100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Real reason Obama didn't release torture pics? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
The marine was recently sentenced for the rape and murder of an Iraqi teenager and her entire family.
And we have this story. What is wrong with our troops? The skyrocketing suicide rate. ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.prisonplanet.com/media-ignores-real-controversy-behind-torture-photos-they-show-prison-guards-raping-children.html Media Ignores Real Controversy Behind Torture Photos; They Show Prison Guards Raping Children Former Governor Jesse Ventura: Let Me Judge Torture Photos On Behalf Of The American People Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet.com Thursday, May 21, 2009 The real reason behind Obama’s reversal of a decision to release the torture photos has been almost completely ignored by the corporate media - the fact that the photos show both US and Iraqi soldiers raping teenage boys in front of their mothers. The Obama administration originally intended to release photos depicting torture and abuse of detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq by the end of May, following a court order arising out of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit first filed by the ACLU in 2004. However, a reversal of Obama’s decision was announced this week, after he “changed his mind after viewing some of the images and hearing warnings from his generals in Iraq and in Afghanistan that such a move would endanger US troops deployed there,” according to a Washington Post report. In response, the ACLU charged that Obama “has essentially become complicit with the torture that was rampant during the Bush years by being complicit in its coverup.” The Obama administration has also sought to protect intelligence officials involved in torture from prosecution at every turn. The primary reason why Obama is now blocking the release of the photos is that some of the pictures, as well as video recordings, show prison guards sodomizing young boys in front of their mothers, both with objects as well as physical rape. This horrific detail has been almost completely ignored by the establishment media in their coverage of the story this week, despite the fact that it’s been in the public domain for nearly five years, after it was first revealed by investigative Seymour Hersh during an ACLU conference in July 2004. “Some of the worst things that happened you don’t know about, okay?” said Hersh. “Videos, there are women there. Some of you may have read that they were passing letters out, communications out to their men. This is at Abu Ghraib … The women were passing messages out saying ‘Please come and kill me, because of what’s happened’ and basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. And the worst above all of that is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror. It’s going to come out.” Hersh’s contention that minors were raped by prison guards while others filmed the vulgar spectacle is backed up by a leaked Abu Ghraib memorandum highlighted in a 2004 London Guardian report, in which detainees Kasim Hilas describes “the rape of an Iraqi boy by a man in uniform”. The testimony was also part of the military’s official Taguba Report into the torture at Abu Ghraib. “I saw [name blacked out] ****ing a kid, his age would be about 15-18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard the screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [blacked out], who was wearing the military uniform putting his **** in the little kid’s ass,” Mr Hilas told military investigators. “I couldn’t see the face of the kid because his face wasn’t in front of the door. And the female soldier was taking pictures.” Another inmate, Thaar Dawod, described more abuse of teenage boys. “They came with two boys naked and they were cuffed together face to face and Grainer [Corporal Charles Graner, one of the military policemen facing court martial] was beating them and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures from top and bottom and there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners,” he said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absolutely hainous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ThomasJB
on
Tue 05/26/09 09:57 PM
|
|
This story is BS! Your first clue should be the source prisonplanet.com. Alex Jones does have quit a taste for the fanatical. The source for these claims is Seymore Hersh a journalist for the New Yorker. While he is an excellent journalist and his stories for the New Yorker are rigorously fact-checked he has penchant for exaggeration in his speeches, which is where this story originates.
. . . Occasionally, Hersh’s half-confirmed spoken accounts of key events in the Iraq War do get significantly revised when they make their way into print. Last July, not too long after the Abu Ghraib story broke, Hersh spoke to the annual membership conference of the American Civil Liberties Union. He stood before the crowd and in mid-speech appeared to talk to himself. “Debating about it,” he muttered, then paused. “Um.” Clucked his tongue. “Some of the worst things that happened that you don’t know about. Okay? Videos,” he said. “And basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children, in cases that have been recorded, the boys were sodomized, with the cameras rolling, and the worst above all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking. That your government has. They’re in total terror it’s going to come out.” What Hersh said wasn’t entirely correct. His book Chain of Command would deliver the authoritative Seymour M. version: “An attorney involved in the case told me in July 2004 that one of the witness statements he had read described the rape of a boy by a foreign contract employee who served as an interpreter at Abu Ghraib,” Hersh wrote. “In the statement, which had not been made public, the lawyer told me, a prisoner stated that he was a witness to the rape, and that a woman was taking pictures.” Horrifying stuff. But key details were different from the impression Hersh gave to the ACLU crowd. And the Sy version raced halfway across the Internet before Seymour M. could get his boots on. Many who blogged the revelation believed that Hersh was talking about multiple rapes committed by American soldiers. Nearly everyone took it for granted that Hersh had seen the videotapes himself because he’d described their horrifying soundtrack. And everyone did assume that there were in fact videotapes, which there may not be. (“Was it a video camera or a digital camera? Nobody was quite sure,” Hersh told students at Tufts later in the year.) The speech was so widely blogged that the ACLU says Hersh asked it to remove part of the video—including the sodomy allegation—from the organization’s Website, which it proceeded to do. . . . http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/11719/index3.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter if Seymours particular story is entirely true or not. There is plenty of other evidence.
See some photos yourself here: http://www.aztlan.net/iraqi_women_raped.htm US is guilty of atrocities and war crimes. And this "most transparent government ever"  is going to continue to cover them up.  -------------------------------------------- http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1029 Abuse, Torture and Rape Reported at Unlisted U.S.-run Prisons in Iraqby Lisa Ashkenaz Croke Beyond Abu Ghraib, witnesses say Americans have committed and may still be carrying out acts of extreme depravity against inmates in US custody at two dozen bases whose names are not household words outside Iraq. Huntington Woods, Michigan; Sept. 23, 2004 – American legal investigators have discovered evidence of abuse, torture and rape throughout the US-run prison system in Iraq. A Michigan legal team meeting with former detainees in Baghdad during an August fact-finding mission gathered evidence supporting claims of prisoner abuse at some 25 US-run detention centers, most of them so far not publicly mentioned as being embroiled in the Iraq torture scandal. "That list was something that we came back with -- we only knew of three prisons going there," investigator Mohammed Alomari told The NewStandard, referring to the few detention centers in Iraq where concerns over treatment of prisoners have already been raised publicly. The list includes some actual prisons, such as Al-Salihiya Prison in Baghdad, the notorious prison in Abu Ghraib, and a prison at Camp Bucca, a Coalition-built POW camp in the southern port city of Um-Qasr. Other detention centers have been established at military bases, such as the US Military compound at Al-Dhiloeia, north of Baghdad; a US base outside Fallujah; and the Hilla military compound, a joint US-Polish base where Alomari said he has recently been informed of allegations against US and Polish personnel. "Nobody talks about it. All everyone talks about is Abu Ghraib because of the pictures," said Alomari. "But in these other places, there?s tons of acts of torture, abuse, rape." The majority of detention centers where former inmates allege American soldiers and contractors committed acts of abuse were found in and around Baghdad, most of them buildings that had been converted into prisons. Students living at Mustansiriya University Student Housing were "kicked out," said Alomari, and US troops reportedly turned the dorms into a detention center. Other such facilities were reported on the grounds of the Akai Pharmaceutical Company Compound, the Palace of Conferences located across from the Al-Rasheed hotel, the Scania transportation depot and the Al-Sijood Palace in Baghdad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the reason that Bush didn't release the torture pics?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the reason that Bush didn't release the torture pics? Same reason Obama doesn't release them. Does it make a difference who is not releasing them? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the reason that Bush didn't release the torture pics? Same reason Obama doesn't release them. Does it make a difference who is not releasing them? I think it does to Norslyman. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When are they gonna release some more pix of Michelle Obama in a bikini?
Now THOSE pix I'd wanna see... Little boys getting raped by G.I.Joe? Not my cup of tea...! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Atlantis75
on
Wed 05/27/09 09:21 PM
|
|
This story is BS! Your first clue should be the source prisonplanet.com. Alex Jones does have quit a taste for the fanatical. The source for these claims is Seymore Hersh a journalist for the New Yorker. While he is an excellent journalist and his stories for the New Yorker are rigorously fact-checked he has penchant for exaggeration in his speeches, which is where this story originates. . . . Occasionally, Hersh’s half-confirmed spoken accounts of key events in the Iraq War do get significantly revised when they make their way into print. Last July, not too long after the Abu Ghraib story broke, Hersh spoke to the annual membership conference of the American Civil Liberties Union. He stood before the crowd and in mid-speech appeared to talk to himself. “Debating about it,” he muttered, then paused. “Um.” Clucked his tongue. “Some of the worst things that happened that you don’t know about. Okay? Videos,” he said. “And basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children, in cases that have been recorded, the boys were sodomized, with the cameras rolling, and the worst above all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking. That your government has. They’re in total terror it’s going to come out.” What Hersh said wasn’t entirely correct. His book Chain of Command would deliver the authoritative Seymour M. version: “An attorney involved in the case told me in July 2004 that one of the witness statements he had read described the rape of a boy by a foreign contract employee who served as an interpreter at Abu Ghraib,” Hersh wrote. “In the statement, which had not been made public, the lawyer told me, a prisoner stated that he was a witness to the rape, and that a woman was taking pictures.” Horrifying stuff. But key details were different from the impression Hersh gave to the ACLU crowd. And the Sy version raced halfway across the Internet before Seymour M. could get his boots on. Many who blogged the revelation believed that Hersh was talking about multiple rapes committed by American soldiers. Nearly everyone took it for granted that Hersh had seen the videotapes himself because he’d described their horrifying soundtrack. And everyone did assume that there were in fact videotapes, which there may not be. (“Was it a video camera or a digital camera? Nobody was quite sure,” Hersh told students at Tufts later in the year.) The speech was so widely blogged that the ACLU says Hersh asked it to remove part of the video—including the sodomy allegation—from the organization’s Website, which it proceeded to do. . . . http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/11719/index3.html It's not BS. It's coming from reuters too http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090528/wl_nm/us_iraq_abughraib_rape "These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency," Taguba, who retired in January 2007, was quoted as saying in the paper. He said he supported Obama's decision not to release them, even though Obama had previously pledged to disclose all images relating to abuses at Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run prisons in Iraq. "I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one," Taguba said. "The sequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan. "The mere depiction of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it." The newspaper said at least one picture showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the reason that Bush didn't release the torture pics? Same reason Obama doesn't release them. Does it make a difference who is not releasing them? I think it does to Norslyman. Well, tell us what is the difference between Bush not releasing them vs. Obama not releasing them. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO...Bush didn't see anything wrong so why would he release them? it's BHO that has flip flopped on the issue. BHO should be the one to release them. now why he won't....could be many reasons. Like danger to the troops (even though a lot of the pics have been released and in the media), more might be taken down by it, etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When are they gonna release some more pix of Michelle Obama in a bikini? Now THOSE pix I'd wanna see... Little boys getting raped by G.I.Joe? Not my cup of tea...!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not BS. It's coming from reuters too http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090528/wl_nm/us_iraq_abughraib_rape "These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency," Taguba, who retired in January 2007, was quoted as saying in the paper. He said he supported Obama's decision not to release them, even though Obama had previously pledged to disclose all images relating to abuses at Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run prisons in Iraq. "I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one," Taguba said. "The sequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan. "The mere depiction of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it." The newspaper said at least one picture showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee. This article is not of the same source as the one quoted by OP and appears to be more credible. It would seem from the reports that these alleged rapes were mostly part of a form torture and somewhat different from our normal understandings of rape. I find it just as reprehensible though and believe all those involved should face prosecution for war crimes. I wonder though if those participants of this board that feel enhanced interrogation techniques are acceptable still feel the same way if those techniques include those described in the article. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thomas....I can't speak for others, but I can't look at the pics without feeling sorrow. I have never been in the military or war so I won't claim to know what is involved. I just know that it's hard for me to see them
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see how we as country can support any form of torture and still make a claim of moral superiority over those we fight against.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would think there would be a better way. but like I said...I've never been in a war...so I am no expert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Winx
on
Thu 05/28/09 02:24 PM
|
|
What is the reason that Bush didn't release the torture pics? Same reason Obama doesn't release them. Does it make a difference who is not releasing them? I think it does to Norslyman. Well, tell us what is the difference between Bush not releasing them vs. Obama not releasing them. It doesn't. Criticize both of them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see how we as country can support any form of torture and still make a claim of moral superiority over those we fight against. cause we don't chop their heads off after we torture em |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
psst winx...I think they are both being criticized...although for their different roles in it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
