|
April, 2004, Week 5 |
|
Monday April 26 , 2004 Did you know that the worldwide food shortage that threatens up to five hundred million children could be alleviated at the cost of only one day, only ONE day, of modern warfare. Peter Ustinov, actor, writer and director (1921-2004) I left the ignition key in the bike on 'On'... the battery is so dead I don't think it will recharge. I took "B" to Dr. Snow's office (Orthodontist) and did a little shopping. Tuesday April 27 , 2004 As people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing. Karl Rove (Bush's top advisor) I read an article about Red and Blue America yesterday... talking about the polarization of Liberals and conservatives, You can read it by clicking on the button in the header. I will be posting all three articles there. I wrote about this phenomenon a year or two back it really concerns me. My friends and I used to be able to have discussions but I think that is a thing of the past, has been since 1996... people are blinded by party loyalty, they believe what their fathers believed... they trust the government when their party is in office and distrust it when it's out. I believe Bush is the worst president we have ever had, Some of my friends think he is the best. Reading the second article reminded me that I was just like that guy in Sugar Land Texas... 40 years ago. I thought that anything that America did was "righteous' because we were Good and everywhere else in the world was bad, or at least flawed. America was this benevolent big Daddy that only did what was right... then came Vietnam... and Foster children... and Adoption, and reading about what really happened in the Philippines, Panama, the Spanish American War, and invading Canada and on and on. It dawned on me slowly that there were segments of my society that were greedy, self serving conscienceless, evil people. I saw what mismanagement greed and incompetence can do to a company from the inside, I saw what greed can do to a politician. I used to be a Republican, mostly because my Dad was one. In his day Republicans were the party if the little guy and the Democrats were the Fat Cat's party, but the Party's have swung 180 degrees, I am not really a Democrat but I seem to be voting democrat most of the time. There are things to like and dislike about both party's. To my mind you have to look I don't really trust either one of them, they will do and say what ever they think will get their guy elected. I will do my damnedest to get the current bunch of crooks and liars out of office and pray that the next bunch of fools can start to patch the world Bush is trying to destroy back together. I got the battery back, none the worse for wear... thank goodness. Took a ride on the bike... 'bout an hour... my butt is sore... not a good sign... I hope it's just a matter of acclimation... We took Christy's car in to T&J Auto... the noise she was hearing was a bad wheel bearing $209. it should be ready tomorrow some time. Sort of a bummer for Christy, that means she has to drive the van to Autumn's appointment at USC tomorrow and my Taurus is on it's last legs... it died in the driveway, first time since last summer... the air conditioner was on... the damn thing has not ever been a dependable car. Wednesday April 28 , 2004 You take your life in your own hands, and what happens? A terrible thing: no one to blame. Erica Jong, writer (1942- ) Autumn went to USC to be evaluated for the Bicycle program... there will be three control groups, one which gets a bicycle to ride, one that will use an exercise bicycle and one that will just get their regular PE type exercise. they will all be evaluated every 3hree months by a team that has no idea which regimen is being used. Autumn endured 5 hours of testing, six laps around the track (600 yards), questionnaires, strength testing... she was a real little trooper, never complained and never quit... I was amazed. We got Christy's car fixed, Wheel Bearing's cost a lot these days, ford sells a wheel bearing assembly, it costs twice as much... when the car was on the rack we noticed that the right front tire was cut by something , and worn, so I had to buy two tires too... expensive day. I had to pick up the Acton kids and the Lancaster kids, a tedious and time consuming pain. Luckily Christy's car was ready so I didn't have to worry about getting mine back and forth. Thursday April 29 , 2004 Extremists think 'communication' means agreeing with them. Leo Rosten writer humorist I will be taking Autumn to UCP (United Cerebral Palsy) Parent Support Group. There will be someone there representing the people that make the Springboard communication device that Autumn uses. I ordered a relay for my bike that will cancel the turn signal if I forget... $94 Should have it in 5 working days...
Friday April 30 , 2004 The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell, philosopher, mathematician, and author (1872-1970) I have read and heard quotes like this before, it's insulting, but I think there is a fundamental truth there, I don't know that it's the "trouble with the world..." I think it's the trouble with humanity. I find that the more I know about a thing or a person the more I want to know and the more I realize there is to know. On the subjects I care little about, like fashion or Soap Operas, for example, I have opinions that tend toward the absolute. "President Bush and Dick Cheney testified together before the 9/11 commission for about three hours and 10 minutes. Here's the condition of the testimony: No transcript, no records whatsoever, no evidence that it ever happened; it's just like President Bush and the National Guard." David Letterman I think people must be genetically disposed toward their political views, How else do you explain the political, religious and emotional polarity in in the world. it seems that folks either live with a Black v.s White, or Good vs, Evil view of the the world and some see the world as as a subtle mix of extenuating circumstances, innuendo, perspective, opinion, education, and that absolutes are only viable in theory. Where one is impassioned the other type is apathetic so there is no conflict, however, where both are impassioned the conflict is virtually irresolvable except by violence... and the problem with violence is that the winner has only won a battle, it hasn't changed minds, as a matter of fact it has made matters worse because the next battle will be fought with a greater resolve. Violence doesn't solve anything all it does is solidify resentment... shallow, I got an e-mail from a friend in England... he was talking about American GI's torturing prisoners... I had heard a quick one line remark on NPR but I was busy taking kids to school and forgot about it. After reading his e-mail I turned NPR back on and heard a several more references to it so I looked it up on the NET ... this is awful … words fail me. ...it not really news here yet… but it will be!! My sense of revulsion and humiliation is unbounded. If anyone thinks this is an isolated incident and not the tip of the iceberg they are idiots or Republicans. … we need to get the hell out of there. The General in charge knew about it, the pictures were passed around for no one knows how long before someone said “This is wrong.” The CIA knows, the Pentagon, who hired the interrogators knew about it... So far the Spin Doctors are doing damage control and it is a bunch of whitewashed crap so far… those six soldiers are being lined up to take the fall… they were just pawns… I just read al Jazeerah (SP), CNN and The Scotsman and a few others (Posted below) They had the Brit’s on the pillory for torture last month, now this… obscene… George Bush has created an army of enemies that hate us with a passion never seen before… they will strike back… and I don’t blame them. I wish I could get the pictures of those poor men out of my head... no one deserves to be treated like that... I don't care what they did. Furthermore, Bush needs to assume responsibility and resign, it’s Bush’s rhetoric and implied acceptance of these policies that were interpreted by the Army and the CIA to give permission for these atrocities… If it was just a few soldiers that would be one thing but it’s appears to be a pervasive policy, the coalition is involved. Iraqi's the vast majority of them who have been killed have been civilians, they did nothing, they were mothers and children old and young, they were Doctors and Lawyers and grocery clerks, they weren't Evil, they weren't spending their waking hours dreaming up ways to kill Americans, they were just people like you and I. I think the bottom line is that we had no right to kill them,,, Saddam... perhaps, he was a brutal dictator, he should probably have been disposed of one way or another, but for us to be liberating Iraqi's by killing them seems seems so disgustingly Orwellian, By calling them "Collateral Damage" and other dehumanizing terms we have given the kids in the Army permission to shoot first and ask questions later. I saw a video of a soldier bragging about killing an unarmed, wounded civilian, not about the killing, he was bragging about the shot he had made. The young man he killed wasn't a human being, he was just a target. After the torture story was released, I looked for the pictures on the Net, I found some, not all... they made me sick, those kids were playing with their prisoners like they were 5 year olds pulling wings off butterflies or burning ants with a magnifying glass, they were acting like mean little children, there was nothing malicious in their expressions, they were just playing with 'objects'. The other thing is that they were apparently unsupervised, and obviously untrained, kids in uniform, the girl giving the 'thumbs-up sigh in fr5ont of the naked Iraqi man was fresh out of boot-camp, she managed a pizza restaurant in Ohio before she enlisted. She and her insensitive playmates will be the ones to take the rap... not the Lieutenant, or the Captain or the Major or the General or the Pentagon or the Secretary of Defense or the Vice President or the President who condoned it. I wonder how the team of PR Spin Doctors are going to be able to distinguish between themselves and the regime they just overthrew... Winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people... my tired ass.. MAY 1. Stooping low to Smear Kerry 4. Kerry's Lionizing Shift From Officer to Activist This is a long article, but it is honestly written, apparently the RNC is going to rip into everything Kerry said and did 35 years ago while they are writing off 15 years worth of Bush's drunken debauchery as "youthful indiscretions" Why is this double standard acceptable to the American public So far Kerry has done or said nothing that I can find fault with, I wish I could say I had stood beside him... but I was out of it by then and far too self centered 5. U.S. War Crimes: Torture of Iraqi Prisoners Exposed 6. War Crimes Prompts wave of revulsions 7. US military in Iraq torture scandal 8. Torture Probe Soldiers are Scapegoats Claim Families 9. Iraqi Prison Sexual Abuse Photos Mar U.S. Image
By E. J. Dionne Jr. Tuesday, April 27, 2004; Page A21 "Have you no sense of decency, sir?" It was the classic question posed by Joseph Welch to Sen. Joseph McCarthy 50 years ago during the Red-hunter's hearings investigating the Army for alleged communist influence. With his query, Welch, the Army's special counsel, began the undoing of McCarthy. Unfortunately, the question needs to be asked again. It needs to be posed to shamelessly partisan Republicans who can't stand the fact that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are facing off against a Democrat who fought and was wounded in Vietnam. Cheney said in 1989 that he didn't go to Vietnam because "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service." While Kerry risked his life, Bush got himself into the National Guard. Funny, isn't it? When Bill Clinton was running against Republican war veterans in 1992 and 1996, the most important thing to GOP propagandists and politicians was that Clinton didn't fight in Vietnam. Now that Republican candidates who didn't fight in Vietnam face a Democrat who did -- and was awarded the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts while he was there -- the Republican machine wants to change the subject. Thus the shameful display on the floor of the House of Representatives last week as one Republican after another declared that what mattered was not Kerry's service but that he decided afterward that the Vietnam War was a terrible mistake for our country. The decorated combat veteran was transformed from a hero to "Hanoi John," in the phrase of Rep. Sam Johnson, a Texas Republican. Johnson deserves our gratitude for his seven years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam. But his agenda last week had election-year politics stamped all over it. Johnson declared that in speaking out against the war, Kerry showed "his true colors, and they are not red, white and blue." Kerry, Johnson said, was engaged in "nothing short of aiding and abetting the enemy." Rep. John Kline, a Minnesota Republican who served as a helicopter pilot in Vietnam, argued that Kerry's service "does not excuse his joining ranks with Jane Fonda and others in speaking ill of our troops or their service, then or now." Thanks for your service, Mr. Kline, but that "then or now" part is demagogic: Yes, Kerry criticized what our troops were asked to do in Vietnam. But have you ever heard Kerry speak ill of our men and women under arms in Iraq? The Republican agenda is obvious: to distract attention from the contrast of Kerry having served in a war theater while Bush and Cheney stayed home. It seems to be a habit. When Bush faces a Vietnam War hero in an election, a Vietnam veteran perfectly happy to trash his opponent always turns up. In the case of Ted Sampley, the same guy who did Bush's dirty work in going after Sen. John McCain in the 2000 Republican primaries is doing the job against Kerry this year. Sampley dared compare McCain, who spent five years as a Vietnam POW, with "the Manchurian Candidate." Now, Sampley says that Kerry "is not truthful and is not worthy of the support of U.S. veterans. . . . To us, he is 'Hanoi John.' " Is that where Sam Johnson got his line? One person who is outraged by the attacks on Kerry is McCain. When I reached the Arizona Republican, I found him deeply troubled over the reopening of wounds from the Vietnam era, "the most divisive time since our Civil War." He called Sampley "one of the most despicable characters I've ever met." McCain said he hoped that in the midst of a war in Iraq, politicians "will confront the challenges facing us now, including the conflict we're presently engaged in, rather than refighting the one we were engaged in more than 30 years ago." McCain recalled that he had worked with Kerry on "POW/MIA issues and the normalization of relations with Vietnam" and wanted to stand up for his war comrade because "you have to do what's right." Speaking of Kerry, McCain said: "He's my friend. He'll continue to be my friend. I know his service was honorable. If that hurts me politically or with my party, that's a very small price to pay." Now that McCain has spoken, will Bush have the guts to endorse or condemn the attacks on Kerry's service? Or will he just sit by silently, hoping the assaults do their work while he evades responsibility? Once more, Welsh's words call out for an answer: "Have you no sense of decency, sir?" A Sterling Record
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. When The evaluations were uniformly glowing. One commander wrote that Mr. Kerry ranked among "the top few" in three categories: initiative, cooperation and personal behavior. Another commander wrote, "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed." The citation for Mr. Kerry's Bronze Star praises his "calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire." In the United States military, there's no ideology — there are no labels, Republican or Democrat — when superiors evaluate a man or woman's service to country. Mr. Kerry's commander for a brief time, Grant Hibbard, now a Republican, gave Mr. Kerry top marks 36 years ago. Now the standards are those of politics, not the military. Despite his positive evaluations, Mr. Hibbard recently questioned whether Mr. Kerry deserved one of his three Purple Hearts. In the heat of a political campaign, attacks come from all directions. That's why John Kerry's military records are so compelling; they measure the man before his critics or his supporters saw him through a political lens. These military records show that John Kerry served his country with valor, and that those who served with him and above him held him in high regard. That's honor enough for any veteran. Yet the Republican attack machine follows a pattern we've seen before, whether the target is Senator John McCain in South Carolina in 2000 or Senator Max Cleland in Georgia in 2002. The latest manifestation of these tactics is the controversy over Mr. Kerry's medals. John Kerry was awarded three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a Silver Star for his service in Vietnam. In April 1971, as part of a protest against the war, he threw some ribbons over the fence of the United States Capitol. Republicans have tried to use this event to question his patriotism and his truthfulness, claiming he has been inconsistent in saying whether he threw away his medals or ribbons. This is no more than a political smear. After risking his life in Vietnam to save others, John Kerry earned the right to speak out against a war he believed was wrong. Make no mistake: it is that bravery these Republicans are now attacking. Although Wesley K. Clark, a former Democratic presidential candidate, was commander of NATO forces from 1997 to 2000. Prince Hal vs. King Henry (Prince George vs. King John) By Harold Meyerson In the course of the past week an odd double standard has emerged in the presidential campaign. Every sentence and gesture of the young John Kerry has been scrutinized -- and often deliberately misinterpreted -- for signs of insincerity, self-promotion, lack of patriotism and fledgling Francophilia. The sentences and gestures of the young George W. Bush, on the other hand, remain shrouded in obscurity. You don't build a record if you don't show up, and that's exactly what Bush did during the Vietnam War. The Republicans have subjected Kerry's time in Vietnam to the kind of going-over normally accorded war criminals. Did he really deserve that third Purple Heart? How big, exactly, was that piece of shrapnel that had to be removed from his left arm? We could, I suppose, ask an equivalent question of Bush, but only if they awarded Purple Hearts for paper cuts incurred in the campaign headquarters of the Republican Senate candidate for whom Bush worked during the year he was supposed to be serving with the Air National Guard in Alabama. Kerry's leadership of Vietnam veterans who opposed the war has also come under attack. Last week a gang of Republican congressmen took to the House floor to charge that Kerry had undermined the war effort and betrayed his comrades in arms. "What he did was nothing short of aiding and abetting the enemy," said Texas Rep. Sam Johnson, who then took to calling Kerry "Hanoi John." What Kerry did, in actuality, was provide a forceful voice and prudent guidance to a movement of angry men who had sacrificed for their country in a war that, by 1971, no longer had a plausible purpose but nonetheless continued to rage. By the time Kerry appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and posed his memorable question -- "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" -- it was plain that no one in the Nixon administration really believed that the war could be won. The war not only dragged on, however, but Nixon expanded it to Cambodia (a decision that predictably destabilized the regime of Prince Norodom Sihanouk and in turn helped bring the Khmer Rouge to power). A number of antiwar activists, veterans among them, responded with a kind of crazed desperation, proposing increasingly confrontational actions. Like many antiwar leaders of the time, Kerry was fighting a two-front war: against the administration in the court of public opinion but also against those of his comrades who wanted to direct the movement into self-destructive spasms of rage. It was precisely because Kerry's impulses were so mainstream that the Nixon White House feared him. Nixon didn't sit around with his goon squad of Bob Haldeman and Chuck Colson plotting against Kerry because they thought Kerry was Hanoi John. On the contrary, Kerry had to be taken down because his patriotism was so glaringly obvious. He had, after all, joined the service despite the grave doubts -- to which he gave voice in his Yale class oration in the spring of 1966 -- he harbored about the war. He had thrown himself in harm's way repeatedly while skippering "swift boats" in the Mekong Delta. He had worked to build an effective, law-abiding antiwar movement. Such men were dangerous. There are days in this campaign when Kerry must think he's still up against Nixon and his thugs. The same slanders that Dick and his boys cooked up then -- Kerry as dangerous radical, Kerry as inauthentic liberal -- are being served up now by Nixon's ethical heirs. Did Kerry make mistakes during his years in the antiwar movement? Sure he did, beginning with his studied (but clumsy) ambiguity about the fate of his medals and ribbons. But what is the standard we judge him by? When Kerry was fighting in Vietnam, and then fighting to change a disastrous policy at home, Bush had become the invisible man to his fellow aviators in the National Guard; Dick Cheney had, by his own admission, "other priorities" than the war and picked up four separate draft deferments, and junior exterminator Tom DeLay was risking life and limb in a daily battle against termites. Bush, in his own words, was "young and irresponsible," and Kerry all but reeked of responsibility. Bush was Prince Hal and Kerry King Henry and, when it comes to maturity of judgment, they remain so to this day
THE RACE TO THE WHITE HOUSE
Kerry's Lionizing Shift From Officer to Activist
A controversial protest and Senate testimony shaped the veterans' antiwar movement.
By Stephen Braun Times Staff Writer
April 23, 2004
The week he became an American household name, John F. Kerry carried his credentials pinned to his shirt pocket.
For five days in late April 1971, Kerry wore his battle ribbons on old combat fatigues as he led 1,000 disillusioned Vietnam veterans massed in Washington for a protest against the war they fought.
"Mr. Kerry, please move your microphone," Sen. Stuart Symington (D-Mo.) prodded the 27-year-old former Navy lieutenant during a climactic appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "You have a Silver Star, have you not?"
Solemn, gangling, hunched over a witness table, Kerry obliged, showing the cloth bars that stood for his Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts. Kerry's pained plea ⤲ "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" ⤲ stiffened congressional opposition to the war and made him a peace movement icon for giving voice to veterans weary of death without victory.
The embittered grunts called themselves "Winter Soldiers," conjuring up Thomas Paine's vision of a Colonial army of patriots. They dubbed their protest "Dewey Canyon III," a play on the Nixon administration's code for secret incursions into Laos. They flashed their decorations everywhere they went that week. Then, in a bitter farewell that still shadows Kerry's career, he and his peace platoons tossed away honors.
Antiwar Turning Point
A signal moment in the slow fade of American support for the war, the 1971 protest by the Vietnam Veterans Against the War was Kerry's entry point into public life. No other presidential aspirant of his generation won such early prominence or endured such microscopic scrutiny.
"I did what I thought was the right thing to save the lives of American soldiers," Kerry said in a recent interview. "It wasn't easy. I mean, I knew people would be critical, that there would be people who wouldn't like it."
Kerry's two-year transformation ⤲ from disaffected patrol boat skipper home from Vietnam to an antiwar leader coming into his own at the Washington protest ⤲ sheds insight into the nuances of his character. His determined entry into the upper echelon of the peace movement was a daring high-wire act for a Yale graduate with no constituency beyond his own conscience and ambition.
Poised beyond his years, Kerry spoke out with wounded eloquence as the nation roiled over widening war and mounting American deaths. He faced risks in coming forward, singled out as a threat by no less than President Nixon and targeted by government and military spies in a covert surveillance campaign still coming to light today.
"The powers that be wanted to know what these guys were up to," recalled John J. O'Connor, a D.C. policeman assigned to infiltrate the VVAW leadership. "They had their hotheads. Not Kerry. He was cool as 12-year-old Scotch."
Kerry pressed his antiwar troops to work within the system, a moderate course he says is a lifelong inclination. But critics and admirers say his centrism reflected a striver's calculation. Fellow protesters mocked his prudence and pressed khakis. Even then, they say, Kerry kept one eye cocked on his future, hedging his bets in careful maneuvering that became the hallmark of his political rise.
On the campaign trail, Kerry plays up his exploits as a patrol boat skipper to show his resolve. Yet he revisits his antiwar days warily, aware his old words and actions remain poisoned symbols. Vietnam veterans still rage over Kerry's Senate speech, reviling him for his incendiary antiwar criticism and for citing unproven atrocities allegedly committed by U.S. troops.
"Going up to testify without confirmation was a slander on the Vietnam veteran," said W. Hays Parks, a former Marine colonel who served as an infantry officer and military prosecutor in Vietnam.
Even as Dewey Canyon III ended with an admiring burst of media coverage, Kerry's success was fissured with doubts. Fearing public recriminations, he urged the antiwar veterans to return their decorations in a muted ceremony. But they ignored him, instead flinging their honors away in an angry symbolic rejection of the war.
Massing in parade formation, 700 veterans wept, cheered and swore as they lobbed their decorations like grenades. When Kerry's turn came, he muttered sorrowfully into a brace of microphones, then lofted his own ribbons.
"I knew I was going to throw them back, but I didn't know how," Kerry recalls. After the crowd dispersed, Kerry says, he discreetly tossed away two medals given to him by veterans who could not attend the event. The flinched denouement fed suspicions that Kerry had pretended the medals were his own ⤲ even as the renounced honors lay unclaimed for years, hidden away in a police storeroom.
Dewey Canyon III ended for Kerry as catharsis, "like throwing the war over the fence." But his path to antiwar activism remains an exposed fault line for his generation, a progression Kerry has always insisted was seamless and unavoidable.
"I had to speak out," he says. "I was compelled."
Kerry had it relatively easy when he came home from the war in April 1969. He was an admiral's aide in Brooklyn and had an apartment with his fiancee on Manhattan's elegant upper East Side.
But Vietnam still gouged his world, erasing old friends. Two weeks after his return, Kerry learned of the ambush death of Don Droz, a fellow patrol boat commander who shared his doubts about the war. Droz's death left him numb.
"That's when I decided I really needed to kick into gear," Kerry recalls.
He vented on paper, intent on composing "a letter to America." At a Greenwich Village pub, Kerry raised the idea with columnist Pete Hamill, a friend of his sister's. The letter sat unsent. "He felt he had something to give. It's the sort of noblesse oblige that doesn't resonate too much these days," said close friend George Butler.
Kerry found an outlet piloting Adam Walinsky, a former speechwriter for Robert F. Kennedy, to upstate New York colleges for a lecture series against the war. Aloft in a bucking prop plane, the two men talked about Vietnam, politics and the Kennedys. For Kerry, the talk "crystallized in me that this was something we all needed to do."
By January 1970, Kerry had left the Navy to run as an antiwar congressional candidate in Boston. Outflanked by the sudden entry of peace activist the Rev. Robert Drinan, Kerry pulled out, canny enough to know his aspirations for office needed a base.
The war kept drawing him back. Newly married and on honeymoon in France, Kerry detoured from his vacation to meet with South and North Vietnamese delegates to the Paris peace talks. How a 26-year-old private citizen without a political track record connected with the negotiators is unclear.
Through an aide, Kerry said he does not recall the details of the session though he told the Senate in 1971 that negotiators for the communist North assured him that if the U.S. "set a date for withdrawal" from Vietnam, its "prisoners of war would be returned."
A Veteran Voice
Speaking out against the war at college campuses and fundraisers, Kerry found his voice as an activist. His reputation reached leaders of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, a group of dissident ex-GIs in New York. "He was just what we needed, the kind of guy who could stand in a room of angry vets and convince them to do something," said Jan Barry, who founded the group in 1967.
Kerry found his chance in late January 1971. As VVAW members massed in a Detroit motel, Kerry asked to organize a march on Washington. By lobbying Congress and marching in front of cameras, Kerry felt, veterans might turn the tide against the war.
His reception was stormy. Many VVAW leaders, working-class grunts from the heartland, teed off on Kerry, suspicious of his officer's rank and patrician aloofness. Radicals resented his blunt push for leadership. They finally gave their assent, but added a symbolic tweak of guerrilla theater a mass return of their combat honors.
"We used each other," explains Jack Mallory, a former Army captain from Virginia. "He was our front man. We were his stepping-stone to publicity."
The veterans also were there to amass proof of U.S. war crimes in Vietnam. The "Winter Soldier" hearings were sparked by the 1968 My Lai massacre of 347 Vietnamese civilians.
Prodded by Kerry and other moderators, more than 150 vets filed into the dimly lighted motel hall, spilling horror tales. Bill Crandell, an Ohio infantry officer who led the hearings, described civilians gunned down in "free fire zones" [ combat areas where soldiers killed at will. Former Marine Scott Camil detailed a torrent of murders and disembowelings] a grisly account he later gave under oath to the Navy.
Government's Scrutiny
Media interest was fitful. But hidden among observers were undercover military agents. In 1973, Army investigators detailed the clandestine intelligence operation to Hays Parks, who taught war crimes law at the Army's Judge Advocate General's School.
The Army's Criminal Investigation Division agents told Parks they confirmed some atrocity allegations, but also found that several VVAW members were impostors. The Army never released its findings, Parks said, but "there were enough questions to put the hearings in doubt."
Unaware of the discrepancies, Kerry cited the "Winter Soldier" findings as fact to the Senate in 1971, comparing the alleged U.S. atrocities with the "ravage" of Mongol conqueror Genghis Khan.
Kerry's testimony infuriated military lawyers, chief among them William Eckhardt, an Army colonel coordinating the My Lai prosecutions. Eckhardt, now a University of Missouri law professor, says Kerry's reliance on unproven "show trial" allegations "besmirched those of us who did it right."
Kerry concedes he "wouldn't be surprised" if some "Winter Soldier" accounts were phony. But he stands by the bulk of the claims. "Free-fire zones, women getting blown away, children getting blown away, ears being cut off, rapes ⤲ people know this," Kerry said. "These are a matter of record in our history."
After Detroit, Kerry plunged into protest logistics. He hit the antiwar fundraising circuit, toting chocolate milk and entertaining VVAW members with broken-French imitations of Inspector Clouseau from "Pink Panther" films. In Washington, he laid plans with dissident congressmen and negotiated with federal officials for rally permits.
At battle stations after two years of war protests, Nixon and his aides were uncertain how to respond to angry soldiers. "Kerry was considered a threat," said John Dean, White House counsel until he turned against Nixon during Watergate.
Nixon wanted the protest scuttled until Dean and speechwriter Patrick Buchanan warned that police violence against the veterans could backfire. Nixon relented, but pressed Charles Colson, his acerbic Special Counselor, for dirt on Kerry and other VVAW leaders. In an undated memo, "Plan to Counteract Vietnam Veterans," Colson demanded their records scoured.
The FBI was already compiling dossiers. An FBI memo dated Feb. 22, 1971, later obtained by Camil, cited intelligence gathering on "Winter Soldier" participants from New York to Florida. And an FBI memo dated Jan. 25, 1971, found by Gerald Nicosia, a historian of the VVAW movement, reveals the bureau was sharing copies of surveillance reports with Army, Navy and Air Force intelligence before the Detroit meeting.
Kerry was under scrutiny even earlier. His name was forwarded to FBI headquarters in September 1970, Nicosia said. The FBI kept watch until August 1972, when the bureau concluded Kerry had no ties to "any violent-prone group" and closed his file.
Complaining recently that FBI spying was "an offense to the Constitution," Kerry grimaced when he learned he was also monitored by Washington, D.C. police. O'Connor, the undercover agent who fit in so well with VVAW members that he rose to office manager, told his superiors that Kerry "was one of the top guys, a little elitist, but knows what he's doing."
Chartered buses filled with VVAW protesters rumbled toward Washington on Sunday, April 18, 1971. Massing in ragged ranks, more than 1,000 Vietnam veterans filed out the next morning to march across the Lincoln Memorial Bridge toward Arlington National Cemetery.
Fresh from an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," Kerry stood out among the rumpled, bearded veterans, marked by his shaggy hair and neatly pressed fatigues. At the cemetery, officials barred the gate. As the troops turned back, sullenly waving toy guns, someone raised a U.S. flag inverted in the "distress" position.
They pitched camp on the National Mall near the Capitol. Grimy from the bus trip, veterans grabbed showers at the YMCA and slept in bedrolls. Some grumbled that Kerry was not around at night. Settled in at the Georgetown townhouse of Butler's mother-in-law, he told doubters he needed a place to field phone calls from congressmen and lawyers.
It was there that Kerry heard from an aide to Arkansas Sen. J. William Fulbright. Impressed by a talk he heard Kerry give at a cocktail party, Fulbright wanted him to appear before the Foreign Relations Committee.
'Letter to America'
After a long day butting heads with VVAW radicals, Kerry bent over his old "letter to America." Refined over months of fundraisers, it needed final touches. He phoned Walinsky for Kennedyesque pointers, then "sat up all night in the most uncomfortable chair in the house," recalled Butler. When dawn broke, Kerry was still scribbling away in longhand.
Hurrying to the hearing room on the morning of April 22, Kerry passed scores of veterans pressing from the back of the hall and peeping from doorways. He launched into a grim catalog of the "winter soldier" atrocities, describing a deathscape of decapitations, torture and razed villages.
The U.S. had "created a monster," Kerry warned ⤲ soldiers "given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history." He told of their anger, sense of betrayal and their hope that the nation might look back on Vietnam as a turning point "where soldiers like us helped it in the turning."
"He had the guts to say wrong is wrong," said Chris Gregory, a former Army medic who watched, mesmerized, wedged against a far wall. "It was brave. There was a price to be paid for talking like that."
Kerry is still paying. For three decades, Vietnam veterans who supported the war have recoiled at his words. Robert Turner, an Army officer interrogating Vietcong defectors at the time in the war zone, recalls pulsing with rage as he read accounts of the speech. "He made us all look like monsters," Turner says.
Kerry admits he "can wince sometimes" at "the language of an angry young man." But he stands by his indictment of the war policy and its architects: "It was honest at the time and it's honest today." Conceding he is "sensitive" to the fury his old words evoke, Kerry says he tried even then to "distinguish the war from the warrior."
But that day, Kerry left the Senate chamber an instant celebrity. Film clips played on the nightly news. They were impressed, too, at the White House. An Oval Office tape machine caught Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman admitting that Kerry "did a hell of a great job." Nixon seconded: "He was extremely effective."
But Kerry still faced trouble over how to handle the protest's parting gesture. Nervous about how the nation might perceive a mass turn-in of decorations, he urged VVAW leaders to lay their honors down with dignity on a table shrouded in white cloth. He was outvoted. The vets chose to heave their medals in protest, then turning them over to the sergeant-at-arms at the Capitol.
Kerry's objections left VVAW officers convinced "he was out," said Jack Smith, a former Marine who ran the event. At the White House, Colson dashed off a memo to Haldeman: "John Kerry is not participating ⤲ would be a total loss of all he has accomplished this week."
He was swaying "between patriotism and protest," recalls Kerry's brother-in-law, David Thorne. But when protesters mustered for their last day of protest on the morning of April 23 ⤲ 33 years ago today ⤲ Kerry was still with them.
Overnight, police had erected a high wire fence around the Capitol, preventing the veterans from turning in their combat honors. Enraged, they decided to leave them behind.
For nearly two hours, the antiwar troops heaved medals, ribbons, berets, dog tags, and snapshots of dead comrades at a sign marked, "Trash." Maimed vets threw their canes. One discarded an artificial leg. Some let loose with the medals of veterans who could not attend. And several now admit tossing medals offered by strangers.
As former Marine aviator Rusty Sachs prepared to throw his own decorations, someone handed him a Silver Star and a Distinguished Flying Cross. "What do I do with these things?" he recalls wondering. He thought of dead comrades, then pitched the medals away after a tear-strewn speech that many VVAW members describe as the event's emotional highlight.
At the end of the long line, Kerry unfastened the ribbons he wore for a week. Nearing "dozens of cameras, countless people watching," Kerry "took out the ribbon plate, pulled them off, said something ⤲ I do this sadly, or I do this with regret ⤲ and threw them over the fence."
He waited until "after everybody and all the cameras dispersed." Then, he took out two medals from his fatigue pocket and "threw the other things away." Emotionally spent, weeping, he embraced his wife.
"He looked fractured," recalls Chris Gregory.
The medals Kerry threw were not his own. One, he says, was offered from a patient in a Brooklyn VA hospital. The other was a Bronze Star handed over by a World War II veteran at a Massachusetts fundraiser ⤲ an incident also recalled by Gregory. Kerry never asked their names.
Myths of the Medals
Kerry says he never claimed to have thrown the medals as his own. But as his reputation grew as a shrewd political operator after his 1984 senate election, Kerry was dogged by a troubling political myth.
He was accused of discarding his ribbons and the medals of others in 1971 to appear as an antiwar hero, while keeping his own medals for use as political props years later ⤲ a charge echoing this election year.
"It's so damn hypocritical to get these awards, throw them in the dirt and then suddenly value them again," said B.G. Burkett, a Vietnam veteran and author who critiques Kerry's antiwar stance.
"I never ever implied that I did it," Kerry says wearily, adding: "You know what? Medals and ribbons, there's almost no difference in distinction, fundamentally. They're symbols of the same thing. They are what they are."
The war honors abandoned by the "Winter Soldiers" sat for years in boxes shelved in the Capitol Police Department's property room. The honors lay ignored for two decades, long after Kerry's exit from the VVAW in late 1971 and his immersion into politics.
They remained hidden as the years passed, unclaimed by the protesters who bitterly flung them away, forgotten, too, by the war supporters who cherish them as symbols of valor.
Finally, police ran out of space. "Last thing I wanted to do was throw them away again," said former Deputy Chief James Trollinger. But when aides approached him "sometime in the early 1990s," asking for permission to remove the decorations, Trollinger reluctantly agreed.
Three boxes bulging with medals and ribbons were hauled away to a local forge, destined to be melted down as scrap.
Times Researcher John Beckham contributed to this report.
From military officer to antiwar activist
1966-1969: John F. Kerry enlists in the Navy in 1966, undergoes officer training and volunteers for duty in Vietnam. He serves there from November 1968 to April 1969, including 4 1/2 months as a swift-boat commander in the rivers of the Mekong Delta. After being wounded for third time, he is sent stateside.
April 11, 1969: Returning from the Vietnam War, Lt. j.g. Kerry is assigned as an admiral's aide in Brooklyn.
Jan. 3, 1970: Kerry takes an honorable discharge from the Navy to run as a Democrat for a Massachusetts congressional seat, then withdraws from the race in February after the entry of the eventual winner, the Rev. Robert Drinan.
May 1970: On his honeymoon in France after marriage to Julia Thorne, Kerry meets as a private citizen with South and North Vietnamese delegates to the Paris Peace Talks.
September 1970: Kerry's name is forwarded to FBI headquarters after speaking to Vietnam Veterans Against the War rally near Philadelphia. Agents covertly monitor Kerry's activities until August 1972.
Jan. 31, 1971: Kerry attends VVAW's "Winter Solider" meeting in Detroit, winning approval to organize an antiwar rally in Washington and participating as a moderator in hearings that raise claims of widespread American war crimes in Vietnam.
April 18, 1971: Kerry arrives in Washington to lead VVAW members in the "Dewey Canyon III" antiwar demonstration.
April 22, 1971: Kerry testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, criticizing the Nixon administration's war policy and citing "Winter Soldier" war crimes claims.
April 23, 1971: As 700 VVAW protesters angrily throw away their war honors to condemn the war, Kerry joins in by discarding his combat ribbons and the medals given to him by others, but retains his Silver Star, Bronze Star and other medals awarded for Vietnam service.
Source: Times research
Los Angeles Times
************************************************************* Copyright material is distributed without profit or payment for research and educational purposes only, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. Reference: <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml>. *************************************************************
U.S. War Crimes: Torture of Iraqi Prisoners Exposed One of the pictures shows an Iraqi prisoner standing on a box with a hood over his head. Electric wires are attached to his hands. He was told that if he fell off the box he would be electrocuted. Another photograph is of naked male detainees stacked in a pyramid shape, one of the men has a slur written on his skin in English. In some pictures, prisoners are positioned to simulate sex with each other while US troops point and laugh. The photos have surfaced in connection with the suspension in March of 17 members of the 800th Military Police Brigade for mistreatment and abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in November and December of last year. The jail was infamous for torture and executions under the Saddam Hussein regime. Six of those suspended were charged with dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, assault and indecent acts' the military's term for sexual abuse' and could be court-martialed and jailed. Military investigators have also recommended that disciplinary action be brought against seven US officers in charge of the prison, including Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, the 800th Brigade's commander. While the US Army revealed these violations last month, it has attempted to prevent any detailed information leaking to the media. Army officials, however, were forced to appear on the high-rating television program after other news outlets were given copies of the photographs. The Army told '60 Minutes II' that it had numerous photos, including a picture of a detainee with electric wires attached to his genitals, a dog attacking an Iraqi prisoner and a dead Iraqi prisoner who had been badly beaten at the prison. One civilian interrogator had smashed several tables in order to 'fear up' prisoners. The television show also revealed that the Army is investigating allegations by an Iraqi detainee that a prison translator at Abu Ghraib raped a male juvenile detainee. Part of the prisoner's testimony states: 'They covered all the doors with sheets. I heard the screaming ... and the female soldier was taking pictures.' These acts of sadism and cruelty constitute a blatant violation of the 'UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment' and are war crimes as defined by Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of war prisoners. Article 3 prohibits: a. violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; b. taking hostages; c. outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. Army Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, deputy chief of military operations in Iraq, told '60 Minutes II' that the torture was 'reprehensible' and claimed that those facing charges were 'not representative' of American soldiers in Iraq. 'Don't judge your army by the actions of a few,' he said. Americans 'need to understand that is not the Army.' These mendacious comments were refuted by CBS's chilling interview with Army Reserve Staff Sergeant Chip Frederick, one of those facing court martial. Frederick, a Virginia prison guard, is charged with assaulting detainees, ordering prisoners to strike each other and an 'indecent act' for observing one of the sexual abuse incidents. He insisted, however, that his actions were not those of a rogue soldier, but were sanctioned and encouraged by military intelligence and the CIA. Along with other reservist jail guards, he was directed to physically and mentally 'prepare' Iraqi detainees for interrogation. He said that dogs were also used as 'intimidation factors' against prisoners. One of Frederick's e-mail messages said: 'Military intelligence has encouraged and told us 'Great job.' They usually don't allow others to watch them interrogate. But since they like the way I run the prison, they have made an exception. We help getting them [detainees] to talk with the way we handle them.... We've had a very high rate with our style of getting them to break. They usually end up breaking within hours.' As these comments make clear, torture in US-run Iraqi prisons is an integral part of the illegal occupation. A systematic process of brutalization is being directed from the upper ranks. At the same time, the fact that US soldiers are employing methods similar to those used by the Nazis in World War II is indicative of a deep-seated state of demoralization and degradation that the occupation has bred within the US military. Finding themselves in a hostile environment with the vast majority of Iraqis opposing the occupation, many American soldiers have come to see the country's entire population as the enemy. Fed lies about the colonial intervention in Iraq being part of a global 'war on terrorism,' some have also assumed a license to torture and humiliate their helpless captives. Contrary to Kimmitt's claims'slavishly echoed by the corporate media'this is the logic and modus operandi of imperialist conquest and colonial occupation. The pictures of torture, brutality and sexual sadism are representative of the entire criminal operation being conducted in Iraq. Washington anticipated and prepared in advance for the war crimes now being committed against the Iraqi people. No criminal charges can be brought against a US soldier in Iraq because the Iraqi Governing Council has given the American military a blanket amnesty from prosecution. Secondly, with the backing of Germany and a number of other countries, no US soldier or citizen can be prosecuted for war crimes in the International Criminal Court. The '60 Minutes II' broadcast has provided only a partial glimpse of the crimes being carried out by US forces in Iraq and elsewhere. The conditions in Iraqi jails, where over 18,000 prisoners are being held, are replicated in a network of US-run concentration camps around the world. These include Guantanamo Bay, Diego Garcia, Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan. According to current estimates, the US is incarcerating over 25,000 detainees in these hellholes, in violation of the Geneva Conventions. Torture of Iraq Prisoners Prompts Wave of RevulsionBy PA News Reporters
The Allied occupation of Iraq was under fresh scrutiny tonight as shocking pictures of United States troops torturing prisoners prompted a wave of revulsion across the world.
Prime Minister Tony Blair was among those to condemn the TV pictures as the Iraqi Governing Council said they would increase anti-American sentiment.
President George Bush said he was disgusted by what he saw, adding “that’s not the way we do things in America”.
The pictures sparked outrage as they were broadcast across an already hostile Arab world by Middle East TV stations including Al Jazeera.
The chilling pictures show hooded and naked prisoners cowering and being sexually abused by their smiling captors, who include women.
The prisoners were being held at the Abu Ghraib prison which Saddam Hussein used to torture his own people.
Mr Blair’s official spokesman said: “The US army spokesman has said this morning that he is appalled, that those responsible have let their fellow soldiers down, and those are views that we would associate the UK Government with.”
Asked if the Prime Minister was appalled, the spokesman replied: “The Government view is the same as that of the US army.”
President Bush said: “I share a deep disgust that those prisoners were treated the way they were treated. “Their treatment does not reflect the nature of the American people. That’s not the way we do things in America. I didn’t like it one bit,” Mr Bush said. One Iraqi prisoner is shown standing on a box, hooded, dressed in black robes with wires attached to his hands. He was reportedly told that if he fell off the box, he would be electrocuted. Other pictures show US soldiers, men and women in military uniforms, posing with naked Iraqi prisoners. In some, the male prisoners are positioned to simulate sex with each other. One photo is of a female US soldier standing by a naked prisoner, also hooded. The soldier is pointing at his genitals and grinning at the camera. Mr Blair’s spokesman said: “The previous regime under Saddam carried out actions like this as a matter of policy. “These actions are carried out in direct contravention of all policy under which the coalition operates. “Nobody underestimates how wrong this is and how wrong this is seen to be. “But equally, what should be recognised is that it has been condemned by the US military and they have taken action. “That does not excuse what’s happened but it does set it in perspective.” Arab television stations led their news broadcasts today with the photographs. One network said the pictures were evidence of the “immoral practices” of American forces. Many Arabs are already angry about the US-led occupation of Iraq and violence has being worsening in the country in recent months. “This will increase the sense of dissatisfaction among Iraqis toward the Americans,” said a member of the Iraqi Governing Council, Mahmoud Othman. “The resistance people will try to make use of such painful incidents.” Mr Othman, whose council is the interim governing authority of Iraq appointed by the US, added: “This is a shame on the Americans. We used to criticise Saddam (Hussein) regime regarding the beating of detained people.” CBS Network, the US TV station which published the pictures – taken late last year – said they surfaced after being passed around among troops, one of whom went to his commanding officer. Mr Blair’s human rights envoy to Iraq, Ann Clwyd MP, said of the published photos: “I think they are absolutely terrible. I am shocked.” The MP told BBC Radio 4 that she had previously discussed the treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib with officials in President Bush’s administration. “I was told by a very senior person there ’We don’t do this kind of thing. “Clearly the people in charge did not know this was going on. “A small number of cases, horrible though they are – you cannot compare that with the tens of thousands of people Saddam Hussein was responsible for executing and torturing,” she said. “You can’t make that comparison.” Amnesty International UK director Kate Allen said: “Amnesty International has taken numerous testimonies from Iraqis who allege torture at Abu Ghraib and other prisons, where they are held incommunicado and without charge.” Brigadier General Janice Karpinsky, who ran Abu Ghraib prison for the US Army, has been suspended. In March, the US Army announced that six members of the 800th Military Police Brigade faced court martial for allegedly abusing about 20 prisoners at Abu Ghraib. An incident involving British soldiers photographing the alleged torture of Iraqi prisoners of war hanging in netting from a fork-lift truck came to light in May last year. Allegations surrounding the torture and death of Iraqi civilians in the custody of British troops were reported in February this year. A number of investigations are being carried out by the Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch (SIB) but no British soldiers have yet face a court-martial. A spokesman confirmed eight cases of alleged mistreatment of Iraqis by British personnel were being investigated by the Army’s Special Investigations Branch.
The commander of the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay has been sent to Iraq to oversee the treatment of 8,000 detainees as part of an investigation into torture at a US army-run prison outside Baghdad,
Photographs of the torture shocked the world after they were shown on prime time TV in the US. Six US military police men and women have been charged following the discovery of prisoner abuse. But their families claimed today they were ill trained and are being made scapegoats The charges included conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, assault and indecent acts with another, the military’s term for sexual abuse. According to the charges: Soldiers forced prisoners to lie in “a pyramid of naked detainees” and jumped on their prone bodies. Detainees were ordered to strip and perform or simulate sex acts. A hooded man allegedly was made to stand on a box meals ready to eat, and told that he would be electrocuted if he fell off. A soldier unzipped a body bag and took snapshots of a detainee’s frozen corpse inside. Several times, soldiers were photographed and videotaped posing in front of humiliated inmates. One gave a thumbs-up sign in front of the human pyramid. The documents add to growing accusations of improper prisoner treatment at Abu Ghraib, which was Iraq’s largest and most notorious prison during Saddam Hussein’s rule. US officials confirmed that TV images were authentic and said they had taken several steps to stop the mistreatment of prisoners. Major General Geoffrey Miller has been appointed head detention facilities in Iraq. He had previously overseen the detention facility at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, which holds hundreds of detainees from about 40 countries, many of them from the 2001 war in Afghanistan. The top US commander in Iraq, Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, has ordered administrative penalties against seven officers who supervised the reserve military police unit that was responsible for the Abu Ghraib detention facility. In addition, Sanchez has ordered new training on the requirements of the Geneva Conventions and on the military’s rules of engagement. He also has ordered the creation of a team of officers that would retrain prison guards on conditions of confinement, “with emphasis on treating detainees with dignity and respect,” said the top US military spokesman in Iraq, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt. In January, after a soldier tipped off investigators about abuses at Abu Ghraib, Sanchez suspended 17 soldiers from their duties and ordered separate criminal and administrative investigations. The highest-ranking officer to be suspended was Army Reserve Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade. She was responsible for all US military detention facilities inside Iraq. Relatives of some the the accused soldiers said were being made scapegoats for following orders from officers who actively supported, and even commended, the way they treated the prisoners. Robin Harman said her daughter, Specialist Sabrina Harman, was not properly trained. “She’s being railroaded,” Harman said of her daughter, who before the Iraq war was an assistant manager at a pizzeria. “This kid has never hurt anyone in her life. They took her fresh out of boot camp and threw her platoon over there.” Gary Myers, a lawyer for two, said the prison was set up in such a fashion that the intelligence community had far too much influence. “They were instructing or advising the MPs to create favourable conditions’ for interrogation. Favourable conditions’ were conditions where the detainees were susceptible to providing intelligence information, and that process involved techniques of humiliation.” The soldiers were congratulated by their senior officers, he said. “These guys are being told they are doing a fantastic job for their country, that they are saving lives and to keep up the good work,” Myers said. A soldier accused of abusing Iraqi prisoners of war claimed that his commanders silenced his questions about harsh, humiliating treatment of inmates. In a journal he started after military investigators looking into the abuse approached him in January, Army Reserve Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick wrote that Abu Ghraib prison was nothing like the Virginia state prison where he worked in civilian life. The Iraqi prisoners were sometimes confined naked for three consecutive days without toilets in damp, unventilated cells with floors 3ft by 3ft, Frederick wrote in materials supplied to The Associated Press by a relative. “When I brought this up with the acting BN (battalion) commander, he stated, ‘I don’t care if he has to sleep standing up’. That’s when he told my company commander that he was the BN commander and for me to do as he says,” Frederick wrote. /PA Iraqi Prison Sexual Abuse Photos Mar U.S. Image Fri Apr 30, 2004 08:21 AM ET By Paul Majendie LONDON (Reuters) - Photos of U.S. soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners drew international condemnation on Friday, prompting the stark conclusion that the U.S. campaign to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis is a lost cause. "This is the straw that broke the camel's back for America," said Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the Arab newspaper Al Quds Al Arabi. "The liberators are worse than the dictators." "They have not just lost the hearts and minds of Iraqis but all the Third World and the Arab countries," he told Reuters. The CBS News program "60 Minutes II" on Wednesday broadcast photos taken at the Abu Ghraib prison late last year showing American troops abusing some Iraqis held at what was once a notorious center of torture and executions under toppled President Saddam Hussein. The pictures showed U.S. troops smiling, posing, laughing or giving the thumbs-up sign as naked, male Iraqi prisoners were stacked in a pyramid or positioned to simulate sex acts with one another. Britain has been America's staunchest ally in Iraq but alarm has spread over strong-arm U.S tactics, support for Prime Minister Tony Blair has plummeted and the pictures were widely condemned on Thursday. "When it comes to winning hearts and minds, the U.S. Army hasn't got a clue," wrote the Daily Mirror tabloid, one of several British papers to splash the photos on its front page. "Nobody underestimates how wrong this is," Blair's spokesman told reporters. "Actions of this kind are in no way condoned by the coalition." The publicity could not have been worse in the Arab world with the sexual humiliation depicted in the pictures particularly shocking. "That really, really is the worst atrocity," Atwan said. "It affects the honor and pride of Muslim people. It is better to kill them than sexually abuse them." MUSCLE-BOUND OX Saudi Arabia's English-language Arab News daily said: "The greatest loss the Americans face is to their reputation, not simply in the Middle East but in the world at large. "U.S. military power will be seen for what it is, a behemoth with the response speed of a muscle-bound ox and the limited understanding of a mouse." In Geneva, the International Committee of The Red Cross voiced concern. "We take this extremely seriously. Torture is forbidden in any circumstances of any person detained in the world. Humiliation and degrading treatment is a form of torture," chief spokeswoman Antonella Notari told Reuters. The photographs were splashed across many leading newspapers in Italy, which is anxiously following the fate of three Italians being held hostage in Iraq. "Torture in Iraq: American horrors revealed on TV," the left-wing L'Unita said in a headline while la Repubblica daily said the images were "irrefutable" proof of torture. "It wasn't psychological pressure or simple mistreatment or illegitimate detention as in Guantanamo, but true, classic and irrefutable torture," the paper wrote in an editorial, citing forced, public sodomy as one of the gravest offences. Calling for an independent inquiry, Amnesty International said: "There is a real crisis of leadership in Iraq with double standards and double speak on human rights. "The prison was notorious under Saddam Hussein -- it should not be allowed to become so again," said the human rights pressure group. "Our extensive research in Iraq suggested that this is not an isolated incident," it said. "Detainees have reported being routinely subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during arrest and detention." (Additional reporting by Will Dunham in Washington, Stephanie Nebehay in Geneva, Ghaida Ghantous in Dubai, Shasta Darlington in Italy) US military in Iraq torture scandalPosted on Friday, April 30 @ 10:06:17 EDT Use of private contractors in Iraqi jail interrogations highlighted by inquiry into abuse of prisonersBy Julian Borger, The Guardian Graphic photographs showing the torture and sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners in a US-run prison outside Baghdad emerged yesterday from a military inquiry which has left six soldiers facing a possible court martial and a general under investigation. The scandal has also brought to light the growing and largely unregulated role of private contractors in the interrogation of detainees. According to lawyers for some of the soldiers, they claimed to be acting in part under the instruction of mercenary interrogators hired by the Pentagon. US military investigators discovered the photographs, which include images of a hooded prisoner with wires fixed to his body, and nude inmates piled in a human pyramid. The pictures, which were obtained by an American TV network, also show a dog attacking a prisoner and other inmates being forced to simulate sex with each other. It is thought the abuses took place in November and December last year. The pictures from Abu Ghraib prison have shocked the US army. Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, deputy director of operations for the US military in Iraq, expressed his embarrassment and regret for what had happened. He told the CBS current affairs programme 60 Minutes II: "If we can't hold ourselves up as an example of how to treat people with dignity and respect, we can't ask that other nations do that to our soldiers." Gen Kimmitt said the investigation began in January when an American soldier reported the abuse and turned over evidence that included photographs. "That soldier said: 'There are some things going on here that I can't live with'." The inquiry had centred on the 800th Brigade which is based in Uniondale, New York. The US army confirmed that the general in charge of Abu Ghraib jail is facing disciplinary measures and that six low-ranking soldiers have been charged with abusing and sexually humiliating detainees. Lawyers for the soldiers argue they are being made scapegoats for a rogue military prison system in which mercenaries give orders without legal accountability. A military report into the Abu Ghraib case - parts of which were made available to the Guardian - makes it clear that private contractors were supervising interrogations in the prison, which was notorious for torture and executions under Saddam Hussein. One civilian contractor was accused of raping a young male prisoner but has not been charged because military law has no jurisdiction over him. Hired guns from a wide array of private security firms are playing a central role in the US-led occupation of Iraq. The killing of four private contractors in Falluja on March 31 led to the current siege of the city. But this is the first time the privatisation of interrogation and intelligence-gathering has come to light. The investigation names two US contractors, CACI International Inc and the Titan Corporation, for their involvement in Abu Ghraib. Titan, based in San Diego, describes itself as a "a leading provider of comprehensive information and communications products, solutions and services for national security". It recently won a big contract for providing translation services to the US army. CACI, which has headquarters in Virginia, claims on its website to "help America's intelligence community collect, analyse and share global information in the war on terrorism". Neither responded to calls for comment yesterday. According to the military report on Abu Ghraib, both played an important role at the prison. At one point, the investigators say: "A CACI instructor was terminated because he al lowed and/or instructed MPs who were not trained in interrogation techniques to facilitate interrogations by setting conditions which were neither authorised [nor] in accordance with applicable regulations/policy." Colonel Jill Morgenthaler, speaking for central command, told the Guardian: "One contractor was originally included with six soldiers, accused for his treatment of the prisoners, but we had no jurisdiction over him. It was left up to the contractor on how to deal with him." She did not specify the accusation facing the contractor, but according to several sources with detailed knowledge of the case, he raped an Iraqi inmate in his mid-teens. Col Morgenthaler said the charges against the six soldiers included "indecent acts, for ordering detainees to publicly masturbate; maltreatment, for non-physical abuse, piling inmates into nude pyramids and taking pictures of them nude; battery, for shoving and stepping on detainees; dereliction of duty; and conspiracy to maltreat detainees". One of the soldiers, Staff Sgt Chip Frederick is accused of posing in a photograph sitting on top of a detainee, committing an indecent act and with assault for striking detainees - and ordering detainees to strike each other. He told CBS: "We had no support, no training whatsoever. And I kept asking my chain of command for certain things ... like rules and regulations." His lawyer, Gary Myers, told the Guardian that Sgt Frederick had not had the opportunity to read the Geneva Conventions before being put on guard duty, a task he was not trained to perform. Mr Myers said the role of the private contractors in Abu Ghraib are central to the case. "We know that CACI and Titan corporations have provided interrogators and that they have in fact conducted interrogations on behalf of the US and have interacted the military police guards at the prison," he said. "I think it creates a laissez faire environment that is completely inappropriate. If these individuals engaged in crimes against an Iraq national - who has jurisdiction over such a crime?" "It's insanity," said Robert Baer, a former CIA agent, who has examined the case, and is concerned about the private contractors' free-ranging role. "These are rank amateurs and there is no legally binding law on these guys as far as I could tell. Why did they let them in the prison?" The Pentagon had no comment on the role of contractors at Abu Ghraib, saying that an inquiry was still in progress. ' Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 Reprinted from The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1206725,00.html
|