Prisoner abuse

[Guest LCPGUY]

My only question is, after all the torture the prisoner's endured, why isn't there any evidence that shows the Iraqi prisoners were bleeding or bruised?

My guess is that because it was psychological abuse which would leave no physical marks. Still shameful, and uncalled for (according to Geneva Convention), but far from physical torture.

Just my 2

[Guest kitkat]

Don't you find it ironic that the same people who were silent on Saddam's slaughter of 300,000 innocent civilians are outraged over hazing of Iraqi terrorist prisoners?

No news here.

Also, if Rumsfeld is ineffective and incompetent, why did the terrorists put a $15 million bounty on his head?

Kitkat: What you may have missed was the photos of dead Iraqi bodies in the prisons...and reports that haven't become fully publicized of detainees who were tortured to death.

They showed a few in the prison partially shown in body bags but naked and definitely beaten and bruised.

Cats, I had not heard of this. Could you please provide me with a link that talks about these murders?

This was taken from Newsmax, remember I'm not condoning this treatment, but:

Sunday, May 9, 2004 1:50 p.m. EDT

9/11 Flashback: When Libs Backed Torture

In the months after Sept. 11, when the shock of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history still angered most Americans, even the most vigorous civil libertarians were in favor of getting tough with detainees in the war on terrorism - even to the point of actually recommending torture.

It's a measure of how much the outrage of that dark day has faded that a handful of demeaning photos of detained Iraqi terrorist suspects has sent the nation into a convulsion of hand-wringing and recrimination.

Things were different when America still realized it was under attack from its enemies at home and abroad.

Leading civil libertarian, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, actually argued that the torture of terrorist suspects was legal under the U.S. Constitution and should be employed when a suspect refused to divulge information about potentially deadly terrorist plots.

"Is it justified to resort to unconventional techniques such as truth serum, moderate physical pressure and outright torture?" Dershowitz asked in a Nov. 8, 2001, Los Angeles Times op-ed piece.

"The constitutional answer to this question may surprise people who are not familiar with the current U.S. Supreme Court interpretation of the 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination," he wrote.

"Any interrogation technique, including the use of truth serum or even torture, is not prohibited," the noted civil libertarian insisted.

Dershowitz explained that while evidence obtained through torture could not be used in a criminal prosecution, it "could be used against that suspect in a non-criminal case - such as a deportation hearing - or against someone else."

Since there was no constitutional ban against torture, he argued, the U.S. courts could issue torture warrants in cases where terrorist suspects refused to talk.

"What if [torture was] limited to the rare 'ticking bomb' case - the situation in which a captured terrorist who knows of an imminent large-scale threat refuses to disclose it?" posited Dershowitz.

"Would torturing one guilty terrorist to prevent the deaths of a thousand innocent civilians shock the conscience of all decent people?"

My guess is that because it was psychological abuse which would leave no physical marks. Still shameful, and uncalled for (according to Geneva Convention), but far from physical torture.

John, I will have to agree with you at this point. It was psychological abuse, but I guarantee you, it's nothing like what our enemies would do to our captives. How many body bags of captured allies are all over the TV screen, like these images? I would sure like to know how many American lives this humiliation saved.

Kitkat

[Guest LCPGUY]

Yeah Kitkat,

I'm not sure, but I think I'd rather be beaten and shocked and stand naked in front of women than be put feet first into a shredder. Or, have my nose, lips and ears cut off with pruning shears.

There's so much outrage over this, but I ask where is the outrage over what they (muslims) do to us, or even their own. Seems kinda lopsided to me.

Bro John

[Guest yod]

Yod, you'd be singing a different tune if that had of been Israeli jews being stripped naked with their genitals hung out there for the world to see, while an American woman smiled and pointed.

You are proving my point, charles.

This happens on a daily basis to the jews who are captured. They are tortured (NOT just abused or humilated) every day they are in captivity. Where is the outrage? Where were all these liberals when the pregnant woman and her 3 daughters were slaughtered just last week by a Palestinian man?

I haven't heard Cats get upset about that yet...or Kerry. CNN hardly mentioned it. What would happen if they started showing pictures of that?

People would be sympathetic to the jews and of course we can't have THAT happening, now can we?

Almost none of these Iraqis were TORTURED

this is called "abuse" because there was no physical harm done.

I have 2 sons in the military, btw. I want our enemies to fear us....I want us to destroy the enemy with such overwhelming force that they think twice about an uprising. We won't do that by ballet dancing. I'm upset that we haven't flattened Fallujah. Many more American boys and girls are going to die for that mistake.

It would not bother me if we started castrating every single Iraqi male prisoner. Those cowards treat their own wives worse than they have been treated.

I have said repeatedly that this is wrong but we are not taking the innocent to prison. That "taxi" lie is ridiculous.

These folks were just taken out of a cell at random for some fun either. These particular prisoners were being prepped for interogation for intelligence. I hope we got every thing they knew out of them and it quickens the war.

War is hell.

[senerhu]

I think the reason there is so much outrage over this is that Amercians are supposed to be so much more civilized than this. It's just hard to stomach that one of our own would stoop to such lows. What Saddam did was beyond horrific and he will stand accountable for every drop of blood on his hands come judgement. All will.

I think why there is so much outrage is because the liberal media and liberal politicians are controlling the outrage to embarrass the president and Rumsfeld...

I didn't see the outrage when hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's were brutilized by a satanic mass murderer!

If a liberal were president, this wouldn't make page 3 of the New York Times!

ps, if this saved American lives, let em do it some more!

[senerhu]

oh and btw

One of the biggest complaints about the Iraqi prison abuse scandal is the claim that U.S. soldiers violated the Geneva Convention by subjecting detainees to humiliation and intimidation tactics in a bid to get them to talk.

Democrats are griping the loudest about this. Typical was Tuesday's tirade by Sen. Hillary Clinton to CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

She fumed: "Well, first of all, Wolf, there is the Geneva Convention about the treatment of prisoners of war and there is protocol that certainly members of the Intelligence Committee and others have been briefed on as to what is expected with respect to interrogations carried out in the name of the United States."

Newsflash to Sen. Clinton, and all the others who may have forgotten that the Pentagon expressly exempted terrorist suspects - which is what many of the captured Iraqis are - from Geneva Convention protections at the outset of the war on terror.

And for a very good reason. Notes today's Wall Street Journal:

"The Pentagon has avoided formal Geneva Convention status because it doesn't want al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners to be able to hide behind 'name, rank and serial number.'

That's why, strictly speaking, the Iraqi insurgents being held at the Al Ghraib prison haven't been accorded Prisoner of War status.

If Americans want to suddenly change that, fine. But they should be mindful of the potential consequences.

Just last month Jordanian security forces foiled an al Qaeda weapons of mass destruction plot that could have killed up to 80,000 people. Jordanian TV ran videotaped confessions from the suspects, one of whom admitted he was trained in Iraq by Osama bin Laden's WMD specialist, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

It's a fair bet that the Jordaniains didn't extract this information by adhering to the Geneva Convention protocols.

Zarqawi and his minions are still on the loose in Iraq, plotting to do the same to Americans at home as well as U.S. forces there.

If captured and interrogated, nothing would please them more than to be able to invoke the Geneva protocols - and promptly clam up about the next WMD plot they have in the works.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/6/110255.shtml

[Guest charlie]

I didn't see the outrage when hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's were brutilized by a satanic mass murderer!

Where have you been? Why do you people act like this is the first time there has been any outrage expressed over the killing, maiming and torturing of people. IT'S NOT! We've been hearing about it and seeing the outrage for years. When the WMD scam, yes it was a scam, fell thru, our "excuse" for being there was to free the Iraqi people and help them have better lives. This is the first time in many years, that it has been made public, that we have some soldiers who've been the perpetrators of evil acts.

Some of you seem more outraged that American transgressions have come to light than you are at the atrocities themselves. Do you think the pictures taken during the civil rights movement should have been kept out of the public eye too? You guys are justifying this pure and simple.

I've asked this before but it seems that now is a good time to ask it again:

Who do you serve, God or mammon?

[Guest yod]

If you ever saw the house I live in or the car I drive you wouldn't ask.

I'd bet yours in nicer. Who do you serve?

[Guest LCPGUY]

Some of you seem more outraged that American transgressions have come to light than you are at the atrocities themselves.

Please note, what have seen so far are in NO WAY atrocities. They are simply descriptions and pictures of people being humiliated. When national interests and the safety of our personnel come into question, then I say we need to use "close" to every effort to protect them.

You know, you don't get information out of godless murderers by treating them with kid gloves, being polite, and treating them in a politically correct manner. War is war, and you do what is best for you.

And as far as all these innocents being mistreated, like the guy in the taxi, are we so dumb as to think they won't lie about who they are and what they're up to? Why not put them on trial instead of just believing them?

I really liked Brother Dr. Bob Morey's suggestions regarding these folks. That is, if they don't talk, and talk convincingly, let them know they'll be wrapped in pigskin, photographed, and their pictures sent to their family and local Mosk. Also let them know that any terrorists killed by our forces will be buried in pigskin sacks. That's precisely the advice he gave to Putin in Russia. Putin followed his advice and they haven't had any terrorist problems since.

Let's please put all this PC lovey dovey stuff aside. This is war, and you do what you need to do to win.

For those in doubt, go and reread Joshua, Numbers 1 & 2, Samuel, Kings 1 & 2, etc., etc.

Got news for you boys and girls, we ain't conducting Sunday School classes over there. We're not there to be missionaries. We're in a real honest war and trying to quell vicious and godless murderers while protecting our own.

Wake up!!! Before it's too late.

In His Love,

Bro John

[Guest LCPGUY]

Who do you serve, God or mammon?

I serve the One True God. The God of Love, Truth and Justice.

But what does serving God have to do with war? Are you suggesting that God wants us to let pure evil take over? Does He not want us to do all that is necessary to stop it?

Bro John