BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Torture of Iraqi prisoners

 
  

Page: 1(2)3456

 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
14:33 / 03.05.04
Looks like the MoD in GB are now angling that the Brit pix are 'fakes', while the two squaddies who first brought them to the media are standing by their story...

In this kind of media climate, is not being paranoid just goddamn insane?

I mean, systematically lying to people over a sustained period of time is a documented guaranteed way to unloosen the old mindboplts, is it not? Step up, Governments of the world! The media is yours!
 
 
sleazenation
16:42 / 03.05.04
What I haven't heard as yet is anyone in the US or UK government commenting on either the use of civillian private contractors iin interrogation and the allegations of rape/torture surrounding them .
 
 
eddie thirteen
18:33 / 03.05.04
No, no, I was actually kidding about the eugenics program. Mostly. I can't lie and say it has no appeal at all. I've seen the smiling soldiers giving thumbs-up to the cameras as all of this was going on, and I have to say they look just like the assholes I remember making high school hell on people. They probably *were* those assholes just a few years ago. Are they really that hard to spot in a crowd? I wonder....

As to the pictures, the ones with blurry parts that they've run on CNN are plenty disturbing enough. I don't see why anybody would feel the need to produce fakes when the ones we know are real are that damning.
 
 
Loomis
19:07 / 03.05.04
Perhaps I'm being naive, but I can't help but wonder where the shock and anger is coming from on this issue. I find it difficult to imagine that there has ever been a war on this planet where torture was not practiced on prisoners. It seems like a pretty standard practice when you train people to kill, put them in a war zone where their brains are melted by stress, then put them in charge of prisoners who hours beore were killing their mates. It seems to me that it's a given of warfare, and if you support a war then you are conding this behaviour, Geneva convention or not. Which is of course one of the many reasons why I am against this war and indeed most wars.

Of course it's horrible, but I don't see how making an example of these men and watching Tony and George give press conferences about how outraged they are makes it any more possible to separate the good apples from the bad. Likewise with civilian deaths - it's a given in war.

We should without doubt be protesting this war. But I am concerned that by finding scapegoats to condemn, we simultaneously legitimize the actions of the "good" soldiers. I'm no more outraged by this than I am at the bombing of Baghdad which killed indiscriminately.
 
 
Simplist
20:34 / 03.05.04
Worse pictures have surfaced, appearing to show Iraqi women being gang-raped by American or British soldiers. Scroll down--the pictures you've already seen are at the top of the page, followed by the new ones about halfway down. Very definitely not work-safe, btw.
 
 
w1rebaby
22:02 / 03.05.04
Oh, that's nice.

Not sure about the source, they could be stills from some fucked-up porn film, but you can bet they'll be spreading around anyway....
 
 
MJ-12
03:54 / 04.05.04
Has anyone seen US or British troops in Iraq issued jungle camo?
 
 
ephemerat
07:36 / 04.05.04
Perhaps I'm being naive, but I can't help but wonder where the shock and anger is coming from on this issue. I find it difficult to imagine that there has ever been a war on this planet where torture was not practiced on prisoners. It seems like a pretty standard practice when you train people to kill, put them in a war zone where their brains are melted by stress, then put them in charge of prisoners who hours beore were killing their mates.

Well, quite. In fact this is pretty much what Andy McNab (former SAS soldier and recipient of Iraqi torture) argued in an article for the Sunday Telegraph. He blames the chain of command for failing to restrain their soldier's baser instincts (Access to the Telegraph site requires a free registration process):

"I was shocked when I saw the appalling pictures of the American soldiers humiliating and torturing Iraqi prisoners - but I wasn't surprised. The uncomfortable reality is that many soldiers could do what those men and women did. In Bosnia, the Canadians were alleged to have roasted prisoners over fires. The French in Algeria tortured their victims horribly. And yesterday there were fresh allegations that British soldiers had tortured an Iraqi prisoner, urinating on him and leaving him for dead after they chucked him out of a moving vehicle. The Army is saying that six corporals are likely to face charges related to the incident. But then what should we expect? Soldiers are trained to kill. They are required to be violent and aggressive. In a war, you see your friends die. Your emotions - anger, fear, desire for revenge - become almost overpowering. The majority are able to handle this but, sadly, a few are taken over the edge."

Much as it saddens me, I think we're all aware that isn't just a few soldiers who are capable of such deeds. With the right combination of circumstances I doubt there isn't anyone on the planet who couldn't do such things.
 
 
ephemerat
07:40 / 04.05.04
Or maybe I'm not so sure - was that a strangely Freudian double negative in the last statement (it's too early)? I meant, of course, to (somewhat hesitantly) suggest that anyone could carry out atrocities given the right motivation and/or pressure.
 
 
Sir Real
11:36 / 04.05.04
the thing which gets forgotten in the rush to 'support the troops' here in the u.s. is that military (and police) work tends to attract the type of people looking for oppurtunities for sanctioned sadism. anyone not blindly patriotic who has lived near a miltary base will have noticed this.

surely people like us would never do such a thing...
 
 
Pingle!Pop
12:05 / 04.05.04
... I think around 60% would do pretty much anything, if Stanley Milgram's experiment is anything to go by.

Before the experiment was conducted Milgram polled fellow psychiatrists as to what the results would be. They unanimously believed that all but a few sadists would refuse to give the maximum voltage.

In Milgram's first set of experiments, 65% of experimental subjects administered the experiment's final "450-volt shock", though many were quite uncomfortable in doing so. No subject stopped before the "300 volt" level. The experiment has been repeated by other psychologists around the world with similar results. Variations have been performed to test for variables in the experimental setup. For example, subjects are much more likely to be obedient when the experimenter is physically present than when the instructions are given over telephone.
 
 
Lurid Archive
13:05 / 04.05.04
Interesting article,


Former Iraqi human rights minister Abdel Basset Turki [his resignation was accepted on Sunday] said yesterday US overseer Paul Bremer knew in November that Iraqi prisoners were being abused in US detention centres.

"In November I talked to Mr Bremer about human rights violations in general and in jails in particular. He listened but there was no answer. At the first meeting, I asked to be allowed to visit the security prisoners, but I failed," he said.

"I told him the news. He didn't take care about the information I gave him."


Which is something to think about.

Echoing some of the comments above, I think it has been well known that Iraqis have been detained indefinitely without trial, that urban areas have been cluster bombed and that snipers are deliberately targetting non-combatants like ambulance drivers. The civilian death toll in Fallujah alone is over 600, and our best guess (our overwhelming compassion prevents us from accurately recording the harm we cause) for the total number of Iraqi civilian deaths since the start of the war is as high as 10,000.

Torture is despicable, of course. But is it really any worse than all the other stuff we are doing?
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
15:05 / 04.05.04
I won't even get in to how this seems to happen in every war setting. No matter how "honorable" people are when they start a war (and yes, I DID put it in quotes), soldiers are told that the enemy is not human, which eventually leads to things like this. Add that to the whole "ends justify the means" that they are being told from the top down...how soldiers have been told that Iraq was behind 9/11...you've got a caldron that can only make poison.

But with the pictures we've been shown, how long will be it before someone who wants to further inflame anti-western sentiment creates pictures that are even worse, and gets them into the whisperstream? This is the sort of thing that worried me when the US got into Afghanistan, and I'm just amazed that the people in charge of this military adventure didn't think beyond getting the troops on the ground.
 
 
eddie thirteen
15:48 / 04.05.04
I'd like to be amazed, honestly, but it's just not in me. None of this -- the sadism, the attempts to squelch the media (everything from the hell the woman who snapped those photos of the flag-draped coffins has gone through to the transparent FCC crackdowns for "obscenity" on outlets that have been critical of the Bush administration), the poor justification for an unprovoked war that was not only morally unjust but apparently planned by a kindergarten class for special needs kids -- is really surprising at all if you're jaded and misanthropic, which increasingly seems a rational way to approach modern American life. There's a quote from sf novelist Jack Finney (that I just relocated in Stephen King's book on horror fiction, Danse Macabre) that's been running through my head off and on since we went into Iraq:

"I was...an ordinary person who long after he was grown retained the childhood assumption that the people who largely control our lives are somehow better informed than, and have judgment superior to, the rest of us; that they are more intelligent. Not until Vietnam did I realize that some of the most important decisions of all time can be made by men knowing really no more than the rest of us."

I think one of the most pernicious ways in which the conspiracy theory frenzy of the '90s affected people who tend to think different, or more, or whatever, than the "average" person was its introduction of the notion of sinister but knowledgable cabals of evil types who steer nations into terrible positions for their own dark (but incomprehensible) ends. It's becoming clearer that the Bush administration had no idea whatsoever what to anticipate in Iraq, and didn't especially care, and that's it. I don't think they knew any more than most of the rest of us, and I don't think they even wanted to know. Like who was the military official a week or so ago who, when asked, said he "thought" the US death toll in Iraq was (at that point) something like 500, when it was actually over 700? It's a pretty stupid thing to lie about -- an easily-checked fact -- so this is a person who was either (a) not well informed about a mission he is himself helping to operate or (b) lying, and stupidly. We're giving them too much credit. I think everything is exactly as it appears to be, and that basically a group of schoolyard bullies are now running the country, and they're every bit as violent and dullwitted as that statement implies.
 
 
Henningjohnathan
20:19 / 04.05.04
Does anyone remember the report of more than a year ago about two prisoners in US Custody in Afghanistan who were beaten to death? There was supposed to be an inquiry, but I haven't heard anything about it since.

I think this would have continued even despite Taguba's report had there been no photographs.
 
 
MJ-12
20:48 / 04.05.04
May 4, 2004 | KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- An inquiry into the deaths in 2002 of two Afghan prisoners at the main American base in Afghanistan has been going slowly, but already has prompted changes at the lockup, the U.S. military said Tuesday.

Human rights groups have strongly criticized the military for its near-silence about the December 2002 deaths of two Afghan men at a heavily guarded holding facility at Bagram Air Base, north of Kabul.

The slow pace of the investigation has left the American military facing damaging publicity on two fronts as it confronts new allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq.

"The investigation is ongoing due in large measure to the complexities associated with gathering evidence and interviewing persons who might have had access to the facility that have long since departed Afghanistan and in some cases departed the Army," military spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michele DeWerth told The Associated Press.


continued
 
 
sleazenation
22:03 / 04.05.04
And the latest news is.... 25 iraqi deaths in US custody include at least 2 murders commited by US citizens ....

from the BBC report...
The other murder was committed by a private contractor who worked for the CIA, the official said.

What the fuck are private contractors doing in a position where they are able to murder iraqi citizens who are in custody? And what kind of sentence can a US civilian expect for murder of an Iraqi?
 
 
w1rebaby
22:19 / 04.05.04
I'm a bit surprised that the CIA is employing contractors - are they not good enough torturers themselves?

(I'm not really surprised. It's clear why they do it. Information on private contractors is protected by all sorts of commercial confidentiality legislation, and they're "plausibly" deniable, even if, say, the contracting firm was set up by an ex-CIA member and only employs ex-CIA members. They're ideal for use in a lawless environment like Iraq, where the only restriction on their actions is negative publicity back home.)
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
03:55 / 05.05.04
Just remember that according to the Bush Administration, the Geneva Convention does not apply in this instance, because they have not declared war officially.

That's how they are able to have mercinaries...I'm sorry, CONTRACTORS and not be subject to Geneva Convention penalties.
 
 
sleazenation
08:43 / 05.05.04
Bush appeal to Arabs in abuse row

Mr Bush will say the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners is "shameless and unacceptable", his spokesman said.

I hope he meant 'shameful' rather than 'shameless'.
 
 
aus
13:10 / 05.05.04
Yesterday, for the first time, I heard a radio personality say something like "how come we're still hearing about the torture of Iraqi prisoners when it all happened months ago? Are we still going to be hearing about this next week?"

Odd that he didn't say the same thing about the Michael Jackson case...
 
 
Ganesh
13:24 / 05.05.04
I was gonna namecheck the Stanford Prison Experiment and Milgram's 60% - but you beat me to it. I love you, Barbelith.
 
 
Hieronymus
14:40 / 05.05.04
A friend of mine pointed me to the Frontline video of US soldiers enforcing a kind of Wild West vigilante justice schooled on talk show morality and giddy flexing of their power. For a peek into just how chaotic this 'liberation' was and is, click the last video at this webpage. It's in the prologue.
 
 
Pingle!Pop
14:50 / 05.05.04
I was gonna namecheck the Stanford Prison Experiment and Milgram's 60% - but you beat me to it. I love you, Barbelith.

... Just after posting that last entry mentioning Milgram, I thought of the Stanford Prison Experiment too (though I admit to not having known it by name).

Behold the group consciousness.
 
 
grant
16:51 / 05.05.04
It's clear why they do it. Information on private contractors is protected by all sorts of commercial confidentiality legislation, and they're "plausibly" deniable, even if, say, the contracting firm was set up by an ex-CIA member and only employs ex-CIA members. They're ideal for use in a lawless environment like Iraq,

Well, also be aware that private contractors are now filling an awful lot of roles previously held by public (and publically accountable) employees. It's one of the hallmarks of the neo-con system, actually -- part of that whole "shrinking the government and letting capitalism take over" thing.

In my home state, governed by Dubya's brother, they've replaced park rangers with Wackenhut employees. My better half is a social worker -- and her former supervisor is now a private contractor for a "social work firm." These are people who put kids in foster care when there's suspicion their parents are abusive, you know. Or who decide when you're mentally ill enough to present a danger to yourself and others and need to be put in a facility without your consent. Many of these social work contractors are former state employees... but not all, and of those that are, not all of them left state employ under the best of circumstances, or even with the best of recommendations.

So, in a way, this bit of the ongoing Iraq Unpleasantness is an extension of the conservative big-business-works paradigm as well as a possibly creepy way to get around public oversight.
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
17:49 / 05.05.04
As of today, the right wing talking point to try and bury this point is to blame the reporters, with one of the radio host this morning saying, "If one soldier dies because of this report, Dan Rather should be charged with treason."

Amazing. Just amazing.
 
 
sleazenation
17:54 / 05.05.04
So, what would be the best resources to search to discover the extent and range of jobs in occupied Iraq are being filled by 'private contractors'
 
 
grant
19:16 / 05.05.04
Well according to the Ft. Worth paper, the main civilians inside Al Ghraib were these guys, CACI International.

You can read about the top 100 federal contractors here (CACI is #19). And get the "inside scoop" on working conditions for CACI over here (not too informative, but still).

opensecrets.org gives us this list of other contractors involved only in the "rebuilding" part of reconstruction, I think. They say there are other firms.

The Center for Public Integrity lists over 70 firms in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they admit that their information is incomplete. CACI is not among the companies listed, for example -- I *think* their contract is with the CIA and not the whole government.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
00:27 / 06.05.04
jesus
U.S. Troops ride old lady "like a donkey."
 
 
Lurid Archive
11:37 / 06.05.04
Yet more photos obtained by the Washington Post.

The Washington Post also reports that Dubya is annoyed at Rumsfield and that the Pentagon is pretty miffed too.

This story has legs, it seems.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
12:08 / 06.05.04
Michael Howard's called for Piers Morgan (Daily Mirror editor) to resign if it turns out he was wrong about the photos of Brits torturing prisoners...


...not that I have any kind of love for Morgan, but surely he could call for Blair to resign if he was wrong about WMDs?

...actually, I think he probably did. But hey, people make mistakes, don't they Mr Tony?

Mr Tony?
 
 
sleazenation
12:16 / 06.05.04
The new Washington Post looks like bringing increasing pressure on Rumsfeld to resign.

Publicly, Mr Bush has defended Mr Rumsfeld.
"I've got some confidence in the secretary of defence, and I've got confidence in the commanders on the ground in Iraq," the president said during an interview with the US-sponsored al-Hurra network.


'some confidence' - damning with faint praise? The same article also reveals

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Richard Myers, has admitted that neither he nor Mr Rumsfeld immediately read the report (on proven cruelty in Abu Ghraib).

With revelations such as this, is it any wonder that many people think that this is the tip of the iceberg rather than a 'few bad apples'? Certainly in terms of US media coverage, this seems to have broken the dam - Even ABC News which just a few days ago was ignoring this story has been forced to cover it...
 
 
Lurid Archive
12:40 / 06.05.04
If Rumsfield were to resign, the Bush administration could claim that it is taking responsibility and use that to defuse this crisis. Thomas Friedman in the NYT is calling for that, and it makes a lot of political sense.

On the other hand, it is an admission that errors were made. Given that Bush has assiduously avoided apologising on Arabic TV, I don't see that this is something they will go for willingly. And the longer it drags out, the less politically effective a resignation becomes.
 
 
Rage
13:19 / 06.05.04
What the hell? The "worst pictures" link has now become "forbidden!" Let's hope it's my connection.
 
 
sleazenation
13:25 / 06.05.04
And the longer it drags out, the less politically effective a resignation becomes.
...but also the less politically effective and forced a resignation becomes the more damaging it is to a sitting president in an election year...
 
  

Page: 1(2)3456

 
  
Add Your Reply