The SM masters having fun in Iraqs prison

[pelastration]

I'm fine with that: based on that, none of the items in the list you quoted qualify as torture, with the possible exception of a and k. But there isn't enough information to substantiate a claim of torture. Again, the word 'torture' is used because of its connotation: murder and rape (they have apparently happened) are crimes but are not necessarily part of torture..

... with the possible exception of a and k?

Although the Tagabu report mentions torture, you can say from your desk: " there isn't enough information to substantiate a claim of torture.". Interesting.

h. (S) Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box,
with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his
fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture;

It seems to me that you read selective. The simulation is also considered a crime against human rights and a form of mental torture.

 

[pelastration]

Sue Rumsfeld for neglecting protection against STD/HIV?

We can assume that various forms of sexual abuse and torture exist also in other prisons or interrogations camps run by US forces. For sure this happens also in prisons of other countries.

Now I want to point a quiet important element that is even not mentioned in the report of Major General Antonio M. Taguba.

That report speaks - among other - also about a number of sexual ACTS.

But next to the various forms of sexual acts themselves (i.e. forced oral contact, rape, sodomy, ...) there is the DANGER of being CONTAMINATED by Sexual Transferable Diseases (STD) and HIV/AIDS when prisoners are forced to such acts.

In my opinion this is a new type of infringement of Human Rights, which can indeed give:

(1) a real physical contamination that - in the long run - may end in the death of the victim;
(2) an immense CONSTANT psychological stress on the victim to be contaminated, ever if there is no real contamination.

One of the photo's showed an oral sexual contact between two naked male prisoners in Abu Ghraib. At the 4th International Oral AIDS Conference held in South Africa, the risk of transmission through oral sex was estimated to be approximately 0.04 per cent per contact. Other sexual contacts have an higher risk-level of transmission.

I don't know the average percentage of the STD/HIV population in Iraq but there must be for sure a substantial number of them in a jail with 6,000 prisoners, nor am I aware of the percentage of STD/HIV carrying US soldiers.

Thus by using, allowing, tolerating or organizing practices or methods of sexual abuse - be it between prisoners or guards/interrogators abusing prisoners - the responsibles of the prisons or facilities bring the lives of the prisoners in an additional - potential life-dangerous - situation, and infringe their human rights.

So will the rapist(s) and the people ordering these acts also be prosecuted for this type of infringement of the human rights of their victims?
Who is accountable? Who shows to be neglecting the rights of these prisoners to be safeguard against high-risk infections? Can such an Iraq prisoner sue "someone", i.e. the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld? These can be interesting questions for lawyers, Human Rights Watchers and people from ICC, UN etc.

 

[amp]

Russ has the double think mentality. Raping a woman IS torture to HER by the definition Pel provided as it involves the elements stated. Causing MENTAL anguish IS torture. If you were forced to stay awake for several days would you be comfortable and relaxed? Your dismissiveness of obvious inhumanity and villany is disheartening.

 

[Adam]

Some people will gladly say black does not meet the definitions of black, and white doesn't meet the definitions of white, as long as they can maintain a death-grip on their delusions. Those people were tortured. Some were murdered.

 

[hughes johnson]

Causing MENTAL anguish IS torture. If you were forced to stay awake for several days would you be comfortable and relaxed? Your dismissiveness of obvious inhumanity and villany is disheartening.

During U.S. military basic training, advanced infantry schools, and combat operations, troops are routinely subjected to mental anguish and sleep deprivation. Have I been tortured? Am I entitled to a monetary settlement for this torture? If the Iraqis kept me up all night with their annoying attacks (obviously done on purpose) can I sue the Iraqi Government?

If I work on electrical power lines for three days during an emergency power outage, and I have to stand in an extremely uncomfortable position for hours on end while risking electrocution, can I sue? Will the UN help me? How about the red cross? Will they ignore this "obvious inhumanity and villany" leaving me "disheartened"?

 

[Adam]

During U.S. military basic training, advanced infantry schools, and combat operations, troops are routinely subjected to mental anguish and sleep deprivation... If I work on electrical power lines for three days during an emergency power outage, and I have to stand in an extremely uncomfortable position for hours on end while risking electrocution, can I sue?

It's voluntary.

 

[hughes johnson]

Some people will gladly say black does not meet the definitions of black, and white doesn't meet the definitions of white, as long as they can maintain a death-grip on their delusions.

You didn't have to actually put this in black and white, we've been reading your posts for a long time.

 

[hughes johnson]

It's voluntary.

So is taking up arms against the coalition.

 

[Adam]

It's voluntary to take up arms against the people who bombed your capital city and killed 8,000+ people, yes. How does this in any way make it voluntary for those POWs to be tortured? Really, try harder next time. Your argument preceding this post is completely lame, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion.

 

[amp]

During U.S. military basic training, advanced infantry schools, and combat operations, troops are routinely subjected to mental anguish and sleep deprivation. Have I been tortured? Am I entitled to a monetary settlement for this torture? If the Iraqis kept me up all night with their annoying attacks (obviously done on purpose) can I sue the Iraqi Government?

If I work on electrical power lines for three days during an emergency power outage, and I have to stand in an extremely uncomfortable position for hours on end while risking electrocution, can I sue? Will the UN help me? How about the red cross? Will they ignore this "obvious inhumanity and villany" leaving me "disheartened"?

A word I used 'forced' comes to mind. In military school, basic training, ect., you suffer those inconviences because your goal is to finish, to get thru it, you do because you must in order to progress to the next level. The prisoners don't have that same option/goal, its not voluntary with them, they can't say "I can't take it." and quit. When you have a dangerous job under the conditions you described, you again have put yourself in the position thru your own volition and if you don't like it again you can quit not so with the prisoners. The difference is comparable to corn and potatoes, apples and oranges, solid and liquid, IOW, there is no comparison.

 

[russ_watters]

Russ has the double think mentality. Raping a woman IS torture to HER by the definition Pel provided as it involves the elements stated. Causing MENTAL anguish IS torture. If you were forced to stay awake for several days would you be comfortable and relaxed? Your dismissiveness of obvious inhumanity and villany is disheartening.

I must remind you, amp, that I never said it was right or ok. But your extension of the definition of "torture" makes it cover virtually every physical crime there is. No, rape is not necessarily torture. Rape is rape - and that's bad enough.

Nereid had it right: hyperbole.

As a PF mentor you should check before you post disinformation. Yes Russ, Yes ... you can get AIDS through oral sex.

I'm standing by that one: the info you provided says that aids can be contracted by fluid transfer in open wounds - and that is unrelated to the sex act. You could similarly say it is possible to get AIDS by shaking hands with someone who has AIDS. You can call that factually accurate if you want, but its extremely misleading.

Also, if you notice, every single scenario listed in that faq has a yes answer. That's scientists not wanting to rule anything out entirely even if its never happened before.

Regarding choices: the choice 'should I or should I not become a terrorist?' seems pretty relevant to me.

Every criminal in jail will tell you they are there against their will, but every one of them made a choice and is now paying the consequences.

Even John McCain, who spent 5 years in the Hanoi Hilton made choices that put/kept him there. He chose to be in the Navy and even chose not to be released (most prisoners did) when offered - the rule was first in, first out. Choice or not, John McCain was tortured.

The reason I'm fighting this so hard is that flippant use of words makes them meaningless. You belittle those who actually were tortured to use the word on anyone who has ever received physical or mental pain.

Amp, what do you call publically beheading an American civilian? Burning several to death and dismembering them? Is that torture too?

 

[hughes johnson]

Amp, what do you call publically beheading an American civilian? Burning several to death and dismembering them?

Yes amp, I must have missed the thread, or even the post, that expresses your outrage at this.

 

[hughes johnson]

How does this in any way make it voluntary for those POWs to be tortured?

This is called a straw man. Nice try though.

 

[Adam]

Actually, it's not a straw man at all. Follow the bouncing ball:

1) You said US troops are tortured, and they don't sue for it.
2) I pointed out that it was voluntary.
3) You said it was voluntary for people to take up arms against the "coalition".
4) I pointed out that taking up arms does not constitute consent to be tortured.

There is no straw man from me. Read the definition of a straw man. Then try to come up with a rational response.

 

[Nereid]

Every criminal in jail will tell you they are there against their will, but every one of them made a choice and is now paying the consequences.

Unless I missed it, not even the US military claims that all those held in the prison were criminals; they were taken there for the primary purpose of gathering intel ... apparently by means that included what most folk would call 'torture', and which Dubya has declared unacceptable. No doubt many of those subject to ill-treatment were 'guilty' of nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless it is claimed that the US forces are infallible, or that all Iraqis are 'fair game' ... I doubt that Russ, hughes, phat, etc would make either such claim.

 

[Njorl]

Unless I missed it, not even the US military claims that all those held in the prison were criminals; they were taken there for the primary purpose of gathering intel ... apparently by means that included what most folk would call 'torture', and which Dubya has declared unacceptable. No doubt many of those subject to ill-treatment were 'guilty' of nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless it is claimed that the US forces are infallible, or that all Iraqis are 'fair game' ... I doubt that Russ, hughes, phat, etc would make either such claim.

The statement I heard was that 70%-90% were eventually released and considered innocent. This may be misleading. Many prisoners were considerd criminals, not security problems. Those who were abused were the ones considered security risks. I have not heard if the high release rate was applicable to both groups.

I would think that the common criminals would not be as high a priority, so they would not bother detaining them without good evidence. This leads me to believe that well over 70% of those detained for security reasons were eventually considered innocent. It may seem moot to some - is it worse to torture the innocent than the guilty? I'd say yes, others would say no.

Njorl

 

[pelastration]

CIA interrogations 'too brutal'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3709793.stm

CIA interrogations 'too brutal'

FBI chief Mueller was reportedly advised against using CIA methods

US officials have said the CIA's methods of interrogating suspected al-Qaeda leaders are too brutal, the New York Times reports.

Unnamed counter-terrorism officials told the paper that CIA methods were so severe, the FBI had directed its agents to stay out of many of the interviews.

The techniques are said to have been authorised by the Bush administration after the 9/11 attacks on the US.

None of the detainees, held in secret locations, are thought to be in Iraq.

The paper cites one case of a detainee who was subjected to a technique known as water boarding, in which a prisoner is strapped down, forcibly pushed under water and made to believe that he might drown.

Some have been hooded, soaked with water, roughed up and deprived of food, light and medication.

At least one CIA employee was disciplined for threatening a detainee with a gun during an interrogation.

Secret rules

The paper says FBI officials have advised their director, Robert Mueller, that the techniques would be prohibited in criminal cases.

Defenders of the secret interrogation rules say the methods stop short of torture and serious injury.

Current CIA officers are said to be worried that public outrage at the treatment of detainees in Iraq might lead to a closer examination of their treatment of al-Qaeda prisoners.

"Some people involved in this have been concerned for quite a while that eventually there would be a new president, or the mood in the country would change, and they would be held accountable," one was quoted as saying.

"Now that's happening faster than anybody expected."

The whereabouts of high-level al-Qaeda detainees is a closely guarded secret, and human rights groups have been denied access to the prisoners.

Officials say some have been send abroad.

"There was a debate after 9/11 about how to make people disappear," a former intelligence official told the paper.

The government was advised that if the CIA was considering procedures which violated the Geneva Convention or US laws prohibiting torture and degrading treatment, it would not be held responsible if it could be argued that the detainees were in the custody of another country.

 

[studentx]

Half those pics look fake
Especially the ones where several troops rape a woman, you would expect them to be tanned, but some are ridiculously pale. I don't think its possible to be pale in Iraq.

The photos of british troops abusing prisoners were faked.

 

[pelastration]

The photos of british troops abusing prisoners were faked.

Yes these were in my opinion of too good quality. Disinformation (both political sides + some journalists) is often used. Wasn't this a controversion about Rumsfeld making a disinformation cell, not that one with Feith/Wurmser but another one?

I believe a famous journalist of USA Today ran for 10 years fake stories, and some years ago also a German journalist was catched.

But the photo's on the US CD's were not faked.

 

[pelastration]

Two important events:

1. Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller and Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, were at the heart of decision-making on to hand over control of the prisons to military intelligence officials and to authorize the use of lethal force as a first step in keeping order

2. The U.S. military has prohibited several interrogation methods

more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24845-2004May13.html
Prison Abuse Scandal - Abu Ghraib

Brig. Gen. Janis L. Karpinski, commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade who was in charge of running prisons in Iraq, told Army investigators earlier this year that she had resisted decisions by superior officers to hand over control of the prisons to military intelligence officials and to authorize the use of lethal force as a first step in keeping order -- command decisions that have come in for heavy criticism in the Iraq prison abuse scandal.

Karpinski spoke of her resistance to the decisions in a detailed account of her tenure furnished to Army investigators. It places two of the highest-ranking Army officers now in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller and Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, at the heart of decision-making on both matters. She has been formally admonished by the Army for her actions in Iraq. She said both men overruled her concerns about the military intelligence takeover and the use of deadly force.
...
------
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5152222

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military, facing a scandal over the abuse of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib jail, has prohibited several interrogation methods from being used in Iraq, including sleep and sensory deprivation and body "stress positions," defense officials said on Friday.

The officials, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said these techniques previously required high-level approval from the U.S. military leadership in Iraq, but now will be banned completely.

The officials said the decision was made on Thursday by the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, on the same day that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld met with him on a surprise trip to the country and visited the Abu Ghraib facility on the outskirts of Baghdad.

A senior Central Command official said the U.S. military leadership in Iraq never actually approved a request from personnel at any prison to use any of the techniques that now are being prohibited, although these methods had been listed as among those for which approval could be requested.

Officials refused to say the methods were barred because they were onerous or violated the Geneva Convention governing the treatment of prisoners of war.
...

Of course this change in attitude of the Military doesn't include or just partly the Intelligence people. Maybe MI but the other agencies? And what about the other known and unknown prisons?

 

[pelastration]

1. If USA changed it's interrogation approach in Iraq but not in Afghanistan and in secret/hidden prisons like Guantanamo, Diego Garcia, then that means that the reason is not concerns about human rights but political motives.

Info on Camp Justice (Diego Garcia) http://www.globalsecurity.org/milit...a-imagery-2.htm

----

2. http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/05/d3a8345a-b19f-4b6f-94b0-6f427fd83e8a.html
The human rights group Human Rights Watch (HRW) has accused U.S. military personnel of "systemic" mistreatment of prisoners in Afghanistan, describing the practices as similar to those used in Iraq.

In a statement released in London, HRW said it has warned U.S. officials repeatedly about such problems since last year.

It said the U.S. should publicize the results of its internal investigations of abuse, prosecute those responsible, and provide access to independent monitors.

HRW says it has information that prisoners have been subjected to extreme sleep deprivation, exposure to freezing temperatures, and severe beatings at various locations in the country.

----
3. http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=510011&section=news

Rights groups says Afghan prisoner abuse systemic
Thu 13 May, 2004 13:26

KABUL (Reuters) - Mistreatment of prisoners by American forces in Afghanistan is systemic and not limited to a few cases, Human Rights Watch has said, a day after the U.S. military in Kabul launched an investigation into abuse.

The rights body demanded the immediate release of information about two Afghans killed in U.S. custody 18 months ago. The U.S. military says the investigations are continuing.

The military said on Wednesday it had opened an inquiry into complaints by a former police officer that he was beaten, kicked, taunted, sexually abused and photographed naked during roughly 40 days in American custody in Afghanistan last summer.

The U.S.-led force of 20,000 troops hunting militants from al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan is keen to contain the damage from the latest allegations, after facing a backlash across the Arab world for abusing prisoners in Iraq.

----
4. Human Rights Watch report: “Enduring Freedom:”
Abuses by U.S. Forces in Afghanistan
http://hrw.org/reports/2004/afghanistan0304.
Can be downloaded in pdf. at: http://hrw.org/reports/2004/afghanistan0304/afghanistan0304.pdf

 

[pelastration]

THE GRAY ZONE by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
How a secret Pentagon program came to Abu Ghraib.

http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact

(snip)

According to interviews with several past and present American intelligence officials, the Pentagon’s operation, known inside the intelligence community by several code words, including Copper Green, encouraged physical coercion and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners in an effort to generate more intelligence about the growing insurgency in Iraq. A senior C.I.A. official, in confirming the details of this account last week, said that the operation stemmed from Rumsfeld’s long-standing desire to wrest control of America’s clandestine and paramilitary operations from the C.I.A.

Rumsfeld, during appearances last week before Congress to testify about Abu Ghraib, was precluded by law from explicitly mentioning highly secret matters in an unclassified session. But he conveyed the message that he was telling the public all that he knew about the story. He said, “Any suggestion that there is not a full, deep awareness of what has happened, and the damage it has done, I think, would be a misunderstanding.” The senior C.I.A. official, asked about Rumsfeld’s testimony and that of Stephen Cambone, his Under-Secretary for Intelligence, said, “Some people think you can bull**** anyone.”

...

Rumsfeld reacted in his usual direct fashion: he authorized the establishment of a highly secret program that was given blanket advance approval to kill or capture and, if possible, interrogate “high value” targets in the Bush Administration’s war on terror. A special-access program, or sap—subject to the Defense Department’s most stringent level of security—was set up, with an office in a secure area of the Pentagon. The program would recruit operatives and acquire the necessary equipment, including aircraft, and would keep its activities under wraps. America’s most successful intelligence operations during the Cold War had been saps, including the Navy’s submarine penetration of underwater cables used by the Soviet high command and construction of the Air Force’s stealth bomber. All the so-called “black” programs had one element in common: the Secretary of Defense, or his deputy, had to conclude that the normal military classification restraints did not provide enough security.

“Rumsfeld’s goal was to get a capability in place to take on a high-value target—a standup group to hit quickly,” a former high-level intelligence official told me. “He got all the agencies together—the C.I.A. and the N.S.A.—to get pre-approval in place. Just say the code word and go.” The operation had across-the-board approval from Rumsfeld and from Condoleezza Rice, the national-security adviser. President Bush was informed of the existence of the program, the former intelligence official said.

...
and more.

 

[kat]

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13394

And so once again Sy Hersh is making news with his investigations “Torture at Abu Ghraib: American Soldiers Brutalized Iraqis. How Far Up Does the Responsibility Go?” in the May 10 New Yorker magazine and “Chain of Command: How the Department of Defense Mishandled the Disaster at Abu Ghraib” in its May 17 issue.



These articles, like much of his writing over three and a half decades, feature Hersh’s favorite villains – wrong-doing American soldiers, wicked American leaders and evil agents of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA.



Before you swallow these stories whole, as if they were accurate and true, you ought to know more about this aging enfant terrible of American journalism.

In going after the CIA regarding Chile, Hersh did more than ignore evidence that the Castro-supported Marxist Allende (who had been elected under odd circumstances with only about a third of votes cast for President) was moving to prevent honest future elections that would depose him. Hersh also accused the then-American Ambassador to Chile of being part of a plot to overthrow Allende, an error for which Hersh and the New York Times issued a rare apology on that newspaper’s front page.



“I don’t read him anymore because I don’t trust him,” Max Holland, a Contributing Editor of the ultra-Leftist The Nation magazine, told the Columbia Journalism Review’s Sherman.



“I read what he writes with some skepticism or doubt or uncertainty,” said Newsweek Assistant Managing Editor Evan Thomas (who, incidentally, comes by his own Leftist politics as grandson of longtime Socialist presidential candidate Norman Thomas).

And Hersh has reported false information in other stories. His 1991 book The Sampson Option (about Israel’s nuclear weapons program) relied largely on a source widely recognized as a notorious liar. Another of Hersh’s sources for this book later admitted to telling the author what he wanted to hear, although false, in exchange for money.



When Hersh published his 1983 book The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House, the editor-in-chief of the liberal The New Republic magazine Martin Peretz wrote: “There is hardly anything [in this book] that shouldn’t be suspect.”

 

[pelastration]

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13394

Yes, Kat, and ... ?

(quote)"Hersh, of course, would tell you that the world needs to know the information his methods obtain. He may be right. But that is also what U.S. Military Intelligence believed about getting information by hook or crook out of the criminals and terrorists confined at Abu Ghraib that could save American lives."(end quote)

This article focusses on Hersh as a person, and not on his actual findings about 'copper green' etc. It's not that some inaccurate information in the past of Hersh 35 years of news gathering means that this actual information is not correct. The nature of this new information is that's it's about 'hidden' operations and instructions. What is true and what's not will become clear within some time.
It seems to me that at this moment the knives are sharpened and put in position between all type of different civilian, military and intelligence parties involved. Now the name-calling starts to happen. Then you get people start to talk about more.

Added: And Hersh information on the photo's was correct, isn't it?

 

[ptex]

The U.S. should send all terrorist to Sadi Arabia or some other Islamic based country for interrogation they know how to get answers.

 

[Andy]

How do we know that the US pictures haven't been faked aswell? I have thought since this all kicked off that the pictures had been faked by anti war demonstrators or some other group that has something to gain from from undermining the US's power. Why would the troops take pictures of themselves torturing and abusing the prisoners? that's stupid, too stupid.

 

[pelastration]

The U.S. should send all terrorist to Sadi Arabia or some other Islamic based country for interrogation they know how to get answers.

It is already one of the actual pratices.

 

[pelastration]

How do we know that the US pictures haven't been faked aswell? I have thought since this all kicked off that the pictures had been faked by anti war demonstrators or some other group that has something to gain from from undermining the US's power. Why would the troops take pictures of themselves torturing and abusing the prisoners? that's stupid, too stupid.

Sure ... the other side of conspiracy theories.

Andy, 7 soldiers face military charges related to the abuse and humiliation of prisoners captured by the photo's at the prison.
Do they deny the photo's on which they are?
No.
Instead of telling the photo's are fake (which would be one of the possible defense strageties) they tell that military intelligence officials told military police to "prepare" the prisoners to make interrogations easier.

 

[Andy]

Alrite then, but why the hell did they take pictures of it all? Isnt that just incredibly stupid.

And that 'conspiracie theory' has occurred in the UK.

 

[jimmy p]

Yeah, the photos were analysed and basically called complete phoneys. For example, the rifles in the photos were SA80 Mk1's and the British army uses the Mk 2's now. The Bedford truck Mk1 where the photo's were taken is also not in service in Iraq, the Mk 2's are used. In fact the QM in the Army base recognised the truck just from the pictures. Another photo of a soldier urinating on a captive was proved false as the "urine" stream was too strong flowing and didnt turn enough times.

 

[Njorl]

Who cares what Lowell Ponte thinks? In his article, the fool refers to The Nation as "ultra-leftist", and conservative Evan Thomas as a "leftist". His comments on Hersh's credibility are actually quite sparse. Some are referenced to believable sources, others are referenced to more fringe sources. Most of his piece is just character assassination. He should take his own advice:

"Obsession and hate are dangerous traits in any journalist. It destroys a reporter’s perspective and ability to see all sides of a story. And it tempts a journalist, consciously and unconsciously, to ignore or bend facts in order to paint a black hat on those he has decided in advance are villains. This, say his critics, is Hersh’s great failing."

Njorl

 

[pelastration]

US troops 'abused Iraq reporters'

Fresh allegations have emerged in Iraq regarding the alleged mistreatment of Iraqi detainees by US troops.

The Reuters news agency says three of its local staff were subjected to sexually degrading treatment after being detained in January.

...

'Rape' threats

Reuters said it was unveiling the ordeal of its employees because the US military had concluded there was no evidence they had been abused - and in the wake of the scandal involving the mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison.

The Reuters employees were allegedly abused at two US military bases, after being detained for covering the shooting down of a US helicopter near the flashpoint city of Falluja.

Baghdad-based cameraman Salem Ureibi, Falluja-based freelance TV journalist Ahmad Mohammad Hussein al-Badrani and driver Sattar Jabar al-Badrani were held for three days before being released without charge.

They said they were forced to make demeaning gestures as soldiers laughed, taunted them and took photographs.

Among other things, they were allegedly deprived of sleep, had bags placed over their heads, were kicked and hit and forced to remain in stress positions for long periods.

"When I saw the Abu Ghraib photographs, I wept," Mr Ureibi said on Tuesday. "I saw they had suffered like we had."

He said soldiers told him they wanted to have sex with him, and he was afraid he would be raped.
...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3726675.stm

 

[pelastration]

1.Officers Say U.S. Colonel at Abu Ghraib Prison Felt Intense Pressure to Get Inmates to Talk
By DOUGLAS JEHL Published: May 19, 2004

WASHINGTON, May 18 — As he took charge of interrogations at Abu Ghraib prison last September, Col. Thomas M. Pappas was under enormous pressure from his superiors to extract more information from prisoners there, according to senior Army officers.

"He likened it to a root canal without novocaine," a senior officer who knows Colonel Pappas said of his meetings with his superiors in Baghdad. Often, the officer said, Colonel Pappas would emerge from discussions with two of them, Maj. Gen. Barbara Fast and Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, without a word, but "clutching his face as if in pain."

Colonel Pappas, commander of the 205th Intelligence Brigade, relocated his headquarters from Camp Victory, near the Baghdad airport, to Abu Ghraib just days after a visit to Iraq last fall by another high-ranking Army officer, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller. General Miller encouraged the Army colonel to have his unit work more closely with military police to set the conditions for interrogations.

By the end of September, Colonel Pappas had asserted control of Tier 1 of the prison's "hard site," used for interrogation of Iraqi prisoners, which he maintained until February, when he and his brigade were transferred to Germany at the end of their yearlong tour. After Nov. 19, by order of General Sanchez, Colonel Pappas and his brigade took command of all of Abu Ghraib prison, taking over authority from the 800th Military Police Brigade.

Now Colonel Pappas, who in sworn testimony to a senior Army investigator acknowledged that his subordinates directed military police officers to strip Iraqi prisoners naked and to shackle them, is the highest-ranking officer on active duty known to be under investigation for the abuses committed at Abu Ghraib prison.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/19/p...00&en=a141199a5f9cb73c&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

---
2. I wanted to know more about this Col. Thomas M. Pappas.

This simple google search http://www.google.com/search?q=Col.+Thomas+M.+Pappas&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 brings you to some interesting information, some classified that may bring your computer in 'warned' monitoring mode by MI. If you click "OK" on the warning window you are entered automatically. There is not button to cancel!
Can opening such page make you a potential "illegal combatant"? Sure. It's part of the War against terrorism, and the Cyber War is part of that "war". By looking to such a page you can be jailed without lawyer and civil right for an unlimited period.

Don't forget: The Patriot Act is to protect your freedom!

 

[kat]

---
2. I wanted to know more about this Col. Thomas M. Pappas.

This simple google search http://www.google.com/search?q=Col.+Thomas+M.+Pappas&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 brings you to some interesting information, some classified that may bring your computer in 'warned' monitoring mode by MI. If you click "OK" on the warning window you are entered automatically. There is not button to cancel!
Can opening such page make you a potential "illegal combatant"? Sure. It's part of the War against terrorism, and the Cyber War is part of that "war". By looking to such a page you can be jailed without lawyer and civil right for an unlimited period.

Don't forget: The Patriot Act is to protect your freedom!

Huh? Do you have a link to this "classified" informaiton you googled?...lol, I feel like humming the doo doo do doo's of the old "twighlight zone" shows.

BTW-I thought the Patriot Act was to protect MY freedoms as an American..not YOURS as a hostile Euro! :surprise:

 

[Njorl]

Huh? Do you have a link to this "classified" informaiton you googled?...lol, I feel like humming the doo doo do doo's of the old "twighlight zone" shows.

BTW-I thought the Patriot Act was to protect MY freedoms as an American..not YOURS as a hostile Euro! :surprise:

There was a rather tragically comical incident regarding a report of the prisoner abuse. The report was classified, but it was posted on the web, at FOX, I believe. The DoD asked FOX to remove it. They refused of course. They did, however, put up a warning that the report was classified, and that government employess would be violating the law to read it. High ranking people at the DoD did not see the humiliating nature of this warning, and it stayed up for a while. They thought it was a good thing. Since then the warning itself has become a popular joke, and has appeared on other web sites.

Njorl