Image control...
 

I'm reading about US military prison abuses in Iraq. 60 minutes ran a story and images, after pressure to withold the story. But they ran it as the images started to hit the net. I couldnt find these images at the CBS site. I'm curious. Anyone know a link?

The Toronto Star gives graphic descriptions, but I have not seen anything.

Uniondales a nice little town...

I don't know but this is hmmm intereting: http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle5365.htm

War is ugly. I know that. When the last rickety rationalization for invading Iraq is humanitarian liberation...well, these incidents are important to note and to see. The images provide some needed contrast to not only Saddams mass graves but to young Jessica Lynch. But we cant see them.

Three pictures on the TV news this morning.

1- Naked, hooded man with wires attached to each arm, standing on a bucket, with arms out stretched. Told if he steps down he'd be electricuted.

2- Six naked, hooded men forming a human pyramid.

3- Naked, hooded man, bound and standing, while an American female in fatigues, smiles and points at his penis.

What's deeply saddening about this is that the abuses took place ( I think these are the same ones I heard about anyway) In Abu Ghraib, which was one of Saddam's torture/execution prisons

Yeah, but a big difference in the outcome. No prisoners were injured in the production of this thread,

Just saw the pictures on F*x News BTW...

The turds responsible for this need to be punished... hard, and have examples made of them. And then their boss turds need the same thing. It's worse, y'know, because of the honor/shame society stuff. We need to set the example of how to treat prisoners...

This really pisses me off.

Guantanomo and all the prisoners being kept there in secrecy is another situation that needs to see the light of day. It is an example of how this government has disreguarded the Geneva Convention because it is inconvienient. Its shameful. The blame is not limited to low ranking people in the military, it clearly goes all the way up to Bush. He is allowing that situation to remain, and probably ordered it to be that way in the first place.

Indeed. The descriptions of Guantanamo bay that the lads from Manchester and Tipton in the UK have given us made me quite angry.
Jamal Udeen still walks with a stoop because the chains are kept too short for them to straighten up. In the interview I heard he could have been one of my family. His accent sounded as Manchester as theirs. He was nothing to do with the Taliban. He was held and tortured for two years.

I know...he wasnt the only one....but you cannot imagine how much it grieved me to know a fellow Manc was in that hellhole being held by our allies for no good reason. It also pissed me off to hear about the lads from Tipton. fucking Tipton... If anybody in here had any idea what a pitiful little place Tipton is you'd know just how tragic that sounds. Birmingham accents in Guantanamo Bay.

Jamal's story

As a side note. One of the things that moved me when I heard his interview on the radio was that he sounded so ordinary. He sounded tired, but he seemed to have kept his sense of humour even if it had become a little dark. He wasnt spitting anger or anything like that He just seemed to want to tell his story and did so in a fairly gentle and good natured way.

It's these kind of connections that make this whole mess real to us. Apparently these guys are from Uniondale, a pretty little town in one of the most beautiful areas in the States. It is on Cayuga lake in the wine growing region of New York State. It's a place I love to cycle through. War makes it possible for people from ANYWHERE to behave like animals. The costs of war can't be measured.

Eh, Griff, are there two Uniondales in NY State? The only Uniondale with which I am familiar is on Long Island.

Crap. Union Springs not Uniondale. On the upside, I don't have to get creeped out next time we ride through there.

Fucking drunk. :)

What amazes me was the one soldier who said he had never read the Geneva Convention until he was charged. Of course, he did not have to read it to know that stacking guys in naked human pyramids was probably wrong.

I wonder how long the military would have waited to take action if the story hadn't leaked, and how long CBS would have waited to report it.

"What amazes me was the one soldier who said he had never read the Geneva Convention until he was charged. Of course, he did not have to read it to know that stacking guys in naked human pyramids was probably wrong."

I thought that too. What is going on in your head that you think that could possibly be appropriate? One of these guys is a prison guard back home, great.

Let's see we've had incidents of women soldiers being raped by their fellow servicemen and now this. We're doing a great job of showing the rest of the world how an evolved society works.

An evolved society decries and punishes these acts. Isn't that what's happening?

-sm

When/if we hear about them, and certainly not under international law. It is suspect. The press is the only sort of "independent" or less dependent check in place.
Good cop bad cop. Good war crime bad war crime. Now there is another unfortunate Vietnam association.

The thing about war is, those who are participating have to turn in their humanity card for a brief period. Otherwise they go nuts. Their job is to kill the enemy, which means dehumanizing the enemy - otherwise they can't kill. It's gone on in every war since war began. The difference today is that the press is on the front line and can more effectively document the reality of war.

It's a sad fact that if armies try to be polite to their enemy, they get killed. The quickest way to win this war would be to follow the doctrine of WWII: Get the press out so they can't see what happens, then carpet bomb the place and send in the infantry to kill whatever is still twitching. Quick, but not pretty.

Thing is, this wasnt on the romantic battlefield, this was after the "battle" (this was like a year ago and if we listen to Bush it was probably even after the "war".
This was when we were incharge and meant to be just and humane. That being said, I dont know how all the soldiers arent nutty.

This also brings up a bit, the contracting out off the policing and security duties to private companies. Does anyone check for humanity cards? Are these guys held up to military law? International law? Do they need to worry about the Geneva convention?

Maybe not all of them, but some of them are. Washington Post every couple of weeks runs pictures of the soldiers who have died, and a brief description of how they died. Too many of the war dead are suicides. I am confident that not one of those suicides would have occurred if these guys weren't living through hell. It can't help that their tours keep getting extended. How many times can you hear that you aren't going home after all, before you lose all hope?

By the way, the Washington Post doesn't list them as suicides, but how else can a soldier die of a gunshot wound to the head while in a chapel on a secure base?

In a word - no.

There was a scandal a while back because a group of the private security guys started notching their knives by enforcing apartheid in South Africa while it was falling apart.

Power and Abuse
 

Stanley Milgrams experiment in Obedience

If you want to understand some human behavior, you can look at Stanly Milgram's Experiment in Obedience

In the 1960's, Milgram told subjects that they would be 'teaching' volunteers by administering electical jolts when the volunteers made a mistake.

Milgram's experiment was controversial in it's effect on the subjects. Even after being told that there was no real physical damage to the 'volunteer', many of the test subjects suffered attacks of conscience.

In effect, Milgram was conducting a 'morality test' of average Americans (the test was later peformed in other countries). He advanced the theory that while some Nazi leaders were sociopaths, the capacity to commit acts of atrocity exists in 'normal' citizens, requiring only the encouragement of authority.

Project Phoenix in Vietnam

This is the best summary I could find of
The Phoenix Program: in Vietnam. I placed a quote below I should add that the last statement has never been completely proved. The part that ties in with our current discussion about military prisons is the rules for detention of individuals who were 'suspected' of Viet Cong (VC) sympathies or activities.

Picture an Enron environment in which artificial quotas replace any qualitative measure of success. Now picture middle managers under pressure to meet quotas. Except instead of a board room or assembly line, the quotas cover the interrogation, torture, and executions of individuals.

Milgram was a fucking pimp...too bad his experiments are considered unethical now...

That experiment changed the way experimental ethics are handled (made getting human research projects approved a colossal pain in the ass).

I always liked Peter Gabriel's song about the experiment ...

Apparently torture and abuse of prisoners was ongoing many times previously. At least two earlier cases of outright abuse have been reported. But then this only demonstrates a fundamental principle - 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top mangement. When Americans last were in a war due to top management lies, then abuse and torture was routine. VietNam. One need only look at Guantanamo to see this administration gives lip service to civil rights, rule of law, and the truth.

Why is prisioner abuse probably widespread in Iraq? And why does this administration refuse to admit the problem until the press finally tells Congress? Problematic is a righteous loyalty to George Jr - god's choosen president. Civil rights, the law, and ethical responsibility is always secondary to that (god's) agenda. Lets not forget what George Jr told his staff. He is choosen by god to be president. Does god also condone torture? Of course. "NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. The White House set the tone for how all non-Christian prisoners are to be treated. Camp Delta. Why should anyone do anything different? After all, those prisioners in Cuba are obviously being treated as god has ordered through his disciple - George Jr.

Maybe god hates us. He has given us the president we deserve. Just another reason for the world to so suddenly go from admiring Americans to disliking Americans. (don't tell right wing extremist Americans who never understood why the world hates them). Clearly god is punishing us. He gave us George Jr. Those American prison guards were only doing what the president advocated - Camp Delta.

I'm not quite ready to build a conspiracy theory around this. Basically we under-supported the prison in order to supply manpower to a badly overstretched occupation force. Conspiracy theories imply competence. This was just another cluster fuck caused by bad planning and lack of support, not to mention politicizing the war in not allowing the generals fighting it to ask for the forces they really need and getting rid of the ones who actually do give reasonable estimates.

It will be interesting if this news will affect the Supreme Courts hearing of the two cases before it about Camp Delta. I am especially interested in how the US intends to justify taking a US citizen in custody inside the US and specifically shipping him outside the US to deny him his legal rights, then pretending that a US military base is not US soil. If a suspect fled the country he would be charged with Interstate flight to avoid prosecution. So is the governments action 'International flight to avoid defense?".

With these pictures coming out, any country with citizens in Camp Delta will be under pressure to demand oversight.

BTW, Joe Scarborough's spin on this is so bizarre that he must be doing it for ratings. He really can't possibly believe what he is saying, can he?:eek:

What would an Iraqi say?
Alaa, The Mesopotamian

Unfortunately, everyone knew Saddam was a bad man. It wasn't news. The US, as crusaders, are the 'good guys'. It's just like the fact that child molesters exist is not news, the fact that some priests were child molesters and that some individuals in the heirarchy knew about it and took little or no action raises the issue to a new level.

We went in there on a crusade, and like the last Crusade (actually there were 8 to 12 over hundreds of years), this one has been fraying around the edges as a significant minority sink to the lowest level.

Now, we can say that because no blood was shed and no permanent injury was done, that this is not as bad as Saddam's regime. In fact, the concept of 'bloodless torture' was what was proposed by Pope Innocent IV at the start of the Inquisition around the time of one of the Crusades.

The problem with all war, especially murky ones, is that in addition to the dead and physically wounded, the spiritually wounded come back home. These are the ones who have to worry about going near an amusement park because the children's happy screams might trigger a flashback.

I am actually as concerned for the US soldiers who acted as torturers as I am for their victims. These men and women, unless they have gone completely cold inside, must have some attacks of conscience. One of the reasons that Milgram got into so much trouble was that his subjects, after the experiment was over and they were told that they had caused no actual damage, were still devastated.

The men and women who participated, the ones who didn't but kept quiet, all of them will have that guilt follow them for the rest of their lives. Unlike combat, there can be no 'fog of war' excuse. They did this premeditated and in cold blood.

People accuse Kerry of flip-flopping on the war and being indecisive. I think that he and every other 'blooded' veteran in Congress understand what war really means and were trying to be cautious. One need only look at the problems of Vietnam-era veterans to understand the mental toll war takes on men and women.

These dozen men and women only represent a fraction of the mess we are going to have to deal with when all of these troops come home. The cost, emotional as well as monetary, will continue long after every soldier is home.

God save us all.

Richlevy that's an excellent point.

It's too easy I think to simply point at the soldiers/reservists who engaged in such activities and say they are the problem. The way I understand it, it's not an easy thing to cross that line the first time. Our militaries spend fortunes training people to be able to cross a line which most humans simply cant cross.

In studies ranging from the Prussian wars to the modern era we see that the vast majority of soldiers on the front line ( without the particular training which has been developed to combat this in recent years) didnt aim to kill when confronted with his enemy's face. In the down and dirty type of fighting which allows you to see the eyes of the man you are about to kill most people find it nearly impossible to strike the killing blow. People who would have sworn blind they would have no difficulty found instead that they simply couldnt do it. One of the most common forms this inability would take ...was that their hand would not respond. A temporary paralysis or freezing of their trigger finger.

An American military chap ( cant recall his name now) who lectures at Westpoint and is recognised as the world's leading expert in the phsycology of killing suggested on a programme I saw, that 98 per cent of the population find killing difficult often to the point of impossibilty which means that even if they are able to overcome their difficulty and take the life of another they are then left with enormous phsycological trauma....Two per cent have little or no difficulty in killing . Of those half are what we generally think of as "heros" they are able to empathise and understand the seriousnes of what they do but are able to kill without difficulty and without the crippling psychological aftereffects. The other half of this 2 per cent...are sociopaths. They are able to kill without difficulty , without psychological after effects and are unable to empathise.

The US military has perfected training methods which specifically counter this difficulty. Theirs is the best training available to modern man if what you wish to train people to do is to step over the line which stops most animals (it apparently holds true across many species) actually killing another of its own species.
They apparently can now train an ordinary soldier in such a fashion that they are able to overcome this whilst in combat. (they do it with very very sophisticated wargames and pattern behaviours to the point of near automation when in the zone)
They are still working on the crippling psychological after effects

They claim 60 % of their soldiers now are able to fire the killing shot at rather than 2 or 3 % .....If thats the case then there must be a lot of trauma being inflicted on these people which they are going to have to live with...Not just the ones who have committed "crimes" against the Iraqis but the also ones who are following orders to the letter and doing their job well.

It also means....that amongst the well trained and organised soldiers there is a small but heavily armed bunch of sociopaths running around iraq right now.

Needless to say I think this extends to the British army also....Seems our boys and girls have been up to some highly dubious shenanigans as well.

Iraqi familys' High Court Battle for Compensation

What's your point? The purpose of a soldier is to kill people. That's their job. I want them to have that training. I want them to be good at killing.

My point ( or points) is that it isnt really much of a surprise to find some of our soldiers are overstepping the mark and that both the ones who are guilty of crimes and the ones who are merely guilty of doing their job will have a lot of psychological trauma to deal with when they return to civilian life.

(they do it with very very sophisticated wargames and pattern behaviours to the point of near automation when in the zone)

And thus, are possibly almost as good as those 13-year-olds who have logged over 1000 hours in Counter-Strike.

USMil: 0WnZZ0Rs!!!!

And me with Ghost Recon - where practically every other kill is that close, and it's as sophisticated a wargame as is possible to design with current technology. Am I 31337 enuf for teh MARINEZ?

OK. Fair enough.

I know it's a bit trite, but: "war is hell."

I'm no fan of this war in Iraq. I don't think we have a good reason to be there. The decision to go to war was made too casually. But now that we are at war, I'm not surprised in the least by any of the crap that's going on.

It's only going to get worse.

I can see hordes of dead iraqis floating over falluja bitching about the way UsMil has godmode and keeps getting BS headshots.

Heh, that's the thing - they believe they have Godmode. Can't remember where I read it, but apparently one reason Arabs are terrible shots as a whole is because they tend to not aim at all - just point in the general direction of the target, and Allah is supposed to take care of the rest.

To combine this thread with the philosophy thread, a solid belief in predestination is a really, really bad trait for a soldier.

Actually, this is something that the US Military is quite aware of, and has plans in place to deal with the reentry into civilian life. Some of this involves Critical Incident Stress Management, as well as counselling.

.

As our good friend, Rush Limbaugh, says:

Please tell me this is a joke.

Chosen carefully and taken out of context.

I heard that segment and he was NOT excusing the soldiers who mistreated Iraqis. He's not even an apologist for them, he was simply making the point that a few rotten apples should not be used to judge ALL Americans any more than a few misguided Arabs who hijacked and subsequently crashed civilian jets into buildings, killing thousands, should not be used to judge all Arabs.

I can find the transcript on his website if I really want to.

Brian

I was thinking about this tonight...Rush is a dumbfuck, IMO...but not that dumb. Besides, had he really said it as presented above, it would have been all over the news.

I don't understand where insufficient staffing has anything to do with the abuse. Do people who are overworked then physically and sexually abuse others? Where is the justification? Understaffing and insufficient training do not justify this kind and widespread abuse.

When a large organization enters a project with a clear objective, then the rules work. We entered the Kuwait liberation with clear and specific objectives. In fact Powell had to fight tooth and nail to get those objectives defined. He fought so hard for those specific objectives that many (ie Cheney) openly wondered if they had the right General for the job. But as a result, the liberation occurred according to principles that America deems essential. The rules actually meant something because top management was responsible enough to even make specific objectives.

This war is clearly had no strategic objectives, no exit strategy, no political solutions to take over when the military job was done, top management that even takes troops off of planes to go home and says, "you are staying another three months". When management is that corrupt (and yes that kind of incompetance by management is called corruption), then the little people make on their own rules (ie Catch 22).

Where is a conspiracy to be assumed? There is no conspiracy. These things will happen when top mangement does as this administration has done. These are lessons from Vietnam - another war lead by corrupt top management.

Is it not obvious that the rules don't matter. Guantanamo Bay (Camp Delta) said torture and abuse of 'infidel' muslims is acceptable and preferred. That attitude - that message from highest levels - the White House - said the written rules will not be enforced. No conspiracy. Just exactly what happens when troops never even trust the date given for going home.

No specific agenda. Lies even about reasons for war from the highest levels. Lies about sufficient numbers of troops. Lies about the people wanting to be liberated. Lies - for some units multiple times - about when the troops would be going home. Even a top general who outrightly disparages Muslims in public - and is not even reprimanded (investigation is said to still be ongoing). Torture and abuse are therefore acceptable behavoir. That is the message. Just as in VietNam, when top management lies, does not even provide honest objectives. Lies and deciet within the ranks are then common; should be expected. The concept is even taught in a 500 BC book called "Art of War". Principles are that well understood - except apparently by this administration.

In VietNam, we were liberating yellow skined, slant eyed boys. It turns out they did not want to be liberated. And so we ended up with My Lai massacre and "we had to burn the village to save it" mentality. Exact same thing in Iraq. Directly traceable to the attitude and knowledge provided by this George Jr administration.

A soldier marries an Iraqi against orders. He is simply reprimanded. Soldiers sexually and physically absue prisoners. They too are only reprimanded. Investigation still ongoing for how long and nobody - not even Congress - is informed? What does that say? Minor infractions include outright torture and sexual abuse. How much clearer could top management be?

Then it gets even worse. The president cannot even apologize for this abuse. Abuse was ongoing and known for most of the last six months in that one prison alone. It is still ongoing in Guantanamo Bay. It may have been routine in many other locations (only during the tenure of George Jr). People are picked up and held for 3 months. No outside contact. Relatives are not even told where they are. The Red Cross is not even permitted to visit! After three months, if they are not guilty of anything, they are kicked out with $10. This is justice? This says to Iraqis that Americans are better than Saddam? This is how America will win the hearts and minds of people? Teach them the values of democracy?

We did not even do that to prisoners in WWII. Red Cross informed the families of where the man was being held. Why is it justified now to not even tell his family where he is? Because they are only muslims? That was the message even from Guantanamo Bay.

If the prisons were so understaffed, then why was the Red Cross not even permitted to help?

Tell the truth? Even the murder, in 15 minutes, of an Iraq Major General was covered up. They even faked the attempt to rescue him from a heart attack long after he was murdered. Why do we only find out about this now, almost 1 year later? Why does 60 Minutes II report to the president what even his top cabinent officers knew and could not report? Or is George Jr only lying again? Hoping just like Nixon that the truth will remain buried? Blame the misguided assistants.

Tell the truth? A new sign is now posted in Abu Ghraib that says no pictures? Why? Torture would still be ongoing if not for those photos. Reminds me of when the press would demonstrate repeatedly how airports had no real security. What was the solution? Congress passes a law making it a crime to test airport security. That mentality also saved the WTC. The sign should read, "all who enter are required to take pictures." Why do we fear more truths coming out?

Again, top management is so much the problem that George Jr will not even apologize for the abuse. His arrogence is only dipping toxins all over the middle east.

But some have noted something good. America - or more specific, the name George Bush - is so toxic in the Arab world that this only and again confirms the hate. It does not increase the hate. However it has caused a light to be turned on. Suddenly, Arabs are now seeing how dirty the entire room is. Discussions in free press organizations (ie Al Jazzera) are also expanding the anger to how prisons are also run in Syria and Saudia Arabia. So maybe some good will come.

Still that and a shortage of troops does not justify any of the abuse. There is no conspiracy. That abuse occurred because it was condoned and encouraged at the highest levels of government. They defined the objectives. They demonstrated that the wrong actions will not result in anything more than a reprimand. This Abu Ghraib prison abuse is exactly the attitude encouraged from the White House. No conspiracy. They simple defined an attitude and objective. The abuse was an inevitable consequence - for the same reasons even massacres were inevitable in Vietnam. This is what happens when top management does not do its job - does not even define a valid strategic objective - lies about the war's purpose - and all but condones the resulting abuse. Hell. The president is so arrogent that he cannot even apologize for something that America should be apologizing for.... big time.

The picture Bruce posted is of alleged abuses at the hands of British troops. Needless to say this does not make me all too proud of our lads. .....What does make me proud though is that the pictures and the details of abuse were passed to the Mirror by squaddies serving alongside the abusers. Some of the soldiers felt strongly enough abou this to blow the whistle. Go lads.

Talking of the My Lai massacre.....Just as an aside, my ex's dad wrotea play about that called "Bodycount" which has been translated into serveral languages and performed in several countries ( including somewhere in the East but damned if I can recall where!)....was a wonderful play. He can write can Les.....Goes for the gritty little details that make it all come home and spins off into something beautiful and lyrical ....I wish I could finda copy of it but I believe its out of print now. Last time it was performed was over a decade ago at least. Its all told to the audience by the character of a woman who survived the massacre ( she was a child at the time).

No need. Here it is. (last four paragraphs) He was not talking about judging all Americans. He was being an apologist for the perpetrators, deliberately misinterpreting the caller's point, and saying that it was "understandable" that they could "lose control".

Danac you mention My Lai and that there are always those of good heart mixed amongst the bad and I am reminded of

Hugh Thompson an American helicopter pilot who turned his guns on American troops at My Lai

The british case is a funny one, it appears the pictures were faked, I wouldn't be shocked if the Mirror made up the whole thing. It is the Mirror after all.

The problem with plays is the gritty little details are often not true, which leads the play goers to think they know the true story, when in fact they don't.

Are you saying that a publication would fake information?!? If this is true, it puts my view of "The National Enquirer", "The Star", and, most importantly, "The Weekly World News" into a whole new light. That means that BatBoy and Oprah Winfrey aren't getting married, and even worse, all those women aren't really married to aliens. I feel ...... dirty.

Yelof, thanks for that . Just goes to show not everyone succombs to the heat of the moment.

Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce By that logic we should only ever have plays which are set in fantasy worlds for fear of accidentally giving someone the wrong impression.
Generally people who go to a play know that it's the playwrite's own interpretation of events ( on the occassions where real life has been the inspiration) Shakespeare was not an authority on the life of kings and nobody looks to Arthur Miller if they wish to get an authoritative history of the events surrounding either the witchhunts or McCarthyism.

Gritty little details are one of the things I pick out as common in Les Smith's plays. He is a political playwrite, his plays are there to tell stories he thinks should be told. Generally speaking the people watching and the people producing those plays know this. The other stylistic feature I picked out was his lyricism, which I think would prevent anybody from accidentally believing they were watching a documentary. I do however think he may have had a reasonable insight into the events given the several years of research and the interviews with some ofthe people concerned.


Originally posted by jaguar The Mirror has a habit of making up stuff about celebs...Gossip and so forth. When it comes to more weighty matters their track record is pretty good. Currently another soldier is talking to Officials at the MoD about further allegations of abuse. This soldier also approached the Mirror with his allegations. Piers Morgan is standing by his sources and indeed there are other soldiers who have refuted some ( though not all) ofthe evidence for the pictures being faked;for instance, the truck which has been reported as not being used by the army in Iraq is in fact in use by the territorial Army in Iraq. The headgear which was said to not be in use in Iraq it seemingly in fact is, as is evidenced by several other photos of other events in Iraq showing very clearly soldiers wearing that particular type of hat.

There is still much about the photos that doesnt quite ring right for me though....People are starting to suggest now, that the photos may have been a reconstruction of actual events. If that's the case then it's a little disengenuous of the rest of the press to focus on the potential for fake photographs when the verifiable evidence is now starting to emerge of serious breaches of human rights in Iraq at the hands of members of the British forces.

If that's the case then it is highly unlikely to be the mirror which has falked the evidence butrather the soldiers who brought it tothem. Since nobody has thus far been able to categorically prove them fakes, one must assume that the mirror also was unable to prove their veracity and instead made the judgement call that this was an issue of grave importance which neded to be brought tothe attention of the public. Now I realise they must have also had in mind the sale of newspapers, but I have noticed in the last few years that the mirror has a decided tendency to stick to it's guns on an issue even when there is an enormous pressure to back off ( as with the start of the Iraq war when the calls for dissenters to stand behind the troops in time of war were vociferous and showing the other side was dangerous to a profit making paper) They also show a remarkable reluctance to jump on the anti asylum issue despite the fact that many of their readership would probably accept it and some even welcome it. They have consistently takenthe opposing side to that, choosing instead to run features about the "Myths" surrounding asylum seekers and the newcomer states to Europe.

I dont suggest for a moment that they would continue to take that tack if they started to fail as a business nr do I hold them up as bringers of truth but I do think that Piers Morgan takes his journalistic integrity seriously when deaing with matters of grave importance such as war, warcrimes and fascist whispers in the British winds.

Does it really matter whether one photo is fake? Yes to the integrity of that newspaper. It is why they have an Ombudsman. But newspaper integrity is promoted only to avoid the issue. The issue is this. Top management knew this abuse was ongoing and did nothing.

Rumsfeld even had the report of abuse and torture on his desk in March. He did nothing. He did not even read beyond the Executive Summary. IOW torture and abuse is condoned at the highest levels. THAT is the subject - not whether some paper reconstructed an event. We know that torture and sexual abuse was ongoing. We know it was reported to top management. We know top management did nothing - therefore condoned the abuse and torture - until the press exposed the issue. We know that the abusers and their officers only got reprimands - a slap on the hand - for doing something that would be years in jail elsewhere.

Just like there was no looting in Iraq. Just like we have enough troops in country. Just like the people were storming the streets when liberated. That is the issue. Top management would have us divert attention to the irrelevant. The bottom line remains that top management lied - which only encourages if not endorses torture and abuse. Then top management did nothing to stop it. These are the blunt facts that some would have us avoid. Don't fall for their propaganda. The only question in this thread remains - how corrupt is our leadership? Not whether the picture in a paper is legitimate. A far more serious question remains that we should have been asking when Camp Delta and the Patriot Act were being promoted. How corrupt is the George Jr administration. Not whether they are corrupt. How corrupt?

All I ask, tw, is that you stop just making shit up.

It turns out they removed the six, uh, alleged fuckwad guards from duty a few days after they found out about it in January, and initiated court-martial procedures, and by March had instituted a new command structure at the prison with a large set of reforms, and on March 20 had a press conference on it. At some point they asked to not have 60 Minutes air the photos because they felt it would be too dangerous for the troops in the field at the time.

Worst of it: there are tons more photos and even videos.

:(

UT, are you saying that the military command structure not only knew about this, but they were on top of it and had the situation resolved long before the story hit the big time?

Now that I would find very hard to believe.

Given what I have been seeing on the news I'm with russotto on this

The hearings are live for the last two hours, I'm just telling you what they said.

Fair enough UT ....Here *hands UT a :joint: *

Provide all the facts UT. First the entire MP company - except for a few - are now being investiagated if not reprimanded. This only *after* the press reported the coverup. Only one court-martial was being considered. Other five just reprimanded. Now most everyone in the unit, "except a few" (and that is an exact Rumsfeld quote) is suspect - as they should be. The abuse was that widespread.

How widespread the abuse was stated by Rumsfeld in testimony today as Senators such as McCain and Clinton took him apart. Especially damning was the angry questioning from McCain who demanded Rumsfeld display knowledge and stop asking a General to, instead, answer the questions. McCain demonstrated how little Rumsfeld really knew of the problem. Rumsfeld had mostly ignored the entire affair which is why he could not even list the command structure from him down to the unit. Again he was dependent on his General to answer questions of specific facts because he did not know specific and major facts.

Lynne English had long been transfered out because she was pregnant in Iraq. Her boyfriend is another story of "wrong man to be prison guard". Only after her transfer out was she being investigated. Only a few were taken back to the US for investigation. One officer tried to claim the problem only existed on third shift. But the abuse may have spread beyond this MP unit. Units now in Germany are also under investigation. Rumors have it that at least two other American prison facilities may also be involved.

Of course Rumsfeld did not dispute the facts. Instead he blamed people with digital cameras taking unauthorized pictures AND leaking secret information to the press. Of course. Blame the messenger so they don't blame top management. Cast blame everywhere so that we forget - 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. Of course DoD refused to even followup an investigation of almost the entire MP unit- leaving the two foot tall study mostly unread. Even the Red Cross had warned Rumsfeld of problems. Rumsfeld's comment also included "...they found problems as they always do...". It demonstrated how little he really regarded the problem.

Where Sen Hillary cited accusations against Chaplain Yee. All charges against this Chaplain in Guantanamo Bay were trumped up, quickly leaked to the press, and eventually (quietly) dropped. Why did the DoD not trump the dropping of those charges as they had hyped Yee's arrest (on phony charges)? If what Yee did in Guantanamo was serious, then why is his so called secret crime not kept secret. Whereas widespread abuse in Iraq is not disclosed?

Rumsfeld claims this Iraq problem was all disclosed in January. Then he blames whistle blowers and people with digital cameras for creating all problems. No. The problem was Rumsfeld, et al were keeping this quiet and not charging any officers. Again, almost zero court-martials. That probably now will change due to whistle blowers - the same whistle blowers that Rumsfeld blames instead of taking blaming for Rumsfeld's inaction.

How did CBS get the story? Rumsfeld's staff was quick to leak charges against Chaplin Yee but not tell anyone about the abuse in Iraq. Double standard. This is the ethics of the man and his administration. Since nothing was happening to stop the problem in Iraq - same officers (except top officers) remained at that prison long after six were returned to the states. Then patriots - whistle blowers - let the word out. So Rumsfeld instead blames those whistle blowers - rather than the principles he had advocated first in Guantanamo Bay. Now most everyone in the MP unit will finally be investigated. UT forgets to mention that part.

Furthermore, Rumsfeld apparently knew the CBS story was going to be reported in advance. He knew it even when he testified, only hours before the story was released, before Congress. The same Congressman he is suppose to report these things to; yet he said nothing. Rumsfeld thought the story so insignificant that he did not even tell his boss - George Jr - of the story in advance. At least that is the president's public statement.

Get your facts right UT. Stop hugging the mental midget president everytime they get caught lying. The question is how many people will now be blamed for condoning sexual abuse and torture. Don't question whether a newspaper picture is legit. Question what did Rumsfeld know and when did he know it. Rumsfeld was sitting on the case - not even continuing the investigation beyond maybe one court-martial. No they were not going to court-martial all six. Now that may change because patriots - whistle blowers - exposed a Rumsfeld coverup.

Well said tw. Anything else is just misdirection, stories of fakery to take our attention away from the nub of the matter.