Pentagon Finally Releases 198 Detainee Photos

While the American Civil Liberties Union – which has fought for the publication of the photos of Bush-era torture in Iraq and Afghanistan since October 2003 – hailed the belated disclosure, it pledged to keep fighting for approximately 1,800 more images the Pentagon continues to withhold, which it believes documents far more graphic detainee torture.

[...]

“It’s most likely the case that these are the most innocuous of the photos, and if that’s true, it’s a shadow of meaningful transparency,” said Alex Abdo, an ACLU attorney who has worked on the photo litigation since 2005.

[...]

While a full accounting of what the photos show remains elusive, the ACLU believes that among the still-suppressed photos are imagery of a female soldier sexually abusing a detainee with a broomstick; an Iraqi civilian farmer executed by US troops while his hands were tied behind his back; and autopsy photos of an Afghan detainee known as Dilawar, whose death was the subject of Alex Gibney’s acclaimed 2007 documentary Taxi to the Dark Side.

[...]

The photos appeared decontextualized, without indication of what specific abuses investigators inspected, where detainees were held, or under what circumstances.

  Guardian

Sort of a document dump, in other words.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Keep Stalling - They'll Never Come Out

A federal court insists it wants the Department of Defense to supplement the 2,100 pictures showing US military abuse of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan with an individual reason for not making each of them public.

Judge Alvin Hellerstein gave a week to the government on Wednesday either to submit a written estimate of how long it might take to comply with the August 2014 ruling and list individual exemptions for the disclosure of the photographs, or to appeal the court’s decision.

  RT

Well, they’ll appeal, of course. Stall. Then appeal. Then stall some more.

Hellerstein ruled in 2005 that the government had to make the pictures public. The ruling was supported by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 2008.

However, a bill passed by the US Congress in 2009 made it possible for the Department of Defense to conceal images it deemed dangerous for Americans. That same year, President Obama denied the release of the photographs on the grounds they would “further inflame anti-American opinion and … put our troops in greater danger.”

Damn the courts. He’s above the law.

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

The Torture Business

Billmon Twitter Acccount

And at Vox.com...

At The Intercept...

In the wake of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s landmark report on the CIA’s post-9/11 torture program, civil rights organizations are calling for those responsible to face immediate legal accountability.

[...]

The report provides proof that detainees were tortured while in U.S. custody, Dixon argued. “These revelations trigger mandatory obligations on the part of the United States to prosecute those who both implemented and designed this torture program at the highest levels,” he said.

  The Intercept

In your dreams.

Also noted were the details of the torture of Abu Zubaydah, one of the first CIA detainees subjected to the enhanced interrogation program. As described in the report, Zubaydah was subjected to repeated waterboarding, physical violence, and extended confinement in a “coffin-size box.” After enduring 17 straight days of torture, he was described as being “completely unresponsive with bubbles rising through his open, full mouth.”

Zubaydah’s torture reduced him to a state of total submissiveness.

[...]

[...]

Reprieve is calling for bringing the architects of the terror program to justice, stating that despite the release of this report, “those responsible for signing off on [abuse] are still being feted on book tours and talk shows. We are still a long way from acknowledging the horrors of the CIA’s torture program, and achieving real accountability.”

[...]

Lawyers at the Center for Constitution Rights are dubious, however, about the prospects of the Obama Administration pursuing criminal charges against those responsible for torture, calling instead on international courts to take steps to ensure accountability. “[I]f the [U.S.] government continues to refuse to hold them accountable, they must be pursued internationally under the principles of universal jurisdiction,” the group said in a statement.

A verbal chastisement is likely. Will that do?

Also, the Washington Post has a graphic list of then CIA Director Michael Hayden's serial lies regarding the torture program, as revealed by the torture report.  

Finally, from Yahoo News Service...

Detainee Portraits

Why do they hate us?

FOIA Suit for Release of Detainee Abuse Photos

Why are they called detainees? Are they not prisoners?

Last week, US District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein scheduled a hearing on the matter for September 8 and said he would allow the government to submit additional evidence to justify the withholding of the pictures before he renders a decision. But he also signaled that he may ultimately order the Department of Defense to release the abuse photographs, stating in a 21-page ruling that the government did not submit evidence to back up its 2012 claims that releasing the photographs would endanger national security and the lives of US military personnel.

[...]

Obama was pressured by Bush-era holdovers at the Defense Department to withhold the photographs and, going against his own promises of transparency — "The government should not keep information confidential… because of speculative or abstract fears," he'd said months earlier — he reversed his stance.

"The publication of these photos would not add any additional benefit to our understanding of what was carried out in the past by a small number of individuals," Obama told reporters in explaining his flip-flop. "The most direct consequence of releasing them, I believe, would be to further inflame anti-American opinion and to put our troops in greater danger."

  Vice News

“Carried out by a small number of individuals.” And ordered to be carried out by an even smaller number who have yet to answer for it. I won’t hold my breath.

A US official told VICE News that government attorneys would likely argue next week that the photographs could "lead to a violent reaction" by Islamic State insurgents, [...]

What? Because they aren’t already violently reacting to our behavior???

[...] who have reportedly subjected American captives to CIA interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, a detailed description of which is contained in the memos Obama released in 2009.

The fear, the US official said, is that the "terrorists will parade their victims around" in the same manner US soldiers did with the detainees in their custody.

How dare they do to ours what we have done to theirs?

In that regard, the US official said, the photographs become nothing more than a propaganda tool for terrorists.

As if they needed more.

No, the only people who are still unconvinced of the nature of the US military assault on Iraqis are Americans. And if the government/military learned any lesson in Viet Nam, it was that you don’t want to show the American public what is really going on.

Makes You Proud, Eh?

After the Supreme Court ruled last month that for-profit corporations like Hobby Lobby should be considered "persons" under a law intended to protect religious liberties, the Obama administration said this week that Guantanamo detainees should not be.

As "nonresident aliens outside the United States sovereign territory," Guantanamo detainees "are not protected person[s] within the meaning and scope" of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Justice Department lawyers argued in a filing on Tuesday evening.

The government lawyers were responding to an emergency request from attorneys for Guantanamo detainees asking a federal judge to allow their clients to pray communally during Ramadan.

  HuffPo

WTF?

Former Guantanamo detainee Moazzam Begg has been arrested in the UK along with two other men and a woman. The four are being held on suspicion of Syria-related terrorist charges in central England, according to police.

Begg was detained on suspicion of “attending a terrorist training camp and facilitating terrorism overseas,” according to West Midlands police.

[...]

Police said that the arrests didn’t necessarily mean the suspects were guilty of any crime.

“We would take this opportunity to remind you of the requirement to report responsibly, that this is an arrest, not a charge, and that our naming does not imply any guilt,” police said.

  RT

In 2001 Begg and his family left for Afghanistan, where he says he worked on aid projects until the US bombing, when he took his wife and three children to Pakistan. He was released from Guantánamo in 2005 without charge, and returned to Britain.

Begg was one of several British men who sued the British government for damages over their detention in Guantánamo. The government settled the case.

[...]

In January Begg condemned Britain's approach to Syria and the alleged criminalising of those who go out to fight there. He wrote: "It is not hard to understand why Muslims would want to go out to Syria to help. Scores of them go every month on humanitarian aid missions and face endless questioning at ports by British police under schedule 7 anti-terrorism powers. It is also understandable why people want to go out and fight for what they believe is a just cause, even if the wisdom of them doing so can be questioned."

[...]

Begg had written about meeting MI5 in October 2012 to discuss his trips to Syria and said he believed the UK's domestic security agency had no objection.

He wrote about visiting Syria that year and said he was researching "several leads regarding British and American complicity in rendition and torture in Syria". He was stripped of his UK passport after visiting Syria.

Begg said he was stopped by police at Heathrow airport in 2013 and told that his passport was being confiscated as it was "not in the public interest" for him to travel.

A Home Office order given to him at that time stated that he had been assessed as being involved in terrorist activity because of an earlier visit to Syria.

Begg wrote that the removal of his passport was politically motivated: "I am certain that the only reason I am being continually harassed – something that began long before any visit to Syria – is because Cageprisoners and I are at the forefront of investigations and assertions based on hard evidence that British governments, past and present, have been wilfully complicit in torture."

  The Guardian

He Calls Me Bill

An active duty Army colonel testified Tuesday that the three-star general who headed the training mission in Afghanistan made him retract a request for an inspector general's investigation into corruption and horrible conditions at a U.S.-funded Afghan military hospital. Col. Mark Fassl, who was inspector general for the training command, said he was shocked when Lt. Gen. William Caldwell cited the then-upcoming 2010 congressional elections and asked, "How could we ... make this request with elections coming? He calls me Bill."

Fassl said he believed this was a reference to President Barack Obama.

[...]

In September 2011, The Wall Street Journal reported from Kabul that U.S. officers found that patients at the hospital were routinely dying of simple infections and starving to death, while corrupt doctors and nurses demanded bribes for food and basic care.

[...]

Retired Army Col. Gerald Carozza Jr., who was chief of legal development assisting the Afghan Army and defense ministry, also said Caldwell expressed concern that the request was too close to the 2010 congressional elections. But Carozza added that in his view, Caldwell "did not want the request to go to the DOD IG (Defense Department inspector general) at all."

"The general did not want bad news to leave his command before the election or after the election," Carozza's statement said.

[...]

[Rep. Jason] Chaffetz [R-Utah ] introduced a Sept. 12, 2011, memo from the training command that he described as an attempt to destroy evidence. The memo ordered destruction or deletion of unofficial audio and video recordings and photos of patients and conditions at the hospital.

[...]

”The lack of transparency with lawmakers, the inspector general, and the American people is stunning."
  CNS

Suddenly the Republicans care about millitary coverups and corruption in the “War on Terror.”

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Oh, For the Love of Pete

Hundreds of protesters have clashed with police and security forces in Afghanistan in a second day of angry demonstrations over reports that copies of the Quran were burnt at an airbase used by NATO and coalition troops.

[...]

"People are marching towards Kabul. Police are trying to stop them. We have sent more reinforcements to the area," the spokesman said.

  alJazeera

I can't believe they're still resorting to Koran burning. What could possibly be the reason?  Really.  Wouldn't it be wiser to lace them with some biological like anthrax and pass them out like blankets to the American Indians?

The US embassy said on Wednesday it was locked down and had suspended all travel in Afghanistan.

[...]

Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, issued an apology for the "inappropriate treatment" of Islam's holy book at the base and backed General John Allen's call for "swift and decisive action to investigate this matter".

"These actions do not represent the views of the United States military. We honour and respect the religious practices of the Afghan people, without exception," he said.

Isn't that obvious? I mean, we're constantly saying Islam is the reason we're at war.

Carsten Jacobson, a spokesman for the NATO-led international force in Afghanistan, said an investigation had been launched into the issue and preliminary information showed that Quran copies had not been burned.

"Fortunately for all of us, local workers recognised the type of material and intervened. Actually the disposal process was stopped in time but it led to protests over the day. As far as we know, and the investigations are ongoing, they were not burned. But we have to wait for the results."

Which does not explain how the story got out (some Afghan workers found charred remains in the rubbish) or why Leon Panetta would apologize.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Detainee Abuse Heard in Court!

Oh. In Pakistan.

Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- Seven men detained by Pakistan's spy agency, the ISI, appeared in court Monday in a landmark case that places one of the nation's most powerful institutions under the scrutiny of its highest court.

The men -- who appeared to be in pain and poor health -- hobbled into the courthouse, surrounded by dozens of armed police officers and family members. Several of the detainees covered their faces. At least two carried urine drainage bags in their hands.

[...]

A lawyer representing Basit and the six others detainees argues that they were arrested without due process and injured while in Inter-Services Intelligence custody since 2010.

[...]

ISI attorney Raja Muhammad Irshad offered an explanation for the detainees' condition. "You can imagine, when somebody is in custody or jail, you can't have the facilities you have at home," he told CNN after Monday's hearing.

[...]

Pakistan's Supreme Court ordered the government to give each detainee a medical exam and report the results in four days. The court also ordered the spy agency to produce all documents related to the detention of the men by the first week of March.

Monday's hearing came after the court gave the spy agency a deadline to bring the detainees to court.

[...]

The ISI has also been ordered to explain the deaths of four other detainees.

[...]

The men were initially arrested in 2007 and 2008 and accused of being suspects in militant attacks targeting army bases. They were acquitted and freed in 2010, then detained again by ISI.

The ISI's attorney has said all 11 detainees -- the seven who remain in custody and four who died -- were detained legally under the Army Act, a law that says the army can detain men on suspicions of terrorism or if they are deemed to be a danger to the state.

The Supreme Court case breaks new ground in that the ISI has long been thought untouchable. Legal proceedings in the nation's highest civilian court could expose the inner workings of the secretive agency like never before. Few people have ever challenged the ISI, Pakistan's most feared and shadowy institution. The spy agency has been accused of backing and toppling politicians, using militant groups as proxies and backing extrajudicial killings.

  

So, it looks like we could simply exchange the letters CIA for ISI in this story and still be accurate with one exception: the CIA would never have to explain itself in an American court. There will be no day in court for American detainees. 

It is virtually impossible to imagine the U.S. Supreme Court ordering the CIA to disclose documents about its treatment of detainees or, even more unrealistically, to permit the victims of CIA abuse to have their grievances heard in court. Anyone who doubts that can simply review the past decade of full-scale immunity bestowed by the Justice Department and subservient American federal courts on all executive agencies in the War on Terror. We should think about that the next time some American pundit, politician, or media figure righteously holds forth on how undemocratic and oppressive is Pakistan as opposed to the U.S.

Oh, no. Let's don't.

Speaking of American justice and Pakistan, Eric Lewis has an Op-Ed in today’s New York Times – under the headline: “Britain Shouldn’t Aid A Lawless America” — detailing the plight of two Pakistani rice merchants who were detained by British forces in Iraq 2004 when they were on a business trip to Iran, then turned over to the U.S. and shipped to Bagram, where they have been held for the last seven years without charges of any kind. Since then, the two nations have played a shell game as the men’s relatives try to secure their release, with the British government insisting to British courts that they can do nothing because they’re in American custody, while the American government argues to its courts (thus far successfully) that the men have no legal rights because they are being held “in a war zone” (which they were taken to by the U.S.). For an appreciation of the lowly depths to which American justice has sunk, that Op-Ed is worth reading.