0
   

THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

 
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 05:29 am
When did we become such scaly green reptiles?



Terror Suspect Alleges Torture
Detainee Says U.S. Sent Him to Egypt Before Guantanamo

By Dana Priest and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, January 6, 2005; Page A01

U.S. authorities in late 2001 forcibly transferred an Australian citizen to Egypt, where, he alleges, he was tortured for six months before being flown to the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to court papers made public yesterday in a petition seeking to halt U.S. plans to return him to Egypt.

Egyptian-born Mamdouh Habib, who was detained in Pakistan in October 2001 as a suspected al Qaeda trainer, alleges that while under Egyptian detention he was hung by his arms from hooks, repeatedly shocked, nearly drowned and brutally beaten, and he contends that U.S. and international law prohibits sending him back.


Habib's case is only the second to describe a secret practice called "rendition," under which the CIA has sent suspected terrorists to be interrogated in countries where torture has been well documented. It is unclear which U.S. agency transferred Habib to Egypt.

Habib's is the first case to challenge the legality of the practice and could have implications for U.S. plans to send large numbers of Guantanamo Bay detainees to Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other countries with poor human rights records.

The CIA has acknowledged that it conducts renditions, but the agency and Bush administration officials who have publicly addressed the matter say they never intend for the captives to be tortured and, in fact, seek pledges from foreign governments that they will treat the captives humanely.

A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment on Habib's allegations, which were filed in November but made public only yesterday after a judge ruled that his petition contained no classified information. The department has not addressed the allegation that he was sent to Egypt.

An Egyptian official reached last night said he could not comment on Habib's allegations but added: "Accusations that we are torturing people tend to be mythology."

The authority under which renditions and other forcible transfers may be legally performed is reportedly summarized in a March 13, 2002, memo titled "The President's Power as Commander in Chief to Transfer Captive Terrorists to the Control and Custody of Foreign Nations." Knowledgeable U.S. officials said White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales participated in its production.

The administration has refused a congressional request to make it public. But it is referred to in an August 2002 Justice Department opinion -- which Gonzales asked for and helped draft -- defining torture in a narrow way and concluding that the president could legally permit torture in fighting terrorism.

When the August memo became public, Bush repudiated it, and last week the Justice Department replaced it with a broader interpretation of the U.N. Convention Against Torture, which prohibits the practice under all circumstances. The August memo is expected to figure prominently in today's confirmation hearing for Gonzales, Bush's nominee to run the Justice Department as attorney general.

In a statement he planned to read at his hearing, made public yesterday, Gonzales said he would combat terrorism "in a manner consistent with our nation's values and applicable law, including our treaty obligations."

Also yesterday, the American Civil Liberties Union released new documents showing that 26 FBI agents reported witnessing mistreatment of Guantanamo Bay detainees, indicating a far broader pattern of alleged abuse there than reported previously.

The records, obtained in an ongoing ACLU lawsuit, also show that the FBI's senior lawyer determined that 17 of the incidents were "DOD-approved interrogation techniques" and did not require further investigation. The FBI did not participate in any of the interviews directly, according to the documents.

The new ACLU documents detail abuses seen by FBI personnel serving in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, including incidents in which military interrogators grabbed prisoners' genitals, bent back their fingers and, in one case, placed duct tape over a prisoner's mouth for reciting the Koran.

In late 2002, an FBI agent recounted that one detainee at Guantanamo Bay had been subjected to "intense isolation" for more than three months and that his cell was constantly flooded with light. The agent reported that "the detainee was evidencing behavior consistent with extreme psychological trauma," including hearing voices, crouching in a corner for hours and talking to imaginary people.

According to the e-mails, military interrogators at Guantanamo Bay tried to hide some of their activities from FBI agents, including having a female interrogator rub lotion on a prisoner during Ramadan -- a highly offensive tactic to an observant Muslim man.


Habib was taken to the Guantanamo Bay prison in May 2002.

Three Britons released from the prison -- Rhuhel Ahmed, Asif Iqbal and Shafiq Rasul -- have said Habib was in "catastrophic shape" when he arrived. Most of his fingernails were missing, and while sleeping he regularly bled from his nose, mouth and ears but U.S. officials denied him treatment, they said.

Habib's attorney, Joseph Margulies, said Habib had moved to Australia in the 1980s but eventually decided to move his family to Pakistan. He was there in late 2001 looking for a house and school for his children, Margulies said. U.S. officials accuse Habib of training and raising money for al Qaeda, and say he had advance knowledge of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Australian media have reported that authorities in that country cleared him of having terrorist connections in 2001 and have quoted his Australian attorney as saying he was tortured in Egypt.

On Oct. 5, 2001, Pakistani authorities seized Habib, and over three weeks, he asserts in a memorandum filed in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, three Americans interrogated him.

The petition says he was taken to an airfield where, during a struggle, he was beaten by several people who spoke American-accented English. The men cut off his clothes, one placed a foot on his neck "and posed while another took pictures," the document says.

He was then flown to Egypt, it alleges, and spent six months in custody in a barren, 6-foot-by-8-foot cell, where he slept on the concrete floor with one blanket. During interrogations, Habib was "sometimes suspended from hooks on the wall" and repeatedly kicked, punched, beaten with a stick, rammed with an electric cattle prod and doused with cold water when he fell asleep, the petition says.

He was suspended from hooks, with his is feet resting on the side of a large cylindrical drum attached to wires and a battery, the document says. "When Mr. Habib did not give the answers his interrogators wanted, they threw a switch and a jolt of electricity" went through the drum, it says. "The action of Mr. Habib 'dancing' on the drum forced it to rotate, and his feet constantly slipped, leaving him suspended by only the hooks on the wall . . . This ingenious cruelty lasted until Mr. Habib finally fainted."

At other times, the petition alleges, he was placed in ankle-deep water that his interrogators told him "was wired to an electric current, and that unless Mr. Habib confessed, they would throw the switch and electrocute him."

Habib says he gave false confessions to stop the abuse.

The State Department's annual human rights report has consistently criticized Egypt for practices that include torturing prisoners.

After six months in Egypt, the petition says, Habib was flown to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.

U.S. intelligence officials have said renditions -- and the threat of renditions -- are a potent device to induce suspected terrorists to divulge information. Habib's petition says the threat that detainees at Bagram would be sent to Egypt prompted many of them to offer confessions.

His petition argues that his "removal to Egypt would be unquestionably unlawful" in part because he "faces almost certain torture."

The U.N. Convention Against Torture says no party to the treaty "shall expel, return or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture."

"The fact that the United States would contemplate sending him to Egypt again is astonishing to me," said Margulies, the attorney.

Researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Permission to Republish
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
[/quote]http://www.allhatnocattle.net/an%20unusual%20new%20year.JPG
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 06:38 am
BBC:

US army reserve a 'broken' force

Part-time soldiers form 40% of US troops in Iraq
The commander of the US army reserve says it is rapidly degenerating into a "broken" force.
Lt Gen James Helmly, in a leaked memo to the Pentagon, says the reserve has reached a point where it cannot fulfil its missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Reservists provide a large share of US troops in Iraq. The army says Gen Helmly's concerns are being addressed.

But analysts say they will fuel criticism that Pentagon policies are harming the US all-volunteer military.

The army reserve is a force of about 200,000 part-time soldiers who chose not to sign-up for active duty but can be mobilised in time of need.

Together with National Guard troops - who also serve part-time - reservists account for about 40% of US troops in Iraq.

Burden

The internal memorandum was first reported on Wednesday by the Baltimore Sun newspaper, and appeared on the internet later in the day.

In it, Gen Helmly says that under current procedures his forces will be unable "to meet mission requirements associated with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom" in Afghanistan.

The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you of the Army Reserve's inability under current policies... to meet mission requirements

Gen James Helmly
Gen Helmly takes issue with a number of "dysfunctional" Pentagon practices, including:


Financial incentives to attract and retain reservists on active duty, which the general says confuses "volunteers" with "mercenaries"

Reservists being called to active duty at only a few days' notice

Reserve troops being required to leave equipment for other forces after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The BBC's Nick Childs in Washington says such blunt words from a senior general are likely to provide further ammunition for critics who argue that the current policies are doing long-term harm to America's all-volunteer military.

US armed forces have been placed under considerable strain by the wars launched by President George W Bush during his first term.

Some commentators have accused Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of not accepting that huge troop deployments were needed, notably in Iraq.

Reacting to the leaked memo, Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat, told the Associated Press news agency: "By consistently underestimating the number of troops necessary for the successful occupation of Iraq, the administration has placed a tremendous burden on the Army Reserve and created this crisis."

In its response, the army said it acknowledged that changes have to be made in the way reserves are used and mobilised to deal with the new threats.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4150749.stm
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 06:45 am
Another investigation - at least the US DOES investigate these things:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4150589.stm


US to hold new Guantanamo inquiry

The abuse allegations date back several years
The US defence department has announced a new investigation into allegations of prisoner abuse at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre.
Documents published last month suggest FBI officials expressed concerns over the mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay as far back as 2002.

There have been numerous allegations of abuse and torture at the centre.

The internal probe has been ordered by the head of the US Southern Command, which covers Guantanamo Bay.

The detention centre at the US base in Cuba currently holds almost 550 detainees from around 40 countries, mostly captives from the war in Afghanistan.

'Aggressive treatment'

FBI memos detailing abuses - some dated after the Abu Ghraib scandal surfaced last May - were obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union under the Freedom of Information Act.

One agent described seeing prisoners shackled, hand and foot, in a foetal position for up to 24 hours at a time, and left to defecate on themselves.

Another, sent to FBI Director Robert Mueller, described strangulation, beatings and the placing of lit cigarettes into detainees' ears.


Allegations of abuse in Iraq rocked the US military

Some of the memos were written in response to a request by a senior FBI official that agents tell him if they had witnessed "aggressive treatment", in the wake of the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal in Iraq.

The Pentagon says prisoners are treated humanely, but has promised to investigate all credible allegations of abuse.

The UK-based human rights group Amnesty International has accused the US government of tolerating mistreatment.

The new investigation has been ordered by General Bantz Craddock, the head of US southern command which has responsibility for Guantanamo Bay.

The inquiry is to be led by US Army Brigadier General John Forlow.

There have been eight major official investigations into allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay."


Not like in Egypt etc to which the US export prisoners for torture they will not do themselves:

This particular story may not be true - but evidence that it is being done is ample:




"Terror Suspect Says He Was Tortured in Egypt- WPost
Thu Jan 6, 2005 01:11 AM ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Australian terror suspect says U.S. authorities sent him to Egypt in late 2001 where he was tortured for six months before being transferred to the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, The Washington Post reported on Thursday, citing newly released court documents.
In a petition seeking to keep the United States from returning him to Egypt, Mamdouh Habib alleges that while under Egyptian detention he was hung by his arms from hooks, repeatedly shocked, nearly drowned and brutally beaten, the newspaper said.

The Egyptian-born Habib contends that U.S. and international law prohibit sending him back in the petition filed in November in U.S. District Court in Washington. It was made public on Wednesday after a judge ruled that it did not contain classified information, the Post said.

According to the newspaper, Habib's case is only the second to describe the secret Central Intelligence Agency practice of "rendition" and the first to challenge the legality of the practice.

Under the practice, the CIA has turned over suspected terrorists to be interrogated in some countries that are known to torture prisoners, the newspaper said.

It was not clear which U.S. agency transferred Habib to Egypt, The Washington Post said, adding that the U.S. Justice Department had not addressed the allegation that he was sent there.

A Justice Department spokesman was not immediately available for comment.

Habib, a father of four, was arrested crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan three weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, airliner attacks on the United States. He was detained as a suspected al Qaeda trainer, the Post said.


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7250620&src=rss/topNews



And:

"Bush Nominee to Face Grilling on Prisoner Policies
Thu Jan 6, 2005 02:42 AM ET


By Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - White House counsel Alberto Gonzales will be grilled over what critics call his "appalling" role in policies blamed for abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo Bay, when Senate hearings begin on Thursday over his nomination to be U.S. Attorney General.

Opponents acknowledge they are unlikely to defeat Gonzales, a long-time adviser to President Bush, who has praised Gonzales for a "sharp intellect and sound judgment" that helped shape U.S. counterterrorism policies.

But critics hope the hearings will make Gonzales answer for his White House advice that parts of the Geneva Conventions on prisoner treatment were "obsolete."

Senators will also want him to shed light on any policy link to practices that shocked the world: the sexual humiliation of Iraqi detainees and alleged abuses at a prison for foreign terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"Gonzales' record is appalling," the anti-war group Win Without War said on the eve of the hearings. "His radical legal reasoning opened the door to the terrible abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay."

Some Senate Democrats have also ripped into his record, and a coalition of human rights groups launched an anti-torture campaign to coincide with the hearings.

Bush has said that he never ordered torture.

POTENTIAL SUPREME COURT PICK

Gonzales, a former Texas Supreme Court justice, was chosen in November to replace John Ashcroft, who was widely criticized over his implementation of U.S. anti-terror legislation viewed by many as damaging to civil liberties.

Gonzalez would be the first Hispanic-American to serve as the top U.S. law enforcement official -- furthering a Republican goal of wooing Hispanic voters. He also is considered a potential Bush choice to fill any U.S. Supreme Court vacancy.

"The result is not in doubt. He will be confirmed overwhelmingly," said Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who will introduce Gonzales at the confirmation hearing, which begins at 9:30 a.m
..........."


Full story: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7251454&src=rss/topNews
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 08:00 am
Absolutely unreal.

C'mon conservatives.

See the light; smell the coffee.

Help us out here!

Just as Islam has responsibility to rein in the excesses of the nut cases on its fringe....just as Christianity has responsibility to rein in the excesses of the nut cases on its fringe...

...you people have responsibility to rein in the excesses of the nut cases on your fringe.

That fringe, in case this point is escaping you, contains the people now making policy in Washington.

They are turning us into slime...or scaly green reptiles, as Ge puts it...

...they are destroying our military...

...and they are making us less safe with their counterproductive misadventures.

Stop your kneejerk defenses of their incompetency.

If you cannot join us in trying to bring our nation back to sanity...at least step out of the way...rather than helping perpetuate the insanity.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 08:04 am
Quote:
In June of 2002 the Pentagon had presented the Bush admin. detailed plans for a military strike on the northeastern Iraqi camp which Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was allegedly running. The Bush Admin. declined this action in favor of the larger invasion and occupation of Iraq.


Out of all the information so far this one just competely blows me away.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 08:10 am
Quote:
The result is not in doubt. He will be confirmed overwhelmingly," said Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who will introduce Gonzales at the confirmation hearing, which begins at 9:30 a
.m

If he really is confirmed so overwhelmingly after his redefinition of what defines terror, God, I don't know what to say, what can we say, for that matter what can we do other than to impotently moan about it?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 10:57 am
The inmates are running the asylum now, for sure....

The article c.i. posted about our continual lack of troop deployment in sufficient numbers is the real scary part. We haven't seen things get bad in Iraq yet, but it's coming.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 11:02 am
Ican Wrote:
Quote:
All those supposes could be easily tested. Add a proposition to be voted on at the 1/30/05 election: "We approve holding these elections." If a majority disapprove these elections, they can express that opinion without killing any more Iraqis by voting against the proposition.

What do you think?


An idea, and while I always support giving people non-violent options to speak their minds, I hardly think it will be effective.

In order for the elections to have legitimacy, there must be a really small number of f*ckups during the process. The insurgents, you can bet on it, are going to lay into the populace, the police, and the Americans around voting day.

What if it is a close race? And fifteen polling stations were attacked in predominantly sunni/shia/kurdish areas? Would that be enough to tip the vote to one person or another? What if ballot boxes are stolen, or blown up(this happens in India all the time, btw)? What if there is massive fraud, as all ballots list people as 'male' and fake ID's are a dime a dozen in Iraq?

There are too many 'what if's' to be comfortable about the election...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 11:27 am
Forced elections in an environment of violence is not free elections; maybe it's a new form of democracy that Bush and minions are trying to push onto mideast countries. It ain't gonna work.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 11:40 am
Double-speak again?
******************

Bush's top lawyer defends record
President Bush's nominee for attorney general has denied paving the way for US prisoner abuses and dismissing the Geneva Conventions as "obsolete". Alberto Gonzales, currently the president's chief legal adviser, has been accused of giving the green light for violent treatment of detainees.

At his Senate confirmation hearing, he insisted: "Torture and abuse will not be tolerated by this administration."

He faced tough questions as the two-day hearing got under way on Thursday.

A senior senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Democrat Patrick Leahy, said the Bush administration in its first four years had set out to "minimise, distort and even ignore our laws, our policies and international agreements on torture and treatment of prisoners".


The Department of Justice's top priority is to prevent terror attacks against our nation Alberto Gonzales

"America's troops and citizens are at greater risk because of those actions," he said. Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy said: "The issue of your commitment to the rule of law is what most concerns us."

Mr Gonzales' opponents say his advice that the Geneva Convention on treatment on prisoners of war did not apply to terrorist suspects led to human rights abuses like those at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

They have cited two memos. One said the Geneva Conventions were being "rendered obsolete" by the new type of war America was fighting, the other apparently narrowed the definition of torture.


CONTROVERSIAL MEMOS
Most computers will open PDF documents automatically, but you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader.


The Texan judge defended a robust US policy on terror suspects, but denied that it was responsible for the Abu Ghraib scandal, which he said was "simply people who were morally bankrupt having fun, and I condemn that totally".

Mr Gonzales told the Senate: "I am deeply committed to ensuring that the US government complies with all its legal obligations... [including] of course the Geneva Conventions whenever they apply."

He said after the attacks of 11 September 2001, government lawyers had to make "fundamental decisions" on how to apply treaties and US law to an unconventional enemy, and that "the Department of Justice's top priority is to prevent terror attacks against our nation".

Even those who posed hostile questions in the Senate praised Mr Gonzales' character and his progress from an extremely poor immigrant family, via Harvard University, to become a Supreme Court justice.

His opponents concede that they are not likely to prevent his appointment as the successor to Mr Bush's first attorney general, John Ashcroft.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4150489.stm

Published: 2005/01/06 17:09:30 GMT

© BBC MMV
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 12:47 pm
i offered my opinion on another thread that the elections should be held this month. that would fulfill the "stated mission" of the bush administration; a saddam free iraq, a freeley elected government and a standing defense force and police department.

then hand baghdad the keys and get our people out of there.

simply put, i do not believe that the elections will be generally agreed on by the iraqis. there is too much "diversity of thought" ( :wink: ) at work there. i believe that following the elections, there will be complaints, protests, whatever. there seems to be at least two opposing mindsets; one favors a secular iraq, one favors a theocratic government. sound familiar ? and then there is also the kurdish issue.

i'll be really surprised if there isn't a civil war. and that is not something that we should want our military in the middle of.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 12:49 pm
Quote:
U.S. Only Spent Small Part of Iraq Rebuilding FundsThe United States has still only spent a small portion of the $18.4 billion it set aside for rebuilding Iraq, a new government report shows.
According to a copy of the Bush administration's latest quarterly update to Congress on Iraq obtained by Reuters on Thursday, as of Dec. 29 only $2.2 billion of the funds has actually been spent.

This is up from $1.2 billion in the previous report that detailed reconstruction spending as of Sept. 22.

However, the portion of the money promised to companies for projects has risen to $10.5 billion from $7.1 billion in the previous report.

The report also concludes that while Iraq's security forces have made progress, "the overall performance of these forces has been mixed when put to the test."
Source
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 01:11 pm
Quote, "..."the overall performance of these forces has been mixed when put to the test." That's an understatement if I ever heard one about the Iraqi forces. They're getting killed not only at their training bases, but also at their stations. Many run from the insurgents when fired upon. It's also established that the Iraqi forces are in no condition to protect their own country or it's people. Their make-believe democracy is a metaphor for chaos, violence, and non-existent sovereignty. Who's kidding who?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 02:07 pm
Quote:
Doctors aided in detainee abuse, journal says
Pentagon denies report of tailored torture
- Joe Stephens, Washington Post
Thursday, January 6, 2005


Washington -- U.S. Army doctors violated the Geneva Conventions by helping intelligence officers carry out abusive interrogations at military detention centers, perhaps participating in torture, according to a report in today's edition of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine.

Medical personnel helped tailor interrogations to the physical and mental conditions of individual detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the report claims. It says that medical workers gave interrogators access to patient medical files and that psychiatrists and other physicians collaborated with interrogators and guards who in turn deprived detainees of sleep, restricted them to diets of bread and water, and exposed them to extremes of heat and cold.

"Clearly, the medical personnel who helped to develop and execute aggressive counter-resistance plans thereby breached the laws of war," says the four-page article.

"The conclusion that doctors participated in torture is premature, but there is probable cause for suspecting it."

The report was written by M. Gregg Bloche, a law professor at Georgetown University and adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University, and by Jonathan H. Marks, a London barrister who is a bioethics fellow at Georgetown University Law Center and Johns Hopkins. It is based on interviews with more than two dozen military personnel and on a review of documents released to the American Civil Liberties Union under the Freedom of Information Act.

Pentagon officials said Wednesday that the report was inaccurate and misrepresented the positions and acts of military officials. Doctors did not violate the Geneva Conventions, said William Winkenwerder Jr., assistant secretary of defense for health affairs. Some functioned as consultants to intelligence officers but never acted unethically, he said.

The report in the medical journal purports to add new facts to the public record and put others in context. But it is most significant because it adds to a chorus of concern expressed by respected medical institutions, said Arthur L. Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania.

"The New England Journal of Medicine plays a unique role in serving as a moral beacon for the health profession; when they take it on, it's important," Caplan said.

Leonard S. Rubenstein, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights, a Boston-based advocacy organization, added: "This underscores the pressing need for a transparent and full investigation, which the Pentagon has consistently refused to initiate."

The Geneva Conventions forbid the use of abusive techniques in questioning prisoners of war. Tactics used in Iraq and Cuba were "transparently coercive," the article asserts. The report discloses that the Army's surgeon general is developing new rules for medical personnel who work with detainees.

Meanwhile, the armed forces on Wednesday ordered an investigation into allegations that terrorism suspects were abused at Guantanamo and appointed a one-star general to head the probe.

The U.S. Southern Command named Brig. Gen. John T. Furlow, deputy commander of its U.S. Army South wing at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, to lead the investigation. The move comes six weeks after an FBI memo detailed reports from 26 agents saying they had witnessed interrogation excesses at Guantanamo.
Source
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 03:10 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Quote:
U.S. Only Spent Small Part of Iraq Rebuilding FundsThe United States has still only spent a small portion of the $18.4 billion it set aside for rebuilding Iraq, a new government report shows.
According to a copy of the Bush administration's latest quarterly update to Congress on Iraq obtained by Reuters on Thursday, as of Dec. 29 only $2.2 billion of the funds has actually been spent.

This is up from $1.2 billion in the previous report that detailed reconstruction spending as of Sept. 22.

However, the portion of the money promised to companies for projects has risen to $10.5 billion from $7.1 billion in the previous report.

The report also concludes that while Iraq's security forces have made progress, "the overall performance of these forces has been mixed when put to the test."
Source


To be fair - I wonder how possible it is going to be to spend reconstruction funds unless the insurgency is defeated?

I am aware of one big company which has pulled out because of the security situation for its workers, for instance.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 03:21 pm
Reconstruction is an oxymoron in Iraq while the insurgents continue violence against all targets. The January 30 election is also an oxymoron.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 04:12 pm
Weeks Before Vote, General Says 4 Iraqi Provinces Are Not Ready
By DEXTER FILKINS

Published: January 6, 2005


BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 6 - With three weeks go to go before nationwide elections, four of the country's 18 provinces are still not secure enough to allow for voting, the commander of American ground forces in Iraq said today.

Speaking at a news conference here, Lt. Gen. Thomas Metz said he planned increased military action against insurgents in the coming days to make those places safe enough for voting. The four provinces were all in the country's Sunni heartland, which forms the core of the resistance against the American-backed project: Al Anbar, which includes Falluja and Ramadi; Nineva, which contains the restive city of Mosul; Salahadin, which includes Tikrit, the hometown of Saddam Hussein, and parts of Baghdad.

Advertisement


General Metz said that the 14 other provinces were ready to hold the elections, and he expressed confidence that the Iraqi security forces, which have often performed miserably against the guerrillas, would be largely responsible for security around some 9,000 polling places around the country. The American military plans to stay away from the polling places, lest they antagonize Iraqi voters, and engage in military operations only if they are called in by the Iraqi forces.

The statement by General Metz that there were still significant parts of the country too unstable to hold elections comes after several major offensives against insurgent strongholds in Falluja, Samara and areas south of Baghdad.

"Today I would not be in much shape to hold elections in those provinces three weeks from today," General Metz said. "Those are the four areas that we see enough attacks that we are going to continue to focus our energies."

As part of that plan, American forces this week stepped up military operations in and around Mosul, the Sunni-dominated city in northern Iraq that has been particularly violent in recent weeks. American forces have recently doubled the number of American troops there, adding about 3,000 soldiers, and also dispatched "significant numbers" of Iraqi forces as well.

Despite the difficulties, General Metz gave a mostly upbeat assessment of the security environment here in the final days before the vote, scheduled to take place Jan. 30. General Metz said that attacks against American and Iraqi forces, had declined in recent weeks following the monthlong Ramadan holiday, and that there were signs that the "quality" of the fighters had begun to decline and that the execution of some recent attacks had been poor.

General Metz, a three-star general, said American and Iraqi forces had been attacked an average of about 70 times a day in the past week. He said he expected the number of such attacks to climb to about 85 a day as the vote nears. Insurgents have launched a number of spectacular attacks against Iraqi security forces, killing more than 80 police and soldiers in the past week.

The general said that the recent run of gruesome suicide bombings, which have killed dozens of civilians, was a measure of desperation among the insurgents, who have put forward no political vision beyond expelling the Americans.

"Murder, kidnapping and torture are not the tools of a popular movement," he said.

Yet even with the drop in recent attacks, their frequency still far exceeds the number of attacks faced by American forces in late 2003, when the insurgency began to gather steam. At that time, the number of attacks averaged about 50 a day.

Like other senior American officials, General Metz said he was opposed to postponing the election, saying that a delay would give the insurgents more time to try to wreck the democratic process.

"I think there is a greater chance of civil war with a delay than without one," he said.

General Metz said he favored going forward with the elections even if it meant that significant numbers of Iraqis stayed away from the polls. Many prominent Sunni clerics and political leaders have said they plan on staying away from the polls, some because of the violence, others because they insist that a fair election cannot take place under a foreign military operation.

"Part of democracy is the right to choose," General Metz said. "If people choose to boycott the election, that is their choice."
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 04:16 pm
General Metz is a dope; will he go to the polls to vote if he's not sure whether his life is at stake?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 05:22 pm
I honestly can't take any more about our actions in the abuse scandal.
I am wondering just how low we can go and still go around acting like the world's super hero.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jan, 2005 05:30 pm
Has Ican gone away yet?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 08/21/2025 at 06:11:51