Abu Ghraib, Revisited (Joy)

[RedSkunk]

So, the Abu Ghraib torture cases are old news. No one cares anymore. The news gave us a glimmer, told us what to think, and then it slipped from the headlines, in favor of more pressing issues, such as who fucked who, who's getting breast implants, and the wonders of dick pills. More time is used whenever a US troop or contractor is murdered, than the atrocities we committed. It only makes sense, since the US, as the victors, has free reign to re-write history.

But hey - what's one more topic about it, eh?

A new expose in Rolling Stone magazine, details some of the more vile acts that the mainstream never picked up on. It details how far the scandal did go, and how the investigation is now being stonewalled, and swept under the rug.

-
New classified military files uncovered, include more than 106 "annexes" that were withheld from earlier reports. This intelligence includes "nearly 6,000 pages of internal Army memos and e-mails, reports on prison riots and escapes, and sworn statements by soldiers, officers, private contractors and detainees. The files depict a prison in complete chaos. Prisoners were fed bug-infested food and forced to live in squalid conditions; detainees and U.S. soldiers alike were killed and wounded in nightly mortar attacks; and loyalists of Saddam Hussein served as guards in the facility, apparently smuggling weapons to prisoners inside.

The files make clear that responsibility for what Taguba called "sadistic, blatant and wanton" abuses extends to several high-ranking officers still serving in command positions. Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, who is now in charge of all military prisons in Iraq, was dispatched to Abu Ghraib by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last August. In a report marked secret, Miller recommended that military police at the prison be "actively engaged in setting the conditions for successful exploitation of the internees." After his plan was adopted, guards began depriving prisoners of sleep and food, subjecting them to painful "stress positions" and terrorizing them with dogs. A former Army intelligence officer tells Rolling Stone that the intent of Miller's report was clear to everyone involved: "It means treat the detainees like shit until they will sell their mother for a blanket, some food without bugs in it and some sleep.""

In this newly released information, prisoner accounts provide more insight than we had previously gotten. These accounts are described by Taguba as "credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses."

Some memorable quotes:
In one sworn statement, Kasim Mehaddi Hilas, detainee number 151108, said he witnessed a translator referred to only as Abu Hamid raping a teenage boy. "I saw Abu Hamid, who was wearing the military uniform, putting his dick in the little kid's ass," Hilas testified. "The kid was hurting very bad." A female soldier took pictures of the rape, Hilas said.

During the Muslim holy period of Ramadan, Hilas saw Spc. Charles Graner Jr. and an unnamed "helper" tie a detainee to a bed around midnight. "They . . . inserted the phosphoric light in his ass, and he was yelling for God's help," the prisoner testified. Again, the same female soldier photographed the torture.

Another prisoner, Abd Alwhab Youss, was punished after guards accused him of plotting to attack an MP with a broken toothbrush. Guards took Youss into a closed room, poured cold water on him, pushed his head into urine and beat him with a broom. Then the guards "pressed my ass with a broom and spit on it," Youss said.
....
The sworn statement of Amjed Isail Waleed, detainee number 151365, is especially graphic. On his first day at the Hard Site, he told investigators, guards "put me in a dark room and started hitting me in the head and stomach and legs." Then, one day in November, five soldiers took him into a room, put a bag over his head and started beating him. "I could see their feet, only, from under the bag. . . . Some of the things they did was make me sit down like a dog, and they would hold the string from the bag, and they made me bark like a dog, and they were laughing at me." A soldier slammed Waleed's head against the wall, causing the bag to fall off. "One of the police was telling me to crawl, in Arabic," he testified, "so I crawled on my stomach, and the police were spitting on me when I was crawling and hitting me on my back, my head and my feet. It kept going on until their shift ended at four o'clock in the morning. The same thing would happen in the following days."

Finally, after several beatings so severe that he lost consciousness, Waleed was forced to lay on the ground. "One of the police was pissing on me and laughing at me," the prisoner said. He was placed in a dark room and beaten with a broom. "And one of the police, he put a part of his stick that he always carries inside my ass, and I felt it going inside me about two centimeters, approximately. And I started screaming, and he pulled it out and he washed it with water inside the room. And the two American girls that were there when they were beating me, they were hitting me with a ball made of sponge on my dick. And when I was tied up in my room, one of the girls, with blond hair, she is white, she was playing with my dick. I saw inside this facility a lot of punishment just like what they did to me and more. And they were taking pictures of me during all these instances."

There is too much to copy+paste here, but I urge people to read the full article here

The next time someone gets beheaded, or the next time someone talks about spreading democracy in the Middle East, or about all the good we're doing, I'll just respond with a simple picture.

[Metal69hed]

I hate those soldiers that were a part of the scandal. They don't truly represent the military.

[RedSkunk]

Let me get this out really quick - I don't think this is representative of our military either.

Not one bit.

But I do think this is representative of this current conflict. Of what happens, when you go in half-cocked, with no regards towards international law or human rights. This is representative of neo-con international policy. A disregard for common deceny. For humanity.

[bombkangaroo]

terrible as it may be, nobody thinks it should be happening, and it doesn't negate the benefits, however few and far between, of the war.

[bombkangaroo]

At 8/3/04 07:25 PM, red_skunk wrote: This is representative of neo-con international policy. A disregard for common deceny. For humanity.

i don't think i've read anything that suggests that it is in any way linked inextricably to neo-conservatives.
all the articles i have read point to it being a problem exclusively within the military.

[RedSkunk]

At 8/3/04 07:30 PM, bombkangaroo wrote: i don't think i've read anything that suggests that it is in any way linked inextricably to neo-conservatives.
all the articles i have read point to it being a problem exclusively within the military.

It's emblematic of the situation. If we cared about the populace of Iraq, we wouldn't be arbitrarily jailing and sodomizing them. That just wouldn't make sense. Our foreign policy is neo-conservative in nature, for the past four years. Our foriegn policy, has put us in this position, and disregard for human rights, et al., from the upper tiers of military officials - as well as squalid conditions for the people on the ground in Iraq - created this.

[StatiK]

The people involved in this should be immediately dishonorably discharged, court martialled, and have criminal charges pressed against them, from the lowest tier soliders carrying it out to the highest tier generals authorizing it, up to George W. Bush who sent out a memo saying that the Geneva Convention somehow did not apply to the United States in this situation. What's sad is that I don't know that anybody has been rightfully punished. How can anyone say that they were just following orders when they're shoving a broom up someone's ass, urinating on them and sodo-fucking-mizing them?! How can anybody say that it was just the soldier's fault, that they had no idea what was going on, and that they were just looking out for security and trying to save lives? This was, and still is, a disgrace to the United States and the military.

[bombkangaroo]

At 8/3/04 07:39 PM, red_skunk wrote: stuff

so it's their fault for not doing anything to make sure it didn't happen?(actually that does make sense, but i'm wondering if that is what you're saying)

[RedSkunk]

The blame has to be placed at the entire system involved.

Not specific military personnel, but the military as a whole, for not adequetely curtailing abuses such as this. In the article, it talks about in one instance, a CO found abuse happening, reprimanded the parties involved, and then left. What happened? They started again.

The blame can lie on those who did disservice to those serving in Iraq - the article talks about food, delivered by contractors, with bugs in it. Food, which the prisoners - and sometimes our military - were suppose to eat. The personnel who guarded Abu Ghraib, were bombarded daily. Etc. and so on.

The blame also lies with the highest tiers of the military - those who read - or disregarded - all of the e-mails, discussion, and memo's on abuse occuring. Additionally, it must lie in the hands of those who - explicitly or otherwise - approved of abuse, of actions which lay in murky legal waters (and which lead to abuse), those who condoned such actions.

Finally, the blame can lie at those who put us in this position. The talking heads in Washington. Those who ultimately dictate foriegn policy and our actions in Iraq.

[witeshark]

Clearly things happened that go way past any use of decency and common sense and all that need be must be done to absolutely prevent such abuses

[bombkangaroo]

prbably the most concerning thing is that the administration and military didn't make a big song and dance about putting an end to it.
you would think they would want to capitolise on the situation.

[Metal69hed]

"you would think they would want to capitolise on the situation."

They're not that sick.

[antiklaus]

At 8/3/04 07:19 PM, Metal69hed wrote: I hate those soldiers that were a part of the scandal. They don't truly represent the military.

Well, Metal, I would certainly not like those kind of slodiers to be a part of my military, but consider the evidence.

It's not ultimately a process initiated by soliers who were not being supervised, its a case of military intelligence coming in and instigating abuse.

I don't blame any of the low ranking soldiers involved in this scandal. It's too easy to manipulate them because they feel pressure to comply to orders and they are a lot more likely to act on the impulse to 'get revenge' for their fallen brothers.

The charges in Abhu Ghraibe need to go up to the place in the chain of command where it became a policy, not upon the shoulders of the people who executed it.

[The-Enforcer]

How can you compare a beheading to the the abu ghraib scandal? The Iraqi's from the beginning of the war when they took prisoners tortured and then shot our soldiers at close range. When the Iraqi's surrendered to us we provided them with food and water and all the other things required by the geneva convention.

Now, as then, you're on the side of the Iraqi's. Why do you jump to the defense of the enemy first?

Please answer I would really like to know.

[specimen56]

At 8/6/04 11:57 AM, The_Enforcer wrote: Now, as then, you're on the side of the Iraqi's. Why do you jump to the defense of the enemy first?

I think everyones on the side of humanity, it isn't a case of us vs. them in this instance.

[antiklaus]

At 8/6/04 11:57 AM, The_Enforcer wrote: How can you compare a beheading to the the abu ghraib scandal?

You defended the Abhu Ghraibe abuses before beheadings became an "en vogue" defense of the Republican party. And now you use one wrong to justify another.

It's an ad hoc defense that doesn't take into account the status we are trying to establish in the world. The Terrorists are not trying to claim the mantle of the 'good guys' - we are. That alone warrants our country to be better than Abhu Ghraibe.

:: The Iraqi's from the beginning of the war when they took prisoners tortured and then shot our soldiers at close range.

Close range or long range, dead is dead. We dropped unguided bombs and cluster munitions in areas where civilians were bound to find them, and they did.

When the Iraqi's surrendered to us we provided them with food and water and all the other things required by the geneva convention.

and some we raped with broomsticks and treated like animals. we are better than that... or at least we should be. We have no room to speak as being great liberators if we have to resort to terroristic tactics.

Now, as then, you're on the side of the Iraqi's. Why do you jump to the defense of the enemy first?

You call them the enemy - not me. Saddam was my enemy years ago when he gassed his own people... your kind wasn't doing a damned thing, except giving him more weapons.

Iraqi's are not the enemy - they are victims of their leader's ideologies, yet they suffer while their leaders get treated like royalty... and given trials. The people we shot while liberating the country didn't get that privelege.

Please answer I would really like to know.

I have a whacky belief. If someone wrongs you, you get even with THAT person. not their family, not their subjugates... THEM.

And just them.

We DO have the capability to do that. And in fact, when snipers asked for permission to 'take down Saddam' Bush said to back off. Instead, innocents die so that we can crush their country.

The real issue here is Abhu Ghraibe though. And you are trying to obfuscate it with a bunch of diversionary stuff.

America is better than Abhu Ghraibe. When we start using one wrong to justify another we get caught in an endless spiral of revenge and death. We HAVE to be better. If we are not, then we justify every atrocity committed against us.

[witeshark]

Well it's certainly about time to call this over and done with. Let's move on

[fli]

Oh yes, joy! Yes, this makes me very proud...

[The-Enforcer]

At 8/6/04 12:26 PM, antiklaus wrote:

The Iraqi's from the beginning of the war when they took prisoners tortured and then shot our soldiers at close range.

Close range or long range, dead is dead. We dropped unguided bombs and cluster munitions in areas where civilians were bound to find them, and they did.

My point is they didn't comply with the geneva convention. When Prisoners of war are taken into custody they have to be treated well. That means food, water, and clothing. The Iraqi's tortured them and shot them. A far cry from a civil captor.

And please provide a source regarding the "unguided bombs and cluster munitions" that would be in violation of the geneva convention also and I don't believe it happened.

[RedSkunk]

At 8/6/04 11:57 AM, The_Enforcer wrote: Now, as then, you're on the side of the Iraqi's. Why do you jump to the defense of the enemy first?

I don't consider Iraqi's "enemies".

[antiklaus]

And please provide a source regarding the "unguided bombs and cluster munitions" that would be in violation of the geneva convention also and I don't believe it happened.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/us040103.htm

http://www.mcc.org/clusterbomb/iraq/ (complete with photos for the literarily challenged)

http://www.independent-media.t...=Iraqi%20Civilian%20Casualties
(if videos are more to your liking)

of course the situation was much worse in Afghanistan where the food relief packages just happened to be the same size and color as the cluster munitions that were unexploded...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/meanandnasty.html

[Spookshow]

What's more important:

Torturing someone that we KNOW has information that could stop an attack

-or-

Our morals.

[bombkangaroo]

morality is a highly subjective topic. i'd say you should be mor concerned with arguing the law concerning such actions.

[RedSkunk]

At 8/10/04 05:43 AM, Spookshow wrote: Torturing someone that we KNOW has information that could stop an attack

This is a hypothetical situation that holds no sway in the real world. We can't know for a fact that they have information, and we can't know for a fact that it would stop anything.

It's all hypothetical, and it's not a very good justification to torture.

[antiklaus]

At 8/10/04 05:43 AM, Spookshow wrote: What's more important:

Torturing someone that we KNOW has information that could stop an attack

If we resort to torture, we vindicate every person who uses these tactics against us. And I might add, of the many people tortured at Abhu Ghraibe, including the woman who was brutally raped and filmed, only two of them were even SUSPECTED of having useful information.

This was a psy op. Clear and simple.

-or-

Our morals.

If we are going to be taken seriously in the global community, we have an OBLIGATION to hold the moral high ground.

If we had held the moral ground, I guarantee you that 911 would never have happened.

[The-Enforcer]

At 8/10/04 05:36 AM, antiklaus wrote:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm

These bombs were clearing an area for our troops.

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/us040103.htm

This one is about some human rights activist complaining.

http://www.mcc.org/clusterbomb/iraq/ (complete with photos for the literarily challenged)

http://www.independent-media.t...=Iraqi%20Civilian%20Casualties
(if videos are more to your liking)

This one is great.

"Abbas Abdulla and Saif Ibrihim look at the dark, scorched spot along the side of a road where three boys died the day before while playing with live ammunition that they had picked up. Two other boys were seriously injured in the blast, losing limbs."

I guess their parents didn't teach them that live ammunition is dangerous.

of course the situation was much worse in Afghanistan where the food relief packages just happened to be the same size and color as the cluster munitions that were unexploded...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/meanandnasty.html

Yeah considering one is a cylinder and the other is a flat packet. Man I can't believe they didn't teach shapes in school. Oh wait! They didn't have schools before we got there.

Antiklaus you're just like John Kerry. You're defeating yourself.

Nice sources, they continue to prove MY point.

[bombkangaroo]

At 8/10/04 09:13 PM, antiklaus wrote: I might add, of the many people tortured at Abhu Ghraibe, including the woman who was brutally raped and filmed, only two of them were even SUSPECTED of having useful information.

i don't think enforcer is trying to argue in favour of abuses. his post was clearly intended to be interpereted as meaning that torture should be used a s ameans to extract information.
you seem to be misunderstanding him there.

[antiklaus]

At 8/11/04 02:55 PM, The_Enforcer wrote:

At 8/10/04 05:36 AM, antiklaus wrote:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm

These bombs were clearing an area for our troops.

Theer were clusted bombs and unguided munitions. And they went into civilian areas. Regardless of your 'reasons' it was morally wrong.

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/us040103.htm

This one is about some human rights activist complaining.

about the US using unguided ordinance in civilian areas.

http://www.mcc.org/clusterbomb/iraq/ (complete with photos for the literarily challenged)

http://www.independent-media.t...=Iraqi%20Civilian%20Casualties
(if videos are more to your liking)

This one is great.

"Abbas Abdulla and Saif Ibrihim look at the dark, scorched spot along the side of a road where three boys died the day before while playing with live ammunition that they had picked up. Two other boys were seriously injured in the blast, losing limbs."

I guess their parents didn't teach them that live ammunition is dangerous.

I'm sure your parents taught you how to identify unexploded tank rounds and mines? You can't possibly be that ignorant.

of course the situation was much worse in Afghanistan where the food relief packages just happened to be the same size and color as the cluster munitions that were unexploded...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/meanandnasty.html

Yeah considering one is a cylinder and the other is a flat packet. Man I can't believe they didn't teach shapes in school. Oh wait! They didn't have schools before we got there.

half buried under sand, how much are two identically colored packages going to look? you cant make out the shape there. And remember - some of these were hungry two and three year olds.

It makes no difference to you that we dropped these food packages in the same areas we cluster bombed either I suppose.

Antiklaus you're just like John Kerry. You're defeating yourself.

Nice sources, they continue to prove MY point.

If 'Your point' is that you are proving you are a complete idiot without a lick of sense, then MISSION FRIGGIN ACCOMPLISHED. You refuse to exercise the capablilty of imagining a situation from another point of view. Especially that of a child who doesn't know better.

Tank shells and mines and cluster ordinance should NEVER be a lesson a child should have to learn about, especially in the ways we have forced upon others. IF you cannot see that then you have a brain like a block of steel and a heart like a lump of granite.

[bumcheekcity]

At 8/6/04 11:57 AM, The_Enforcer wrote: How can you compare a beheading to the the abu ghraib scandal? The Iraqi's from the beginning of the war when they took prisoners tortured and then shot our soldiers at close range. When the Iraqi's surrendered to us we provided them with food and water and all the other things required by the geneva convention.

And then tiedf them named to other Iraquis and put electrodes on theit balls. Lovely people, we are.

[The-Enforcer]

At 8/11/04 08:39 PM, antiklaus wrote: If 'Your point' is that you are proving you are a complete idiot without a lick of sense, then MISSION FRIGGIN ACCOMPLISHED.

*yawn* don't care.

The way I see it an American life is worth more than any other life on earth. So when they bomb the hell out of an area to make it a little bit safer for our GI's I will not object. I want as many of our troops to come home as possible.