« Follow The Leader | Main | He Used To Write Books! »
Nothing To See Here
Somebody tell Martin Peretz:
The prisoner, a slight, 22-year-old taxi driver known only as Dilawar, was hauled from his cell at the detention center in Bagram, Afghanistan, at around 2 a.m. to answer questions about a rocket attack on an American base. When he arrived in the interrogation room, an interpreter who was present said, his legs were bouncing uncontrollably in the plastic chair and his hands were numb. He had been chained by the wrists to the top of his cell for much of the previous four days. . . .I blame Newsweek. Let's also note that "In sworn statements to Army investigators, soldiers describe one female interrogator with a taste for humiliation stepping on the neck of one prostrate detainee and kicking another in the genitals."At the interrogators' behest, a guard tried to force the young man to his knees. But his legs, which had been pummeled by guards for several days, could no longer bend. An interrogator told Mr. Dilawar that he could see a doctor after they finished with him. When he was finally sent back to his cell, though, the guards were instructed only to chain the prisoner back to the ceiling. . . .
Several hours passed before an emergency room doctor finally saw Mr. Dilawar. By then he was dead, his body beginning to stiffen. It would be many months before Army investigators learned a final horrific detail: Most of the interrogators had believed Mr. Dilawar was an innocent man who simply drove his taxi past the American base at the wrong time.
May 20, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345160fd69e200d8347b1a2369e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Nothing To See Here:
Comments
Matthew,
You're irresponsible reporting of these liberal "facts" will only embolden our sworn enemies. I hereby revoke your 1st amendment rights.
Posted by: drjimcooper | May 20, 2005 12:08:18 AM
Should be carved into the keystone of the George W. Bush Presidential Library. Though it be my last act, I would do it myself with a bucknife. I look at thr top of this administration, and it is most in the character of Bush to prove his manhood in such a manner as in approving this policy. Cheney & Rumsfeld have less need to prove theirs.
I am ashamed & sorry. This is my country that has been dishonoured, and I want revenge.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | May 20, 2005 12:25:09 AM
Darn it Matt, you libruhl freedom-loathing traitor, don't you know that you're sabotaging the cause of worldwide democracy and freedom here? How can you spread this commie pinko propaganda from the NY Times? You and Newsweek, tsk tsk-- don't you know that truth is relative, facts are subordinate to the ideology of the Bush-Wilsonian democracy-spreading machine?
You, Matthew Yglesias, have therefore been appointed as the official target of the Two Minute Hate. You have been sentenced to a 5-year term as Favorite Liberal Punching Bag to Fox News, and are hereby remanded to the custody of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter for your "reeducation." You will gain parole upon confirming the absolute presence of Weapons of Mass Destruction in the US arsenal-- er, buried under Saddam's backyard, on national television.
Posted by: Wes Ulm | May 20, 2005 12:34:20 AM
Ugh-- it gets even worse. Here's the full paragraph from the Peretz article that Matt excerpts at the bottom:
"In sworn statements to Army investigators, soldiers describe one female interrogator with a taste for humiliation stepping on the neck of one prostrate detainee and kicking another in the genitals. They tell of a shackled prisoner being forced to roll back and forth on the floor of a cell, kissing the boots of his two interrogators as he went. Yet another prisoner is made to pick plastic bottle caps out of a drum mixed with excrement and water as part of a strategy to soften him up for questioning."
And more: "Sometimes, the torment seems to have been driven by little more than boredom or cruelty, or both."
Remember that the interrogators knew a priori that the poor guy Dilawar was innocent. He was just a convenient, powerless target.
Note, too, that this is an *8-page article*, and all of this represents the tiny fraction of what we *do* know about the conditions in Afghanistan, in Guantanamo Bay, and at Abu Ghraib. It was bad enough when both the US and Britain were besmirched by the Iraqi prison scandals, but what's happening in Afghanistan seems even more appalling. At least some members of the staff at Bagram-- like Sgt. Yonushonis in the article-- had the decency to voice their disgust.
Posted by: Wes | May 20, 2005 12:49:32 AM
Because one dead taxi driver is worth more than the lives of all the soldiers saved by interrogation: Just as long as the soldiers are American!
Posted by: Al | May 20, 2005 12:50:22 AM
Because one dead taxi driver is worth more than the lives of all the soldiers saved by interrogation: Just as long as the soldiers are American!
Screw you, Stalker.
Posted by: Al | May 20, 2005 1:03:22 AM
This article is in the best liberal tradition of guilty until proven innocent. Typical left-wing media.
Posted by: Al | May 20, 2005 1:05:17 AM
Nonetheless, there do appear to be at least a few cases in which guilt was proven, and the offending soldiers appropriately punished. Entirely as it should be. One hopes that our domestic prison system would do so well to punish abusive guards.
Posted by: Al | May 20, 2005 1:12:57 AM
Ah, I'm glad to see Minister of Information Al has returned.
He must be disappointed that his opportunities to grovel at the foot of power are not as great in the US as they were for his counterparts in Saddam's Iraq or the Soviet Union. But perhaps that will change, and Al will get to do all the bootlicking his heart desires.
Posted by: grh | May 20, 2005 1:44:01 AM
All joking aside, that article was a pretty horrific thing to read.
Posted by: Ethical Werewolf | May 20, 2005 1:45:37 AM
How is it that sworn statements from Army officers to other Army officers are part of a "left-wing" narrative -- and that completely unverifiable stories from milblogs in Iraq are the unassailable word of God?
Posted by: curious | May 20, 2005 2:06:18 AM
All joking aside, that article was a pretty horrific thing to read.
Yes. And note Al's immediate response: Typical left-wing media.
As I've said before, Al is useful because he illustrates so clearly what it would be like to live in Saddam's Iraq or the Soviet Union. For instance, in a similar situation in Saddam's Iraq, the Iraqi Als would have said EXACTLY the same thing. Well, except for one word -- the Iraqi Als would have called it "typical Zionist media."
The important thing for all the world's Als is to find some boots, somewhere, to lick. Certainly our own Al here isn't picky as long he can lick SOMEONE'S boots all day long. The boots here in America may not be as tasty as they were for Al's counterparts in Baathist Iraq, but hopefully (from Al's perspective) that will change.
Posted by: grh | May 20, 2005 2:31:54 AM
On the same page as abuse-scandal story (by the way: ugh) notice Friedman column ("The Best PR: Straight Talk") with lines like this:
We are spending way too much time debating with ourselves, or playing defense, and way too little time actually looking Arab Muslims in the eye and telling them the truth as we see it.
They're not directly related stories, but um, Tom, maybe looking Arab Muslims "in the eye" and berating them for their nihilistic passions (which are certainly not justified) is a little difficult when our soldiers have such a penchant for genital stomping...
(ps: now that Safire's gone, does Friedman feel he is personally responsible for making up what's now lacking in the trite-&-obfuscating quotient?)
Posted by: FreeMan | May 20, 2005 3:52:18 AM
I always looked back on things like the torture in the suppression of the Filipino insurgency with a quiet faith that we've moved beyond that. Now it seems like we're determined to prove that we're worse than ever.
Donald Rumsfeld, do you have anything to say to Shahpoor, Dilawar's brother? What would you tell him if you met him?
Posted by: Julian Elson | May 20, 2005 6:06:04 AM
Shorter Al: If Bush is in charge, all is right in the world. Truth, Justice, Democracy!
Posted by: Al Gore | May 20, 2005 7:43:31 AM
Read the report and then look at this news at WaPo - 'Army Warns Iraqi Forces On Abuse Of Detainees':
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp...5051901863.html
'U.S. officers say they regularly warn the Iraqis that failure to curtail abusive behavior could tarnish the image of the new security services, risking a loss of Iraqi public support and jeopardizing U.S. and other foreign assistance.'
I wonder why the Iraqis don't listen to that good advise? The message from the U.S. is clear and simple:
'Don't behave like we do'
Posted by: Gray | May 20, 2005 7:50:48 AM
Sry, ruined the link. Here's the complete one:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/19/AR2005051901863.html
Posted by: Gray | May 20, 2005 7:52:57 AM
Shorter Al: Sometimes you gotta break some eggs to make an omlet. Al, interrogation doesn't produce useful information; it's used to intimidate, not to learn.
Posted by: blogsy mcblog | May 20, 2005 9:21:32 AM
Translation from Alese into American: You've got to torture innocent people to death to spread democracy. All hail the glorious leader!
Posted by: Michael Farris | May 20, 2005 9:28:50 AM
After quoting an excerpt from the same story, Armando of dailykos states:
The story precludes Newsweek snark.
You should have refrained from the same.
Posted by: Ugh | May 20, 2005 9:54:38 AM
How is it that sworn statements from Army officers to other Army officers are part of a "left-wing" narrative -- and that completely unverifiable stories from milblogs in Iraq are the unassailable word of God?
Nobody said they are the "the unassailable word of God." Nonetheless, they aren't accusing anybody of horrific crimes, now are they? Thus, "guilty until proven innocent" isn't exactly a concept that makes sense when applied to milblogs.
I thought that the concept that Howard Dean USED TO espouse - that we should consider everyone innocent until PROVEN guilty - is pretty useful (as we all know, Howard Dean now only thinks this should apply to minor criminals like Osama bin Laden; not to the most evil people like Tom DeLay). I would certainly apply it to all people accused of committing crimes (although not to enemy combatants). But that is not a concept that the Left seems to apply to American soldiers any more. So now we know what the Left really thinks: enemy combatants and OBL - innocent until proven guilty; Tom DeLay and American soldiers - guilty until proven innocent.
Posted by: Al | May 20, 2005 9:55:08 AM
Shorter Al: Look over there!
Posted by: Michael Farris | May 20, 2005 10:02:16 AM
I thought that the concept that Howard Dean USED TO espouse - that we should consider everyone innocent until PROVEN guilty - is pretty useful
hey Al, where are the WMDs ?
Posted by: cleek | May 20, 2005 10:10:58 AM
Sometimes you gotta break some eggs to make an omlet. Al, interrogation doesn't produce useful information; it's used to intimidate, not to learn.
As I said above, there does appear from the story that some of the soldiers have been proven guilty of crimes and appropriately punished. As it should be.
Do I think some of the techniques described in the article are immoral? Yeah.
Do I think some of the techniques described in the article are counterproductive? Yeah.
Do I think that some of the techniques described in the article are illegal, and that those proven to have engaged in them should be punished? Yeah.
But I think that what is described in the article is typical of the entirety of the military? No. There is certainly no evidence for that.
And do I think that EVERYTHING described in the article is immoral, illegal, or counterproductive? No. And while everyone is entitled to their opinions on the morality of the various techniques, I am not knowledgable enough about what techniques are productive in terms of gathering intelligence and which are not; frankly, I doubt whether you are knowledgable about that too.
Posted by: Al | May 20, 2005 10:14:43 AM
Perhaps now's the time to reconsider the treatment and prosecution of our fellow citizen John Walker Lindh.
http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/washington_lawyer/may_2005/stand.cfm
Posted by: fnook | May 20, 2005 10:17:37 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.