New abuse photos found

CptStern

CptStern

suckmonkey
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
10,303
Reaction score
62
" The U.S. military has launched a criminal investigation into photographs that appear to show Navy SEALs in Iraq (news - web sites) sitting on hooded and handcuffed detainees, and photos of what appear to be bloodied prisoners, one with a gun to his head.

... A reporter found the photos, which since have since been removed from public view, while researching the prosecution of a group of SEALs who allegedly beat prisoners and photographed one of them in degrading positions. Those photos, taken with a SEAL's personal camera, haven't been publicly released.

Though they have alarmed SEAL commanders, the photographs found by the AP do not necessarily show anything illegal, according to experts in the laws of war who reviewed photos at AP's request.

Gary Solis, a former Marine Corps prosecutor and judge who teaches at the United States Military Academy, said the images showed "stupid" and "juvenile" behavior — but not necessarily a crime.

John Hutson, a retired rear admiral who served as the Navy's Judge Advocate General from 1997 to 2000, said they suggested possible Geneva Convention violations. Those international laws prohibit souvenir photos of prisoners of war. "


source
 
One of my big problems with the coalition.

It spreads 'peace' but does not seem to practice it in any way. Things need to be looked at.

Beating prisoned soliders breaks the geneva convention, it is not "juveneille" it is evil, and against the law.
 
Read this in the 20 Minuten today. They showed the pictures in it.
 
and Absinthe, im sure your avatar is something very rude....

anyway, i dont get it either Burner69, the Americans invade a country and replace the regiem to instate democracy, peace and all things western and good. Yet they do not comply with the geneva(sp?) convention, in Iraq or with the "non-combatants".... it's a terrible irony.
 
FFS, it is not the policy of the US or the Coalition to violate the Geneva Conventions. Anytime you get 100,000 or more people together, you're going to have some idiots. Sad fact of life. Deal with it. If it was policy to do these things, the headline would read, "OMFG,US REFUSES TO PROSECUTE SEALS INVOLVED IN ALLEGED TORTURE!!!!!!!"
 
Torture and humiliation is not something you can just sweep away and say "it happens"; it just goes to show that some of the people going over to wage war on those who oppose 'peace' are just as bad themselves. It simply is not on.

Then there's the fact that the Coalition has killed far more innocents than any terrorist organisation ever has.

The fact they swept through Afghanistan, promising them a new life, then just leave them to rot.

Then there's the reports of America using illegal weapons on Iraqi soliders and civilians; napalm. Although there is little evidence to support this, there are eye witness's, and burnt bodies.

Then there's the fact that America is ignoring the environment issues; which are far more important than terrorists. The fact is simple, if we carry on doing what we do the world will be, within a few hundred years, uninhabitable. Before then many millions will die as a result of rising seas and changing weather. America does not care, as changing it's ways are expensive; hell, there's wars to fight!

How about the fact that American government quite happily propagates issues for their benefit; resulting in minorities getting dicked. "Blacks/ Mexicans/ immigrants cause crime" "Pot smokers are criminals" "There are loads of terrorists everywhere."

How about being peaceful before we start telling others the same. That'd be nice for once.
 
that has nothing to do with it Hapless ..the article quite clearly says the government will investigate. You have to admit that's it's kinda bad publicity considering you're supposedly there to "help" the iraqi people
 
Did you guys not know that alot of the old torture fotos were doctored?
 
MaxiKana said:
Did you guys not know that alot of the old torture fotos were doctored?
Click to expand...
That's BS. The people in them admitted doing it, and just said they were being scapegoated, cuz it was happening everywhere.

Maybe one or two were changed, but the vast majority were real. And gave only a glimpse into a larger picture.
 
Only the British torture photos were doctored fakes.
 
Hapless said:
FFS, it is not the policy of the US or the Coalition to violate the Geneva Conventions. Anytime you get 100,000 or more people together, you're going to have some idiots. Sad fact of life. Deal with it. If it was policy to do these things, the headline would read, "OMFG,US REFUSES TO PROSECUTE SEALS INVOLVED IN ALLEGED TORTURE!!!!!!!"
Click to expand...

Yup. It is a sad fact of life. The more people you have the more idiots your going to have.

CptStern said:
that has nothing to do with it Hapless ..the article quite clearly says the government will investigate. You have to admit that's it's kinda bad publicity considering you're supposedly there to "help" the iraqi people
Click to expand...

It is bad publicity and this bad publicity goes a long way. It rubs off on all civil servants, damn shame. Until they find a cure for being an idiot, hey what can you do?
 
It annoys me that we torture Iraqis, but that really doesn't matter. What matters is that abu Ghraib, the Fallujah execution video and these new images drive the Iraqis themselves completely freaking insane.

A huge, huge component of the current resistance is people reacting to what we did in abu Ghraib. Good American kids are dying today because some retard decided to pull JAG officers out of US-administered detention centers. Without supervisors schooled in the minutiae of wartime law, the officers did what counterinsurgency armies always do. Which, if you read memos written by Gonzales among others, was precisely the idea.
 
[in reply to Stern]

Agreed 100%. As I said, memos prepared by Gonzales and the DOD demonstrate that they planned to commit torture in US facilities.

A big part of it was not dictating that torture happen per se, but removing the impediments to torture (e.g., supervising JAG officers) so that our troops would do what counterinsurgency troops always do. We're not any better than any other occupying army has ever been, except that we have discipline, supervision and consequences for soldiers who commit abuse. The magic of our leaders was to take away the discipline, supervision and consequences.

On the other hand, a number of torture practices were too widespread and culture-specific to have sprung independently from the minds of grunts. Somebody knew how to humiliate an Iraqi to the point that he (or she) will wish for death and that person seems to have gotten the word out.
 
seinfeldrules: here's the jist of it:


the cia is trying to bend the law to justify torture, it's not a "few bad apples", it's systematic


"Former intelligence officials say that lawyers from the C.I.A. and the Justice Department have been involved in intensive discussions in recent months to review the legal basis for some extreme tactics used at those secret centers, including "waterboarding," in which a detainee is strapped down, dunked under water and made to believe that he might be drowned."



tim: :cheers:
 
Those people disgust me. Anyone who dares justify anything they do doesn't deserve to breath the same air I do.
 
Stern if your child was taken from you and these means of interrogation would guarantee the location of your child and he's safe return. I'm sure your view of these drastic measures would change.

If a captured individual holds critical data, that which could potentially save lives. The information he holds is valuable and he's human rights should for the sack of humanity be violated.

Knowledge is power.

The idiots who are doing this for shit and giggles should be punished.

But, like I said. Critical data. By all means.
 
Well, then these are'nt exactly "new" then, in terms of whats become.

But rather, what has.

Good find -- I did'nt know these existed.
 
GiaOmerta said:
Stern if your child was taken from you and these means of interrogation would guarantee the location of your child and he's safe return. I'm sure your view of these drastic measures would change.

If a captured individual holds critical data, that which could potentially save lives. The information he holds is valuable and he's human rights should for the sack of humanity be violated.

Knowledge is power.

The idiots who are doing this for shit and giggles should be punished.

But, like I said. Critical data. By all means.
Click to expand...
Fairly well said. I agree that a terrorist should not be given equal rights if he holds information that if he doesnt give up will lead to the deaths of others. Including civilians and American troops.

"Please tell me where you are going to hit"
"No"
"PRETTY PLEASEEEEE. I am asking so nicely!"
 
burner69 said:
One of my big problems with the coalition.

It spreads 'peace' but does not seem to practice it in any way. Things need to be looked at.

Beating prisoned soliders breaks the geneva convention, it is not "juveneille" it is evil, and against the law.
Click to expand...

Well obviously because every single member of the coalition was involved and supporting those actions. [/sarcasm]

Truth is, there are ****ed up people in our military who do not belong. I agree with that, but saying such things like the coalition does not spread peace, but only violence are silly blanket statements, and the actions of these individuals cannot even possibly begin to mirror the rest of the armed forces.
 
Well, they've got a choice -- US Army, or Chinese Parade Military circa 1998. :D

You can either have us making some mistakes, or Chinese T55's running over Islamic Protestors. :D
 
The old 'ticking bomb' scenario comes back. You'd think people would give that poor thing a rest.

Torture doesn't work for two reasons. First, innocent people will tell the torturer anything he or she wants to know. I'm sure that every other inmate at abu Ghraib claims to know where exactly the WMDs are and where the resistance leaders are hiding out. Have we found WMDs or ended the resistance? No. Second, the people we really want are willing to die for their cause so torture is useless. They will continue lying until they are dead.

It's nice to see that the right-wing has moved beyond denying that torture happened, to justifying it. I think that pretty much speaks for itself.
 
The immates at Abu Ghraib were most likely not involved in the smuggling of WMD into neighboring countries.

And, if the knowledge was obtained via interrogation. It never reached the public, which is good. The situation would be easier to deal with.

And Tim.

Tim if someone you cared about was taken from you and these means of interrogation would guarantee the location of that person and his/her safe return. I'm sure your view of these drastic measures would change.
 
Gia I love it how he skips over this.
The idiots who are doing this for shit and giggles should be punished.
Click to expand...

Is that not what he was referring to, even though you already mentioned it?

PS Dont expect your question to ever be answered.
 
Yes Omerta, I know the ticking bomb scenario. The ticking grandkid scenario is just another iteration of the same story. Nobody is impressed.

Here's an excercise. Imagine that you have 1,000 people imprisoned. 70-90% of them are completely innocent, and maybe one or two know something meaningful about the resistance. You can be sure that the innocent ones will break fast under torture and lie to you. The mildly-guilty ones will break slower and tell you stuff that you probably already know. The really guilty ones will lie to you until they die.

From an intelligence perspective, how exactly are you better off?

Also, I'd be fascinated to hear from where comes this certainty about Iraq smuggling WMDs out of the country. My spider-sense tells me that a liberal media conspiracy factors in somewhere.
 
My spider-sense tells me that a liberal media conspiracy factors in somewhere.
Click to expand...

Nah, havent you heard? FOXNews reporters were actually in on the torture, providing wire for strangulation and batteries for electricution.
Here's an excercise. Imagine that you have 1,000 people imprisoned. 70-90% of them are completely innocent, and maybe one or two know something meaningful about the resistance. You can be sure that the innocent ones will break fast under torture and lie to you.
Click to expand...
You are basing that number off of what exactly?
 
Military sources acknowledged that as many as 70% of Ghraib inmates were innocent. Hersch, who has generally been proven right about such things, claims 90%. 70 to 90%.
 
The use of torture as an interrogation tactic is an extremely controversial subject. On the one hand if you have someone that knows critical information that could save lives, then extract the information by any means possible or kill him trying. On the other theres no way to verify how much someone knows and the torture of innocent people goes on regularly in Armys that don't regulate it.

It's easy to say "Torture is awful no matter what" or "F**k em', even the possibility is worth it." The truth, as with most things, lies somewhere in the middle. It looks to me from those pictures and certainly from Abu Grahib that the interrogations were for no other purpose than the amusement of the personell, which is reprehensible.
 
About those deaths. The Lancet study cites published, western reportage of 20,000 innocent deaths. Based on their own epidemiology work they estimate that the actual number, reported plus unreported, totals 100,000.

Do you honestly believe that every single dead noncom gets reported in the western press? Seriously.
 
GiaOmerta said:
Tim if someone you cared about was taken from you and these means of interrogation would guarantee the location of that person and his/her safe return. I'm sure your view of these drastic measures would change.
Click to expand...

This question. Quit dodging me.
 
Tim F said:
About those deaths. The Lancet study cites published, western reportage of 20,000 innocent deaths. Based on their own epidemiology work they estimate that the actual number, reported plus unreported, totals 100,000.

Do you honestly believe that every single dead noncom gets reported in the western press? Seriously.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3962969.stm

Iraq Body Count: 14-16,000
Brookings Inst: 10-27,000
UK foreign secretary: >10,000
People's Kifah >37,000
Lancet: >100,000

The Iraq Body Count, a respected database run by a group of academics and peace activists, has put the number of reported civilian deaths at between 14,000-16,000.
Click to expand...

It looks to me from those pictures and certainly from Abu Grahib that the interrogations were for no other purpose than the amusement of the personell, which is reprehensible.
Click to expand...
Which nobody is disputing, contrary to public belief.
 
As for the smuggling.

The Iraq Survey Group found a network of laboratories and safehouses controlled by Iraqi intelligence and security services that contained equipment for chemical and biological research and a prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing for Biological Weapon agents, that were not declared to the UN. It also appears that Iraq had the infrastructure and talent to resume production.

In a briefing for journalists reported on October 29, 2003, the director of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency said satellite images showed a heavy flow of traffic from Iraq into Syria just before the American invasion in March 2003. Retired Air Force Lieutenant General James Clapper Jr. said he believed "unquestionably" that illicit weapons material was transported into Syria and perhaps other countries. He said "I think people below the Saddam- Hussein-and-his-sons level saw what was coming and decided the best thing to do was to destroy and disperse. ... I think probably in the few months running up to the onset of the conflict, I think there was probably an intensive effort to disperse into private hands, to bury it, and to move it outside the country's borders."

In an exclusive interview with The Sunday Telegraph published on January 25, 2004, Dr. David Kay, the former head of the Iraq Survey Group, said there was evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before the start of the war to overthrow Saddam. "We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

As of October 2002 the US intelligence community believed that Baghdad had mobile facilities for producing bacterial and toxin BW agents; these facilities can evade detection and are highly survivable. Within three to six months these units probably could produce an amount of agent equal to the total that Iraq produced in the years prior to the Gulf War.

Some of the information about the mobile labs came from an Iraqi defector working with another government who was never interviewed by American intelligence. In his 05 February 2003 presentation to the UN Security Council Secretary of State Colin Powell said that "firsthand descriptions" had come from an Iraqi chemical engineer who had defected and is "currently hiding in another country with the certain knowledge that Saddam Hussein will kill him if he finds him." The US eventually realized that this source was related to a senior official in the Iraqi National Congress. And in late 2003 the US discovered that relevant analysts in the community missed a notice that identified a source cited as providing information that in some cases was unreliable, and in other cases was fabricated. The source was an Iraqi major who was provided to the US officials by the Iraqi National Congress.
Click to expand...
 
smwScott said:
The use of torture as an interrogation tactic is an extremely controversial subject. On the one hand if you have someone that knows critical information that could save lives, then extract the information by any means possible or kill him trying. On the other theres no way to verify how much someone knows and the torture of innocent people goes on regularly in Armys that don't regulate it.

It's easy to say "Torture is awful no matter what" or "F**k em', even the possibility is worth it." The truth, as with most things, lies somewhere in the middle. It looks to me from those pictures and certainly from Abu Grahib that the interrogations were for no other purpose than the amusement of the personell, which is reprehensible.
Click to expand...

No. Iraqis have a particular code of taboos and cultural rules which generally penetrate much more deeply than taboos that we have here in America (think fondling another guy, or the N-word). Those taboos include nudity in front of strange women and dogs, among others. The thumbs-up is a symbol a decent bit more offensive than the middle finger is here.

The abu Ghraib pictures were meant to humiliate prisoners to the point that they would prefer to die than go on in such a state. Torturing children or wives in front of the father served the same purpose.
 
Omerta, you need a link. Your question is silly: in order for the Ticking Bomb scenario to be valid you must know that there is a bomb and that the guy you have knows where it is. In that scenario most people, myself included, would agree that you do what you need to do.

Conditions in Iraq rarely if ever met those conditions. Torture as a means of fishing for information, which we were doing, is reprehensible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Warped Dan
We're ****ed
Replies
20
Views
4K
Mr Stabby
Mr Stabby
Jintor
Obama Torture Photo Turnaround!
Replies
24
Views
1K
Maturin
M
Warped
Do you live on the East Coast of the US??
Replies
5
Views
697
dfc05
dfc05
CptStern
Confessions of an Abu Gharib Torturer
Replies
14
Views
1K
Sulkdodds
Sulkdodds
Munro
Badge of Blood - Life on Mars
Replies
0
Views
2K
Munro
Munro
Back
Top