Remember all that talk about torture & rape rooms?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...0347/1010/STATE

 

A.C.L.U. Presents Accusations of Serious Abuse of Iraqi Civilians

New York Times

 

WASHINGTON, Jan. 24 - The American Civil Liberties Union released documents on Monday describing complaints of serious abuse of Iraqi civilians, including reports of electric shocks and forced sodomy, and accused the military of not thoroughly investigating the cases.

 

The documents list dozens of allegations of abuse at American detention centers - the use of cigarettes to burn prisoners, aggressive dogs, electric shocks, sexual humiliation and beatings - that began at about the same time such acts were occurring at Abu Ghraib prison.

 

But it is not always clear whether every case described is a new incident; many details, including the names of victims and of the accused, were blacked out before the documents were provided to the A.C.L.U. as part of its litigation.

 

Jameel Jaffer, a lawyer for the organization, said gaps in the files made it difficult to draw any definite conclusions about a particular case. "But overall there does seem to be a clear pattern here, and that is that it is difficult to say the government was aggressive in investigating these allegations of abuse," he said.

 

Lt. Col. Pamela Hart, an Army spokeswoman, declined to discuss any particular case mentioned in the documents. But she said, "The Army has aggressively investigated all credible allegations of detainee abuse and we've held soldiers accountable for their actions."

 

The documents list several sites where abuses are reported to have taken place, many of them at the detention center at Adhamiya Palace, one of Saddam Hussein's villas in Baghdad. The documents contain allegations from detainees about being abused and statements from American contractors who said they saw the effects of beatings.

 

In one case, a detainee said that while at Adhamiya Palace, his nose was pinched while water was poured down his throat, a wooden stick was inserted forcefully into his anus and electric shock was applied to his genitals. Some of the allegations were directed against Iraqi policemen. One contractor who said he was assigned to screen detainees brought to Abu Ghraib said that many who had come from Adhamiya arrived with serious injuries, including one boy with a bleeding rectum. He said the boy had told him that an Iraqi policeman had sodomized him with a soda bottle and that American soldiers were present.

 

Most of the previously undisclosed allegations concern the early months of last year, while some are said to have occurred as recently as July. The more than 4,000 pages of documents were released by the Army in response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups that have accused American forces of serious abuse, even torture, in treating detainees.

 

The new documents show that some allegations of assault were investigated and soldiers were disciplined. Mr. Jaffer, of the A.C.L.U., said that in the more than 50 cases mentioned, military investigators had ruled in all but a few that there was insufficient evidence to proceed.

 

The new accusations generally concern the behavior of American Special Forces, as opposed to prison guards or interrogators, who have been accused at Abu Ghraib.

 

The files released on Monday concerned only cases that had been resolved by military investigators; there may be other cases still under investigation.

 

Colonel Hart said that more than 300 criminal investigators had looked into accusations of mistreatment of detainees and that more than 100 military members had been disciplined. "The Army's record of investigating detainee abuse continues to be thorough and fair," she said.

 

Really glad we went out of our way to free the Iraqi's from Saddam's torture chambers and rape rooms so that we could run torture chambers and rape rooms of our very own design!

[Jingus 0]

But it is not always clear whether every case described is a new incident; many details, including the names of victims and of the accused, were blacked out before the documents were provided to the A.C.L.U. as part of its litigation.

 

Ya know, it would help their case out a lot if the ACLU could provide those names. I find it difficult to take this seriously without any way of knowing who was supposedly victimized and who supposedly committed the crimes.

[edotherocket 0]

Poor Iraqis. They keep getting sodomized.

[Matt Young 0]

Poor Iraqis. They keep getting sodomized.

They shouldn't take that for granted. Newfoundlanders had to fight for their right to sodomize.

[C Dubya 04 0]

But it is not always clear whether every case described is a new incident; many details, including the names of victims and of the accused, were blacked out before the documents were provided to the A.C.L.U. as part of its litigation.

 

Ya know, it would help their case out a lot if the ACLU could provide those names. I find it difficult to take this seriously without any way of knowing who was supposedly victimized and who supposedly committed the crimes.

I think that the ACLU was not provided with the names. Not the other way as you described.

[Guest INXS]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. I'm trying not to think of the atrocities that will come to light when this invasion is over.

[Jingus 0]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you'd instantly believe any wild claims made against the US forces despite the fact that there's NO PROOF.

 

I think that the ACLU was not provided with the names. Not the other way as you described.

 

Well then, they're making a Dan Rather-ish mistake by releasing those documents as if they were infallible.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. I'm trying not to think of the atrocities that will come to light when this invasion is over.

One of them being your posting...

[cbacon 0]

That made no sense.

 

Wait, wait, i'll fill in the next reply for you KKK, "just like your posting!" OLOL

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Bah, I was just playfully teasing INXS. Don't worry, I don't bother reading most of what you type anyway -- you're Cerebus' bitch. INXS is all mine...

[Guest wildpegasus]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you'd instantly believe any wild claims made against the US forces despite the fact that there's NO PROOF.

 

I think that the ACLU was not provided with the names. Not the other way as you described.

 

Well then, they're making a Dan Rather-ish mistake by releasing those documents as if they were infallible.

I think it's completely logical that this would happen. I predicted it way before reports even came out. I say we're not even hearing the worst of it.

 

Proof is always nice but just because proof isn't there doesn't mean something didn't happen. If theoretically there was some type of camera that could oversee everything that happened on this planet and I was forced to bet one way or another on this scenario that was painted I wouldn't even hesitate for a second to bet that the US troops were up to even worse stuff than what this article describes.

[Justice 0]

Proof is always nice but just because proof isn't there doesn't mean something didn't happen. If theoretically there was some type of camera that could oversee everything that happened on this planet and I was forced to bet one way or another on this scenario that was painted I wouldn't even hesitate for a second to bet that the US troops were up to even worse stuff than what this article describes.

If only we used this legal doctrine ALL the time.

 

Seriously, there is a difference between lacking proof on a theory, and lacking proof on an accusation. With one, it doesn't matter. With the other, it's the basis for the entire thing.

[NoCalMike 0]

I am waiting for Rush's next "oh, it is just fraterinity pranks people...big deal" blast.

[Guest BDC]

Proof is always nice but just because proof isn't there doesn't mean something didn't happen. If theoretically there was some type of camera that could oversee everything that happened on this planet and I was forced to bet one way or another on this scenario that was painted I wouldn't even hesitate for a second to bet that the US troops were up to even worse stuff than what this article describes.

 

To make accusations like this, there damned well better be proof of it.

[Guest Astro]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pict...afar/html/1.stm (with pics)

 

US Troops shoot civilians

 

 

and the supposed result:

 

http://www.geocities.com/korenga/dead-iraqi3.jpg

[Justice 0]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pict...afar/html/1.stm (with pics)

 

US Troops shoot civilians

 

 

and the supposed result:

 

http://www.geocities.com/korenga/dead-iraqi3.jpg

US soldiers in Iraq approach a car after opening fire when it failed to stop as requested. Despite warning shots it continued to drive towards their dusk patrol in Tal Afar on 18 January.

[Special K 0]

Let me preface this by saying I was against the war from the get-go, and think that torturing prisoners is fucked ('specially when estimates our own people admit that at least half of the Iraqis held now are probably innocent.)

Regarding the above post, yeah, that's shocking, but what the fuck are American troops over there supposed to do? Let every car right near them? They'd all be fucking dead. The terrorists there bring this on innocent Iraqi people for using suicide tactics.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you'd instantly believe any wild claims made against the US forces despite the fact that there's NO PROOF.

These aren't all US forces, a lot of them have to do with those Iraqi police we've trained, too.

 

And it's not like you need to see pictures of someone being violated to add legitimacy to a flood of complaints. We didn't see Saddam's torture rooms, but we knew they were there.

[Justice 0]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you'd instantly believe any wild claims made against the US forces despite the fact that there's NO PROOF.

These aren't all US forces, a lot of them have to do with those Iraqi police we've trained, too.

 

And it's not like you need to see pictures of someone being violated to add legitimacy to a flood of complaints. We didn't see Saddam's torture rooms, but we knew they were there.

Actually, uh, yeah we did, just so you know.

[Jingus 0]

These aren't claims, these are fucking rumors. THERE ARE NO NAMES. None, for either the alleged perpetrators or the alleged victims. No proof whatsoever. Not "circumstantial proof" or "controversial proof" or even "fucking weak proof". NO PROOF.

[Special K 0]

Perhaps they should look in the pudding.

[SuperJerk 0]

But I thought in Bush's Inaugural speech, he said he was in favor of expanding human rights worldwide![/naive]

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Proof is always nice but just because proof isn't there doesn't mean something didn't happen.

wildpegasus anally raped and ate the genitals of 18 children yesterday.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Actually, uh, yeah we did, just so you know.

Okay, maybe politicians did, but I haven't. I don't want to personally, but that kind of thing isn't made accessable to the public for reasons good and bad.

[Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0]

This reeks of bullshit. Not a hint of any proof, just a lot of rumors as Jingus said.

 

a lot of them have to do with those Iraqi police we've trained, too

 

If the acts have been committed by the Iraqi police, why the hell is the ACLU getting involved in this. They didn't get involved when Saddam was in control, so why should they interfere if the acts have been done by the Iraqi forces. I though ACLU stood for American Civil Liberties Union

[cbacon 0]

This reeks of bullshit. Not a hint of any proof, just a lot of rumors as Jingus said.

Given the Abu Gharib scandal as well as human rights violations in Guatanamo Bay and other facilities in Iraq, why are you so easy to dimiss this as bullshit?

 

I'll give naysayers the benefit of the doubt until there's concrete proof although I'm sure we'll be seeing footage of such violations and more wonderful abuse scandals as this war wages further. Considering this all falls under the an explicit chain of command and all...

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Since we can't seem to understand that these torture claims aren't just second-hand claims:

 

Torture in Iraq Still Routine, Report Says

Detainees Beaten, Hung by Wrists, Shocked by Security Forces, Rights Group Finds

 

By Doug Struck

Washington Post Foreign Service

Tuesday, January 25, 2005; Page A10

 

BAGHDAD, Jan. 24 -- Twenty months after Saddam Hussein's government was toppled and its torture chambers unlocked, Iraqis are again being routinely beaten, hung by their wrists and shocked with electrical wires, according to a report by a human rights organization.

 

Iraqi police, jailers and intelligence agents, many of them holding the same jobs they had under Hussein, are "committing systematic torture and other abuses" of detainees, Human Rights Watch said in a report to be released Tuesday.

 

Legal safeguards are being ignored, political opponents are targeted for arrest, and the government of interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi "appears to be actively taking part, or is at least complicit, in these grave violations of fundamental human rights," the report concludes.

 

A spokesman for Allawi declined to comment, Monday and said "I will put this report on the prime minister's desk tomorrow to see if he has any reaction."

 

Ibrahim Jafari, an interim vice president, said in an interview that security forces needed to be tougher to combat the campaign of violence by opponents of the election.

 

"I think the security people are not arresting enough and are releasing them too quickly," Jafari said. "And many of the security people are cooperating with the criminals. I think we have to put security as our priority."

 

The Human Rights Watch report acknowledged that Iraq was "in the throes of a significant insurgency" in which 1,300 police officers and thousands of civilians were killed in the last four months of 2004. But it argued that "no government, not Saddam Hussein's, not the occupying powers and not the Iraqi Interim Government, can justify ill-treatment of persons in custody in the name of security."

 

The report was based on interviews with 90 current and former detainees in Iraq conducted between July and October last year, many of them interviewed when they were brought to court for initial proceedings. Of those, 72 said they were "tortured or ill-treated," the report says. It recounts numerous individual cases of torture, and says the victims often had fresh scars or bruises.

 

"I was beaten with cables and suspended by my hands tied behind my back," Dhia Fawzi Shaid, 30, a resident of Baghdad, told the human rights investigators, according to the report. "I saw young men there lying on the floor while police [stepped] on their heads with boots. It was worse than Saddam's regime."

 

Another, identified in the report as Ali Rashid Abbadi, 21, said he was arrested by police after the bombing of a liquor store on July 11. "The police came and started hitting us," he told Human Rights Watch. "They shouted at us to confess. . . . We were blindfolded and our hands were tied behind our backs. They poured cold water over me and applied electric shocks to my genitals."

 

Abbadi was later released by a judge for lack of evidence, the report says.

 

The report deals with the conduct of Iraqi authorities but not that of U.S. military forces at three U.S.-run detention facilities in Iraq, including Abu Ghraib. The three sites currently hold about 9,000 prisoners.

 

The Washington Post contacted several people whose cases were included in the report. They declined to speak to a reporter, saying they feared retaliation by police.

 

"The majority of detainees . . . stated that torture and ill-treatment during the initial period was commonplace" in jails run by the Interior Ministry, the report says. The abuses included "routine beatings . . . using cables, [rubber] hosepipes and metal rods . . . kicking, slapping and punching, prolonged suspension from the wrists," as well as electric shocks to the genitals and long periods spent blindfolded and handcuffed.

 

Hania Mufti, the Baghdad director of Human Rights Watch and chief author of the report, said she did not find examples of abuses that were on a par with the worst atrocities committed under Hussein's rule, such as mock executions, disfigurement with acid or sexual assaults on family members in front of prisoners. But in many other respects, she said, treatment of those swept up by police had changed little.

 

"Many of the same people who worked in Saddam's time are still doing those jobs today. So there is a continuity of personnel and of mind-set," she said in an interview. "I think the Iraqi people themselves thought there was going to be a different system. Every day, they are finding it is not so different."

 

The report also says authorities made a mockery of legal safeguards. People said they were arrested without warrants and held without charges for days, weeks or months. Police officials ignored summonses from judges, and judges who became too demanding of authorities were removed from their jobs.

 

"The message has not gone out from the government that torture will not be tolerated," Mufti said. And foreign advisers hired to assist the Iraqi police have failed to object, she said.

 

The report relates "the only known case in which U.S. forces intervened to stop detainee abuse." It said scouts from an Oregon Army National Guard unit saw Iraqi guards at an Interior Ministry compound abusing detainees on June 29. A soldier took pictures through his rifle scope of detainees who were blindfolded and bound.

 

According to an account related in the report by Capt. Jarrell Southal of the National Guard, his soldiers entered the compound and found bound prisoners "writhing in pain" and complaining of lack of water. They gave water to the men, moved them out of the sun and then disarmed the Iraqi police. But when the Oregon soldiers radioed up their chain of command for instructions, they were ordered to "return the prisoners to the Iraqi authorities and leave the detention yard."

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2005Jan24.html

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

OBV. YOUR LYING

WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA???!??

 

There, now no one else has to say it and actually mean it.

[nl5xsk1 0]

Given the Abu Gharib scandal as well as human rights violations in Guatanamo Bay and other facilities in Iraq, why are you so easy to dimiss this as bullshit?

Because there was photographic & physical proof of the atrocities there.

 

This story means little more than someone claiming on the internet that they have a wicked hot girlfriend. It's just a bunch of words until I see proof.

[Jingus 0]

There's still no proof other than the detainees' claims. Yeah, 72 people all telling the same story probably does indicate that there's some truth there. But that's still not proof.

 

"I was beaten with cables and suspended by my hands tied behind my back," Dhia Fawzi Shaid, 30, a resident of Baghdad, told the human rights investigators, according to the report. "I saw young men there lying on the floor while police [stepped] on their heads with boots. It was worse than Saddam's regime."

 

I am getting really goddamned tired of hearing "it's worse than Saddam!" when that is clearly not the case:

 

Hania Mufti, the Baghdad director of Human Rights Watch and chief author of the report, said she did not find examples of abuses that were on a par with the worst atrocities committed under Hussein's rule, such as mock executions, disfigurement with acid or sexual assaults on family members in front of prisoners.

 

Not to mention THOUSANDS of non-mock executions.

 

If these abuses are really happening, then they need to be stopped ASAP and the abusers need to be sufficiently punished. But there's still no real evidence for any of it.