home

Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse

Will people listen now that it is the Pentagon, not the ACLU or Human Rights First that is confirming American soldiers in Iraq abused detainees?

United States Special Operations troops employed a set of harsh, unauthorized interrogation techniques against detainees in Iraq during a four-month period in early 2004, long after approval for their use was rescinded, according to a Pentagon inquiry released Friday.

The abuse by special-ops forces detailed in the report continued after the allegations at Abu Ghraib came to light. As for the particular abusive techniques used,

Special Operations interrogators gave some detainees only bread or crackers and water if they did not cooperate, according to the investigation, by Brig. Gen. Richard P. Formica of the Army. One prisoner was fed only bread and water for 17 days. Other detainees were locked for as many as seven days in cells so small that they could neither stand nor lie down, while interrogators played loud music that disrupted their sleep.

The inquiry also determined that some detainees were stripped naked, drenched with water and then interrogated in air-conditioned rooms or in cold weather. General Formica said it appeared that members of the Navy Seals had used that technique in the case of one detainee who died after questioning in Mosul in 2004, but he reported that he had no specific allegations that the use of the technique was related to that death.

How many of the special ops forces have been disciplined? Would you believe none? Of course you would. And you'd be correct:

Despite the findings, General Formica recommended that none of the service members be disciplined, saying what they did was wrong but not deliberate abuse. He faulted "inadequate policy guidance" rather than "personal failure" for the mistreatment, and cited the dangerous environment in which Special Operations forces carried out their missions. He said that, from his observations, none of the detainees seemed to be the worse for wear because of the treatment.

< Truthout "Stands Down" on Rove Article | Duke Lacrosse Weekend Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#1)
    by squeaky on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 09:23:40 PM EST
    He faulted "inadequate policy guidance" rather than "personal failure" for the mistreatment, and cited the dangerous environment in which Special Operations forces carried out their missions.
    General Formica???
    But confusion over use of the techniques became widespread, even after they were barred a month later except when approved by General Sanchez. Many of the American captors at the Abu Ghraib prison have also said they believed the techniques were authorized, even without General Sanchez's approval.
    Poor puppies. Are the commander in chief's signing statements confusing you?

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#2)
    by Sailor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 09:24:24 PM EST
    Why would they believe the pentagon when they wouldn't believe the fbi!?

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#3)
    by squeaky on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 10:26:27 PM EST
    Gary Myers, a lawyer who has been retained by a marine under investigation in the Haditha shooting, said he had been told by his client that the marines were operating within existing regulations. Mr. Myers suggested that responsibility should be placed on the commanders who approved those rules of engagement, and not on the soldiers on the ground at Haditha. "I don't want to see these marines isolated and vilified," he said.
    NYT Between the states secrets Privilege signing statements and being a nation at war, they can get away with anything. No wonder the 'plantation' voted for non-ending war.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 10:34:27 PM EST
    "inadequate policy guidance" That's a nice way to put it. But, hey, suggesting Democrats might practice real oversight and investigate if they win in November is outrageous. It is in fact dangerous for Democrats, so says people like John Dickerson at Slate, to list this as even one of their goals if they gain control.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 11:51:29 PM EST
    He said that, from his observations, none of the detainees seemed to be the worse for wear because of the treatment.
    A dead person is none the worse for wear?

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#6)
    by Al on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:56:45 AM EST
    Despite the findings, General Formica recommended that none of the service members be disciplined, saying what they did was wrong but not deliberate abuse.
    Excuse me? How can starving a prisoner, or depriving him of sleep not be deliberate abuse?
    He faulted "inadequate policy guidance" rather than "personal failure" for the mistreatment,
    So, he's saying it's the manual's fault for not explicitly forbidding starving or sleep deprivation?
    and cited the dangerous environment in which Special Operations forces carried out their missions.
    Where, in Guantanamo? Somewhere else? What does this have to do with anything? Is this guy for real? He must be taking lessons from the nutcase who had the gall to state that the suicides were an act of war.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#7)
    by HK on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:42:33 AM EST
    [they] never aspired to be villains. Rather, they...suffered from a lack of imagination or empathy
    These words could easily come from General Formica about the service members involved in these cases of abuse, but in fact they were written about Nazi war criminals. Of course, on a scale of brutality, what the Nazis did in WWII far exceeds what these service members have done. I imagine, though, that it is a very slippery slope. History has shown that 'ordinary' people can do terrible things to fellow humans. There must be some consequence for this. Equally, we must recognise that some of the people who do bad things are not necessarily bad; there could be many reasons why they did what they did and although their actions are not acceptable, it is the cause of their actions that must be tackled. The account the above quote was taken from ends with these words of wisdom:
    The Nuremberg trials did not, however, fulfill the grandest dreams of those who advocated them. They have not succeeded in ending wars of aggression. Crimes against humanity are with us still.


    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#8)
    by john horse on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:03:29 AM EST
    For those military personel who haven't gotten the word, the White House approves of "harsh interrogation techniques" but the Pentagon does not approve of "harsh, unauthorized interrogation techniques." (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more)

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#9)
    by jen on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:44:27 AM EST
    People have known and belied for at least two years. The differences are between those who approve and those of us who don't

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#10)
    by jen on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:52:39 AM EST
    believed, belived wow, what a difference a tiny typo makes!

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#11)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:00:01 AM EST
    Another whitewash. Nevertheless, they are investigating the wrong people. As usual. "Hey look! Over there! Gay marriage!"

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#12)
    by Sailor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:49:58 AM EST
    Bread and water is not starving. It certainly is not torture.
    bush has stated that all the prisoners are treated according to the GenCons and get 3 meals a day And the GenCons specifically state that food can't be used to aid interrogations.
    The basic daily food rations shall be sufficient in quantity, quality and variety to keep prisoners of war in good health and to prevent loss of weight or the development of nutritional deficiencies. Account shall also be taken of the habitual diet of the prisoners.


    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:29:55 AM EST
    It wasn't just about detainees who had to deal with bread and water. The report specifically cites one prisoner who died during interogation, apparently due to using hypothermia techniques on him. In the report, Brig. Gen. Formica said that he did not investigate the underlying incidents that led to the investigation, or check the existing documentation for completeness or accuracy, relying instead on the military's own previous findings on the incidents. Those previous findings, unfortunately, appear to have been from investigations which were stonewalled, where members of the Special Forces used fake names and mysteriously "lost" the great majority of their files, and in which the Criminal Investigations (CID) officer on site stated that he was "unable to thoroughly investigate suspects and witnesses because of their involvement in the Special Access Program and/or the security classification of the unit they were assigned to during the offense." The Special Access Program was specifically approved by Rumsfeld and his assistants in the Pentagon. Amongst the allegations not investigated further are this one, in which a US soldier over at Abu Ghraib swore an oath indicating that a young Iraqi claimed to have been sexually and physically abused and sodomized while imprisoned by US Special Forces. The US soldier swore an oath indicating that the Iraqi in question "could not sit and was bleeding from the rectum". This claim of sexual assault while under Special Forces imprisonment appears to have been backed up by numerous other sworn statements from US soldiers. According to the sworn statement of one soldier: "In my opinion, (prisoner's name redacted) came in emotionally and physically abused. (Prisoner) said, I don't remember in exact words, "they have taken everything from me." I don't know the name of their capturing unit. All I know is they came from the palace. . . I don't know if they got a rectal investigation. . . When SF (Special Forces troops, such as Task Force 626) brought detainees in . . . you could see that they were facially abused. I don't know which SF unit. I saw detainees with bruises, black eyes, beaten, physical abuse. If we get them like that, we'll stop and take them to the aid station or MPs, that way we're cleared of it. We don't want it said that it happened here. . ." Over the course of my time here, I've seen maybe ten detainees come in here physically abused, downright beaten and tortured, and I've easily screened hundreds of detainees. The only trend associated with that abuse would be SF (Special Forces) detainees. One of the first questions I'd ask was "why were you detained" and if they would mention (redacted) it was usually associated with extortion, and "he beat me". Those were the two trends right there." So basically, these are very serious allegations with numerous sworn statements backing them up. It should be of real concern that the US' best troops would act in such a manner, with such impunity.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#14)
    by Dadler on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 10:48:04 AM EST
    Feeding someone only bread and water, to all the nutriontially ignorant, is indeed starving them. It's a form of control -- feeding them nothing gives you nothing to carrot-and-stick with.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#16)
    by Dadler on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:13:10 AM EST
    Narius, Our military is in someone ELSE'S country, and NOT for reasons of self-defense by by choice. If our concern is fisrt and foremost for ours and ours alone, how are Iraqis to feel about their worth in that equation? Any free American citizen who doesn't realize that, when invading another nation that was NO threat to you, you also have a responsibility to treat the other country and its citizens with even MORE respect and dignity. You want to base your opinion or vote on a concern for yours and yours alone, even when yours invaded a nation and occupy it, well, okay then. But I do not and won't. "Marines Die. That's what we're here for." Lee Ermey from FULL METAL JACKET

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#18)
    by Dadler on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 11:51:31 AM EST
    The need for blood is so strong after 911. Irrationality and malevolence raised to the level of need. So...do YOU need blood? Need it badly? On your Grape Nuts in the morning? I'd say you more than lost me with your reply. Again, from Lee Ermey and FULL METAL JACKET: "Five foot eight??? I didn't know they stacked sh*t that high!!"

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:32:30 PM EST
    if u dont like america why dont you move to europe u wont be missed, although i do like the coverage of the duke hoax

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:10:36 PM EST
    zabmom is on the WH meal plan.....in other words mmmm that sh*t tastes mighty good. After a while s/he was even able to dispense with the optional blindfold and nose clip. 'A bit more please'. Surprising that you like the "duke hoax". In your dissent free America wetdream, trials would not be necessary, as the government would always be acting in your interest. No one would make a peep. Nice, maybe you should move to Saudi Arabia for a taste of what you wish for.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:13:01 PM EST
    From the popularity of successful wars (like the Afgan one)
    yeah, right.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#22)
    by jen on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:34:42 PM EST
    oh narius, dear heart, are you assuming our soldiers have moved to iraq forever? what? do you think they will never come home? are you unaware of the concept of time? or that actions have consequences? or that post traumatic stress will become ... well.. it won't be LESSENED in these men and women, lets put it that way. And they will move in next door to you! Maybe one will be the armed cop pulling you over! But thats ok, right, because once they come back they will be EXACTLY THE SAME as when they left. And since you never do anything wrong ever ever, you will never be hurt by random violence.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:45:37 PM EST
    If Zabmom had her way, Martin Luther King should've just moved to another country. Anybody who wants to make their place a better country should. The brilliance is blinding me.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:04:47 PM EST
    oh narius, dear heart, are you assuming our soldiers have moved to iraq forever? what? do you think they will never come home? *********************************** Actually, Americans will quite readily establish military outposts in other nations under all sorts of pretexts....hmmmm let's see, Spanish-American War (invasion of Cuba, based on a Congressional Act), hmmmmm that's right America took possession of quite a few Spanish Colonies then didn't we? Then let's see we still have military bases all over tha world that were established right after tha end of WW2, then there is Taiwan and Korea, Panama, Grenada, our involvement in Nicaragua. We have had military bases in Turkey for more years than I have been alive, my Dad used to fly spyplane missons out of Incirlik back in tha 50/60s. So ifn any of yall think that our gov't. is going to leave Iraq or Afganistan any time soon, yall haven't been paying attention in History Class. This is how U.S. of A. "colonizes" tha world, with our world-class military-industrial cabal. BTW, has anyone ever wondered why tha DC politicians never seem worried about tha so-called Balance-of Payments deficit? Most of our country's exports are covered by tha Secrets and Classified Acts....we sell more weapons and ammo than any other nation in tha world. I have a suggestion for those of yall that are interested, tha Pentagon has a webpage that lists all of our so-called Allies in tha "Coalition of the Willing." It also lists what they contribute to tha war effort, some of these so-called Allies have only contributed less than 10 Military Officers who have never gotten closer to Iraq than Yemen. I have an Israeli friend who has another friend (both former DIA). Tha friend of my friend is making his retirement selling Israeli weapon systems to Uzbekistan, paid for by our Financial Aid Packages approved by our Congress. Leave Iraq and Afganistan, Hell No, We Won't Go! Too much profit to be made. Have a nice Day.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#25)
    by jen on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:17:21 PM EST
    ah, yes, but "our soldiers will stay" does not equal "no soldier will ever return" It just means we will have a steady supply of young people changed for life. A very few for the better, a good number just changed, not for good OR drastically worse, just changed, and quite a few emotionaly damaged to varying degrees. The better the leadership, and moral guidance they have over there, the smaller that number will be. When I was on the mall with the world war 2 vets for the grand reunion it was a story heard often. The vets were talking into tape recordings, things they had never told any of their loved ones. Things that had weighed heavily on them their entire adult lives. My stepfather didn't go on that trip. So he's still not talking. And before you say 'see, they are all ok' may I remind everyone, they are the survivors. a huge percentage of the WW2 vets are gone. The men and women coming back from Iraq are not the people who went there. They never will be. It is the responsibility of leadership BEGINING AT THE TOP to set the example, to LEAD, to guide our airmen, sailors, marines, and soldiers, to fight and serve the military so as to bring honor upon themselves, their units, their service, and the United States of America. NOT to become amoral sadistic souless murderers and torturers (or come back and believe thats what they were) , then be expected to be proud of their service, and return as if none of that ever happened, or serve time in jail if caught doing what they were told, or go to jail for NOT doing what they are told.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#26)
    by john horse on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 05:37:20 PM EST
    There seems to be some differences of opinion on what constitutes abuse of prisoners expressed in this blog. Despite the fact that human rights groups and now even the Pentagon have claimed that there was abuse of prisoners, some of my friends on the right are of the opinion that what these prisoners experienced was not abuse. So we must ask the question, what is torture? According to Pentagon spokesman Maj. Brownback, torture is "poking a person in the eye with a red-hot needle." You would think most people would agree with this criteria, including my friends on the right, but even this criteria may not be torture according to the Bush administration. According to Rumsfeld, causing great pain to a prisoner is not necessarily torture. It is only torture if causing pain was the objective of the actions. If the primary objective was to obtain information, well, that is not torture according to the Bush administration. In other words, sticking a red hot needle is not torture if the objective is to obtain information. It only becomes torture if you start getting a hardon from your abusive actions. For the apologists of the Bush administration, the definition of torture is in the eye of the beholder. Increasingly it is becoming more like a red hot needle in the eye of the beholder.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#28)
    by jen on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:09:59 PM EST
    aw narius, you didnt read my post, I'm so sad

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#29)
    by jen on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:12:08 PM EST
    causing agony, whether physical or mental IN ORDER TO GET INFORMATION is torture causing agony, wheter physical or mental for no reason other than to make people behave is sadism, or terrorism

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#30)
    by jondee on Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 09:47:46 PM EST
    Hey we're at war. You all need to shut-up and go along to get along. And dont pay any attention to Grover going out the back door with the silver, he'll bring it back.

    Re: Pentagon Study Confirms Detainee Abuse (none / 0) (#31)
    by john horse on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 06:02:02 AM EST
    jen Thanks for reading my post and picking up on my point. I doubt whether many of the apologists for Bush and Guantanamo actualy know what the Bush position on torture is. As the March 6, 2003 Rumsfeld memo makes clear, torture is torture only if an interrogator "knows that severe pain will result from his actions, if causing such harm is not his objective, he lacks the requisite specific intent even though the defendant did not act in good faith . . . Instead, a defendant is guilty of torture only if he acts with the express purpose of inflicting severe pain or suffering on a person within his control." So, according to this definition, poking someone in the eye with a red hot needle is torture only if it was done with the "express purpose of inflicting severe pain." And now for something different, here is TL's link to the Terry Jones article (Terry Jones, formerly of the Monty Python group) expaining how responsible parents can now use Rumsfeld's new definition of torture to extract information from our kids (definite satire alert).