Torture at The Library of Congress
Torture at The Library of Congress
By Morris Davis
Lynndie England will discuss her biography Tortured: Lynndie England, Abu Ghraib and the Photographs That Shocked the World at the Library of Congress Veterans Forum on Friday August 14 at noon in room 139 on the first floor of the James Madison building.
She is a convicted criminal who was dishonorably discharged, but she’s out of prison and on stage at the Library of Congress. You may recall many of the memorable pictures of the glowing Private England during her tour in Iraq, including the one of her standing next to an Iraqi prisoner, a cigarette dangling from her lip, as she points at the Iraqi prisoner’s genitals as he stands there naked with a sack over his head as he’s forced to masturbate in the presence of GI England and several other nude men. It sure looked like she was enjoying some good times in the picture, so maybe she’ll give more behind the scenes details during her lecture on Friday as she expounds on how she’s a victim who is deprived of veteran’s benefits because of her dishonorable discharge. As she said in an interview published in the West Virginia Metro News on Monday: “Yeah, I was in some pictures, but that’s all it was … I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.” That has to be comforting to those who died because of the wave of anger her snapshots ignited in the Middle East, like the family of Nick Berg who was slaughtered in front of a video camera in retaliation for Abu Ghraib, according to his murderers. America as a whole still pays the price for Private England’s “wrong place — wrong time” misadventure, but that won’t stop the Library of Congress from opening its doors and handing her the mike.
The event is sponsored by the Library of Congress Professional Association’s Veterans Forum and its leader LOC employee and Vietnam Veteran Bob Moore. Veteran Moore has weathered a wave of criticism in recent days, but he remains steadfast in his hatred for Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney and his admiration for Lynndie England’s “guts.”
I am a Library of Congress employee and a veteran.* I retired with an honorable discharge after serving for 25 years in the Air Force. I was the chief prosecutor for the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay for more than two years and I resigned in 2007 in large part because I believe waterboarding is torture and my superiors, Tom Hartmann and Jim Haynes, did not. I believe my views on torture have been clearly expressed, so it should come as no surprised that I am more than a little disappointed that the library that belongs to the United States Congress is hosting one of the most infamous torturers in modern time so she can promote her book. I’m even more disappointed that the event is sponsored by a veterans group. Perhaps I should start a rival group within the LOC called Veterans with Values and our motto will be “we don’t honor the dishonorable.” It doesn’t appear that we’d overlap in any way with Mr. Moore’s group.
Thousands and thousands of honorable men and women have and are serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places. They don’t get book deals and invited to lecture at the Library of Congress. Most of them would be happy with a thank you and a chance at an education or a decent job when the mission is over. It’s a disgrace that the dishonorable profit and that we use government property and resources to glorify the gutless. If you attend the lecture on Friday, don’t save me a seat.
— Moe Davis
*The views expressed herein are my personal views published in my personal capacity.
I agree completely. Miss England is not a victim of anything but her own poor judgement and flawed moral character. The LOC should not be giving this woman a venue to wallow in self-righteous false victimhood.
Amazing decision and has anyone thought of the negative publicity that will accrue to our enemies? Symbolism is important. If Ms England was speaking at a church hall, wherever few would notice.
England’s latest saga sounds like an Onion story. But, distressingly, it is true. There is no shame on her part and it is shameful that there are those who should know better using her dishonorable actions for political points. She has no place in the Library of Congress, or any other honorable institution.
Maybe she’ll share this story, from early in her unit’s deployment, before their arrival at Abu Ghraib:
Corroborated by a separate account from Joe Darby, the Abu Ghraib troop who turned the photo evidence in to Army authorities that led to charges against the group. (The uncle of one would – months later – turn the same pictures over to CBS TV when it became clear the Army wasn’t going to back off prosecuting his nephew and his pals.)
Anyhow, if anyone attends the Library of Congress event, do ask her to share the funny cat story.
I read the book and certainly it is obvious that it was not written by Lynndie England. The author, Gary S. Winkler, tells it like it is and exposes Ms. England as a person who was not fit for military service.
First of all Moe Davis, his name is David Moore. Why do you not at least get that fact right. Mr. Moore is a combat Veteran from the Vietnam War. Where he actually was an enlisted man, who unlike yourself was in a kill or be killed situation. Second,That Ms. England has not been dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Army she is still on active duty with leave. You on the other hand were always an officer who could not be bothered with getting his hands dirty. Real easy for you to feel superior to the actual soldiers who served. Bravo! Does it make you feel like more of an man to pick on a woman, the enlisted who actually fought and served, or just anyone who disagrees with you.
Maybe you should read her book or actually her trial of transcript before you open your mouth and prove how misinformed you are. I am being polite. I should just let the world know that you are lying. That you are defaming the Library of Congress. Where you should no longer be employed.
England and her fellow felons did tremendous harm to the effort of their fellows soldiers and caused untold death and destruction in Iraq. While no one in attendance should throw one at her, hopefully at least someone there will hold up a shoe while she speaks. It is far from the disdain she deserves yet she ought to be shown at least that much.
First, the Library of Congress is not sponsoring the event. An employee organization is and no matter how disagreeable it may be the Library of Congress is not getting itself in the business of censoring its employee organizations – probably a good idea.
Second – From Wikipedia – She has been dishonorably discharged.
“At her retrial, England was convicted on September 26, 2005 of one count of conspiracy, four counts of maltreating detainees and one count of committing an indecent act.Along with a dishonorable discharge, England received a three-year prison sentence on September 27.
England worked in the kitchen of a prison (Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar) from which she was paroled on March 1, 2007, after having served 521 days. She remained on parole through September 2008, when her three-year sentence was complete and she received a dishonorable discharge.
First, the Library of Congress is not sponsoring the event. An employee organization is…
Of course, all the wiggle room fit for the politically correct. And if that employee’s organization happened to be the KKK or Skin Heads the Library of Congress would not hesitate to ban the event as offensive. Well, giving the dishonorable England a forum to claim her victim status is very, very offensive to many of us veterans. But that does not matter, does it?
Daniel you and the Wikipedia website are WRONG!!!!! Lynndie England is still in the U. S. Army on active duty with leave. Get your facts RIGHT!!!!!!!!
What is distressing is that there is no senior NCO, no company grade, field grade, or flag officer who shares her unfortunate distinction as torturer.
I still await the arrest, prosecution of those in that supervisory chain to suffer much greater punishment than SPC England. I want them paraded, stripped, and pilloried for the wanton disregard of the Code of Conduct and the hallowed Army Core Values…
Lynndie was never convicted of torture. That is for the MI, CIA, and OGA. Lynndie was convicted of standing in pictures. Maybe you should read her conviction sheet.
Lynndie only stood in pictures, wow. How do you live with yourself?
Is there a good summation out there that gives an evenhanded account of what happened at Abu Ghraib? I’m very leery of trusting what I read about this issue online because it is so polarized and politicized. The only book that I’ve seen on the topic was about 400 pages or so and I’m not even sure whether that was an evenhanded account or just propaganda from one side. I’m curious what the facts are, but I’d rather not dole out $30 and spend two weeks plowing skeptically through 400 pages of small print that may or may not be objective, just to get what I suspect could be summarized in 10 pages.
LS
Double check that reference above. Are you saying a story related by Lynndie England has no place in a discussion about Lynndie England telling her story? I’d say it’s more applicable to this discussion than whatever fate befell her commanders.
Follow the link – that’s just one excerpt from a long article based on interviews with England and her family and friends and full of quotes from all. I’d warn first that it’s one of the tamest excerpts you’ll find. If you want to argue that’s all typical behavior of junior enlisted military folks be my guest.
I’d like to believe Darby – the guy in the second link I provided – is a more typical Joe.
Please remember that Ms. England did not write the book. The author, Mr. Gary Winkler, was threatned with an injunction by Ms. England’s representative prior to the release of the book. We consider it to be a balanced opportunity for Ms. England to tell her story. The book also relies upon her trial transcripts, testimony of others involved, as well as her own personal artifacts. We have received a lot of positive mail regarding the strength of Mr. Winkler’s research and writing. Unfortunately, Ms. England does not feel comfortable appearing with Mr. Winkler. We regret this decision,but it is her right to do so.
Sorry – I thought I put my name with the posting about the strength of the book. I am Katrina Landon, promotions, Bad Apple Books, LLC.
While I cannot confirm via the LOC web page, I received an e-mail that stated:
Tonight the Library of Congress Professional Association pulled the plug on Lynndie England’s promo event scheduled for noon tomorrow. They cited safety concerns from the backlash as the reason for terminating her appearance.
Associated Press:
Organizers have canceled a lecture at the Library of Congress by the woman who became a symbol of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal after threats caused concerns about staff safety.
Former Army reservist Lynndie England had been scheduled to discuss her biography Friday as part of a veterans forum on Capitol Hill. The book by author Gary S. Winkler is called “Tortured: Lynndie England, Abu Ghraib and the Photographs That Shocked the World.”
In a notice to members, Angela Kinney, president of the Library of Congress Professional Association, says the event was canceled due to staff safety concerns.
David Moore, a Vietnam War veteran and German acquisitions specialist at the library who organized the event, says he had been receiving threats.
—
Hmm, threats, or second thoughts? Only Moore knows for sure. Wish someone would do a FOI request on this. But in the grand scheme of things, it might not be that important considering the time and effort involved. At least the dishonorable England gets one in the loss column in revising her version of history.
“Is there a good summation out there that gives an evenhanded account of what happened at Abu Ghraib?”
No.
Try out my second link above though. Being one guy’s story it’s certainly one sided, but that’s one guy who deserves to be heard. IMHO the fact that he was an Abu Ghraib troop himself is problematic for the grand conspiracy theorists.
It’s interesting that none of the self-righteous folk (e.g. Vito) have followed up on olevet69’s suggestion that there may actually be a chain of command involved in this disgrace. Ms Englnd is no sweetheart, I agree, but she was a small cog in an ugly machine that has profited (and continues to profit) from our willingness to torment the little guys (and gals) while we bend over for Messrs. Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al. They clearly had no shame.
It’s not only free speech that has disappeared from the USA; it’s a shared sense of decency and intelligence.
Arthur,
No arguments here, though I do object to being labeled self-righteous. Would you care to explain that? I’m all for accountability here and all against making England our poster child for that accountability. Do you get that? Or do you have a larger agenda that requires you to attack my objection to England waxing poetic at the Library of Congress.
Do all you can do and be all that you can be in defense of our nation’s core values, but excuse me if I throw up when you elevate Lynndie England to a position of a honorable, credible, and believable spokes-person. The very fact you are even suggesting that is repugnant.
Vito
While we are all outraged about the person that served her time for her crime, what happened to the officers that did the following?
“One night, this Black Hawk landed at about 4 a.m., and a couple guys came in with a prisoner and took him to tier 1, put sheets up so that nobody could see, and spent the rest of the night in there. They told us to stay away, so we did. Then a couple hours later, they came back out. They were like, “The prisoner is dead.” They asked for ice to pack him, and then they said, “You guys clean this up. We werent here. Have a good day.” Got back on the bird and took off, left the dead body right there. Those guys can come in and kill a guy, and theres nothing you can do. Theres no record of them.”
If memory serves correct, after the scandal, the MI COL in command brokered a deal to testify against his Soldiers in order to avoid prosecution. I heard he retired with full benefits and now works for a very senior Army general at a major command.
What’s the lesson here?
“what happened to the officers that did the following”
Better question: What officers did that? What were they officers of?
The AP has picked up the story of the cancellation, as Vito pointed out earlier today. It cites David Moore, a library employee who organized the event, as blaming Moe Davis’ essay at Small Wars Journal for “stirring up much of the opposition.”
Here’s a link to the piece as it appears in Yahoo. It is everywhere, read it in your favorite newspaper. My first Google alert went off on the Billings Gazette version of it.
I would not join David Moore in saying that free speech is dead. Yet I believe I can speak for many of us here in saying that, as much as we oppose the event, we are appalled the outcome is the result of safety concerns arising from threats of violence. Thuggery is unacceptable — over there, and especially over here. Small Wars Journal, and I am confident Moe Davis, a man of great principle, do not stand for that.
Far better that the LOC had come to its senses, evicted the event on principle, and it be held safely in a more appropriate venue. As firmly as I still weigh in with Moe Davis and I’m glad there is no event in the LOC, this is not entirely a good outcome.
We tend to be a fairly pragmatic group here and accept that good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. Welcome, David Moore and LOC, to the challenges faced by our many partners in small wars when attempting to exercise their much more basic freedoms in the face of much greater threats. We hope the police and the library inspector general are quickly successful on your behalf in enforcing the rule of law in our great Nation.
– Bill
Publisher, Small Wars Journal
There’s a reason that privates are privates. And, while I’d expect better, stupid behavior from privates doesn’t come as a shock to me. Further, while I don’t personally appreciate the mutilation of a dead cat or goat, neither do I consider it relevant to the discussions here. I did 5 months over there, and don’t think anyone who hasn’t walked in her shoes has much credibility in criticizing their behavior. And, for what it’s worth, I think it’s a shame – literally – that privates were punished but not their commanders…
As for the LOC appearance; I’d be really disappointed (and quite surprised) if threats originated from SWJ. Presuming she’s done her time for whatever she was accused of, she gets to start over. *shrug* I don’t hold that against her.
When I think back to all the stupid things we did when I was a private, I’m often surprised we lived through it. It’s unfortunate that some are basing the vehemence of their condemnation of her on the (public perceptions of the) consequences of her acts. I’d argue that her acts were the scab on a much deeper wound…
SWJ has, as ever, provoked thought.
Semper cogito…
I don’t mean to suggest that by asking a question that I am entitled to an answer, but it baffles me to think that people who apparently hold passionate views on this issue cannot answer my earlier question.
There seems to be two sides to this issue, with one side holding dear to its facts and the other side clinging to its. There may be some overlap of those facts, some that do not overlap but are not contradictory, and others that are contradictory. It would be nice to get an objective overview of the facts that most people can agree on, rather than having two sides cling to their preferred set of facts and yell past each other.
Greyhawk,
In regard to your question of “What officers?”, here’s some names(just for starters): Cpt. Brinson, Col. Papas, Lt. Col. Jordon.
Cpt. Brinson, Col. Papas, Lt. Col. Jordon arrived on a helo with a prisoner who ended up on ice?
That’s amazingly similar to a story of some OGA guys who did the same thing.
Oh really?? And just how do you know that “said officers”, were on a helo together at all?? And with a prisoner who ended up on ice??
Hi Schmedlap
Apologies if my “no” answer seemed too brief to be accurate. But that’s the answer, and I’ll suggest the lack of other responses supports it.
That said, there are some accounts available on line that can be called “primary sources”. Since those are testimonies of the individuals involved they should be read with reasonable skepticism (hopefully that’s obvious).
A quick (not comprehensive) timeline (why it matters in a moment): The events depicted in the well known Abu Ghraib photos took place in the Fall of 2003. In January 2004 an Abu Ghraib soldier obtained copies of those photos from a fellow soldier and turned them in to CID. Their investigation followed immediately. (That much from the Darby account I linked in my first comment.)
Higher level investigations followed the CID investigation. The most well known by Major General Antonio Taguba resulted in what’s now known as the Taguba Report.
Throughout the period above, the Army briefed the press on a few scant details (“investigating abuse”, etc) of the ongoing investigations. A few other details (“pictures exist”) were leaked. Transcripts of those briefings and a few CNN stories are still available online.
By April ’04 Art 32 hearings for the accused soldiers began. To make a long story very short, on the day the Army determined to move forward with a Court Martial for one of the troops (Ivan “Chip” Frederick), his uncle turned the photos over to CBS news, along with Federick’s own written account of events. Nearly simultaneously Seymour Hersh’s account – based on interviews with Frederick and his civilian attorney and a few selected quotes from Taguba’s classified report – was published. The Army had ‘no comment’ – at least no effective comment. (Anything said would arguably have been prejudicial to defense or led to charges of undue command influence, etc.) This policy could be (and was) portrayed as a “coverup”.
Most of what’s passed since for an accounting of what happened at Abu Ghraib originated in Frederick’s written account, along with a few selected quotes from Taguba’s report.
I submit that the timeline matters because you can now separate accounts of Abu Ghriab into two categories: pre- and post-April ’04. The difference is significant because at that point the story became an historically significant event on a global scale, the magnitude of which the accused did not anticipate (see the England account I linked in my first comment for example. There are others). Post April ’04 no one wrote an unbiased account of Abu Ghraib. Unfortunately, in the US most of that bias was purely political.
Continuing my previous comment…
About the only thing that exists from pre-April ’04 (the only accounts not contaminated by the enormity of the post April story) is the Taguba report itself. It’s since been released via FOIA requests, and in fact is now hosted online at a DoD site here.
More interesting (IMHO) than the report itself are the annexes, which include multiple interviews with the officers and others involved.
Missing from the link above are annexes 25 and 26, the actual initial CID investigation report and the interviews conducted with the soldiers and prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
Taguba described it thusly: “The US Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID), led by COL Jerry Mocello, and a team of highly trained professional agents have done a superb job of investigating several complex and extremely disturbing incidents of detainee abuse at the Abu Ghraib Prison.”
A determined Googler could probably find a FOIA-released copy onlne somewhere. That first draft of history – compiled before these folks knew what was coming – is interesting to say the least.
So if anyone actually is interested in what happened at Abu Ghraib, I’d suggest actually reading the Taguba report (starting with the annexes!) before any other reading on the topic. Most of the selected quotes, mis-quotes, or paraphrasing from it I’ve seen elsewhere seem to somehow miss his main points.
My son was in the Company from the 82d that provided external security for Abu Gharaib at the time of the incidents. They became aware of the problem and reported it — combat troops do not like it when folks in the rear mistreat the prisoners or detainees that said troops have not man handled. The investigation started earlier than most say.
I’ve read the Taquba report. It does not answer the question I asked in November of 2003 — note that date — to wit: “Are they going to court martial the Company Commanders and 1SGs for failure to supervise their people? For allowing them to do this simply because the V Corps CG said ‘I want more intel!'”
I realize their careers were over — but that’s not quite the same thing, is it…
I didn’t expect an answer to the question. Good thing…
SWJ, et al,
Well you’ve been pawns for terrorist enemies of freedom, congrats. Do continue to wallow in your self righteousness. As you lose small wars (not that you’d win “The Big One”) then neurotically look back on it for decades. I think you know the one I mean.
The PVT and the rest of them were following rather detailed orders, which their (purely administrative) female GEN has recently stated they questioned and were informed under the circumstances it was lawful. Or perhaps you believe they received Phd’s in Arab Pyschology on the trip North from Kuwait. The first time stamp was 42 hours after they rolled onto site.
Was it wrong? Yes. It’s all wrong, you morally myopic *****
COL Pappas was the MI CDR who cut a deal to rat his own out, while the junior enlisted swung. The Officer Corps continues to cover itself in shame, which no amount of preening self righteousness can hide. This disgraceful scattering before the light to leave the enlisted to face the consequences is worthy of a small banana republic Army, in fact it reminds me more of the 26th INF Div (Iraq) officers who abandoned their men in the trenches in 91. If you think the left will have any use or regard for you afterwards do think again.
Darby – you are a rat. You ratted your comrades over things that happened under color of orders, and war while you weren’t even present. Your war was simply to rat out the rest who did some of the dirty work.
Darby – you are a rat. You ratted your comrades over things that happened under color of orders, and war while you weren’t even present. Your war was simply to rat out the rest who did some of the dirty work.
That’s not “ratting”, that’s fulfilling a moral obligation to report war crimes and human rights abuse.
Since my last post was deleted, I will reitterate: Not being able to gain necessary intelligence from these terrorist assholes is far more damning than humiliating them. When the needed intel cannot be gleaned from these sources…..THAT is when lives are lost. This is war not a popularity contest. By gaining intel as to what they are planning saves the lives of our troops and the civilian populace. The mere fact that Davis has the unmitigated gall to question the means by which his cozy blanket of freedom is provided for him by our brave men and women in and out of uniform is unthinkable. The presence of interrogators, while repugnant and vile to you and your ilk saves lives and is a necessary evil. If this truth is to much for you then go ahead and snuff it out as you did Englands and my previous post. And you have the nerve to say freedom of speech is not dead? Pick up a weapon and stand a post. A real post, not some backwater potato peeling station staffed by officers like Davis. You have no idea what the daily lives of our troops are like till you have walked a mile in their shoes over there, and certainly NO RIGHT to judge them. Glad you resigned. Thankfully there is no place for the likes of you in the military. Semper Fi!!
Back and forth trumps Freedom of Speech…
I’m so proud of you all…
I won’t be back so save your rant…
Nice to see some new visitors to the site. SWJ was getting bland with all of its reasoned discourse. What a lucky break that this thread suddenly attracted some people who could inject profanity, name-calling, finger-pointing, and other nonsense that has been missing from the site for so long.
It is obvious that England did the stuff she did and all who condemn her are right in doing so. But, given the continued exposing of senior military and civilian government officials involved in the mistreatment and torture of enemy combatants you all might want start looking beyond the “foot soldier”. I am getting the feeling that this blog and those who feel strongly about honor in battle have looked in the wrong direction. I wonder if any of you will ever believe that your commanders and civilian government officials(Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo) committed crimes against the Constitution.
These characters either created, blessed or implemented the use of torture based on the SERE training methods. It is amazing to me that they believed these methods would work to the end they wished to achieve. One must remember that the “torture” training SERE attendees go through was designed to familiarize personnel with what they could expect when captured and that the purpose of the torture was not necessarily for intelligence but also for propaganda (example: McCain’s written statement from Hanoi).
Lets keep a focus on our values – we don’t torture. Those who endorsed using these methods were incompetent, evil or stupid. We cannot let them walk while the Englands of the military are the only ones punished. It’s a black mark on the US military for sure, but it’s even a blacker mark against the rule of law. Why should England be shouted down and vilified when the ones who created and condoned this behavior go un-prosecuted?
A SERE gradute & Vietnam Vet
Jealousy is a bitch…a shame you want to limit freedom of speech over your own anger and insecurities
You may call it anything you wish Schmedlap, (nice name by the way!)but the facts are undeniable. You cannot reason this to death in order to spin it into something its not. The bottom line is harsh interrogation is, and always will be, a necessary evil. If the liberal and self righteous whiners in this country had their way, we would be whipping them with a wet noodle in order to get intel. Again, pick up a weapon, stand a post or walk a mile in their shoes. Otherwise your “reasoned discourse” amounts to nothing more than the errant babblings of those who want to impose their will and ideas (while risking nothing) on those who HAVE sacrificed, and risked everything. Stop attempting to judge those you dont understand and who have been there and experienced a life you obviously have not. You are out of your league and provide little in the way of usable or interesting commentary.
Also, I agree that once again the highers ups (those with the cleanest of hands) have walked while those at the bottom of the ladder got hammered and vilified. Same old story: the highest of the high (Officers on up) walk while those in the trenches get screwed. They blame and burn the grunts in order to cover their tracks. All this to feed and satisfy the liberals and liberal press to get them off the politicians backs.
Wow. Hats off to Moe and the others that helped assure that my government and the minority it actually consists of (LOC this time) can’t tolerate anything they don’t like.. much less discuss or analyze it, or god forbid use the situation to convey what they think is reasoned logic with the party in question or the public!
Pretty hysterical when the LOC was supposed to be a reference for ALL published points of view, eh?
ProudVet,
Did you see me give an opinion either way on Abu Ghraib, let alone judge any of the actors? On the contrary, I asked where we can get more information on the issue. I asked twice and one person responded. As for your advice to me, it seems that you’ve already made a hasty assumption about my background. Perhaps you should take your own advice about “attempting to judge.”
The new visitors who have suddenly shown up to this site have added nothing of value to what could have been a discussion. Granted, it was a pretty provocative, polarizing post that kicked everything off. If that post was so bad, then it should be easy to refute. If it was so clearly correct, then it should be easy to support. Instead, both sides of the “debate” offer up profanity and insults. Take a look at other threads on this blog, over its nearly three year history, and see how often discussions turn in this direction. Rarely. And on those rare occasions, it is because something caught the eye of some people more interested in exchanging insults than ideas – as this thread has apparently done.
Most of the commenters who have taken a side on this topic – both sides – have only come here to voice their displeasure or anger, and levy insults at those who disagree, rather than make a salient point. I stand by my last comment.
Well said Schmedlap, and thank you for pointing out one of our core strengths here. It is very unfortunate that the Johnny-come-latelys waltz in and offer judgment based on their agendas or preconceived notions of what this site is about and what we offer. The last 24 hours is akin to the Jerry Springer crowd showing up at a Charlie Rose interview – some things don’t mix.
@SWJED, Schmedlap…Feld Marshall Von Hindenburg…
You gave a public forum to a man (Davis) with an ax to grind. And grind it did and does, over a lot of raw nerves. This was quite predictable. You also took a polarizing stand yourselves. Did you not?
You are right of course, we do need to have a public debate about interrogations. But we’re not. We’re in the midst of an ongoing witch hunt that was started for PC reasons in 2004, was hyped to incredible heights for political reasons in the election year of 2004, and has now been resurrected so this Wily Loman of a CINC can throw his rabid supporters thirsty for their political opponents (and not so secretly haters of the defenders of this country, in uniform, intel, and the police) blood, and for a few bloody scalps to throw left wing nuts.
That’s why Holder is about to appoint a special prosecutor, so they can distract attention from the rest of the agenda going off the rails.
Welcome to the blood sport of democracy, Gents. If you want scholarly, stay out of it. Especially as the American Republic enters the banana Republic stage.
And don’t you think it’s a bit tone deaf to supress free speech this week? Have you ignored the last few months? Oh wait, you were shocked there were death threats. You been in a coma the last few years?
You’re right, this has been an oasis of scholarship and rectitude. Perhaps you should avoid domestic politics? Because the rule of PC Iron is rusting away and the scaffolding collapsing…and the unquestionable assertion “we don’t torture” is being questioned.
Maybe in an environment where vilification, scapegoat prison terms and disgrace, threats of disbarment, investigations, witchhunts, transparently false denials, and special prosecutors didn’t set the tone…maybe there would be a reasoned debate.
Perhaps you’d like to take up the quest.
But I wouldn’t recommend it.
Peace.
Morris,
In reading your reaction to Lyndie England’s appearance at the Library of Congress, I have mixed feelings. First off, I am a Veteran of the US Air Force, I also spent about a year in Afghanistan (and Iraq for 2 months)as a Contractor for the Army. My capacity as a Contractor was support not Security, a fact I feel I always need to point out due to the stain the behavior of Blackwater and other DoD and State Department Security Contractors have put on civilians working in the two war zones. I served honorably as an enlisted Airman and as a civilian contractor.
I did not spend all of my time in Afghanistan sitting on a FOB (Forward Operating Bases, which are well protected). I spent time traveling around the country doing my job, sometimes with the help of some locals that worked for us. I got a real good look at how that country really is, and I got to know some of the people.
I think we all can learn from what Lyndie has to say because her attitude towards the prisoners she was in charge of looking after is the same as many Americans I talk to each day. A lot of Americans do not see the people whose countries we are fighting in as people. They are “Bad Guy’s”, almost a abstract character of everything they think is wrong in the world. I myself carried some of this view until I got up close and personal with real Afghans. I learned about their culture and the complexity of the current situation in their country. I found most Afghans are very conservative and religious, but would give the last scrap of food to a stranger out of kindness.
My experience has lead me to believe that all wars are wrong and we should do everything in our power to find other ways to resolve our conflicts. Is this goal realistic, probably not, but I no longer want to contribute to the death of anyone anymore. That does not mean I don’t still have respect for our Service men and women and the tough job they are doing.
That being said, I think we NEED to hear from Lyndie. We need to know what she was thinking, and why she did what she did so it never happens again. There are thousands of American men and women serving honorably in the two war zones, many I have personally worked side by side with. You or I do not have to honor Lyndie, but we need to listen or we may see a repeat down the road, and that would not serve us or the people we are suppose to be fighting for any good.
Mr. Davis, all you did was serve to further delay the truth in who all was involved and who was ultimately responsible for the misdeeds at Abu Ghraib. It’s only through intelligent discussion and actually putting everything in it’s real perspective that we find the truth and ultimately stop these types of abuses from happening again.
Funny how you officers who never field have such lofty opinions and then quit when you feel your voiced objections are overruled. Truth be told sir the rest of us hung in there, fought it to the bitter end and we prevailed because we were prepared to pay for the consequences of our actions. You quit, plain and simple.
So the next time you want to show moral indignation, please keep it to yourself so the rest of us can get on with the business of learning the REAL truth so we can stop this type of madness from continuing in the future.
If you’re so heck bent on punishing torturers, why haven’t you had any success with the people from the very command you say you witnessed these types of acts????
Stop burning enlisted servicemembers and go after your own officer corps who are the real culprits in all of this insanity.
Semper Fi!
@Arif
“You also took a polarizing stand yourselves. Did you not?”
Speaking for myself, no. But if that was directed to me, you would not be the first to suggest this. I find that incredible, since I stated no opinion one way or the other.
Other commenters have staked out polarizing positions. To those individuals on either side of the “debate,” I say, “so what?” What facts have been provided by either side to back up their positions? Scant few. A position without backup is just an opinion. Everybody has an opinion and all are equally worthless without some reason to assign greater weight to one over the other. That is why I made two requests for more information, pointing out that I find this issue so polarized and politicized that I do not know whom or what facts to trust. Unfortunately, there was only one taker. As I stated earlier, I am not suggesting that by asking the question that I am entitled to an answer, though I do find it odd that at least two commenters have seen fit to instead “respond” to me for something that I have neither typed nor suggested.
But thanks for injecting more of your opinions into the mix. I will weigh them accordingly.
@Schmedlap,
There are plenty of facts in 256 post which are of course being interpreted a certain way. This as I have said is politics, not an academic debate.
SWJ took a stand or a position if you like when it gave a forum to the accuser of England. And denied her a forum for her side of it. Which someone denied at death threat point.
I do believe the editors denounced England and her actions as well. Than there’s the chem lite line….
Get out of politics, guys. For one thing the line that you’re surprised by the vitriol indicates either 1) you dissemble or 2) you’re detached from life in the USA the last couple of decades.
Please weigh 1) more than 2).
Geeba.