In need of help - military experts especially

[johnpalmer]

(Edited to correct math error: January to March is two months, not three))

I saw this in the Fay report on the abuses in Iraq.


"During the 4-8 January 2004 visit, the ICRC expressed special concern over being informed bo COL Pappas and COL Warren that they were invoking Article 143 of Geneva Convention IV, thereby denying the ICRC access to eight of the detainees in the interrogation section. Of particular interest was the status fo detainee DETAINEE-14, Syrian national and self-proclaimed Jihadist, who was in Iraq to kill coalition troops. DETAINEE-14 was detained in a totally darkened cell measuring about 2 meters long and less than a meter across, devoid of any window, latrine or water tap, or bedding. On the door the ICRC delegates noticed the inscription "the Gollum" and a picture of the said character from the film trilogy "Lord of the Rings". During the 14-18 March 2004 visit, the ICRC was once again denied access to nine detainees, including DETAINEE-14".

Is "totally darkened cell measuring about 2 meters long and less than a meter across, devoid of any window, latrine or water tap, or bedding" some kind of military code for something else? Something that at least *approaches* the least humane detention facilities a civilized country would imagine using?

I mean, or, am I missing something? *WHAT*? What the *HELL* am I missing?

Am I correctly reading that in July of 2004, it was stated, by the army, for the record, that we put a man - I don't care *WHO* he is or *WHAT* he did - in a cell like that?

Does "detained" maybe refer to a situation where he was held there for an exceptionally short period of time? And, they, like, put up the picture and the inscription really, really quickly?

It states that DETAINEE-14 was moved in the intervening time, I hope to something that counts as, you know, a cell, rather than a friggin' oversized coffin... but the intervening time is over two months!

July of 2004, this was known, this was out there, and this is not even listed as one of the abuses?

I mean, it was pure luck that I picked up my printout of the Fay report, and saw this. I haven't read through to this part yet. Maybe there's some explanation in small words that are easy for my liberal brain to understand, but what the *FUCK* is going on here?

And on top of this, Colonel Pappas gets an $8000 fine and a stern letter of reprimand, for approving the use of dogs and dereliction of duty, and that's *IT*?

*AND* President "Terrorists have no rights" Bush gets re-elected, with people citing *VALUES* as a major reason?

Somebody, please... explain this to me.

Comments

virtual hugs

[andreas_schaefer]

what really makes me mad about this is that, this US, that is acting like that, should be fought and that any group or nation not having much resources can justify pretty much everything they do to the states. In a sick way the next terrorist act on US ground is justified.
Moreover , young countries outside the 'western' sphere can look on the way the Geneva convention is handled and can argue that they were not consulted in the drawing up of it and feel not bound by it. And since the west (well the coalition countries but we others will be lumped in ) is treating the Geneva convention not as unbreakable law but as convention of convenience without binding force, why should they do more.

It is depressing. ( Lee Harvey Oswald, where are you now that your country needs you [ button last seen in '83 ])

[cerval.livejournal.com]

I don't even know what more to say... *shudders*

[ms-interpret.livejournal.com]

"Values" doesn't mean what it should. "Values" means "we don't want people with matching parts marrying each other", "no abortions for anyone", and "my God is the only god, so therefore you're all going to hell". And near as I can tell, that's all it means. It makes me sick.

[siliconshaman.livejournal.com]

*shrugs* I dunno...
I think the Revolution is way overdue anyway !

The problem seems to be that the people in power have just stopped giving a damn what anyone thinks.

[eleccham.livejournal.com]

But they're the bad guys, see.

[nsingman.livejournal.com]

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is their natural manure."

[blackthornglade.livejournal.com]

It is the End of Days and the end of the world has come.

(Yes, I know how surreal that sounds coming from me. :))

More seriously, though, I'm pretty certain that some faction of the faithful *does* believe the End of Days is approaching and that's what's causing it.

You can see millenialism on the rise, despite it not being the end of a century.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

No John, it's not some code. That's probably an accurate description of the cell.

I'm very disappointed that Col Pappas was allowed Non-Judicial Punishment. I thought he deserved a General Court Martial. But at least he won't be commanding any more troops, and every Military Intelligence officer now knows not to do what he did.

It all bothers me very much. This is not the American way of warfighting. It's a goddamned disgrace.

[kightp.livejournal.com]

The Dominionists - of whom there are several in high places in the Bush administration - not only believe the End of Days is coming, but have the supreme arrogance to believe that they can, and should, hasten it along.

Which, by my reading of the Book, is just plain heresy.

[johnpalmer.livejournal.com]

I re-read what I said yesterday, and Bill, even if you understood I was upset, I'm sorry about how I put it. I didn't want to come across like I was calling out military folks, as if they had control over this, or anything.

My first thoughts when I heard that Pappas was getting off was that, however pissed I was, you were probably angrier... and justifiably so. I've never had to consciously put my faith and trust in the honor of the military. I don't know how you feel, but I feel like this is a betrayal of every military person who's ever served honorably, even when it was hard... and even a betrayal of every military person who didn't act honorably, but accepted their guilt and their punishment.

And, now I'm reading the report through, and while the report is, in a large sense right (military policy and doctrine did not cause the abuse), it's also wrong (it was systemic, based upon a set of ideas and beliefs that pervaded the entire military operation).

What it came down to is that we were fighting "the next step in the war on terrorism", we were "taking the fight to the enemy", we weren't going to wait to be attacked again. "The gloves are off". Terrorists are unlawful combatants and have no rights.

Relaxing the standards at Guantanemo, giving the CIA free reign, not staffing the prison sufficiently, the poisonous rhetoric linking Saddam and 9/11, all of this came awfully close to making something like this inevitable.

And, the worst part is, I'm not sure if we're ever going to find out how bad it got, or get everyone to acknowledge that it was *bad*, that it wasn't just overzealousness, it wasn't just "a few criminals".

And frankly, I'm scared as hell, because I've never felt more of a need to get people to understand, and never felt so much doubt that they would.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure Major General Taguba understands. His report was quite clear, and I suspect the only reason that Col. Pappas was charged at all. One of these days when the nation comes to its senses, the Taguba Report will be there to show that somebody recognized the rot for what it was. Of course, it was not just one person. Many, many good military folks were pleased by Taguba's investigation and finding of facts.

I had occassion, just about a year ago, to speak with the real life Army Master Sergeant who was featured in the movie Blackhawk Down as a Staff Sergeant. He's a very good man. I know he felt the same way I did about this mess. I suspect there are many more like him.

In the end, the facts will be there for the judgement of history.

[johnpalmer.livejournal.com]

Yeah... I know.

It's the loyalty that bugs me. The blind, unthinking loyalty to George W. Bush and the Republican party.

I'm afraid if they don't crash and burn, terribly and horribly, in ten or twenty years, this will be "the good old days" again. "Remember when George W. Bush was President? He didn't feel we needed to wait for permission from public opinion polls or the United Nations!"

It's crazy. I started this writing project and said that I love this country, my home. I meant it. But as I've written more, and thought more, and researched more, I've started loving it more, and feeling more and more determination to beat these bastards back with the only weapons that *can* work in a war of words against a supremely loyal group.

But as the love grows, so does the determination to succeed, to manage to accomplish something... and thus, the cost (and fear) of failure rises also.

I can't, and won't, let it stop me, but damn is it hard to deal with, sometimes.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

I'm sure Dietrich Bonhoffer felt the same way John. (German minister, he was a leader of the German resistance movement.)