The Abu Ghraib-Guantanamo difference

[Honeycombe8]

I saw the retired General (was that her title?)on KO, saying forcefully, finally, that she was glad the torture memos had been released so people could see that the soldiers at Abu Ghraib were following a pattern of prisoner treatment that had come from high up, etc., etc.

She did a great job. I remember thinking at the time that she, in particular, was treated horribly over the matter. She got blamed because she was the commander in the area and should've known...blah blah blah. Maybe so, maybe not. But certainly SHE was no more culpible than OTHER higher-ups who most certainly not only SHOULD have known, but certainly DID know, and there were no repercussions for them.

The only problem I have with her position in defending the Abu Ghraib soldiers is that, unfortunately for them, photos exist of the soldiers performing some of their, er, "treatment" events. And those soldiers weren't performing their duties begrudgingly or hesitantly. They seemed to be having a really, really, REALLY good time. They were drinking, smoking, partying, having a good time while putting their boots on top of naked prisoners with hoods on. They were posing for the cameras, seemingly proud and wanting souvenirs of their time at Abu Ghraib.

So maybe it's true that they were told to soften up the prisoners for interrogations later. Makes sense. But because they enjoyed their activities so much, it's easy to believe that they wouldn't have had to have been told to do that. And I believe none of them gave any names of any higher-ups who actually told them to do activities like those. That was the main problem with their defense, wasn't it? They could give any source of an order that told them to do those things, or anything like the things they did.

Maybe I'm misremembering. But that's what I recall about their trials. I waited for info about their testimony about orders and who told them to soften up the prisoners and such, and none of them gave up information like that.

[Xipe Totec]

1. ...

"This will constitute visual proof that, unlike the Bush administration's claim, the abuse was not confined to Abu Ghraib and was not aberrational," said Amrit Singh, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which obtained the agreement as part of a long-running legal battle for documents related to Bush-era anti-terror policies."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3846685

[Duer 157099]

2. Karpinski n/t

[vaberella]

3. Have you ever seen Fishermen or Hunters with a big kill?! That's what I saw with those soldiers.

It turned human beings who were allegedly accused of a crime into cattle or a "big kill"/"big catch". It's disgusting on so many levels. These people became trophy to the prowess of the American super power but at the same time killing our reputation world wide. I'm just disgusted.

[NYC_SKP]

4. In my estimation, the soldiers at Abu Ghraib were prisoners themselves.

And victims of that bizarre environment.

No, they didn't suffer the way the prisoners did, but that was not a pleasant place to be and it's probably NOT what they signed up for.

Walk a mile in their shoes.

:patriot: