More Iraqi prisoner abuse?

[Rdr4evr]

I came across this story at the website posted below and had not heard of it elsewhere previous to today, so I am not certain about its legitamacy....but the photos definately don't appear to be false.

The images were apparently found during a google search, but they have not yet been released to the public. If the images are released to mainstream media, we may have a repeat of the Abu Ghraib incident, which could be dangerous in terms of the war situation, but it must be known as well so the public is not decieved into thinking all is well.

Unfortunately, I believe this happens more often than we know about, but only a small percentage may be caught.

Some people may not feel as though this is torture, but it is certainly not the way these prisoners should be treated.

http://www.boingboing.net/2004/12/03...als_iraqi.html

Google reveals Iraqi prison abuse photos on photosharing site
The Associated Press found what appear to be new photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse by US military personnel -- by Googling for them, then paying 29 cents a copy for reprints through on-line photo sharing service smugmug.com. The images appear to date from May 2003, which may make them the earliest evidence of such alleged abuse. Snip:
[The AP] reporter found more than 40 of the pictures among hundreds in an album posted on a commercial photo-sharing Web site by a woman who said her husband brought them from Iraq after his tour of duty. It is unclear who took the pictures, which the Navy said it was investigating after the AP furnished copies to get comment for this story.
These and other photos found by the AP appear to show the immediate aftermath of raids on civilian homes. One man is lying on his back with a boot on his chest. A mug shot shows a man with an automatic weapon pointed at his head and a gloved thumb jabbed into his throat. In many photos, faces have been blacked out. What appears to be blood drips from the heads of some. A family huddles in a room in one photo and others show debris and upturned furniture.

(...) The images were found through the online search engine Google. The same search today leads to the Smugmug.com Web page, which now prompts the user for a password. Nine scenes from the SEAL camp remain in Google's archived version of the page. "I think it's fair to assume that it would be very hard for most consumers to know all the ways the search engines can discover Web pages," said Smugmug spokesman Chris MacAskill. Before the site was password protected, the AP purchased reprints for 29 cents each.


Link to AP news story, and link to the smugmug.com photosharing site (the images referenced are no longer publicly accessible through that photo-sharing website). The AP report says:
Nine scenes from the SEAL camp remain in Google's archived version of the page.
Any 1337 BoingBoing readers who sleuth the url for Google's cache of the smugmug gallery in question are invited to let us know.
Update: More images said to be from the smugmug gallery in question are published here: Link (Thanks, pemdasi) And the Spanish newspaper El Mundo has also published a selection of those photos. Link (Thanks, nv1962)

[sprocket]

There is no telling whats really going on in these photos.. mabye prisoner abuse, mabye not. Either way, somebody needs to find out. Hopefully, prisoners on the other side wont feel any retaliation for any perceived abuse by our soldiers. I dont think thats how it will play out though.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

If anything I would say that these photos were taken during/after a raid. Outside of a few smiling faces it's probably safe to assume that everything you see was/is standard procedure in the apprehension and field interrogation of combatants.

[whocarz]

This is potentially prisoner abuse, but it may not be. We do not have firsthand knowledge of the scene. Who is to say how the man that is bleeding from the head sustained that injury? Maybe he was captured then hit in the head or perhaps he was hit in the head with grenade fragments or grazed by a bullet while fighting. Putting a bag on a prisoner's head doesn't automatically mean torture, even though the Abu Girhab incident featured bags over heads. And the mugging for the camera is simply that, mugging. The jury is still out, but perhaps time will tell.

[powerclown]

These things happen in War. In every war that's ever been fought, that created POW's. Except this one is being fought in the age of digital cameras, computers, and the Internet. It's despicable, it's the doing of a few twisted individuals, and in the grand scheme, it's of minor importance.

[Seaver]

How is any of this abuse? The only questionable thing was the guy's head bleeding but that's probably during his capture.

Everything else they're tied and bagged.... how is this bad?

[thrsn0730]

Well, regardless of whether or not it is abuse, every single soldier should have learned by now to stay away from the cameras. Why would you do anything even remotely questionable in this day and age?

[OFKU0]

Originally Posted by powerclown

These things happen in War. In every war that's ever been fought, that created POW's. Except this one is being fought in the age of digital cameras, computers, and the Internet. It's despicable, it's the doing of a few twisted individuals, and in the grand scheme, it's of minor importance.

And when these circumstances involve American's as the victim's, do the same rules apply as stated,..." these things happen in War?" In other words,.. no big deal?

[smooth]

Originally Posted by Seaver

How is any of this abuse? The only questionable thing was the guy's head bleeding but that's probably during his capture.

Everything else they're tied and bagged.... how is this bad?

I classify jumping and lounging on prisoners as "questionable" at least, "bad" usually.

Pointing loaded weapons at someone's face while snapping a digi of his scared look for the buddies is also "questionable" behavior.


EDIT: if you read the blurb posted before the pictures, did you notice the Navy was investigating the conduct?

[Mojo_PeiPei]

I think it's safe to assume the only reason the Navy is looking into the matter is because the pictures were made public.

These guys are SEALS, for those of you who don't know they are special forces. Pointing loaded weapons at someone's face is legitmate when they are trying to secure a scene and apprehend and acquire knowledge. I'm sure you would find nothing out of line with their tactics if you look into it.

Also it's fairly upsetting and ridiculous how people from the left here bitch and scream about detainee's at Gitmo even though everything there is nice and legal, but you hold your own forces to some perverse Napolenic code of guilty until proven innocent.

You ever walk into an enemy stronghold without major combat support? Are you familiar with the tactics employed by special forces? Are you familiar with the tactics employed in the detaining of combatants? Ok, I didn't think so, don't jump to conclusions.

P.S.
The equating of American military treatment of combatants to Insurgent/terrorist treatment of kidnapped civilians is just ridiculous. Don't cut your nose to spite your face.

P.S.S.
If you take notice of the pictures they aren't jumping or lunging(sp) at the prisoners, they are in the back of a truck, so it's safe to assume that they are transporting them. It's not as if they have the convience of squad cars.

P.S.S.S.
The scene with the gun, notice how they are taking pictures of the assailant? The gun has a flash light on it. Plus I'm sure it a security precaution to make sure the guy doesn't try anything funny. But I forget they are Americans, they are probably up to something there....

[Dragonlich]

Originally Posted by smooth

I classify jumping and lounging on prisoners as "questionable" at least, "bad" usually.

Pointing loaded weapons at someone's face while snapping a digi of his scared look for the buddies is also "questionable" behavior.

EDIT: if you read the blurb posted before the pictures, did you notice the Navy was investigating the conduct?

You weren't there, so don't know whether there was any abuse. I could think of many possible scenarios where the scenes you see would be normal. A struggling man, for example, where one of his captors sits on him to restrain him. It's not like he's kicking him in the head, or torturing him.

Pointing loaded weapons at a face isn't nice, but if these are violent insurgents, I'd say it's a pretty good way of keeping them in check.

finally, the navy investigating the conduct doesn't say anything at all. Of course they'll investigate, but mostly to find out who took the pictures, because that'd be illegal. You know, international law and all - not putting POWs in the media. If the media makes a fuss about this as they did with the other abuse pictures, then yes, there will be consequences for the soldiers involved. But *only* because the media jumps on it, not because they're really guilty of anything serious.

Someone should be kicked very hard for taking these pictures. And someone else should be kicked even harder for putting them on the internet. Y'see, no matter what the story really is, extremists will jump on this. They will claim that it's abuse anyway, and will use it in their anti-US stories. Of course, it doesn't compare to pictures of civilians being decapitated by them, but that doesn't matter to these people.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

Originally Posted by Dragonlich

Someone should be kicked very hard for taking these pictures. And someone else should be kicked even harder for putting them on the internet. Y'see, no matter what the story really is, extremists will jump on this. They will claim that it's abuse anyway, and will use it in their anti-US stories. Of course, it doesn't compare to pictures of civilians being decapitated by them, but that doesn't matter to these people.

Nor many people here.

[smooth]

It's safe to assume whatever you feel is convenient.

I didn't say they were lunging at the prisoners. I said they were lounging on them--and they are. It's not interpretation--they are smiling and sitting on the prisoners plain as anyone who doesn't like to talk shit about liberal posters in this board can see in the pictures.

While none of us were there, it's fairly obvious to many people, including the reporter who blew the story and the Navy evidently, that these tied up, head bagged people were not violently struggling against a smiling crew of people snapping pictures of them.

And evidently these people have some mighty nice trucks: ones with brick walls, a tree, a bed, hell, even a fridge. Or, we could read the article:

These and other photos found by the AP appear to show the immediate aftermath of raids on civilian homes. One man is lying on his back with a boot on his chest. A mug shot shows a man with an automatic weapon pointed at his head and a gloved thumb jabbed into his throat. In many photos, faces have been blacked out. What appears to be blood drips from the heads of some. A family huddles in a room in one photo and others show debris and upturned furniture.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

Of the pictures provided here on the thread where there is lounging, they are on a truck.

I mean this is insanity. These men are in a hostile enviroment trying to secure it, what do you expect hugs and cuddles?

[smooth]

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Of the pictures provided here on the thread where there is lounging, they are on a truck.

I mean this is insanity. These men are in a hostile enviroment trying to secure it, what do you expect hugs and cuddles?

Funny you should mention that, since cuddling is exactly what they are doing while smiling into the camera.

I expect the soldiers to guard the prisoners and sit on the edge of the "truck" like the rest of the guys are doing--not posing for snapshots.

Yeah, I agree that your response is insane.


EDIT: btw, it becomes more obvious with each of your posts that you didn't bother to even read through the story before commenting:

The U.S. military has launched a criminal investigation into photographs that appear to show Navy SEALs in Iraq sitting on hooded and handcuffed detainees, and photos of what appear to be bloodied prisoners, one with a gun to his head.

"These photographs raise a number of important questions regarding the treatment of prisoners of war (POWs) and detainees," Navy Cmdr. Jeff Bender, a spokesman for the Naval Special Warfare Command in Coronado, said in a written response to questions. "I can assure you that the matter will be thoroughly investigated."

Gary Solis, a former Marine Corps prosecutor and judge who teaches at the United States Military Academy, said the images showed "stupid" and "juvenile" behavior — but not necessarily a crime.

John Hutson, a retired rear admiral who served as the Navy's Judge Advocate General from 1997 to 2000, said they suggested possible Geneva Convention violations. Those international laws prohibit souvenir photos of prisoners of war.

"It's pretty obvious that these pictures were taken largely as war trophies," Hutson said. "Once you start allowing that kind of behavior, the next step is to start posing the POWs in order to get even better pictures."

At a minimum, the pictures violate Navy regulations that prohibit photographing prisoners other than for intelligence or administrative purposes, according to Bender, the SEALs spokesman.

Are all these concerned people part of your loony left conspiracy category?

[Dragonlich]

Originally Posted by smooth

Funny you should mention that, since cuddling is exactly what they are doing while smiling into the camera.

I expect the soldiers to guard the prisoners and sit on the edge of the "truck" like the rest of the guys are doing--not posing for snapshots.

*sigh*...

They were in enemy/unfriendly territory, with potentially dangerous prisoners just waiting for an oppertunity to escape, and you expect them to sit on the edge of a truck???

It's rather obvious to me that some people here, you included, *want* this to be abuse. I bet that if the navy rules it's not abuse after all, these people will be the first to claim it's a cover-up.

If I re-read your posted quote, the main problem is that there were pictures at all, which is illegal. There isn't anyone that says these people were abused at all; the most you'll hear is that it raises questions about the treatment; this might be aimed at the taking of photographs, not the so-called "abuse".

Now, IF there was indeed abuse, the guilty should be, and will be punished. But if the abuse consists of people sitting on prisoners and scaring or humiliating them, I don't think it's really that bad. Again, I'd like to draw your attention to the treatment of innocent civilians by some of the insurgents. In fact, while we're at it, I suggest you investigate the abuse of normal prisoners all over the middle-east, something nobody but human rights groups seems to care about.

[smooth]

Originally Posted by Dragonlich

*sigh*...

They were in enemy/unfriendly territory, with potentially dangerous prisoners just waiting for an oppertunity to escape, and you expect them to sit on the edge of a truck???

I could argue that hogtied and hooded detainees, while they may be waiting to escape, aren't likely to be going anywhere at all.

Or I could just point out that the other soldiers appear to be sitting on the edge of the truck just fine.

Take your pick. In either case, the smiling soldiers should probably be paying attention to their surroundings instead of snapping momentos if the environment is as dangerous as you want it to be to support the conclusion you reached without any evidence.

It's rather obvious to me that some people here, you included, *want* this to be abuse. I bet that if the navy rules it's not abuse after all, these people will be the first to claim it's a cover-up.

Yeah, dragonlich, I "want" my country's soldiers to abuse their detainees. It gives me great pleasure.

How many troops does your country have over there again? The way you have defended my nation's troops since the beginning of our actions in Afghanistan and all throughout Iraq leads me to believe you are living vicariously through us. Get your own war and atrocities!

Better yet, why not just leave your armchair psychoanalysis of my motive for posting in this thread where it belongs...

If I re-read your posted quote, the main problem is that there were pictures at all, which is illegal. There isn't anyone that says these people were abused at all; the most you'll hear is that it raises questions about the treatment; this might be aimed at the taking of photographs, not the so-called "abuse".

Now, IF there was indeed abuse, the guilty should be, and will be punished. But if the abuse consists of people sitting on prisoners and scaring or humiliating them, I don't think it's really that bad. Again, I'd like to draw your attention to the treatment of innocent civilians by some of the insurgents. In fact, while we're at it, I suggest you investigate the abuse of normal prisoners all over the middle-east, something nobody but human rights groups seems to care about.

You should re-read my post then.

The picture taking was illegal--no one is disputing that. Hardly presents a need for a criminal investigation into the actions of the soldiers since the pictures themselves offer the only necessary evidence of that crime.

Feel free to draw my attention all over the place. In this thread, however, I was answering seaver's question as to what I found to be questionable treatment of prisoners before you and mojo got all bunched up and started haggling all over my posts.

The actions of the military personnel are under investigation. Whether you think it's "bad" or not is frankly immaterial. Their actions were illegal on the face of it, and inappropriate conduct. I happen to think that mistreatment of prisoners and violations of the Geneva convention are "bad." But I never intended to convince you to change your mind. I don't really care what you think about it--like I said, I was answering Seaver's question.

[Lebell]

If someone wants to pm me to reopen this thread, I will consider it. But as for now, it is CLOSED because of the sniping.