US soldiers rape women prisoners

[diamond geezer]

link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1220509,00.html)

The scandal at Abu Ghraib prison was first exposed not by a digital photograph but by a letter. In December 2003, a woman prisoner inside the jail west of Baghdad managed to smuggle out a note. Its contents were so shocking that, at first, Amal Kadham Swadi and the other Iraqi women lawyers who had been trying to gain access to the US jail found them hard to believe.

The note claimed that US guards had been raping women detainees, who were, and are, in a small minority at Abu Ghraib. Several of the women were now pregnant, it added. The women had been forced to strip naked in front of men, it said. The note urged the Iraqi resistance to bomb the jail to spare the women further shame.

Late last year, Swadi, one of seven female lawyers now representing women detainees in Abu Ghraib, began to piece together a picture of systemic abuse and torture perpetrated by US guards against Iraqi women held in detention without charge. This was not only true of Abu Ghraib, she discovered, but was, as she put it, "happening all across Iraq".

In November last year, Swadi visited a woman detainee at a US military base at al-Kharkh, a former police compound in Baghdad. "She was the only woman who would talk about her case. She was crying. She told us she had been raped," Swadi says. "Several American soldiers had raped her. She had tried to fight them off and they had hurt her arm. She showed us the stitches. She told us, 'We have daughters and husbands. For God's sake don't tell anyone about this.'"

Astonishingly, the secret inquiry launched by the US military in January, headed by Major General Antonio Taguba, has confirmed that the letter smuggled out of Abu Ghraib by a woman known only as "Noor" was entirely and devastatingly accurate. While most of the focus since the scandal broke three weeks ago has been on the abuse of men, and on their sexual humilation in front of US women soldiers, there is now incontrovertible proof that women detainees - who form a small but unknown proportion of the 40,000 people in US custody since last year's invasion - have also been abused. Nobody appears to know how many. But among the 1,800 digital photographs taken by US guards inside Abu Ghraib there are, according to Taguba's report, images of a US military policeman "having sex" with an Iraqi woman.

Taguba discovered that guards have also videotaped and photographed naked female detainees. The Bush administration has refused to release other photographs of Iraqi women forced at gunpoint to bare their breasts (although it has shown them to Congress) - ostensibly to prevent attacks on US soldiers in Iraq, but in reality, one suspects, to prevent further domestic embarrassment.

Earlier this month it emerged that an Iraqi woman in her 70s had been harnessed and ridden like a donkey at Abu Ghraib and another coalition detention centre after being arrested last July. Labour MP Ann Clwyd, who investigated the case and found it to be true, said, "She was held for about six weeks without charge. During that time she was insulted and told she was a donkey."

The women appear to have been arrested in violation of international law - not because of anything they have done, but merely because of who they are married to, and their potential intelligence value. US officials have previously acknowledged detaining Iraqi women in the hope of convincing male relatives to provide information; when US soldiers raid a house and fail to find a male suspect, they will frequently take away his wife or daughter instead.

It would appear that using a prisoners close relations to prise info is standard US practice.

link (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6222.htm)

05/20/04 "Chicago Tribune" -- A military intelligence analyst who recently completed duty at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq said Wednesday that the 16-year-old son of a detainee there was abused by U.S. soldiers to break his father's resistance to interrogators.*

The analyst said the teenager was stripped naked, thrown in the back of an open truck, driven around in the cold night air, splattered with mud and then presented to his father at Abu Ghraib, the prison at the center of the scandal over abuse of Iraqi detainees.*

Upon seeing his frail and frightened son, the prisoner broke down and cried and told interrogators he would tell them whatever they wanted, the analyst said.*

[Ugg]

This report must be wrong, gasp! Because there were only seven cases of reported abuse!!!! Just another left wing conspiracy to discount the fine job that our military is doing in Iraq!



It's only going to get worse.....

[Neserk]

It's only going to get worse.....

*sigh*

[mactastic]

Sounds like more hazing to me.... :rolleyes:

[pseudobrit]

A few frustrated kids and pranksters.

Seriously, if I were an Iraqi, I'd want to kill us for this **** too.

[diamond geezer]

Apparently, a poll of iraqis found the 9 out of 10 saw the US as occupiers, rather than liberators.

And that was before the prison scandal.

The only people who think that the US is there because it cares about Iraqi freedom is Mr "awesome article" (a-la Backtothemac) and other rose-colored spectacle wearers.

[Neserk]

Operation Iraqi Freedom is another infamous Euphemism used by the military to try and make something sound like something it isn't.

(does that make sense?)

IOW, Its occupation but it is much easier to sell if we label it Iraqi Freedom.

[pseudobrit]

IOW, Its occupation but it is much easier to sell if we label it Iraqi Freedom.

1939 saw Operation Polish Freedom From Bolshevism.

[Backtothemac]

Apparently, a poll of iraqis found the 9 out of 10 saw the US as occupiers, rather than liberators.

And that was before the prison scandal.

The only people who think that the US is there because it cares about Iraqi freedom is Mr "awesome article" (a-la Backtothemac) and other rose-colored spectacle wearers.


You know what. I would really like to tell you what I think. But since I have been a member here for three years, and have respect for the moderators. AND I don't want to get banned. I won't.

So, what I will say, is don't try to put me into the crowd of morons that are defending the actions of some of the soliders in Iraq. That is ************, and I have not. I have defended the overall action of the soliders there, and the mission. I have done so from the stand point of family that is there, and from an article that pointed the finger NOT at those that disagree with the war, but at those in the media that will ONLY report the negative aspects of the war. I may not agree with someone, but I will die defending their RIGHT to say what they want and to form their own opinons.

So, again. Don't you lump me into that uneducated group of people that are calling this what it isn't.

[Neserk]

I have defended the overall action of the soliders there, and the mission.

This is the problem. How can anyone defend the "mission" which was Georgie's personal vendetta that he mananged to accomplish through lies?

[pseudobrit]

So, what I will say, is don't try to put me into the crowd of morons that are defending the actions of some of the soliders in Iraq. That is ************, and I have not. I have defended the overall action of the soliders there, and the mission. I have done so from the stand point of family that is there, and from an article that pointed the finger NOT at those that disagree with the war, but at those in the media that will ONLY report the negative aspects of the war. I may not agree with someone, but I will die defending their RIGHT to say what they want and to form their own opinons.

So, again. Don't you lump me into that uneducated group of people that are calling this what it isn't.

Do you agree that it's possible for noble men to serve nobly and be stunningly victorious in battle yet still lose the war?

[skunk]

Do you agree that it's possible for noble men to serve nobly and be stunningly victorious in battle yet still lose the war?
Do you agree that it's possible for noble men to be led ignobly into behaviour which is degenerate, callous, inhumane and criminal?

[radhak]

Do you agree that it's possible for noble men to be led ignobly into behaviour which is degenerate, callous, inhumane and criminal?
this is where it hurts the most. starry eyed youngsters inducted with high faluting promises finally ending up in situations they can't control, changing their nature and behaviour forever.

i personally feel most embarassed when having to defend indefensible actions by people i admire / like/empathize with.

i never felt as outraged Saddam's abuses were reported. he was a tyrant and a thug, and needed to brought to justice.

but though not an army person (none in my friends/family), i have had admiration for the people joining it, in general, and the US army in particular. brave, personal sacrifice, all that thing (obviously, i have had to gloss over the concomitant violence and death dealt out, but still...).

so these recent reports of abuse by army personnel of ever increasing serious nature are frustrating, to put it mildly. to top that are the demands for '[blindly] support the troops', or even reports from the middle by army people that harp on the nobility of the operation and end with, 'support the troops, and the mission'. makes me wonder about this blatant propaganda, and doubt my earlier admiration : was it wholly misplaced?

maybe mightier the army, the more the arrogance? after all, absolute power and absolute corruption, right?

[skunk]

after all, absolute power and absolute corruption, right?
Absolutely ;)

[poopyhead]

sadly, I'm american and this makes me want to hurt americans. if this is true then I'm not so sure that I can any longer feel the outrage I have previously felt about the deaths, sometimes horrible, of american military personnel.
certainly one can no longer claim that these are the actions of a few, these are starting to appear to be the actions of americans as a group
I am slowly starting to feel that this is a culture I no longer want to be associated with

[diamond geezer]

You know what. I would really like to tell you what I think. But since I have been a member here for three years, and have respect for the moderators. AND I don't want to get banned. I won't.

So, what I will say, is don't try to put me into the crowd of morons that are defending the actions of some of the soliders in Iraq. That is ************, and I have not. I have defended the overall action of the soliders there, and the mission. I have done so from the stand point of family that is there, and from an article that pointed the finger NOT at those that disagree with the war, but at those in the media that will ONLY report the negative aspects of the war. I may not agree with someone, but I will die defending their RIGHT to say what they want and to form their own opinons.

So, again. Don't you lump me into that uneducated group of people that are calling this what it isn't.

I would REALLY love to hear what you think. I take it you're talking about what you think of me, rather than your political views (we've all heard plenty of those).

With regards to "putting you in with that crowd of morons", well i didn't. As far as i can remember, you've been as outraged as anyone at the treatment of prisoners, although likening it to your University hazing rituals was a bit off, in my opinion. I spose i shouldn't have mentioned your name in my post, as i was actually referring to the Major who wrote that article, your name was just included as a reference so people would know what article i was talking about.

I wouldn't even put you in the category of the aforesaid "spectacle wearers" , as I'm sure that you know this war isn't about Iraqi freedoms or even combating terrorism.

I am in agreement with you about TV etc showing negative aspects of the war, but it's not just about what sells, it's also about fixing what's wrong, which is why the reporting is necessary.

Your major says "I am not ignorant of the political issues, either. But as a professional, I have the luxury of putting politics aside and focusing on the task at hand." Well this is a political forum and we have the luxury of telling it as we see it.

Also his final statement "All we ask is that Americans stand by us by supporting not just the troops, but also the mission.", seems to me like saying "don't question the President about all the lies, and why we are really here"

Good soldiers should always be able to unplug their brains and consciences, so they are able to concentrate on the task at hand. The last thing you need are niggling worries about why you're away from home and invading a basically defenseless country, whose population see you as an enemy.

I know where your coming from regarding not wanting to get banned, as I have already been banned for a comment about your precious President and i didn't notice anyone putting their life on the line to defend my right to say it on this board.

[skunk]

I know where your coming from regarding not wanting to get banned, as I have already been banned for a comment about your precious President and i didn't notice anyone putting their life on the line to defend my right to say it on this board.
I thought you were just on holiday. :)
Must have missed it. What did you say? :D

[Rower_CPU]

...

I know where your coming from regarding not wanting to get banned, as I have already been banned for a comment about your precious President and i didn't notice anyone putting their life on the line to defend my right to say it on this board.

The 1st amendment doesn't apply to this board - certain types of speech (http://forums.macrumors.com/announcement.php?s=&forumid=4) are not allowed.

[IJ Reilly]

Ladies and gents, this might be a good time to remind ourselves to take a few deep breaths before allowing our fingers to make contact with the keyboard...

[skunk]

Ladies and gents, this might be a good time to remind ourselves to take a few deep breaths before allowing our fingers to make contact with the keyboard...
And wash your hands, too! ;)

[Backtothemac]

I would REALLY love to hear what you think. I take it you're talking about what you think of me, rather than your political views (we've all heard plenty of those).

With regards to "putting you in with that crowd of morons", well i didn't. As far as i can remember, you've been as outraged as anyone at the treatment of prisoners, although likening it to your University hazing rituals was a bit off, in my opinion. I spose i shouldn't have mentioned your name in my post, as i was actually referring to the Major who wrote that article, your name was just included as a reference so people would know what article i was talking about.

I wouldn't even put you in the category of the aforesaid "spectacle wearers" , as I'm sure that you know this war isn't about Iraqi freedoms or even combating terrorism.

I am in agreement with you about TV etc showing negative aspects of the war, but it's not just about what sells, it's also about fixing what's wrong, which is why the reporting is necessary.

Your major says "I am not ignorant of the political issues, either. But as a professional, I have the luxury of putting politics aside and focusing on the task at hand." Well this is a political forum and we have the luxury of telling it as we see it.

Also his final statement "All we ask is that Americans stand by us by supporting not just the troops, but also the mission.", seems to me like saying "don't question the President about all the lies, and why we are really here"

Good soldiers should always be able to unplug their brains and consciences, so they are able to concentrate on the task at hand. The last thing you need are niggling worries about why you're away from home and invading a basically defenseless country, whose population see you as an enemy.

I know where your coming from regarding not wanting to get banned, as I have already been banned for a comment about your precious President and i didn't notice anyone putting their life on the line to defend my right to say it on this board.


Um, no, you did lump me into a group. You took a cheap shot at me and went off the topic of the thread. The thread was about Soldiers raping Iraqi women. NOT about how we are viewed in Iraq, and then you try to slap me. So, I slapped back. My opinion was of your comment, not of you, because I don't know you.

[IJ Reilly]

Maybe they should be subjected to a little neocon justice, ala John Podhoretz:

These were acts of ritual humiliation, and everyone who did it should be photographed in the same positions they put other people in.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405240003

[Backtothemac]

Maybe they should be subjected to a little neocon justice, ala John Podhoretz:

These were acts of ritual humiliation, and everyone who did it should be photographed in the same positions they put other people in.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405240003

Well, Rush's justification is just friggin stupid. I tried to call in and tell him how stupid he was. As someone that has been deployed, I can tell you that sometimes things happen. Mistakes are made. These were not mistakes, they were orders. Those soldiers did things that only highly educated people would know to do to humiliate the Iraqi's. I think it would be appropriate to see them tortured the same way, but that includes the rape of the women, and the sodomizing of the men. Followed by the death of the soliders to match the deaths of the Iraqis.

[IJ Reilly]

Well, Rush's justification is just friggin stupid. I tried to call in and tell him how stupid he was. As someone that has been deployed, I can tell you that sometimes things happen. Mistakes are made. These were not mistakes, they were orders. Those soldiers did things that only highly educated people would know to do to humiliate the Iraqi's. I think it would be appropriate to see them tortured the same way, but that includes the rape of the women, and the sodomizing of the men. Followed by the death of the soliders to match the deaths of the Iraqis.

You started out so well, then... oh my. Americans are not supposed to believe in torture, they are supposed to believe in justice, and torture can never masquerade as justice. If we can demonstrate anything worthwhile to the Middle East about our values (and it's precious little anymore), it should be that justice, western style, does not countenance torture or revenge.

[diamond geezer]

I thought you were just on holiday. :)
Must have missed it. What did you say? :D

That was back in my "Pinto" days.

Now I try to be a good boy.