The SM masters having fun in Iraqs prison

[pelastration]

American dignity and freedom in Iraq? The great feeling of having the power? Shame on US ... bring prisoners to JUSTICE ?. What justice? Sick Justice.

A photo from TV shows an Iraqi prisoner with a hood over his head, standing on a box and with wires connected to his hands. Photo: Sky News
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/04/29/430_hoodedman,0.jpg

United States soldiers at a prison outside Baghdad have been accused of forcing Iraqi prisoners into acts of sexual humiliation and other abuses.

The charges, first announced by the military in March, were documented by photographs taken by guards in the prison.

Some of the photographs, and descriptions of others, were broadcast in the US on Wednesday by a CBS television news program and were verified by military officials.

Of the six people reported in March to be facing preliminary charges, three have been recommended for courts martial.

The program reported that poorly trained US reservists were forcing Iraqis to conduct simulated sexual acts in order to break down their will before they were turned over to others for interrogation.

In one photograph naked Iraq prisoners stand in a human pyramid, one with a slur written on his skin in English. Photo: http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/04/29/200_humanpyramid,0.jpg

In another, a prisoner stands on a box, his head covered, wires attached to his body. The news show said that, according to the army, he had been told that if he fell off the box he would be electrocuted. Other photographs show male prisoners positioned to simulate sex with each other.

"The pictures show Americans, men and women, in military uniforms, posing with naked Iraqi prisoners," a transcript said.

"And in most of the pictures, the Americans are laughing, posing, pointing or giving the camera a thumbs-up."

The program's producers said the army also had photographs showing a detainee with wires attached to his genitals and another that showed a dog attacking a prisoner.

The photographs were taken inside Abu Ghraib prison, near Baghdad, where US forces have been holding hundreds of Iraqis.

Gary Myers, the lawyer for one of the enlisted men who has been charged, said the military had treated the six enlisted soldiers as scapegoats and had failed to deal adequately with the responsibilities of senior commanders and intelligence personnel involved in the interrogations.

Officers at the prison, including a brigadier-general, faced administrative review, officials said.

Mr Myers said that the accused men, all from a reserve military police unit, were told to soften up the prisoners by more senior interrogators, some of whom they believe were intelligence officials and outside contractors.

"This case involves a monumental failure of leadership, where lower level enlisted people are being scapegoated," Mr Myers said. "The real story is not in these six young enlisted people. The real story is the manner in which the intelligence community forced them into this position."

[PLAIN]http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/29/1083224523783.html[/URL]

 

[studentx]

the US will bring them to justice :)

 

[Zero]

No surprise...the military is ill-suited to dispense justice, as anyone with a bit of sense should be able to figure out.

 

[pelastration]

the US will bring them to justice :)

You mean the prisoners?

 

[pelastration]

This is a case that came in the public. How much more ... undiscovered or unknown?

 

[pelastration]

Brig. Gen. Janice Karpinski, in charge of the prison, could be relieved of her command, blocked from promotion or receive a letter of reprimand after a noncriminal administrative investigation relating to events at Abu Ghraib prison, said Col. Jill Morgenthaler, a military spokeswoman in Baghdad.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4992675

But of course the good news is : That this Brig. Gen. can be hired by Halliburton. People with experience are high valued in the private business. ... and that's really good news ... isn't it? So Brig. Gen. Janice Karpinski can be soon back in Iraq to keep all 'stay in ... course'!

 

[member 5645]

So, the people in the military broke the military's rules, and are now being dealt with - I fail to see the point. Shame on ths US for stopping this rule breaking?

 

[Adam]

As always it works like this:
- Something good happens, and we can thank America, Bush, and "freedom".
- Something bad happens, and it's all the fault of those few little guys over there.

The USA signed laws to avoid this stuff, to prevent it happening, and every time they get busted, they attempt to avoid responsibility by simply blaming a few individuals.

 

[hughes johnson]

they attempt to avoid responsibility by simply blaming a few individuals.

When a crime is committed, it is generally considered proper to punish the people who committed that crime. Do you not understand the logic behind this concept?

 

[Adam]

The commander is responsible for the actions fo his troops. Command structure. Do you understand the logic behind this concept?

 

[member 5645]

The commander is responsible for the actions fo his troops. Command structure. Do you understand the logic behind this concept?

Yes, and the higher ups are punishing those and taking measures to stop this from happening.
Perhaps, when Australian servicemen go out raping, we should blame you - for in the eyes of a democracy, it is the people who are really in control of the government.

 

[russ_watters]

The commander is responsible for the actions fo his troops. Command structure. Do you understand the logic behind this concept?

There is a failure here on many levels:

Even a private should be mature enough to know at least on a basic level what is/isn't acceptable - but I know a lot aren't.

The staff sgt in charge wasn't qualified for the job. He should have done more about that.

Any officers within earshot certainly did know what was ok and what wasn't. That's part of officer training. Regardless of what orders they get from above, they have an enormous amount of power on a local level. I put most of the blame on them.

The upper levels of the military - high officers in the theater and up into the pentagon should have a clear policy in place for treatment of POWs and procedures for making sure it happens. The basic guidlines for that policy come from...

...The President himself.

 

[Adam]

Yes, and the higher ups are punishing those and taking measures to stop this from happening.
Perhaps, when Australian servicemen go out raping, we should blame you - for in the eyes of a democracy, it is the people who are really in control of the government.

Quite right. So yes, the people of the USA are responsible for their government, and for the actions of their military, who broke a law that nation signed on to.

 

[member 5645]

Quite right. So yes, the people of the USA are responsible for their government, and for the actions of their military, who broke a law that nation signed on to.

So yeah, the people are all facing court martial - what more do you want? to predict the wrongs of individuals?

 

[Adam]

Perhaps the USA government and people could accept responsibility for what they have done, rather than simply say "It was those few guys over there, and we're firing them, so we can all forget about it and move on now".

 

[Njorl]

Things like this do happen in most wars. The scale determines who should be punished. So far, at least there was no attempted cover up. It was not exposed by the press, it was exposed by an enlisted man, a private I believe, who went outside the chain of command to report it.

What I want to know, is why was it publicized by 60 minutes instead of the Army. Long before 60 minutes knew about it , the army knew it. The army should have put one of their own journalists on it. They should have written it up, translated it into Arabic and given it widespread dissemination in Iraq. The story then would have been "American Army aggressively proscecutes soldiers who abuse Iraqis." Instead, it is "American soldiers torture Iraqis in Saddam's prison."

Both stories are true. Which do we want Iraqis reading?

Njorl

 

[russ_watters]

What I want to know, is why was it publicized by 60 minutes instead of the Army.

The story then would have been "American Army aggressively proscecutes soldiers who abuse Iraqis." Instead, it is "American soldiers torture Iraqis in Saddam's prison."

Both stories are true. Which do we want Iraqis reading?

I know its rhetorical, but unfortunately, that's simply not how militaries or governments - or in all fairness, most individuals, deal with problems.

 

[member 5645]

Perhaps the USA government and people could accept responsibility for what they have done, rather than simply say "It was those few guys over there, and we're firing them, so we can all forget about it and move on now".

And this would change our actions how?

 

[pelastration]

Things like this do happen in most wars. The scale determines who should be punished. So far, at least there was no attempted cover up. It was not exposed by the press, it was exposed by an enlisted man, a private I believe, who went outside the chain of command to report it.

What I want to know, is why was it publicized by 60 minutes instead of the Army. Long before 60 minutes knew about it , the army knew it. The army should have put one of their own journalists on it. They should have written it up, translated it into Arabic and given it widespread dissemination in Iraq. The story then would have been "American Army aggressively proscecutes soldiers who abuse Iraqis." Instead, it is "American soldiers torture Iraqis in Saddam's prison."

Both stories are true. Which do we want Iraqis reading?

Njorl

This give some info:

Two weeks ago, 60 Minutes II received an appeal from the Defense Department, and eventually from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Myers, to delay this broadcast -- given the danger and tension on the ground in Iraq.

60 Minutes II decided to honor that request, while pressing for the Defense Department to add its perspective to the incidents at Abu Ghraib prison. This week, with the photos beginning to circulate elsewhere, and with other journalists about to publish their versions of the story, the Defense Department agreed to cooperate in our report.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0428-13.htm
I suggest you read the full article, since it contains interesting quote like:

(1) "Military intelligence has encouraged and told us 'Great job.' "

"They usually don't allow others to watch them interrogate. But since they like the way I run the prison, they have made an exception."

"We help getting them to talk with the way we handle them. ... We've had a very high rate with our style of getting them to break. They usually end up breaking within hours."

(2)"The elixir of power, the elixir of believing that you're helping the CIA, for God's sake, when you're from a small town in Virginia, that's intoxicating,” says Myers. “And so, good guys sometimes do things believing that they are being of assistance and helping a just cause. ... And helping people they view as important.""

 

[quartodeciman]

AI on WOT detentions --->
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510612004

 

[pelastration]

AI on WOT detentions --->
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510612004

Thanks. Very interesting. It took me time to read all ... but sharp.

 

[Bystander]

"Torture?"

High school hazing is uglier than this.

Somebody ask McCain if he'd prefer the Hanoi Hilton to kiddy stuff.

 

[Adam]

And this would change our actions how?

Well, perhaps, if the US government, and thus the population, took responsibility for its messes, they would be hesitant about doing such things again. Maybe next time they would not charge in for oil, kill 8,000+ innocent civilians, mistreat prisoners, et cetera...

 

[member 5645]

Well, perhaps, if the US government, and thus the population, took responsibility for its messes, they would be hesitant about doing such things again. Maybe next time they would not charge in for oil, kill 8,000+ innocent civilians, mistreat prisoners, et cetera...

Taking responsibility is exactly what is happening with court martialing the guilty in this case.

 

[hughes johnson]

Maybe next time they would not charge in for oil...

Why would you think that anyone "charged in for oil"? Oil is cheap and plentiful. I don't even know the current price at the pumps, and I have a Lincoln town car, and an SUV. We waste millions of barrels of the stuff every year without even thinking about it.

 

[Adam]

And again, Adam, the man who loves to accuse others of so many things - why don't you drop the rhetoric, and actually say what that entails. Taking responsibility is exactly what is happening with court martialing the guilty in this case.
Perhaps you will be blaming muslims for all muslim terrorist in the future as well.

"Muslim" is a nation, in which the government is responsible to its people? Wow. Surprising.

 

[Adam]

Why would you think that anyone "charged in for oil"? Oil is cheap and plentiful. I don't even know the current price at the pumps, and I have a Lincoln town car, and an SUV. We waste millions of barrels of the stuff every year without even thinking about it.

Thank you. I rest my case.

 

[member 5645]

"Muslim" is a nation, in which the government is responsible to its people? Wow. Surprising.

How is court martialing those that are guilty, and putting new people in under new guidlines NOT taking repsonsibility? You want to blame all the time, but you can't even tell me what we are being blamed for.

 

[Zero]

"Torture?"

High school hazing is uglier than this.

Somebody ask McCain if he'd prefer the Hanoi Hilton to kiddy stuff.

So torture is ok, so long as there is an example of worse torture?

 

[pelastration]

President: No longer rape rooms in Iraq

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/8563859.htm

On Friday, the president defended his May 1, 2003, statements during a White House Rose Garden appearance with Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin.

"A year ago I did give the speech from the carrier saying we had achieved an important objective, accomplished a mission, which was the removal of Saddam Hussein," Bush said. "As a result, there are no longer torture chambers or mass graves or rape rooms in Iraq."

 

[hughes johnson]

Thank you. I rest my case.

We had lots of oil before the war. We had lots of oil during the war. We have lots of oil now. We would have lots of oil if Iraq didn't even exist. We have so much oil that we don't even bother drilling for a lot of it so as not to wake up the caribou with all the noise. We have enough oil inside the U.S. to supply Iraq for the foreseeable future. We have lots of oil. Plenty. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension?

 

[pelastration]

sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses

Bush said. "As a result, there are no longer torture chambers or mass graves or rape rooms in Iraq."

Shocking details from the New Yorker http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

A fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February. Its conclusions about the institutional failures of the Army prison system were devastating. Specifically, Taguba found that between October and December of 2003 there were numerous instances of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” at Abu Ghraib. This systematic and illegal abuse of detainees, Taguba reported, was perpetrated by soldiers of the 372nd Military Police Company http://members.tripod.com/~dlgdyer/mugsweb/372mp.html, and also by members of the American intelligence community. (The 372nd was attached to the 320th M.P. Battalion, which reported to Karpinski’s brigade headquarters.) Taguba’s report listed some of the wrongdoing:

Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee.

There was stunning evidence to support the allegations, Taguba added— “detailed witness statements and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence.” Photographs and videos taken by the soldiers as the abuses were happening were not included in his report, Taguba said, because of their “extremely sensitive nature.”

The photographs — several of which were broadcast on CBS’s “60 Minutes 2” last week — show leering G.I.s taunting naked Iraqi prisoners who are forced to assume humiliating poses. Six suspects—Staff Sergeant Ivan L. Frederick II, known as Chip, who was the senior enlisted man; Specialist Charles A. Graner; Sergeant Javal Davis; Specialist Megan Ambuhl; Specialist Sabrina Harman; and Private Jeremy Sivits—are now facing prosecution in Iraq, on charges that include conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty toward prisoners, maltreatment, assault, and indecent acts. A seventh suspect, Private Lynndie England, was reassigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, after becoming pregnant.

The photographs tell it all. In one, Private England, a cigarette dangling from her mouth, is giving a jaunty thumbs-up sign and pointing at the genitals of a young Iraqi, who is naked except for a sandbag over his head, as he masturbates. Three other hooded and naked Iraqi prisoners are shown, hands reflexively crossed over their genitals. A fifth prisoner has his hands at his sides. In another, England stands arm in arm with Specialist Graner; both are grinning and giving the thumbs-up behind a cluster of perhaps seven naked Iraqis, knees bent, piled clumsily on top of each other in a pyramid. There is another photograph of a cluster of naked prisoners, again piled in a pyramid. Near them stands Graner, smiling, his arms crossed; a woman soldier stands in front of him, bending over, and she, too, is smiling. Then, there is another cluster of hooded bodies, with a female soldier standing in front, taking photographs. Yet another photograph shows a kneeling, naked, unhooded male prisoner, head momentarily turned away from the camera, posed to make it appear that he is performing oral sex on another male prisoner, who is naked and hooded.

Such dehumanization is unacceptable in any culture, but it is especially so in the Arab world. Homosexual acts are against Islamic law and it is humiliating for men to be naked in front of other men, Bernard Haykel, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at New York University, explained. “Being put on top of each other and forced to masturbate, being naked in front of each other—it’s all a form of torture,” Haykel said.

Two Iraqi faces that do appear in the photographs are those of dead men. There is the battered face of prisoner No. 153399, and the bloodied body of another prisoner, wrapped in cellophane and packed in ice. There is a photograph of an empty room, splattered with blood.

The 372nd’s abuse of prisoners seemed almost routine—a fact of Army life that the soldiers felt no need to hide. On April 9th, at an Article 32 hearing (the military equivalent of a grand jury) in the case against Sergeant Frederick, at Camp Victory, near Baghdad, one of the witnesses, Specialist Matthew Wisdom, an M.P., told the courtroom what happened when he and other soldiers delivered seven prisoners, hooded and bound, to the so-called “hard site” at Abu Ghraib—seven tiers of cells where the inmates who were considered the most dangerous were housed. The men had been accused of starting a riot in another section of the prison. Wisdom said:

SFC Snider grabbed my prisoner and threw him into a pile. . . . I do not think it was right to put them in a pile. I saw SSG Frederic, SGT Davis and CPL Graner walking around the pile hitting the prisoners. I remember SSG Frederick hitting one prisoner in the side of its [sic] ribcage. The prisoner was no danger to SSG Frederick. . . . I left after that.

When he returned later, Wisdom testified:

I saw two naked detainees, one masturbating to another kneeling with its mouth open. I thought I should just get out of there. I didn’t think it was right . . . I saw SSG Frederick walking towards me, and he said, “Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two seconds.” I heard PFC England shout out, “He’s getting hard.”

Wisdom testified that he told his superiors what had happened, and assumed that “the issue was taken care of.” He said, “I just didn’t want to be part of anything that looked criminal.”

The abuses became public because of the outrage of Specialist Joseph M. Darby, an M.P whose role emerged during the Article 3 hearing against Chip Frederick. A government witness, Special Agent Scott Bobeck, who is member of the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division, or C.I.D., told the court, according t an abridged transcript made available to me, “The investigation started after SPC Darby . . got a CD from CPL Graner. . . . He came across pictures of naked detainees.” Bobec said that Darby had “initially put a anonymous letter under our door, then he late came forward and gave a sworn statement. H felt very bad about it and thought it was ver wrong.

Questioned further, the Army investigator said that Frederick and his colleagues had not been given any “training guidelines” that he was aware of. The M.P.s in the 372nd had been assigned to routine traffic and police duties upon their arrival in Iraq, in the spring of 2003. In October of 2003, the 372nd was ordered to prison-guard duty at Abu Ghraib. Frederick, at thirty-seven, was far older than his colleagues, and was a natural leader; he had also worked for six years as a guard for the Virginia Department of Corrections. Bobeck explained:

What I got is that SSG Frederick and CPL Graner were road M.P.s and were put in charge because they were civilian prison guards and had knowledge of how things were supposed to be run.

Bobeck also testified that witnesses had said that Frederick, on one occasion, “had punched a detainee in the chest so hard that the detainee almost went into cardiac arrest.”

next ...

 

[pelastration]

continu ...

At the Article 32 hearing, the Army informed Frederick and his attorneys, Captain Robert Shuck, an Army lawyer, and Gary Myers, a civilian, that two dozen witnesses they had sought, including General Karpinski and all of Frederick’s co-defendants, would not appear. Some had been excused after exercising their Fifth Amendment right; others were deemed to be too far away from the courtroom. “The purpose of an Article 32 hearing is for us to engage witnesses and discover facts,” Gary Myers told me. “We ended up with a c.i.d. agent and no alleged victims to examine.” After the hearing, the presiding investigative officer ruled that there was sufficient evidence to convene a court-martial against Frederick.

Myers, who was one of the military defense attorneys in the My Lai prosecutions of the nineteen-seventies, told me that his client’s defense will be that he was carrying out the orders of his superiors and, in particular, the directions of military intelligence. He said, “Do you really think a group of kids from rural Virginia decided to do this on their own? Decided that the best way to embarrass Arabs and make them talk was to have them walk around nude?”

In letters and e-mails to family members, Frederick repeatedly noted that the military-intelligence teams, which included C.I.A. officers and linguists and interrogation specialists from private defense contractors, were the dominant force inside Abu Ghraib. In a letter written in January, he said:

I questioned some of the things that I saw . . . such things as leaving inmates in their cell with no clothes or in female underpants, handcuffing them to the door of their cell—and the answer I got was, “This is how military intelligence (MI) wants it done.” . . . . MI has also instructed us to place a prisoner in an isolation cell with little or no clothes, no toilet or running water, no ventilation or window, for as much as three days.

The military-intelligence officers have “encouraged and told us, ‘Great job,’ they were now getting positive results and information,” Frederick wrote. “CID has been present when the military working dogs were used to intimidate prisoners at MI’s request.” At one point, Frederick told his family, he pulled aside his superior officer, Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Phillabaum, the commander of the 320th M.P. Battalion, and asked about the mistreatment of prisoners. “His reply was ‘Don’t worry about it.’”

In November, Frederick wrote, an Iraqi prisoner under the control of what the Abu Ghraib guards called “O.G.A.,” or other government agencies—that is, the C.I.A. and its paramilitary employees —was brought to his unit for questioning. “They stressed him out so bad that the man passed away. They put his body in a body bag and packed him in ice for approximately twenty-four hours in the shower. . . . The next day the medics came and put his body on a stretcher, placed a fake IV in his arm and took him away.” The dead Iraqi was never entered into the prison’s inmate-control system, Frederick recounted, “and therefore never had a number.”

Frederick’s defense is, of course, highly self-serving. But the complaints in his letters and e-mails home were reinforced by two interna Army reports—Taguba’s and one by th Army’s chief law-enforcement officer, Provos Marshal Donald Ryder, a major general

Last fall, General Sanchez ordered Ryder to review the prison system in Iraq and recommend ways to improve it. Ryder’s report, filed on November 5th, concluded that there were potential human-rights, training, and manpower issues, system-wide, that needed immediate attention. It also discussed serious concerns about the tension between the missions of the military police assigned to guard the prisoners and the intelligence teams who wanted to interrogate them. Army regulations limit intelligence activity by the M.P.s to passive collection. But something had gone wrong at Abu Ghraib.

There was evidence dating back to the Afghanistan war, the Ryder report said, that M.P.s had worked with intelligence operatives to “set favorable conditions for subsequent interviews”—a euphemism for breaking the will of prisoners. “Such actions generally run counter to the smooth operation of a detention facility, attempting to maintain its population in a compliant and docile state.” General Karpinski’s brigade, Ryder reported, “has not been directed to change its facility procedures to set the conditions for MI interrogations, nor participate in those interrogations.” Ryder called for the establishment of procedures to “define the role of military police soldiers . . .clearly separating the actions of the guards from those of the military intelligence personnel.” The officers running the war in Iraq were put on notice.

Ryder undercut his warning, however, by concluding that the situation had not yet reached a crisis point. Though some procedures were flawed, he said, he found “no military police units purposely applying inappropriate confinement practices.” His investigation was at best a failure and at worst a coverup.

Taguba, in his report, was polite but direct in refuting his fellow-general. “Unfortunately, many of the systemic problems that surfaced during [Ryder’s] assessment are the very same issues that are the subject of this investigation,” he wrote. “In fact, many of the abuses suffered by detainees occurred during, or near to, the time of that assessment.” The report continued, “Contrary to the findings of MG Ryder’s report, I find that personnel assigned to the 372nd MP Company, 800th MP Brigade were directed to change facility procedures to ‘set the conditions’ for MI interrogations.” Army intelligence officers, C.I.A. agents, and private contractors “actively requested that MP guards set physical and mental conditions for favorable interrogation of witnesses.”

Taguba backed up his assertion by citing evidence from sworn statements to Army C.I.D. investigators. Specialist Sabrina Harman, one of the accused M.P.s, testified that it was her job to keep detainees awake, including one hooded prisoner who was placed on a box with wires attached to his fingers, toes, and penis. She stated, “MI wanted to get them to talk. It is Graner and Frederick’s job to do things for MI and OGA to get these people to talk.”

Another witness, Sergeant Javal Davis, who is also one of the accused, told C.I.D. investigators, “I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section . . . being made to do various things that I would question morally. . . . We were told that they had different rules.” Taguba wrote, “Davis also stated that he had heard MI insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates. When asked what MI said he stated: ‘Loosen this guy up for us.’‘Make sure he has a bad night.’‘Make sure he gets the treatment.’” Military intelligence made these comments to Graner and Frederick, Davis said. “The MI staffs to my understanding have been giving Graner compliments . . . statements like, ‘Good job, they’re breaking down real fast. They answer every question. They’re giving out good information.’”

When asked why he did not inform his chain of command about the abuse, Sergeant Davis answered, “Because I assumed that if they were doing things out of the ordinary or outside the guidelines, someone would have said something. Also the wing”—where the abuse took place—“belongs to MI and it appeared MI personnel approved of the abuse.”

Another witness, Specialist Jason Kennel, who was not accused of wrongdoing, said, “I saw them nude, but MI would tell us to take away their mattresses, sheets, and clothes.” (It was his view, he added, that if M.I. wanted him to do this “they needed to give me paperwork.”) Taguba also cited an interview with Adel L. Nakhla, a translator who was an employee of Titan, a civilian contractor. He told of one night when a “bunch of people from MI” watched as a group of handcuffed and shackled inmates were subjected to abuse by Graner and Frederick.

General Taguba saved his harshest words for the military-intelligence officers and private contractors. He recommended that Colonel Thomas Pappas, the commander of one of the M.I. brigades, be reprimanded and receive non-judicial punishment, and that Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan, the former director of the Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center, be relieved of duty and reprimanded. He further urged that a civilian contractor, Steven Stephanowicz, of CACI International, be fired from his Army job, reprimanded, and denied his security clearances for lying to the investigating team and allowing or ordering military policemen “who were not trained in interrogation techniques to facilitate interrogations by ‘setting conditions’ which were neither authorized” nor in accordance with Army regulations. “He clearly knew his instructions equated to physical abuse,” Taguba wrote. He also recommended disciplinary action against a second CACI employee, John Israel. (A spokeswoman for CACI said that the company had “received no formal communication” from the Army about the matter.)

“I suspect,” Taguba concluded, that Pappas, Jordan, Stephanowicz, and Israel “were either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuse at Abu Ghraib,” and strongly recommended immediate disciplinary action.

next ...

 

[pelastration]

continu...

The problems inside the Army prison system in Iraq were not hidden from senior commanders. During Karpinski’s seven-month tour of duty, Taguba noted, there were at least a dozen officially reported incidents involvin escapes, attempted escapes, and other seriou security issues that were investigated by officers of the 800th M.P. Brigade. Some of the incidents had led to the killing or wounding of inmates and M.P.s, and resulted in a series of “lessons learned” inquiries within the brigade Karpinski invariably approved the reports an signed orders calling for changes in day-to-da procedures. But Taguba found that she did no follow up, doing nothing to insure that the orders were carried out. Had she done so, h added, “cases of abuse may have been prevented.

General Taguba further found that Abu Ghraib was filled beyond capacity, and that the M.P. guard force was significantly undermanned and short of resources. “This imbalance has contributed to the poor living conditions, escapes, and accountability lapses,” he wrote. There were gross differences, Taguba said, between the actual number of prisoners on hand and the number officially recorded. A lack of proper screening also meant that many innocent Iraqis were wrongly being detained—indefinitely, it seemed, in some cases. The Taguba study noted that more than sixty per cent of the civilian inmates at Abu Ghraib were deemed not to be a threat to society, which should have enabled them to be released. Karpinski’s defense, Taguba said, was that her superior officers “routinely” rejected her recommendations regarding the release of such prisoners.

Karpinski was rarely seen at the prisons she was supposed to be running, Taguba wrote. He also found a wide range of administrative problems, including some that he considered “without precedent in my military career.” The soldiers, he added, were “poorly prepared and untrained . . . prior to deployment, at the mobilization site, upon arrival in theater, and throughout the mission.”

General Taguba spent more than four hours interviewing Karpinski, whom he described as extremely emotional: “What I found particularly disturbing in her testimony was her complete unwillingness to either understand or accept that many of the problems inherent in the 800th MP Brigade were caused or exacerbated by poor leadership and the refusal of her command to both establish and enforce basic standards and principles among its soldiers.”

Taguba recommended that Karpinski and seven brigade military-police officers and enlisted men be relieved of command and formally reprimanded. No criminal proceedings were suggested for Karpinski; apparently, the loss of promotion and the indignity of a public rebuke were seen as enough punishment.

After the story broke on CBS last week, the Pentagon announced that Major Genera Geoffrey Miller, the new head of the Iraq prison system, had arrived in Baghdad and way on the job. He had been the commander of th Guantánamo Bay detention center. Genera Sanchez also authorized an investigation into possible wrongdoing by military and civilian interrogators

As the international furor grew, senior military officers, and President Bush, insisted that the actions of a few did not reflect the conduct of the military as a whole. Taguba’s report, however, amounts to an unsparing study of collective wrongdoing and the failure of Army leadership at the highest levels. The picture he draws of Abu Ghraib is one in which Army regulations and the Geneva conventions were routinely violated, and in which much of the day-to-day management of the prisoners was abdicated to Army military-intelligence units and civilian contract employees. Interrogating prisoners and getting intelligence, including by intimidation and torture, was the priority.

The mistreatment at Abu Ghraib may have done little to further American intelligence, however. Willie J. Rowell, who served for thirty-six years as a C.I.D. agent, told me that the use of force or humiliation with prisoners is invariably counterproductive. “They’ll tell you what you want to hear, truth or no truth,” Rowell said. “‘You can flog me until I tell you what I know you want me to say.’ You don’t get righteous information.”

Under the fourth Geneva convention, an occupying power can jail civilians who pose an “imperative” security threat, but it must establish a regular procedure for insuring that only civilians who remain a genuine security threat be kept imprisoned. Prisoners have the right to appeal any internment decision and have their cases reviewed. Human Rights Watch complained to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that civilians in Iraq remained in custody month after month with no charges brought against them. Abu Ghraib had become, in effect, another Guantánamo.

As the photographs from Abu Ghraib make clear, these detentions have had enormous consequences: for the imprisoned civilian Iraqis, many of whom had nothing to do with the growing insurgency; for the integrity of the Army; and for the United States’ reputation in the world.

Captain Robert Shuck, Frederick’s military attorney, closed his defense at the Article 32 hearing last month by saying that the Army was “attempting to have these six soldiers atone for its sins.” Similarly, Gary Myers, Frederick’s civilian attorney, told me that he would argue at the court-martial that culpability in the case extended far beyond his client. “I’m going to drag every involved intelligence officer and civilian contractor I can find into court,” he said. “Do you really believe the Army relieved a general officer because of six soldiers? Not a chance.”

 

[hughes johnson]

Wow, that's a lot of typing! I really didn't have time to read all of the stuff you wrote because of other obligations, but from what I saw you are unhappy about the treatment of the prisoners. I'm sure a lot of this stuff gets blown out of proportion. We're currently investigating the matter, and I'm sure we'll make some changes if we need to.