percentage of these people were there simply for not having paperwork on them when they were stopped at checkpoints. You're said to be OK with it when you argue, as you've just done here, that merely being suspected of being a terrorist means that you should expect to be raped and tortured.


I think you should read the Taguba report before you say something like that.


Make sure you ignore the widely publicized reports that these guys were ordered to do this by MI and that Cambone had authorized these troops to operate under special rules.


SUSPECTED terrorists. You simply DO NOT KNOW that they are terrorists. The outcry is over the mistreatment of PRISONERS at the hands of American soldiers. Hell, I don't care if they personally crucified Jesus. They were TORTURED. And you, RIGHT HERE, are saying that it's not that big of a deal.


You can tell the difference between movies and the real world, right? Right?

Come on, what are they then?

Cupcake bakers and gardeners?

Yeah, the military drove through a Norman Rockwell neighborhood in Iraq and randomly picked peaceful people to fill the jails. There isn't enough bad people to pick from, I guess.

This conversation is stupid because some of you want to believe that 90% of the prisoners are just victims of circumstance. "Mr. soldier man, I don't know how that rocket launcher landed in my hand and accidently went off and hit your Hummer. Excuse please." What a hoot.

I do believe there may be a small percentage that are there wrongly, but that is true anywhere.

The last two weeks almost 800 people from the Abu Ghraib prison were released... small percentage my ass

How many people were in that prison?

Some or maybe even a lot of those will go back to attacking US soldiers or helping.

The move was to appease the politicians and all the knee jerkers here. It is a lose lose for the military people right now.

I think that this war is turning into another Vietnam. I may have to agree with some on that now. However the reason it is we may not agree on.

Numbers range in the 3000/4000. And maybe a lot of the people being released will attack or help.. and maybe it's because of what they endured in prison?

Don't be ridiculous: of course I'm not suggesting that confectioners and market-gardeners are being picked up. There is, however, a big difference between being, say, a soldier and being someone with a real interest in committing acts of insurgency.

If you're trying to justify human rights violations on the part of the US Army by saying that the victims are guilty of some other crimes, it doesn't really do your case much good to admit that in all probability an unknown percentage the victims didn't in fact commit any crimes. Admitting that this is the case makes your acceptance of their total lack of accountability even more bizarre. It seems that you're willing to accept the perpetration of what even on your terms is gross injustice on a few individuals, for the sake of a "greater good" of torturing "real" terrorists. That's not on.

Why should we trust the US Army to take in real terrorists? As far as I'm concerned, there's a decent chance that they couldn't find their arse with both hands, given their recent glaring demonstrations of incompetence (desert wedding massacres anyone?) and cultural insensitivity (hmm, bullet holes in mosques will help us garner majority support! stories of shocking insults to the religion of prisoners will endear us to all and sundry!)

At any rate, this is beside the point, since the torture of prisoners is both unacceptable for moral and ethical reasons, and a really stupid political move.

Actually, "Mr. Soldier Man, why the fucking hell did you just knock my door down and arrest me and my wife? I was in bed. I have nothing to do with any terrorists." Which is happening again and again and again and again.

They're arresting innocent people. Like the wives of suspects. Who are getting raped from time to time by your soldiers. This is according to Tagouba, so please feel free to take this up with that liar and commie, not me.

By the way, 'Excuse please' is normally the racist lingo for INDIAN people (aka 'wogs') not Iraqis (aka 'sand-niggers'). I know they all look the bloody same, but still.

If the government picked you up off the street and said you were a suspected terrorist. The easiest way of getting out of US custody is cooperation and honesty. Provide some verifiable information and bam, no reason to hold you. I know that is oversimplifying, but that is how it works with any suspected criminal.

They don't have time to fool around with people for no reason. In case you don't remember they are working 24/7 to establish rule of law and security all while being in the sights of loonies.

Verifying who you are is very critical in a time of war. If you don't have verification, you could be anybody. Any half whit knows that you will get hassled if you don't have the proper ID.


IT IS A BIG DEAL. I have said that many times. It is just not as big a deal as some want to make it. That's all I am saying. Perspective seems to be what is missing. I am trying to add some perspective. Man?!

I agree totally with your last statement. Well said.

I am not trying to excuse anyone just trying to put it all into perspective.

half what?

half-wit

1: a person of subnormal intelligence [syn: idiot, imbecile, cretin, moron, changeling, retard]

2: (informal) a stupid incompetent person [syn: dimwit, nitwit, doofus]

You think I should go back and correct that typo?

Does it so detract from the meaning of the post?

Hmmm. Verifiable information, like say ... fingerprints? Fingerprints GOT THE BASTARD in America who helped out the Madrid bombers. His paws were all over one of the bomb bags!!!!!!!111!!!111

Oh dear. Sorry. This poor man was inside for 17 days because no-one in the States would double-check his fingerprints, despite the fact that the Spanish thought there was a screw up and asked the FBI to do so.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5053007/

And that wasn't private guards or psycho MI loonies in Abu Ghraib.

"No, you're wrong. I have an alibi. Can I go home now please Mr. Granger?"
"My lord, you're absolutely write Mr. Bimji. Terribly sorry for the thing with the hood and the electrodes! Go straight home, and let's say no more about it."

You are totally out of touch with reality, may I just say that?

Seriously, take a step back from this statement, and have a look at what you're proposing:

the US Army picks you up on suspicion of terrorism: they clearly believe for some reason or other that you (or someone whose description you fit) is implicated;

on first principles, this isn't likely to happen when you expect it to;

in the lack of any better evidence of your intentions, personal background, and connections, and given that they may have just dragged you from your bed in the middle of the night, in light of the fact that the Army already thinks you're guilty it is extremely unlikely that you will be able to prove your innocence in any reasonable way, especially because the US Army does not need to demonstrate to anybody that they have good evidence that you are involved.

I suspect that once you're in the hands of the Army, you're basically pretty much f**ked. Guantanamo Bay is a pretty good demonstration of the ability of the US to hold people more-or-less indefinitely without really explaining why.

Um. 1 guy 17 days. And the result?

he was found to be innocent and let go. His experience was bad, sure. Was it proof that the US is holding people for no reason, I thing it proves just the opposite. I could be wrong, of course.

I don't know if you are being specific to Iraq or if you are also including America too.

Sorry I don't have a credible link to this...but what about that Italian immigrant who was taken and detained for 4-6 months...just because he had been arrested years ago (and did jail time for) for a cocaine possession charge? The US authorities believed he was a suspected terrorist because of his past crime (and because of the Patriot Act).

I remember the footage of his release...the crying man was greeted members of his family and much of the community because he was an honest, good and decent member of the community. He yelled, "Why would a country like this do this to me?!"

If a person in this country can be carried off into detention...I can see how much slack a soldier has in grabbing any Iraqi that looks at him the wrong way.

Anyone remember this story?

My point.

/removesflameretardentclothing...

Maybe in fantasy land.

Back here in real world america people are imprisoned all the time for crimes they didn't commit.

As for iraq, pfflam already cited the red cross report, to which you responded

Except that you apparently haven't actually read the red cross report because the figures come from military intelligence officers, not red cross workers.

And my "own government" doesn't think differently. Governments don't "think" and on most issues there are widely differing opinions.

Finally, no one should have to explain to you the problems that have come out of giving soldiers policing duties.

You and I and just about anyone would cooperate fully. This is the thing you are missing. Cooperation is key if you ever find yourself in custody of an army or police organization. Cooperation or lack of, does not necessarily prove guilt or innocence but it will expedite the process.

I hear what you are saying.

let me ask this question:

How many people do you think are picked up and interrogated and finally released?

I would guess that it is more than actual criminals are picked up. Such is the nature of investigations and such.

You are picking 1 person here or there out of how many stories around the world?

Hey don't you have a thread criticizing my websites over at macnn to update or something?

You do know how to start another thread don't you?