Ret. U.S. Major Gen. says: "the current administration committed war crimes"
Physicians for Human Rights who examined 11 former detainees from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay say they "uncovered medical evidence of torture, including beatings, electric shock, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation, sodomy and scores of other abuses."
The detainees were never charged with crimes.
The detainees were never charged with crimes.
"We found clear physical and psychological evidence of torture and abuse, often causing lasting suffering," said Dr. Allen Keller, a medical evaluator for the study.LinkThe report is prefaced by retired U.S. Major Gen. Antonio Taguba, who led the Army's investigation into the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in 2003.
"There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes," Taguba says. "The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
the latest
latest episodes
Send 'em to the Hague War Crimes Tribunal!
torture? those were "freedom kisses"!
I'm certainly not holding my breath.
"There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes," Taguba says. "The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
No.
"There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes," Taguba says. "The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
Not while they're alive anyway.
The Dems have all but sworn on a bible that they won't pursue any action against the Bush blackshirts.
Is there a body that will or can with real results?
"The Dems have all but sworn on a bible that they won't pursue any action against the Bush blackshirts.
Is there a body that will or can with real results?"
Sadly all the crazies with sniper rifles seem to support Bush.
I have to say, I find American politics simultaneously highly amusing and deeply frightening.
Sleep around? Get impeached.
Commit war crimes? Nothing.
Rest easy, all too cynical to hope for justice, for the Wicked shall flee though none pursue them....
and though I'm not religious, if there is a God perhaps Justice is a concern of the Deity...this thought is directed at the more Christian of the US Torturers, I suppose.
In general and as a rule though those who live by the Sword...etc.
It also appears that the court of public opinion has perhaps come to its conclusions with respect to this particular manifestation of State-directed violence.
Contempt and scorn shall make for rotten companions in retirement.
As to the Dem's leadership's take on these matters, perhaps the US needs new leadership.
Detain them because someone thought they might be enemy combatants, terrorists, or people who could be sold to the US as suspects. (Our current administration is confused about the difference between those three categories.)
Then abuse them.
Then refuse to release them, because they're now motivated to become enemy combatants or terrorists.
Riiiiiight....
I still say the chief architect of any current US security threat is sitting in the oval office. Bush has been the best collaborator that any terrorist could have hoped for.
"The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
That's an easy one. No.
For a while, a few years back, some folks referred to the lot of these guys as Fascists, but were treated as the lunatic fringe. Really though, the entire administration is made up of extreme-reactionary-militaristic imperialists. So, what sort of behavior does anyone expect of such people? Of course they're war criminals and of course they are Fascists. If they could've whipped up the population and the military brass, we'd already be fighting in Iran and they would be planning the next invasion. There can be no objective doubt that they have committed war crimes; the real issue is the complicity of the so-called opposition party. “Impeachment is off the table”. So, we have one party of overt Fascism and one party of complicity.
Now what do we do with no one holding the moral high ground?
I remain hopeful (against all odds) Bush and his co-conspirators will hang at the Hague.
Maybe he can dance a jig.
@Canuck
Let "god" punish crimes against god.
Whatever that is.
These are crimes against humanity. Crimes for which there have been well established temporal penalties.
Contempt and scorn can be sloughed off by such men and women and anyway isn't punishment proportional to such crimes.
I just want to know if a body exists which can fairly judge and if found guilty impose a sentence on those charged.
Now what do we do with no one holding the moral high ground?
We may be in an era in which the military will predominate in order to stave off totalitarianism. Right now US military leadership is saner than the White House. Look at Turkey, where the military may stage a coup to prevent the dissolution of the secular state. All bets are off on what democracy will look like in the next century. I'm fairly certain that it will be unrecognizable.
If there is no punishment it seems more resentment and hatred will be generated for us in the U.S. and our "Homeland". Concentrate resentment and hatred, toss in will and some raw materials and what you get is the kind of grassroots applications of terror from our administration's presumed enemies the likes of which we have never seen.
Not trying and convicting these folks is a threat to our national security.
One of the doctors, Allen Keller, said: "As a physician with more than 15 years of experience evaluating and caring for torture victims from all over the world, the torture and abuse these men were subjected to in Abu Ghraib and the resulting trauma are second to none."
BBC article
From his Wiki article:
In 2004 Taguba was assigned to report on prisoner abuse in the Abu Ghraib military prison in Iraq. In May of that year he published an extremely critical report that was leaked to the public.[8]
Later that May Major General Taguba was reassigned to the Pentagon to serve as deputy assistant secretary of defense for readiness, training and mobilization in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs.[7]
In January of 2006, Taguba was instructed by General Richard A. Cody, the Army’s Vice-Chief of Staff, to retire by January of 2007. No explanation was given.[8] Taguba's retirement, effective January 1, 2007 ended a 34 year career of military service.
I just got through reading the PHR's executive summary and I'm a little too nauseous to give the full 120+ page report more than a little flippin' through, but I can say this, as an American. If none of our elected officials and/or public servants is cowboy enough to stand up and take responsibility for these atrocities, then every single American will do so, whether we want to or not, every time we travel abroad. And sometimes when we're at home.
We will be attacked, reviled, spit on, and much, much worse. And still we won't suffer what some of these "detainees" suffered.
It is in our best interest to hold those responsible for these acts, from the top down, accountable as hell.
[*]
Technogeek wrote: "Bush has been the best collaborator that any terrorist could have hoped for."
Absolutely true. If I were paranoid... oh never mind.
@Daemon; You can see our politics in how we censor our entertainment media. (don't even bother with the "news".)
It is perfectly fine to show blood, guts and gore for fun to the public. However, You can't show any kind of nudity unless it's a pay channel.
Death is a-ok. Orgasm, like nudity or profanity, is strictly forbidden unless you are paying extra.
A show about a deranged man that graphically kills women for sport would be prime material for a 10pm slot. A show about a deranged man that pornographically sleeps with as many women as possible would not be allowed.
#8 - Clinton was impeached because he lied to Congress, not because he got blown under the desk by that pasty-faced skank. Remember "I DID NOT have sex with that woman"?
I'm not sure why anyone even bothers with impeachment. If Bush was impeached, he would just ignore it like Clinton did.
How about politicians start running the country again...naw, that would be too easy.
This is highly-skewed reporting. From reading the article it seems like the serious abuse occurred at Abu Graib, which we already know all about. The abuse mentioned in the article against the other prisoner seems to consist of telling him to lie on the floor, which doesn't really seem like torture to me.
While we know for certain that there were abuses at Abu Graib, I think it is highly unlikely, given the furore about Abu Graib and the huge amount of media interest in Guantanamo Bay, that the detainees there were subject to "beatings, electric shock, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation, sodomy and scores of other abuses."
Not that a "human rights" organisation would have a political agenda, or anything...
I take my chances with the political agenda a human rights organization has over the obvious agenda a bunch of guys with guns and torture equipment and no accountability have.
#22, Clinton was impeached, because, as my 'pub friends love to say with one of their weird anger dialects "he lied to a sitting federal judge"
to which my lib friend always said: Perjuy #1 -- lying about the real evidence to send a country to war.
Perjury #24 -- lying about a blow job.
I always say -- what if Clinton had been interrogated about this-and-that, and during it he denied eating a big mac at MacDonald's and it showed up on a video log of McEvil's? Then you could say "He lied to a sitting federal judge!" Yeah, over a big mac. I mean, who cares?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/cartoon/2008/jun/12/georgebush
I have no expectation that any American will ever arrest these war criminals, so its obvious what needs to be done. They need to be arrested at the border, if and when any of them ever leave country, ala Gen. Pinochette.
Lock them in a dungeon in The Hague. Hell, pull an "extraordinary rendition" that they are so fond of.
Here's your start Interpol:
John Yoo, 890 Simon Hall, Berkeley School of Law. (Why the hell hasn't the Berkeley City Council ordered the Berkeley PD to arrest him? Apparently, like the vast majority of all hippies, Berkeley is only interested in making meaningless statements instead of achieving real change.)
I think Ol' Rummy is still at the Hoover Institute at 34 Galvez Mall, Palo Alto.
@Dillnger69
Certainly changing the topic a bit but yes. It's quite strange. Same in Australia I'm afraid.
GTA: San Andreas for PC.
You can drive around, shoot people, kill people, beat an old lady to death in the street and take the money she drops. The game is released and on the shelves no problems.
It emerges later that there is a hack you can put on so instead of 'having coffee' with your girlfriend you can now watch a crappy animation of your character having sex.
Game is taken off shelves.
____
As for all the Torture stuff. Was there ever really any doubt that this was going on? Wasn't that pretty much the entire reason these prisons were set up off US Soil?
The Democrats won't impeach anyone because they're all about 'moving forward' and not focussing on the past but instead moving in a new direction blah blah blah. I like Obama I really do. I certainly think he's the best hope the US has at becoming a decent country again (not the people you are gernerally a good bunch, but your government makes me sick). Hopefully Obama wins and becomes as friendly with Kevin Rudd (Australia's Prime Minister) as John Howard was with George. Only this time they won't both concentrate on being evil racist bastards.
It's obvious to anyone with two or more properly firing neurons that presidential pardons will be the official gift at this year's White House Christmas party (and I wouldn't put it past Bush to try and pardon himself as well), but it may by helpful to point out that under the Constitution, Article II, Section 2, the President only has the authority to issue pardons for federal crimes ("Offenses against the United States"). It's possible that some enterprising state prosecutor could take it upon him/herself to file state charges against Bush and his cronies once they leave office...say, for the murder of any soldier from that state who was killed in combat as a result of Bush's illegal war.
It's a slim thing to take hope in, but it's a consolation to me that a story such as this draws a such large number of posters who do understand right from wrong and are willing to say so.
I haven't followed the link yet, but how exactly do you uncover medical evidence of sexual humiliation? Sexual torture maybe, but humiliation?
So confused. I'll slink away and read the article now.
http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4529&Itemid=220
This is news? At least we know most won't be able to travel to most countries once they are out of office. Remember what happened to Pinochet when he went to Spain? Most of the CIA ops involved can not leave the USA again for fear of arrest.
Yeah, and all bank robbers prove that the president is a criminal?
I haven't followed the link yet, but how exactly do you uncover medical evidence of sexual humiliation?
Do you really want a demo? It's so much easier to show you than to explain it.
and then the torture navy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/02/terrorism.terrorism
From #31 above, Takeshi writes:
"I haven't followed the link yet, but how exactly do you uncover medical evidence of sexual humiliation?"
The phrase was the reporter's - and an attempt to make one sentence do the work of two, IMHO. The quote from the doctor went:
"We found clear physical and psychological evidence of torture and abuse, often causing lasting suffering," said Dr. Allen Keller, a medical evaluator for the study.
I too still have a tiny bit of hope that these bastards might get what is coming to them.
"According to a US Congress report, up to 14,000 people may have been victims of rendition and secret detention since 2001. Some reports estimate there have been twice as many. The US admits to have captured more than 80,000 prisoners in its "war on terror"."
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34171
What a cheering link, Takuan! We can hope. Indeed, we should.
As Markthshark posted on Daily Kos;
"I guess it was inevitable that it would fall upon a group of legal NGOs to finally begin the long march to justice and accountability. I say if Pelosi and Conyers won't hold this scofflaw administration accountable let 'em join the tribunal... as co-defendants.
Complicity has consequences..."
pass the baton, good night
No-one responsible will be arested while trying to cross the border, and most certainly no american will ever stand accused in the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. It is not recognized by the U.S.A. as a ligitimate ruling body. Should any american citizen ever appear before this court, then the U.S.A. retains the right to liberate this person by military force if need be.
Furthermore, in most countries around the world, you are not allowed to put an american citizen on the payroll of the U.S. government to trial in any way. No matter what that person has done in your country, or any other country. These agreements have been enforced by the U.S.A. through coercive tactics like economic boycots.
Basically, if your employed by the U.S. government, you are above the law in most places in the world.
So let's not kid ourselves. President G.W. Bush will retire and will proceed to live a long and happy life touring the world giving splendidly overpriced lectures to captains of industry about leadership and all that crap.
And torture? Well that's just a matter of perception, isn't it?!
Sparkzilla:
Oh, they have an agenda alright. Human. Rights. Wow, I never thought I'd see a freeper torture-apologist on Boing Boing. Sparkzilla, you really, really disgust me.
Sorry to post what's basically a personal attack, but I can't stand seeing someone's dignity and well-being written off as a political football.
Marcel, did the Nazi government recognize any world court? If the criminal's recognition of the court was required for prosecution, there would be no need for prisons, because there would be no one to put in them.
It's not an issue of recognition, but one of power. Not everyone at the top stays on top forever.
Medical evidence of "sexual humiliation" is tricky, but it usually includes the testimony of a psychologist who's trained to look for details of physiological reactions when certain topics are mentioned or perhaps read the GSR values off the meter when certain pictures are shown. FMRI responses. Stuff like that.
As for sexual torture? Evidence of healing (or lack thereof) from testicular bruising, poorly healed rectal tearing consistent with penetration by a mop handle or a rifle barrel -- these things are easier.
Sure, the PHR has an axe to grind. It says it in their name: Physicians for Human Rights. But the 130-page report has 305 footnotes referring to, among other things, testimony of doctors and medical professionals who may or may not be actual members of the organization, but who regardless have licenses and professional reputations to protect. I truly doubt the journal articles referenced were written with foreknowledge that they'd be included as sources for this report, even the ones that center on the long-term, measurable, physiological and psychological effects of torture.
The report wasn't published in a peer-reviewed journal, so it doesn't feel free to live up to those standards. It is, however, published in an arena where the document itself and the sources it relies on can be subject to public scrutiny. Which is kinda the same thing.
As long as those who criticize it (or support it) follow the first rule of critical review -- which is: actually read the damned thing: http://brokenlives.info/?dl_id=5
For those of you who don't feel like bothering (and I can't exactly blame anyone for not wanting to read more than a hundred pages of stomach-churning graphic details), it kinda goes like this: You can tell if something is torture by the effects it has, physiologically and psychologically, rather than depending on a list of prescribed and proscribed techniques.
If the people who have those techniques practiced on them have lasting physical and psychological damage, leaving them unfit for work or normal relationships, then you have committed torture. If the people using those techniques experience lasting psychological difficulties commensurate with those who have been required by order or some sense of duty to inflict physical and/or psychological hell on others, then torture has been committed.
It's tough enough spending years and hundreds of thousands of dollars teaching an ordinary recruit that it's okay to kill someone who is a potential threat -- and then bring them home and hope they find a way to reverse their training before they get to frustrated. It's even tougher when they've found a way to cope with inflicting all kinds of misery short of lethality. For those people, it's not going to revert instantly to "happy families" when they get home.
[*]
Some of the long terms effects of torture include things like triggering (a kind of panic attack based on a situation or object that reminds the victim of the event; these can happen in public and have a direct effect on employment or public perception); difficulty sleeping; difficulty trusting or becoming close to anyone (you'd be amazed how many of our relationships, even working ones, rely on at least marginal amounts of trust); paranoia; sometimes the victim will develop a fear of a situation, like agoraphobia (afraid to leave the house) or claustrophobia (afraid to be in any enclosed space, like a room, for instance); victims are often suicidal or depressed, making it more difficult to engage in any social activity or even the process of grooming that we tend to interpret as a part of sanity or responsibility; victims also often engage in high risk behaviors or passively suicidal behavior (drug use or heavy drinking).
The attempt to reintegrate or provide help for these victims is often compounded by their desire not to speak, which means that getting evidence may be difficult and that a fairly small population will be willing to testify to the treatment they received. It is also disrupted by the nature of the crimes perpetrated against them, as sexual assault (rape with a gun barrel, for instance) causes them to suffer severe self-loathing or dissonance between their conceptions of themselves as individuals (especially individuals who can be the agents of change in their own lives) and themselves as the victim of that crime. It keeps coming back.
Sexual torture is distinguished by profound disruption, often for the rest of the victim's life, of all their functioning, both public and private, since it often causes victims to believe themselves complicit somehow to the torture. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, that loss of bodily integrity causes many victims to feel irreparably reft of a sense of self that, especially here in the US (I don't know as much about cultures elsewhere) is taught as a fundamental part of being alive. The culture of self-reliance tells us that a part of being a member of society means being able to defend ourselves, our loved ones and (especially) our property. The inability to do so makes an argument, to the victim, that they do not deserve to live.
And this is in addition to the bodily injuries.
As a nation, we have irreparably changed the lives of as many as 80k people in this way. Even if the tearing, bruising and broken bones heal and they are able to obtain excellent help with the mass of psychological problems left by torture, especially sexual torture, the victims will have to deal with the ramifications of those acts for the rest of their lives, as will their families, friends and communities. This is a catastrophic problem, in addition to what it turns us into, both in the eyes of the world and in our own eyes, because rationalizing behind the reasoning for the TV show 24 will only last so long.
Not that I don't have a lot of faith in denial. But there comes a point where the facts overturn that apple cart, usually when they become widely circulated.
Thanks #40 Takuan.
That's good to know and a good start.
I think BB linked to it when it first came out, but if you haven't read it, Seymour Hersh's article on Taguba covers a lot of the same ground and has a lot of details about the extent of abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib which went far beyond the infamous pictures.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/06/8765_theres_no_telli.html