BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out

Subject: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 09:20 AM

To-days papers [UK and Ireland] are splashing out on the trial of the British soldiers in Iraq accused of torturing their Iraqi prisoners.    On seeing the photos,
Blair, says he was shocked and appalled, and the soldiers involved have said,"we were only carrying out orders",.         Now in view of Blair`s tissuse of lies on the Iraq war, I believe the soldiers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Mingulay
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 05:08 PM

Whilst not condoning such actions as are alleged, might this be an eye for an eye situation given the Bible bashing leanings (spin,spin)of our GREAT and GLORIOUS LEADERS (Praise be heaped upon them, along with other things). After all, who knows whom the Iraqui's were torturing before we stopped them.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 05:17 PM

How many other Iraqis not caught on camera by these stupid soldiers,[stupid enough to send their photos in to be processed in an English shop] have suffered a worse fate?.
The orders from the top was for the soldiers to come down heavy on these captives, I don`t see anyone"from the top" on trial.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 05:28 PM

Obeying illegal orders is not any kind of defence, legally or morally. Carrying out an illegal order is almost as serious as giving one.

This episode doesn't sound as if it had anything to do a systematised policy of interogation and torture, unlike Abu Ghraib, but was more a case of bullying and brutality. I'd think that in the circumstances in Iraq at the time that probably would not be official policy. (In some other situations involving the British Army it has undoubtedly been.)

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: greg stephens
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 07:34 PM

I tend to agree with McGrath. Not government policy, but a sadly predictable case of the squaddies getting carried away far from home. Appalling, very sad: but not on a par, for example, with capering about grinning on camera while sawing peoples heads off, or whatever other dismal inhumanities are being practised today.
   I hope they come down heavy on the blokes concerned; I would hope even more they would come down heavier on the officers, but I won't hold my breath.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 07:46 PM

Ard Mhacha is correct.
If this abuse of civilian prisoners has been caught "on camera", how much more is going on undetected

The whole disgusting spectacle is reminiscent of Nazi practices during WW2.
Define terorism!!...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 08:44 PM

Terrorism - killing or injuring non-combatants and causing detruction to civilian property as a way of achieving a political or military objective.

There's an awful lot of it about, and most of it around the world tends to be carried out by people in uniforms, obeying orders, or taking advatage of orders.

In this particular case I'd see it as purposeless brutality, so it might fall outside that definition.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 01:26 AM

Since any information gained through torture is most often useless, I think that it falls into the same category as purposeless brutality.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 05:13 AM

The British troops were given instructions 5 days after these pictures, Major Dan Taylor ordered his men if they caught any looters "to work them hard", Lieut Col Nick Clapham said that this order by Taylor was wrong.
Liberal Democrat spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell questioned wether this was a breach of the Geneva convention, he intends to pursue the matter.

The resulting outcome of the trial will follow similiar lines, the goons obeying the orders of their superior officers will face the consequences while Taylor and his lot will carry on as before.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 07:23 AM

For futher information on torture by British forces Google on to The Guinea Pigs by John McGuffin.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 02:12 PM

"Working them hard" might be an incitement to illegal treatment of prisoners, but it couldn't provide any kind of cover for the kind of stuff seen in some of those pictures.

Two things are often confused when the expression "obeying orders" is brought into play. One is where unwilling subordinates are coerced into acting in a criminal way by orders backed by sanctions. The other is where people take advantage of orders in order to behave in a criminal way. And you have situations where both processes are involved.

...........................

"any information gained through torture is most often useless" - generally speaking that's true, but the purpose of torture isn't just to collect information, it's also a way of supplying stuff that can be used as if it was information for internal purposes.

"Information" doesn't always need to be accurate to be useful. For example the stuff about WMDs was important in helping bring about the war, in spite of the fact that it was mostly total bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: GUEST,John O'Lennaine
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 05:39 PM

As McGrath said, or almost said, if there are photos you can tell who is following orders and who is taking pleasure in causing pain and humiliation.

There is a huge difference, and I would imagine an obvious one.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 07:40 PM

It's an important difference when it comes to dealing with the people at the bottom. But if the people above them are encouraging or colluding in absuses, they are the ones who are primarily responsible - no matter hoiw high in the system they may be. A nod and a wink is equivalent to a direct order.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 04:00 AM

The outcome of the Trial 24-2-05, found the soldiers guilty, sentences to follow later, more cases pending.
No senior officers were found guilty, and also none of the brutalised Iraqis involved were brought before the court to give evidence.

Two Channel 4 [UK] programmes to-night should prove to be interesting, at 8pm "Is torture a good idea?, and at 11.05 Torture, The Guantanamo Way, Recreation of Guantanamo Bay`s torture techniques.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: John O'L
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 07:01 AM

"No senior officers were found guilty"

Well there's a surprise

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: GUEST,Mick Tindell
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 07:42 AM

War is a dirty, grubby affair and things like this will happen. The difference being it is frowned upon in the west while in the east they would be lauded as heroes.

Prepares for Liberal backlash.......

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 08:37 AM

All armies have committed atrocities during the course of combat.
When you send men into situations where they may be killed, they become somewhat touchy.

It's all to easy to judge from the comfort of a peaceful life in a stable country.


Rich M

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Leadfingers
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 08:49 AM

From where I sit , as an ex regular serviceman , the sodiers were stupid , but what about the officers who gave the misleading orders ? All promoted as far as I can ascertain . Where is the justice in THAT situation ??

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Barry Finn
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 09:15 PM

If I'm a CEO of large, very profitable & well connected company trying to do the right thing for the company but fail, do the stock holder's fire the mail clerk or the secretary? Does the newly hired junior assistant have to cry "the devil made me do it", does the doorman have to stand in front of the board of directors? Does the phone operator need to scream in defense "the buck stops here". When the make or break decisions are to be made is it good common business practice to outsource that authority & responsibility to consultants that have conflicting interests in any & all outcomes? It's pretty obvious who should be held accountable & who's at fault but the hammerhead always falls far short of where it should. In the courtroom, if the guilty parties plead "we was just following orders sir" & the chief officers are all on paid vacation on the far side of the globe does that mean justice is truly blind...&...deaf...&...dumb & none have to play the part of the monkeys & step forward so that the rest of society doesn't have to speak, hear or see the truth? If this be the case wouldn't it be logical to conclude that the fighting sold..(out)..iers stand to be held accountable for their superior's policies & actions if it were to be found later in the world court that the US was guilty of crimes against humanity, war crimes & violations of the Geneva Convention. While the grunt stands trial & takes the fall for the present administration, the High Command, the departments of Tits For Tats & Tots For Tits, the secure new branch of the Fatherland For Stupidity, the CIA, the NSA, the paid mercenaries & the hired contractors & all those others with their slight of hands that had an invisible backroom role in these crimes can, as usual, the true criminals keep their hands & boots clean while they wash their faces in the blood troops & their victims? The problem, responsibility & excuse will probably take a new change in course & be heaped upon the governments of Iran, Iraqi, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Palestine (not Israel, shit I thought that was spelled I's'not-real), hell, lets just blame the hole (in the desert) mid east, we've been more or less-Moorish looking in that direction since the Crusades anyway (oh, oh, acid flashback). Then we can add into the receipt for an unusual topping, Cuba, North Korea, Russia & China. Then just think & we'll turn our eyes towards those burning shores of Africa. We can wait them out at no cost & let them starve, rot with disease & kill each other off until they roll over & roll out a welcome mat & ask only for a swift & complete death & someone to sing "Lord, Remember Me " at their wake(UP) & at their burying place sing "We've Been Overcome". How exciting is all this? Talk about 'sport & play' & 'shock & awe'? Whoa, we are having a good time yet? Jesus, Buddha, Allah, Ra, Zeus, the Llama, the goats, the birds & the bees & the rest of the animal kingdom will see it our way (or else) & worship the terrorist's Almighty Dollar.

Reality check, am I really to far out there?

Barry,

burning at the Bush while pissing on the shrub

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Feb 05 - 09:20 PM

No, Barry. That reads just about right.

Its just nobody wants to admit it

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Flash Company
Date: 01 Mar 05 - 10:27 AM

The Duke of Wellington reputedly described his own troops as 'The scum of the earth', and said, 'I don't know what they do to the enemy, but, By God, they frighten me!'
Nothing changes.
My own (very short) stay in Her Majesty's Forces in the '60s was enough to convince me that many stories of bullying are true, and covered up by the officers. I don't really blame the other ranks, but those who give the orders should definitely carry the can.

FC

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Mar 05 - 10:29 AM

Where's Teribus these days....?

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 01 Mar 05 - 11:11 AM

The two programmes on Channel 4 last night explaining the methods used to extract useless confessions from screaming internees, would have earned loud applause from Stalin or Hitler.

It is a pity that the two programmes won`t be seen in the US, but then again listening to the comments of the rock-heads US troops and torturers, would it have made any difference to the brain-washed brigade?

These men who went through this won`t ever forget what was done to them and their sufferings will only fuel the fire against the US for years to come.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: NH Dave
Date: 02 Mar 05 - 03:03 AM

The "torture" that various Iraqi detainees have endured at British or American soldiers' hand is far less than they would have been subject to were they in Sadam's hands, but we claimed we were going to war to rid the area of these abuses.

What is worse though, is that we have shown that we are no better than the former Iraqi secret police, when it comes to treating detainees or POWs, and thse acts have spurred various resistance groups to kidnap and kill US and British nationals, once the word was out.   

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 02 Mar 05 - 03:44 AM

Just a point of clarification: My understanding from the news reports, which is also borne out by the pictures themselves, is that these photos were not "posed for" by the miscreants, and were not taken with their knowledge; but that they were taken secretly by other soldiers, who had been appalled by the behaviour.

This would support the theory that these were one-off cases and not part of a more widespread practice or policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 02 Mar 05 - 03:51 AM

From the evidence in the Trial the photos were to be used by the soldiers as souvenirs of their time in Iraq, one soldier said that he was going to show the photos to his mother.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 02 Mar 05 - 04:41 AM

I stand corrected then.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Terry K
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 04:01 AM

One good thing to come from this thread is McGrath's succinctly accurate definition:

"Terrorism - killing or injuring non-combatants and causing detruction to civilian property as a way of achieving a political or military objective".

The pity of the whole thing is that it works, and has been seen to work time and time again. Spectacularly so, in the case of the ANC and its leader.....

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 05:04 AM

I wonder if ever there were a war conducted honourably and decently -the sort of thing Biggles got involved in. I don't really think the nature of war itself makes that possible.

If you look at that famous proclamation that Pearse read out on the steps of the Dublin Post Office in 1916, there can be fewer more determined statements to conduct a war while retaining human decency.

And yet we end up with all kinds of horrors. No intention of winding anyone up by cataloguing them.

I think the evidence tends to suggest that its not the people - its the practice of war itself.

My dad was a gentleman, but I asked him onetime if he killed anybody in the war. He said , "yeh scores. We were there to kill them, they were there to kill us."

I suspect when you're in a situation where you've seen your friends, the guys you have trained with, blown up in front of your eyes - there is a shift in your perception of the enemy.

Anyway we have punished the men involved in the incident, thrown them out of the service. It's not a good situation. But maybe we're one up on military organisations who promote and defend their torturers.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 07:05 AM

The soldiers involved in the Iraq brutality may have been thrown out of the Army, this certainly wasn`t the case when Peter McBride an 18 year old Belfastman was shot in the back by two Scots Guards.

McBride was stopped by the two soldiers James Fisher and Mark Wright, after being body searched he was allowed to go, McBride hurried away too fast for the trigger happy soldiers who shot and killed him.

Both soldiers were surprisingly found guilty of murder, after their trial in 1995, they were given life sentences, but in 1995 were released from prison, all of this time they were still in the army, despite protests and pleas from the McBride family, both men returned to their regiment.

James Fisher has since been promoted.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 07:08 AM

That should read, after their trial in 1992.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 12:12 PM

And the soldiers who tortured and murdered that poor woman who put a cushion under a dying soldiers head . were they promoted?

I think it was Gerry Adams himself, who said we've all got our losses to mourn. Time to move on.

Lets hope we can.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: ard mhacha
Date: 03 Mar 05 - 02:15 PM

Yes I agree move on, out, and take your government murderers and colluding security forces with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Brit version of, I was only carrying out
From: DougR
Date: 04 Mar 05 - 01:38 PM

British soldiers? Torture? Perish the thought! Only American soldiers are barbarians!

DougR