US Soldiers- Iraqi Photos...
-
-
-
The american r psycho!
-
the liberators are worse than the dictators...
-
i suspect these haf been doctored... i mean wow. who on earth would do all these and take fotos!
-
the americansOriginally posted by wuming78:i suspect these haf been doctored... i mean wow. who on earth would do all these and take fotos!
-
Nothing surprising. -
i think the last few photos of yanks raping iraqi women are 'staged'
i guess they are pornstars wannabes -
The series of the male and female soldiers and with the naked detainees I think are true. There are already charges brought against them I believe.Originally posted by wuming78:i suspect these haf been doctored... i mean wow. who on earth would do all these and take fotos!
The "rape" photos are staged, the uniforms and some details don't look right for the current US occupation forces in Iraq.
The last 2 pics were quite well-documented, were taken soon after the fall of the Saddam regime. The naked men were apparently looters who were caught, stripped and made to march around before being released, still naked.
Well such photos are actually quite common, but to see them coming from the US military, which always prides itself as "defender of democracy", "fighter for the oppressed" and "liberators", just elicits a response from me. -
You're right. I received one SPAM email regarding rape of IRAQI women a few months ago. And its a paid porn website. There are many such rape fantasy websites on the net, so don't be fooled. So this person who setup this news page is misinformed. I don't know about the others though.Originally posted by Prodigy:i think the last few photos of yanks raping iraqi women are 'staged'
i guess they are pornstars wannabes -
oh, so its true!Originally posted by Hornet145:You're right. I received one SPAM email regarding rape of IRAQI women a few months ago. And its a paid porn website. There are many such rape fantasy websites on the net, so don't be fooled. So this person who setup this news page is misinformed. I don't know about the others though. -
oh, so its true!Originally posted by Hornet145:You're right. I received one SPAM email regarding rape of IRAQI women a few months ago. And its a paid porn website. There are many such rape fantasy websites on the net, so don't be fooled. So this person who setup this news page is misinformed. I don't know about the others though. -
You'll be surprised wuming! Read on!Originally posted by wuming78:i suspect these haf been doctored... i mean wow. who on earth would do all these and take fotos!
-----------------------------------------
Is it in anyone to abuse a captive?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3683115.stm
By Ryan Dilley
BBC News Online
Photographs appearing to show a British soldier abusing an Iraqi man may still prove false, but coalition troops have certainly mistreated captives on other occasions. Should we be surprised?
"Their boredom had driven them to ever more pornographic and degrading abuse of the prisoners," said a horrified psychologist, Philip Zimbardo.
This exclamation of disgust was not directed at the US soldiers who took snapshots of Iraqi prisoners squirming naked at Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad. Nor was it directed at British servicemen allegedly photographed first urinating on and then beating a captive in a lorry in southern Iraq.
Professor Zimbardo was instead disturbed by the spiralling sadism of group of ordinary male students he had recruited to play prison guards in a two-week scientific study he had devised.
So cruelly did some of the young men begin to treat the inmates - also students picked at random from a pool of sane volunteers - that Zimbardo closed his "prison" after just six days.
The Stanford Prison Experiment - conducted in 1971 - is seen as a breakthrough in understanding how ordinary, decent people can sometimes behave with extraordinary malice.
"It's a touchstone," says Professor David Wilson, a criminologist, who once governed some of the UK's most challenging prisons.
"If you give a person power over someone who is powerless, someone who has been demonised or made to seem less human, then that absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Professor Wilson says that in devising a humane regime for a unit housing particularly violent offenders at Woodhill Prison, he took care to remind his warders that the hostile inmates were still deserving of dignified treatment.
"I had to be really be up-front about what was acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in a situation in which professionalism could have easily been forgotten."
He says that the disturbing photos of hooded Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison - pictures whose authenticity is not in doubt - suggest that the American jailers had crossed this line and were dehumanising their charges.
"By hooding the prisoners, by hiding their faces, they were denying them individuality. This makes abusive treatment more likely. Just as very violent offenders often mask the faces of their victims before carrying out attacks."
Those linked to the photographs were reservists (even a man who is a prison officer in civilian life), not hardened fighters. So is there the potential for such barbarity present in us all?
"Not every person would act like that," says historian Christopher Browning, who researched the activities of a group of unremarkable World War II German reservists - who went on to massacre many thousands of Jewish villagers with little or no coercion from their officers.
The men were not Nazi zealots fired by anti-Semitic hatred, nor were they career soldiers hoping to impress their superiors, and yet they committed horrific and bloody war crimes.
"Not all the reservists went along with the killings. But the majority of ordinary people can be induced to go along with a group."
Mr Browning says that ordinary people can all too easily adopt the brutal "guard culture" seen in the Stanford experiment.
"You have to work very hard with a lot of training and supervision to stop this culture spinning out of control."
Mr Browning notes that the US troops - just like the Germans he studied - were not made callous by battlefield trauma. "This wasn't battlefield frenzy, where discipline breaks downs in the heat of war. These weren't combatants, taking sniper fire in Fallujah."
He argues that it is more subtle signals from very senior figures which can have the most profound effect on the behaviour of soldiers on the ground, setting the scene for abuse without explicitly ordering it.
"In the War on Terror, the US has set limits on the Geneva Convention to minimise the protections it offers, think of Guantanamo. These things filter down from the very top."
Mr Browning says that by casting military captives not as prisoners of war, but as continuing threats and sources of information "it was predictable that these abuses would occur".
Donning a military or any other uniform can increase the risks of just such a sliding of personal morals, says Dr Andrew Silke, lecturer in police studies at the University of Leicester's Scarman Centre.
"Psychology has long known that groups are very dangerous. People can do things in a group they'd never do as an individual. They can do an awful lot of damage because the constraints they feel are diminished."
But psychologist Dr Patrick Tissington - himself a former British Army officer - says that the military can use loyalty to a group to encourage decent, rather than brutal behaviour.
He says that "without supervision, the Stanford guards quickly turned into nasty pieces of work", but where members feel a great loyalty to a group and a concern for the standing of that organisation they will want to behave impeccably.
Dr Tissington says that soldiers will frame their own behaviour so as not to bring shame on their comrades, their predecessors, nor the recruits to come. The British regimental system has long been praised for binding soldiers very tightly to small units with long histories and traditions.
Such a burden of expectation may be vital. The Stanford experiment came to some grim conclusions: "About a third of the guards were hostile, arbitrary, and inventive in their forms of prisoner humiliation. These guards appeared to thoroughly enjoy the power they wielded, yet none of our preliminary personality tests were able to predict this behaviour." -
USA, the nation tat emphasize so much on human right n keep urging other countries such as CHina, Africa to practice human right but they themselve r ruining the right of human... They dun have the right to talk abt human right to any other countries...
-
Whether anyone "has the right" to be "urging other countries" to practice whatever is one thing. (If doing X is really wrong, then even someone who is guilty of doing X would still be right to condemn the doing of X. He would be inconsistent and perhaps even hypocritical; and we won't be much inclined to listen to him...but that doesn't detract from the fact that he would still be right to condemn the doing of X.)Originally posted by Ogbunwezeh:USA, the nation tat emphasize so much on human right n keep urging other countries such as China, Africa to practice human right but they themselve r ruining the right of human... They dun have the right to talk abt human right to any other countries...
But there is an important difference isn't it? The fact is that in the liberal democracies, no matter how much practise falls behind rheotric, there is actually a genuine and very public concern to live up to rhetoric. This Swedish blogger said it nicely (http://www.johannorberg.net/):09:51 - TORTURE IN IRAQ - PAST AND PRESENT: The fact that several American soldiers have tortured Iraqis in the old prisons of Saddam Hussein is disgusting. It proves once again that war is hell, and that democracies are also capable of horrible acts. And it reinforces the need for stronger internal controls, more transparency, and severe punishment of those responsible. But two things are overlooked when some people in the region now claim that the US is no better than the old Saddam regime:
Now step back and think of what will happen to, say, a Chinese journalist who come out into the open and accuse the PLA of doing something similar. Will the Chinese press be all over the issue as the American press is right now?
The first thing is that the pictures really prove that the US is superior to the Baathist dictatorship. In the US, a whistleblower is not shot, but welcomed as a hero. In the US, the press is free to report the facts its regime would like to conceal. In the US, soldiers are punished when they torture prisoners, instead of being punished when they donÂ’t torture prisoners.
Anyway, here's what an Iraqi have to say about the whole thing: (http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/archives/2004_05_01_iraqthemodel_archive.html#108368415340398387):I was surprised when I saw that the reaction of Iraqis to the subject of prisoners abuse by some American soldiers was not huge as we all expected to see, even it was milder than the one in other Arab countries and especially than that in the Arab media.
As for the photos themselves, some of them have already been exposed as ripoffs from a porn site. (See http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38335)
I mean about a month ago, we had considerable reactions and somewhat large demonstrations in response to the killing of Hamas leader, and in the mid of maniac reactions from Arab media and people, the absence of large demonstrations and outrage on the streets of Iraq becomes really strange and give rise to questions. Why the Iraqi people are not really upset with this issue?
Is it because of the firm and rapid response from the American officials to these terrible actions?
Or is it because the Iraqi people lack compassion with the majority of these prisoners?
Could it be that the Iraqi people and as a result of decades of torture, humiliation and executions, took these crimes less seriously than the rest of the world?
Or have the majority of Iraqis finally developed some trust in the coalition authorities and in the American army, to sense that these actions must be isolated and will be punished?
I canÂ’t say I have the full answer but I guess itÂ’s a combination of a little bit of all the above.
Cheers
Theory -
Turns out that, as usual, there's a lot more to the story than meets the eye as it is most recently reported. Investigations started as early as Dec 2003/Jan 2004 upon the instigation of an US soldier. A whole round of court martials, dishonorable discharges, etc., were meted out around the same time period. But it wasn't until April that the media began reporting the story in a big way. As the WSJ editor puts it: "The irony of this latest episode is that American soldiers may be held accountable for abusing Iraqis before Saddam's worst henchmen are."
To read the story in chronological order, see: http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/000962.html
Theory -
Because while they do not have a perfect record it is still good nonthelessOriginally posted by Ogbunwezeh:USA, the nation tat emphasize so much on human right n keep urging other countries such as CHina, Africa to practice human right but they themselve r ruining the right of human... They dun have the right to talk abt human right to any other countries...
But then again the US is self serving and the fact that they have no signed a few human rights treaties kind's of goes againest them -
Cannot access leh .. sth wrong wif the url address ?Originally posted by Master -_-:
