Thread: Abu Ghraib Sex Abuse Photos Leaked

Originally Posted by mrsquirrel

Originally Posted by Panda

Why not ask this question in the open forum Eliminator?

He likes reds.

If you are really lucky he will send you a PM about how he is on a pension and isn't rich like the rest of us.

The wanker wasn't game to post that question in public, or even anywhere he could have got a reply. Shows how much heart he has got.

Originally Posted by Agent_Smith

Hardly. I don't think it's an exaggeration to believe that most, if not all, invading armies commit violence against their captives. Sexual and otherwise. It is an unfortunate human characteristic, and I'm not surprised that American leadership is trying to cover it up--hell even the Japanese to this day won't admit everything they did in China and Chosen despite all the evidence.

Yes. Hitorically, all cultures and civilisations have had their day regarding assorted brutalities and atrocities. Those whom talk the loudest and hardest are the models that should be looked upon with a jaded eye.

Originally Posted by robuzo

Originally Posted by Panda

Originally Posted by Panda

Originally Posted by robuzo

Maybe the US should spill the beans on Arab government torture operations; I'm sure the Egyptian torturers make the Americans look like girl scouts.

Perhaps thats one of the reasons why the US shipped terror "suspects" to places like Egypt to be tortured prior to moving them to Guantanamo Bay.

But they did give it a nice name, -- extraordinary rendition.

(Abu Ghraib Sex Abuse Photos Leaked)Abu Ghraib Sex Abuse...31-05-2009 12:31 AMEliminatorHow would you know this as a FACT?


Why not ask this question in the open forum Eliminator?

I don't get it, is someone denying that extraordinary rendition took place? That it was employed (and not only by the Americans) is not exactly in doubt. Extraordinary Rendition News - The New York Times

Precisely why he wouldn't ask the question in the open forum.

Extraordinary rendition is an issue relating to Thailand as well. Only the usefulness and legality (or do I mean illegality?) of it, not its existence, is questioned.

Go right ahead Pandy and make a fool of your self and blab on about things you know nothing about and can not prove of even show a confirming photo of anything you take for granted.
You are a TEFLer aren't you? A fucking Kangaroo tefler..

bg has a point that neither of the photos has any sort of context. They don't show any U.S. personnel doing anything to anyone. For all we know these pix could be from some third world S&M site.




That being said, the fellow in this photo does not look like he's doing anything of his own free will. When your hogtied and on the floor you better do what the not-so-nice people tell you to do.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I think American civilians are now legitimate targets for torture and beheading,

it's fair game on both sides,

They have been for a long time, or haven't you been paying attention.

"Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.
Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.
The graphic nature of some of the images may explain the US President’s attempts to block the release of an estimated 2,000 photographs from prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan despite an earlier promise to allow them to be published.
"Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency. "

at-Largely: Photos Obama won't release include images of rape...(warning, graphic)

I reckon I would take the word of the Major General who conducted the inquirey into Abu Ghraib over BGs.

Originally Posted by Panda

I reckon I would take the word of the Major General who conducted the inquirey into Abu Ghraib over BGs.

agreed. but see my post on page 3 (post #46).......... taguba says that he has not seen the photos in question.

And lets' not forget that some of the tortured actually died :

Senate Panel's Report Links Detainees' Murders to Bush's Torture Policy


Torture Policy Written by Jason Leopold Thursday, 30 April 2009 06:13 By Jason Leopold

A combination of “enhanced interrogation” techniques approved by high-level Bush administration officials coupled with a series of brutal beatings administered by military interrogators were directly responsible for the December 2002 deaths of two detainees at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan, according to a report released last week by the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The report classified their deaths as homicides. In other words, the two prisoners were tortured to death.

One of the detainees, identified in the report as Dilawar, was the subject of the Academy Award winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side.

According to the Armed Services Committee report, another detainee identified as Habibulllah was killed two days after Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld authorized the use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques against prisoners in Afghanistan. Dilawar was murdered six days after Habibullah. The report labeled their deaths homicides.

The details of their murders at the hands of military interrogators have been previously reported. But the Senate report includes new information about the behind-the-scenes meetings that took place between high-level Pentagon officials in the months before their deaths where “enhanced interrogation” policies implemented at Bagram were discussed.

Previous reports, including one from the Army’s criminal investigative unit, have pinned Dilawar and Habibullah’s deaths on rogue soldiers and on-the-ground military officials but have never linked the murders directly to the interrogation policies enacted by the Bush administration.

Indeed, a report into detainee abuse completed in 2004 by Vice Admiral Albert T. Church, the former Naval inspector general, who conducted an investigation into detainee abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan at the request of then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, specifically cleared Pentagon officials stating they “did not promulgate interrogation policies . . . that directed, sanctioned or encouraged the torture or abuse of detainees."

A declassified version of the 360-page Church report, delivered to Congress in March 2004, said there was "no policy that condoned or authorized either abuse or torture," which critics of the Bush administration believed was a cover-up.

But the Armed Services Committee report undercuts those specific conclusions contained in the Church report and flatly states that policy directives authorized by Rumsfeld were a contributing factor to the deaths of Dilawar and Habibullah.

>>>>>>>>>

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by Panda

I reckon I would take the word of the Major General who conducted the inquirey into Abu Ghraib over BGs.

agreed. but see my post on page 3 (post #46).......... taguba says that he has not seen the photos in question.

Lets just clarify that a bit shall we?

He says he hasnt seen the 40 specific photos Obama wants suppressed.
But he does acknowledge he has seen many more which he describes as depicting "torture, abuse, rape and every indecency".

" The actual quote in the Telegraph was accurate, Taguba said -- but he was referring to the hundreds of images he reviewed as an investigator of the abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq -- not the photos of abuse that Obama is seeking to suppress."

How bad must those ones Obama wants suppressed be then?

Originally Posted by Panda

How bad must those ones Obama wants suppressed be then?

I would guess it makes the Lynndie England photos look like a church picnic.

Originally Posted by Panda

"Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.
Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.
The graphic nature of some of the images may explain the US President’s attempts to block the release of an estimated 2,000 photographs from prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan despite an earlier promise to allow them to be published.
"Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency. "

at-Largely: Photos Obama won't release include images of rape...(warning, graphic)

I reckon I would take the word of the Major General who conducted the inquirey into Abu Ghraib over BGs.

It's possible that what he is referring to as "rape" is sexual degradation and forced simulated rape/sex of one prisoner by another. I have a hard time believing that US soldiers were raping prisoners (as opposed to forcing them to engage in degrading behavior), and a harder time believing they'd film it. Soldiers in such photos would face serious consequences- the US Army hasn't gone completely off the rails, and in fact started comporting itself much better once that sick bastard Rumsfeld was gone.

I'm beginning to wonder if releasing more photos serves any further constructive or informational purpose. There is a leering, prurient, voyeuristic element to the curiosity about the photos, and a related use of such photos by the media to increase sales, that may outweigh the benefit of releasing more. It isn't as if what has been released and documented isn't bad enough; we know what happened, we have representative photos and testimony. In a way the photos might even add to the degradation the victims experienced; will all returning detainees be assumed to have been raped? How will that affect their reception in the hyper-macho Arab world?

I hope I am not coming off as a concern troll. In part it is the porno language-tinged comments I've seen here that make me think that when it comes to the photos enough is enough. The sexual nature of the degradation seems to attract interest that wasn't quite as apparent when it was found that detainees were "merely" subjected to pain and terror. Something about anal rape and forced oral sex seems to bring out the inner 14-year-old in an awful lot of "men" who for reasons they may not have fully admitted to themselves seem to find man-on-man sexual violence a lot more interesting than stress positions, waterboarding, sleep deprivation, beatings, electrocution, and other apparently less titillating practices.

I dunno. I suppose in the "great scheme" of things, having a cucumber shoved up your arse is preferable to having some one stick a Black and Decker through your kneecaps, or nailing your testicles to a board.

That being said, in this particular "battle" America portrays itself as the bringer of truth and justice, and that should, really should mean that cucumbers are also off the list of methods employed in getting information out of (and lets be careful of the word here) suspects.

All in all, its deeply regretable that (a portion perhaps) of the US forces found these practices either aceptable or desirable, but even more deeply unfortunate that the dumb f*cks took photographic evidence of it!