0
   

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

 
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 12:44 pm
What the little green LED is really a camera? No kidding. You'll be telling me my phone is bugged and the CIA monitor my emails next.... Anyway I've fixed the spy cam with a large dollop of tippex.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 12:45 pm
That "once upon a time" is lost foreever. In today's San Jose Mercury News, in the "Perspective" section, there's an article titled "FIGHT OVER JUDGES ABOUT TO 'BLOW UP.'
The sub-title is "The GOP contemplates drastic action against Democrats who want to block court nominees; the fallout also threatens to erase historic curbs on majority-party power - and the last traces of bipartisanship." Second paragraph: "This standoff over a handful of judicial nominees may seem an abstract issue that, like many inside-the-Beltway controversies, produces lots of noice but little real impact on average Americans. But this battle, which could soon come to a dramatic conclusion, has implications far beyond the courtroom." In a divided nation, the arbitors of disputes in our courtrooms will no longer be blind to party politics.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 12:45 pm
Gelisgesti wrote:
Lash wrote:
Do you think the Americans tried to assassinate her?Yeah. We tried to kill her...

She's a communist who hates the US--as are her bosses.

I imagine if some lefties HERE experienced the same thing--they'd blame our troops as well. Ignominious.

She chose to buddy up with her captors, and trust THEM.

Vomitus.


Where did you read that "she's a communist" and "She chose to buddy up with her captors, and trust THEM."?


In a couple of articles--in Italian papers and an Arab paper--she speaks of her captors in favorable terms. She doesn't seem as mad at them as she does the Americans who accidentally killed her friend.

She says her terrorist captors "warned her that the US doesn't like negotiating with hostages--and they may show up" She said they treated her very well. She must not mind beng kidnapped and held for ransom. I wouldn't consider that treatment "very well".

The previous article states before this happened, she was "vehemently opposed" to the war-- so much so that they were surprised that the terrorists would be mad at her--seems like the tenor of her writings would have endeared her to terrorists.

That says it all.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 01:42 pm
That says what?

She was kidnapped- maybe for ransom.
She wound up in the hands of insurgents.
She had a reasonable relationship with them- she didn't get her throat cut on TV, at least. Maybe she was trying to aviod that happening....just a guess.
A large ransom was paid.
She got out.
She got shot.

Are you saying she deserved to get shot because she was not pro-war and did not denigrate her captors? Strange.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 01:54 pm
I wonder, Lash, what your comments are (were) about Margaret Hassan - should be worse than those above.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 02:20 pm
I haven't seen anyone suggest she should have been shot. Why the exagerrated tone? For effect?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 02:21 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Gelisgesti wrote:

Where did you read that "she's a communist" and "She chose to buddy up with her captors, and trust THEM."?


And may I ask, how you think - besides the questions above - how hostages should react in captivity, in Iraq or kidnapped elsewhere?


It could be anything .... all that is at this point is that there is a disagreement as to the chain of events. It's best towait and see where the chips fall or how things corellate.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 02:26 pm
Lash wrote:
She doesn't seem as mad at them as she does the Americans who accidentally killed her friend.


Her friend was still alive until recently and seemed to be rather safe in Italy.

The Italian killed in the car was the head of Italian intelligence in Iraq.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 02:26 pm
Gels, My position exactly; none of still knows what exactly transpired - before or after that event. More news will be forthcoming for sure.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 02:44 pm
Quote:
Soldier Who Reported Abuse Was Sent to Psychiatrist

By R. Jeffrey Smith and Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, March 5, 2005; Page A15

An Army intelligence sergeant who accused fellow soldiers in Samarra, Iraq, of abusing detainees in 2003 was in turn accused by his commander of being delusional and ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation in Germany, despite a military psychiatrist's initial judgment that the man was stable, according to internal Army records released yesterday.

The soldier had angered his commander by urging the unit's redeployment from the military base to prevent what the soldier feared would be the death of one or more detainees under interrogation, according to the documents. He told his commander three members of the counterintelligence team had hit detainees, pulled their hair, tried to asphyxiate them and staged mock executions with pistols pointed at the detainees' heads.
_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• TechNews Daily Report
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Finance
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Tech
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

In another case detailed in the Army files, soldiers in a Florida National Guard unit deployed near Ramadi in 2003 compiled a 20-minute video that depicted a soldier kicking a wounded detainee in the face and chest in the presence of 10 colleagues and soldiers positioning a dead insurgent to appear to wave hello. The video was found in a soldier's computer files under the heading "Ramadi Madness," and it initially prompted military lawyers to recommend charges of assault with battery and dereliction of duty for tampering with a corpse.

The unit's commander told Army investigators he was concerned about the images becoming public and promised to take steps to "minimize the risk of this and other videos that may end up in the media."

Both criminal investigations involved events that occurred before the May 2004 revelation of widespread detainee abuse committed by U.S. military personnel at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad in late 2003, but unlike that event, neither of these cases led to criminal charges.

These cases were among 13 described in more than 1,000 pages of Army criminal records released at the Pentagon under the order of a New York federal judge. They detail the Army's investigations of other allegations by U.S. military personnel in Iraq of abuse, rape and larceny by fellow soldiers.

Investigations into similar allegations were previously disclosed in tens of thousands of pages of records made public since December under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union. Those records describe allegations of detainee abuse in Afghanistan and at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in addition to Iraq, and show that when FBI field agents and interrogation specialists in the Defense Intelligence Agency protested alleged abuse, the complaints were generally ignored.

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, asked about detainee abuse yesterday on CNN's "Wolf Blitzer Reports," said he was not surprised. Gonzales said that he presumed the military used lawful interrogation techniques but that "sometimes people do things that they shouldn't do. People are imperfect . . . and so the fact that abuses occur, they're unfortunate but I'm not sure that they should be viewed as surprising."

In New York, ACLU staff attorney Jameel Jaffer said the new files "provide further evidence that abuse of detainees was widespread." He added: "In light of the hundreds of abuses that we now know to have taken place, it is increasingly difficult to understand why no senior official, civilian or military, has been held accountable." The ACLU has called for the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel and for Congress to hold hearings on the abuse.

In each of the 13 cases described in the latest set of documents, the Army concluded that "the investigations failed to support any criminal charges," according to a statement it released yesterday. In three of the investigations, the Army probes were closed without the finding of sufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegations.

Page 2 of 2 < Back
Soldier Who Reported Abuse Was Sent to Psychiatrist

Those conclusions are consistent with the majority of the 226 Army investigations into alleged wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan that have been completed so far; in 70 percent of those, the Army closed its probes after concluding it could not substantiate the allegations. Of the soldiers who have been disciplined in the remaining cases, only 32 faced a court-martial, which is roughly equivalent to a criminal trial, while 88 others were given nonjudicial or administrative sanctions.

The Army intelligence sergeant subjected to a psychiatric evaluation was serving with Detachment B, 223rd Military Intelligence Battalion, and told investigators that he witnessed an escalation of violence against detainees shortly after arriving at the unit's Samarra detention facility in April 2003.
_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• TechNews Daily Report
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Finance
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Tech
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

Although his name is not listed in the documents, the episode precisely matches events described publicly last year by California National Guard Sgt. Greg Ford, a former state prison guard and Navy SEAL team medic whose complaints were dismissed by the Army in October 2004 as lacking sufficient evidence. Ford said last night, after hearing what the documents stated, that he is the sergeant described.

The soldier complained that he had had to resuscitate abused detainees and urged the unit's withdrawal. He told investigators that the unit's commander, an Army captain, responded by giving him "30 seconds to withdraw my request or he was going to send me forcibly to go see a psychiatrist." The soldier added: "I told him I was not going to withdraw my request and at that time he confiscated my weapon and informed me he was withdrawing my security clearance and was placing me under 24-hour surveillance."

A witness in his unit told investigators that the captain later pressured a military doctor -- who had found the soldier stable -- into doing another emergency evaluation, saying: "I don't care what you saw or heard, he is imbalanced, and I want him out of here."

The next day, after the doctor did another evaluation, the soldier was evacuated from Iraq in restraints on a stretcher to a military hospital in Germany, despite having been given no official diagnosis, according to the documents. A military doctor in Germany ruled he was in stable mental health, according to the documents, but sent him back to the United States for what the soldier recalls the doctor describing as his "safety."

The soldier depicted the evacuation as part of an effort to cover up wrongdoing. But other members of his team denied the allegations, saying that the unit was professional and that they never saw abusive behavior at the facility. Investigators closed the case without filing charges, writing that the investigation "did not identify any witnesses" to the abuse and did not "produce any logical subjects."

The new documents also describe allegations by a military interrogator, who was not named, that members of Task Force 626 -- an elite U.S. military unit assigned to hunt in Iraq for senior officials in Saddam Hussein's government -- used harsh interrogation tactics and abused detainees at a secret detention facility called Camp Nama in Baghdad in April and May of last year. The Army's criminal investigators turned the investigation over to Special Operations and closed the case; the Special Operations probe concluded the allegations of wrongdoing were unfounded.

In the "Ramadi Madness" case, investigators determined the video "contained footage of inappropriate rather than criminal behavior" and determined that the detainee who was kicked was not abused.

Research editor Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.

Page 2 of 2 < Back
Soldier Who Reported Abuse Was Sent to Psychiatrist

Those conclusions are consistent with the majority of the 226 Army investigations into alleged wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan that have been completed so far; in 70 percent of those, the Army closed its probes after concluding it could not substantiate the allegations. Of the soldiers who have been disciplined in the remaining cases, only 32 faced a court-martial, which is roughly equivalent to a criminal trial, while 88 others were given nonjudicial or administrative sanctions.

The Army intelligence sergeant subjected to a psychiatric evaluation was serving with Detachment B, 223rd Military Intelligence Battalion, and told investigators that he witnessed an escalation of violence against detainees shortly after arriving at the unit's Samarra detention facility in April 2003.
_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• TechNews Daily Report
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Finance
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Tech
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

Although his name is not listed in the documents, the episode precisely matches events described publicly last year by California National Guard Sgt. Greg Ford, a former state prison guard and Navy SEAL team medic whose complaints were dismissed by the Army in October 2004 as lacking sufficient evidence. Ford said last night, after hearing what the documents stated, that he is the sergeant described.

The soldier complained that he had had to resuscitate abused detainees and urged the unit's withdrawal. He told investigators that the unit's commander, an Army captain, responded by giving him "30 seconds to withdraw my request or he was going to send me forcibly to go see a psychiatrist." The soldier added: "I told him I was not going to withdraw my request and at that time he confiscated my weapon and informed me he was withdrawing my security clearance and was placing me under 24-hour surveillance."

A witness in his unit told investigators that the captain later pressured a military doctor -- who had found the soldier stable -- into doing another emergency evaluation, saying: "I don't care what you saw or heard, he is imbalanced, and I want him out of here."

The next day, after the doctor did another evaluation, the soldier was evacuated from Iraq in restraints on a stretcher to a military hospital in Germany, despite having been given no official diagnosis, according to the documents. A military doctor in Germany ruled he was in stable mental health, according to the documents, but sent him back to the United States for what the soldier recalls the doctor describing as his "safety."

The soldier depicted the evacuation as part of an effort to cover up wrongdoing. But other members of his team denied the allegations, saying that the unit was professional and that they never saw abusive behavior at the facility. Investigators closed the case without filing charges, writing that the investigation "did not identify any witnesses" to the abuse and did not "produce any logical subjects."

The new documents also describe allegations by a military interrogator, who was not named, that members of Task Force 626 -- an elite U.S. military unit assigned to hunt in Iraq for senior officials in Saddam Hussein's government -- used harsh interrogation tactics and abused detainees at a secret detention facility called Camp Nama in Baghdad in April and May of last year. The Army's criminal investigators turned the investigation over to Special Operations and closed the case; the Special Operations probe concluded the allegations of wrongdoing were unfounded.

In the "Ramadi Madness" case, investigators determined the video "contained footage of inappropriate rather than criminal behavior" and determined that the detainee who was kicked was not abused.

Research editor Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.

Page 2 of 2 < Back
Soldier Who Reported Abuse Was Sent to Psychiatrist

Those conclusions are consistent with the majority of the 226 Army investigations into alleged wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan that have been completed so far; in 70 percent of those, the Army closed its probes after concluding it could not substantiate the allegations. Of the soldiers who have been disciplined in the remaining cases, only 32 faced a court-martial, which is roughly equivalent to a criminal trial, while 88 others were given nonjudicial or administrative sanctions.

The Army intelligence sergeant subjected to a psychiatric evaluation was serving with Detachment B, 223rd Military Intelligence Battalion, and told investigators that he witnessed an escalation of violence against detainees shortly after arriving at the unit's Samarra detention facility in April 2003.
_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• TechNews Daily Report
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Finance
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Personal Tech
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

Although his name is not listed in the documents, the episode precisely matches events described publicly last year by California National Guard Sgt. Greg Ford, a former state prison guard and Navy SEAL team medic whose complaints were dismissed by the Army in October 2004 as lacking sufficient evidence. Ford said last night, after hearing what the documents stated, that he is the sergeant described.

The soldier complained that he had had to resuscitate abused detainees and urged the unit's withdrawal. He told investigators that the unit's commander, an Army captain, responded by giving him "30 seconds to withdraw my request or he was going to send me forcibly to go see a psychiatrist." The soldier added: "I told him I was not going to withdraw my request and at that time he confiscated my weapon and informed me he was withdrawing my security clearance and was placing me under 24-hour surveillance."

A witness in his unit told investigators that the captain later pressured a military doctor -- who had found the soldier stable -- into doing another emergency evaluation, saying: "I don't care what you saw or heard, he is imbalanced, and I want him out of here."

The next day, after the doctor did another evaluation, the soldier was evacuated from Iraq in restraints on a stretcher to a military hospital in Germany, despite having been given no official diagnosis, according to the documents. A military doctor in Germany ruled he was in stable mental health, according to the documents, but sent him back to the United States for what the soldier recalls the doctor describing as his "safety."

The soldier depicted the evacuation as part of an effort to cover up wrongdoing. But other members of his team denied the allegations, saying that the unit was professional and that they never saw abusive behavior at the facility. Investigators closed the case without filing charges, writing that the investigation "did not identify any witnesses" to the abuse and did not "produce any logical subjects."

The new documents also describe allegations by a military interrogator, who was not named, that members of Task Force 626 -- an elite U.S. military unit assigned to hunt in Iraq for senior officials in Saddam Hussein's government -- used harsh interrogation tactics and abused detainees at a secret detention facility called Camp Nama in Baghdad in April and May of last year. The Army's criminal investigators turned the investigation over to Special Operations and closed the case; the Special Operations probe concluded the allegations of wrongdoing were unfounded.

In the "Ramadi Madness" case, investigators determined the video "contained footage of inappropriate rather than criminal behavior" and determined that the detainee who was kicked was not abused.

Research editor Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:00 pm
McTag wrote:
That says what?

She was kidnapped- maybe for ransom.
She wound up in the hands of insurgents.
She had a reasonable relationship with them- she didn't get her throat cut on TV, at least. Maybe she was trying to aviod that happening....just a guess.
A large ransom was paid.
She got out.
She got shot.

Are you saying she deserved to get shot because she was not pro-war and did not denigrate her captors? Strange.

Well. This does shed quite a bright light on how you so often get so much so utterly wrong.

You don't read content. You just make things up as you go along.

I can't believe you would say she deserved to be shot.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:01 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
More news will be forthcoming for sure.


The German weekly "Die Zeit" (the second 'employer' of Giuliana Sgrena) quotes unoffical Italian prosecutor sources that the truth couldn't be found, because the main witness, Nicola Calipari, is dead.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:10 pm
Walter, There's always the possibility that one of the soldiers might speak the 'truth.' Not expect, but it's still a possibility.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:22 pm
Lash wrote:
McTag wrote:
That says what?

She was kidnapped- maybe for ransom.
She wound up in the hands of insurgents.
She had a reasonable relationship with them- she didn't get her throat cut on TV, at least. Maybe she was trying to aviod that happening....just a guess.
A large ransom was paid.
She got out.
She got shot.

Are you saying she deserved to get shot because she was not pro-war and did not denigrate her captors? Strange.

Well. This does shed quite a bright light on how you so often get so much so utterly wrong.

You don't read content. You just make things up as you go along.

I can't believe you would say she deserved to be shot.


What are you, crazy?

You wrote this, which is what I was responding to:

Quote:
The previous article states before this happened, she was "vehemently opposed" to the war-- so much so that they were surprised that the terrorists would be mad at her--seems like the tenor of her writings would have endeared her to terrorists.

That says it all.


And so I ask again, what "all" does that say?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:35 pm
It says, McTag, that she was very likely to be biased against the US--and either her perception or her veracity regarding the events that transpired are understandably questionable to the US.

No one here would suggest something as obscene as what you pulled out of your ass previously. Stating facts about someone, and using their own history and words to question their motives is a far cry from wishing them dead.

At least if you're not a Democrat.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:50 pm
Lash wrote:
It says, McTag, that she was very likely to be biased against the US--and either her perception or her veracity regarding the events that transpired are understandably questionable to the US.

No one here would suggest something as obscene as what you pulled out of your ass previously. Stating facts about someone, and using their own history and words to question their motives is a far cry from wishing them dead.

At least if you're not a Democrat.


Plenty of obscene things are happening, and you don't have to look in my ass for them, I'm glad to say.

It seems to follow from what you said, that the perception or veracity regarding events that transpired are questionable in anti-war people, but not so in pro-war people.

So, we have to accept the word of the military, who shot up an unarmed vehicle with 300 or 400 shots from an armoured vehicle. How convenient that would be.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:52 pm
McTag, Only if you're not a Democrat.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 03:52 pm
So you are not in favor of shooting her? Okay. That's it. I'm calling the White House and that opinion of yours is going on your permanent record.

Joe(We keep track of any off-message thought now that we are in complete power)Nation
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 04:59 pm
Latest googled news says she now doubts it was accidental.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2005 05:05 pm
Rumor has it that she also dyes her hair and wears Italian shoes. NO doubt in my mind she's a liar.(the final determination of if she's left handed has not yet been made)
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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 10/09/2024 at 05:27:24