PERB In Need of Banner

U.S. forces abuse and torture female detainees in Iraq

Jimboyready

New member
Oct 7, 2004
51
0
0
Tri_City
U.S. forces abuse and torture female detainees in Iraq
4/18/2005 3:40:00 PM GMT

U.S. forces abuse and torture female detainees in Iraq
Iraqi female detainees have been raped and sexually abused by U.S. occupation forces.


Iraqi female detainees say that they have been illegally detained, raped and sexually humiliated by U.S. occupation forces.

One female detainee, who identified herself as “Noor”, said that U.S. soldiers at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib raped women and, in many occasions, forced them to strip naked in public. She also said that many female detainees got pregnant.

The classified investigation launched by the U.S. army, led by Major General Antonio Taguba, confirmed Noor’s account and said that U.S. guards sexually abused female detainees at Abu Ghraib.

According to Taguba’s report, the 1,800 abuse photographs shot by U.S. guards inside Abu Ghraib included images of naked male and female prisoners, a male Military Police guard “having sex” with a female detainee, and naked male and female detainees forcibly arranged in various sexually explicit positions for photographing.

The Bush administration, which insists that these were the acts of a few soldiers, blocked the release of photographs of Iraqi women detainees at Abu Ghraib, including those of women forced to bare their breasts, although these have been shown to Congress.

However, Taguba’s fifty-three-page report, found that between October and December of 2003 there were numerous instances of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” at Abu Ghraib”.

Also, a British MP, Ann Clwyd, confirmed a report that an Iraqi woman in her 70s had been harnessed and ridden like a donkey at Abu Ghraib after being captured last July. Clwyd said: “She was held for about six weeks without charge. During that time she was insulted and told she was a donkey.”

Moreover, the Italian reporter, Giuliana Sgrena, who was held hostage in Iraq, reported that in one incident, U.S. occupation forces raided the home of Mithal al Hassan, and arrested both her husband and son.

“The soldiers later ransacked the apartment. Denounced as part of a vendetta, Mithal was condemned without trial to eighty days of horror in the company of other women prisoners who, like her, were subjected to abuse and torture. She has since spotted her tormentors on the internet.”

Other reports state the U.S. forces violate international laws by kidnapping Iraqi women to use them as a bargaining chip to persuade their male relatives to surrender.

Iman Khamas, chief of the International Occupation Watch Center, a nongovernmental organization that gathers information on human rights abuses under occupation, said that “one former detainee had recounted the alleged rape of her cell mate in Abu Ghraib.”

According to Khamas, the detainee said that “She had been raped 17 times in one day”.

Attorney Amal Kadham Swadi, one of seven female lawyers representing women detainees at Abu Ghraib, says that abuse and torture against Iraqi women is not confined only to Abu Ghraib, but is “happening all across Iraq.”

“Sexualized violence and abuse committed by U.S. troops goes far beyond a few isolated cases,” she said.
 

luckydog71

Active member
Oct 26, 2003
1,117
0
36
75
Washington State
Jimboy, the story maybe true it needs some corroborating evidence before any one should be charged and proof beyond a reasonable doubt before they should be convicted.

There are 150,000 soldiers deployed to Iraq. Do you think a cross section of any society would have a few dozen that would commit sexual crimes? I believe the story may very well be true and if it is shame on those soldiers who took advantage of their captors. They need to be punished like any other criminal.

Your liberal roots are showing, when you try to bring the Bush Administration into the story.

So what do you think should be done?

Here is all I ask when you spread these stories. The vast majority of US soldiers in Iraq are decent and honorable soldiers who are there because they are under orders to go. The majority of them also support the cause they are fighting for.

I was traveling last week and I was in an airport bar waiting for my flight. I sat beside to US soldiers dressed in desert fatigues. I asked if they were returning home. No they were headed back to Iraq from 2 weeks R&R. I bought them each a beer and continued to talk. I asked them if the news we get on TV is close to what it is like in Iraq. They said not even close. The news organizations only show the shit (surprise!!) they never show any of the good things that are happening in Iraq.

One of the soldiers told me his platoon was ordered to take a CNN news crew to Baghdad. The news crew asked a number of the soldiers if they would ride with them. To a man (and woman) each soldier refused. The news crew was told they would be safely escorted to Baghdad, but the soldiers had no interest in talking with them.

The majority of US soldiers are very disappointed with US news organizations and he told me they are giving a much distorted view of what is real happening.

I know you are just repeating what you heard on the news, but in my mind your sources are not credible. They want to increase their ratings more then they want to report the real situation in Iraq.
 

hornydude

New member
Dec 22, 2004
646
0
0
Surrey
I guess that's not good...

....but, have you seen what the insurgents do to prisoners?

A raped woman will live, but once your head is sawed off there's no gettng over that now is there.

Somehow too I think very few innocent people got abused in Abu Ghraib. Most of them probably got far, far less than they meted out. It's like the criminals who get beat up by cops: nevermind that they did things 20 x as bad to their victims, but they sob and cry and whine and people lap it up.

A good number of the people causing the violence over there are just assholes anyhow...they kinda ask for a shit kicking. I think the average Iraqi family has 6 or 7 kids so they can afford to lose 1 or 2 as well. When an American gets killed that may be it for the family's line.
 

Cock Throppled

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2003
4,946
852
113
Upstairs
Considering almost all US media outlets are pro-US, flag-waving, embedded corporate insiders just what are the soldiers complaining about re: coverage of the Iraq "war"? Most stories I've seen on US network television have been ussually pretty pedestrian coverage of events or maybe puff pices about soldiers playing basketball with Iraqi kids or digging a well for a neighbourhood. This is reason to not co-operate with a CNN crew?? If they are just pissed off with the coverage of US deaths or Abu Ghraib, well, cry me a river. Shit happens, and it happens a lot in battle zones. If you're tough enough to be there you should be tough enough to take a story about some of the negative aspects. Not co-operating with a news crew is pretty much the best way to NOT get your story told, but then, I'm sure not many of the soldiers in Iraq are there because they're smart.
 

BushPilot

New member
Apr 23, 2004
389
0
0
hornydude said:
....but, have you seen what the insurgents do to prisoners?

A raped woman will live, but once your head is sawed off there's no gettng over that now is there.

Somehow too I think very few innocent people got abused in Abu Ghraib. Most of them probably got far, far less than they meted out. It's like the criminals who get beat up by cops: nevermind that they did things 20 x as bad to their victims, but they sob and cry and whine and people lap it up.

A good number of the people causing the violence over there are just assholes anyhow...they kinda ask for a shit kicking. I think the average Iraqi family has 6 or 7 kids so they can afford to lose 1 or 2 as well. When an American gets killed that may be it for the family's line.
This is probably the single-most assinine thing I've ever read. So, since Iraqi families are larger, it's okay to kill a few thousand of them? I hope for your sake that you just said that to get people riled up. If you actually believe that shit, you are the biggest moron I've ever encountered.
 

Fudd

Banned
Apr 30, 2004
1,037
0
0
Hmmm, so if you had a choice would you rather be the prisoner of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or the prisoner of US forces?
 

Fudd

Banned
Apr 30, 2004
1,037
0
0
I wonder how much is propaganda and how much is true?
 

BC visitor

Member
May 2, 2004
235
0
16
Blue guy in red state
I don't think so...

lebagyptian said:
so what else is new? similar offences incured during the desert storm and the vietnamese war..
I can't speak for the war in Vietnam, but I can speak for Both Desert Shield & Desert Storm. I know of no cases of the abuse of women captives in the first gulf war.

I think the US was very culturally sensitive to the KSA. I did not have any form of alcohol for 7 months I was there and the humanitarian rations we gave away had no pork products of any kind.

Soldiers on my battalion were not allowed to go near any form of Saudi civilization unless with a senior NCO or officer. We lived in the open desert for 7 months to keep ourselves seperate from the Saudi people.

However, there are documented cases of Iraqis sexually abusing female US POWs.
 

timec98

Banned
Mar 5, 2005
84
0
0
Fudd said:
I wonder how much is propaganda and how much is true?
propaganda? --- and the photos still being held by the Pentagon - the one's that haven't been released yet --- what's the Pentagon hiding?

yup, these are sure propaganda :confused:



.
 

timec98

Banned
Mar 5, 2005
84
0
0
luckydog, you are consistent --- is everyone who disagrees with the Shrubists a liberal?

luckydog said:
The vast majority of US soldiers in Iraq are decent and honorable soldiers who are there because they are under orders to go. The majority of them also support the cause they are fighting for.
Exactly what is a decent and honorable soldier in a U.S. war of occupation - a war initiated by the U.S. under false premise - a U.S. war against a country that posed no immediate threat to the U.S. This guy – this leader of the decent and honorable U.S. soldier – what about him? Oh, he just misspoke – nothing wrong here, just a few incorrect word choices: It's fun to shoot some people

hornydude, your comments are some of the most insensitive I’ve read in a long time – none of the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians killed deserve your level of thoughtlessness.

.
 

shank

Member
Sep 19, 2002
322
0
16
A higher standard

is expected of all foreign troops in Iraq. If you say (whatever your real intentions are) you are there to give the people democracy and freedom and thereby human rights, it behooves you to do so by your actions.
No room for error, excuses, whatever. Nada. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.
 

luckydog71

Active member
Oct 26, 2003
1,117
0
36
75
Washington State
timec98 said:
luckydog, you are consistent --- is everyone who disagrees with the Shrubists a liberal?.
Actually, I disagree with Bush on a number of issues like Sherivo / Minutemen on the Mexican border / the Bolton appointment / excessive spending. But those disagreements don't turn me into a Bush hater and one who blames everything on Bush.

The Dan Rather incident is another good example of liberals who hate Bush. I put those who claim it is Bushes fault for the criminal actions of a few soldiers, into the same general category of blind Bush haters.

There are conservatives who do the same thing and I disagree with them as well. The most outrageous example was the Clinton impeachment. His actions did not even come close to an impeachable offence, yet they pushed their case and hurt the country. In fact I think a case could be made that during the 2 year impeachment fiasco, the terrorists gain a lot of strength under the cover of the impeachment BS.
 

luckydog71

Active member
Oct 26, 2003
1,117
0
36
75
Washington State
Cock Throppled said:
….. just what are the soldiers complaining about re: coverage of the Iraq "war"? Most stories I've seen on US network television have been usually pretty pedestrian coverage of events or maybe puff pices about soldiers playing basketball with Iraqi kids or digging a well for a neighbourhood.
CT - so Canadians are starting to watch FOX NEWS now that it is in Canada. They are the only ones I have seen trying to show a balanced view. FOX is the one that broke the Abu Ghraib story.



Cock Throppled said:
…..This is reason to not co-operate with a CNN crew?? If they are just pissed off with the coverage of US deaths or Abu Ghraib, well, cry me a river. …
CT you mis-read what I wrote. They fully cooperated with the CNN news crew and took them to Baghdad. What they refused to do was speak to CNN during the trip. They have not given up their rights because they are soldiers.


Cock Throppled said:
…. I'm sure not many of the soldiers in Iraq are there because they're smart.
CT – the US soldiers are the best educate, the best trained and the best equipped armed force in history. These kids were not bitching or complaining, they were stating their opinion. Any objective viewer of CNN would have to agree that the network is very left wing and report their stories i
 

The Lizard King

New member
Jul 8, 2003
1,272
0
0
Well...here we go again. The same people saying the same things. Do you guys ever get tired of spewing your twisted opinions? LD & Timec, I don't agree NOR disagree completely with what either of you say but this is getting ridiculous. If anybody ever wants to make a case about anything, there will never be a problem finding a media outlet or report, or political hack, to quote to make your point. To anticipate what soldiers feel or are saying and doing over there, without being there yourself, is crazy and an insult to the kids stuck over there. Take it for granted, bad shit and good shit is happening over there with some of the bad being worse than you can imagine and the good being better. I don't see how any of you can really believe 100% of what is being put out there (FOX, CNN, U.S. Admin etc) as it's all twisted by the communicator in order to manipulate the public into supporting or buying into their specific agenda. In times of disagreement, the "right" will resort to fear mongering and brand people as "left wing" or "liberal", which apparently ranks right up there with Nazism and pedophilia. The "lefties" will resort to exploiting the bad examples of injustice and dishonesty, and the relative human and monetary costs, of the "war mongering" administration. In the end, it's all about half truths folks. Sooner or later the mods will probably start nuking these threads before they take up too much bandwidth....
 
N

NoLimitz

Sad but not unexpected. Ever since the US became the dominant superpower after WWII, they have been propping up bases worldwide which has led to raping of women in places such as South Korea and Okinawa Japan.

This will continue so long as the US keeps on acquiring bases (Afghanistan and Iraq) and marches on the path of expanding their empire.
 

hornydude

New member
Dec 22, 2004
646
0
0
Surrey
you're right...

BushPilot said:
This is probably the single-most assinine thing I've ever read. So, since Iraqi families are larger, it's okay to kill a few thousand of them? I hope for your sake that you just said that to get people riled up. If you actually believe that shit, you are the biggest moron I've ever encountered.
I did just say this stuff to piss people off. I was in a funny mood when I wrote it. I wouldn't ever downplay the death of someone's child. That ould be evil.

Sorry to get your stomach acid boiling from anger.
 

luckydog71

Active member
Oct 26, 2003
1,117
0
36
75
Washington State
The Lizard King said:
... I don't agree NOR disagree completely with what either of you say....
So you have no opinion. That is OK, most of eligible voters don't, because they have no opinion. You are in a majority.
 

CallMeJack

New member
Aug 9, 2004
162
0
0
604 area
n
hornydude said:
....but, have you seen what the insurgents do to prisoners?

A raped woman will live, but once your head is sawed off there's no gettng over that now is there.

Somehow too I think very few innocent people got abused in Abu Ghraib. Most of them probably got far, far less than they meted out. It's like the criminals who get beat up by cops: nevermind that they did things 20 x as bad to their victims, but they sob and cry and whine and people lap it up.

A good number of the people causing the violence over there are just assholes anyhow...they kinda ask for a shit kicking. I think the average Iraqi family has 6 or 7 kids so they can afford to lose 1 or 2 as well. When an American gets killed that may be it for the family's line.

from ModWest, no name calling or abusing other members
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fudd

Banned
Apr 30, 2004
1,037
0
0
US as Preeminent Super Power of the World

Love them or hate then, the fact is the US is the preeminent super power today and most likely well into the 21st. centry. That means whatever they do; right or wrong they will be dictating things.

If some other nation were the main super power like Communist China or Soviet Union (Now defunked) we would probably getting assimulated to socialist doctrine when they start exercising their influence. According to my father who escaped such a country, you do not want to live under such tyrannical rule.

On the other hand, if some nation ruled by religious fanatics were the super power (Note: I did'nt say Muslim fanatics) the world would really be fucked. We fellow Perbs would probably be hunted down by the religious police for our activies here.

For these reasons having a free and democratic nation as a the world super power is not all that bad.

Now if they would quit being assholes about the soft wood lumber and live cattle importation. I dare someone to smuggle a live cow into the US.:D
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts