home

Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered in Iraq

by TChris

Where do you suppose officials in the Iraqi government would have gotten the idea that it's acceptable to torture detainees?

Iraq's government said Tuesday that it had ordered an urgent investigation of allegations that many of the 173 detainees American troops discovered over the weekend in the basement of an Interior Ministry building in a Baghdad suburb had been tortured by their Iraqi captors. A senior Iraqi official who visited the detainees said two appeared paralyzed and others had some of the skin peeled off their bodies by their abusers.

The discovery of what appeared to have been a secret torture center created a new aura of crisis for American officials and Iraqi politicians who hold power in the Shiite-led transitional government. For many Iraqis, the episode carried heavy overtones of the brutality associated with Saddam Hussein and his Sunni-dominated government.

Ominously, amid rising sectarianism here, Interior Ministry officials reported that the abused detainees appeared to have been mostly Sunni Arabs, and their abusers Shiite police officers loyal to the notorious Badr Organization, a militia with close links to Iran.

< Wrongful FBI Arrest Leads to $100K Settlement | Bernie Kerik's Misconduct Allegation >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Our shameful example continues to wreak havoc. We decided to stoop to the level of our "enemies", now our "friends" are stopping with us. How wonderful. With such a powerful lack of imagination in their cobweb ridden skulls, this administration should continue to produce blowback for decades.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#2)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Is Iraq a "shining beacon of democracy" yet?

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Once terror surrenders in the war on terror, we can declare a war on torture, which will inevitably lead to an increase in torture. On second thought, never mind.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#4)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    I usually keep quiet on torture threads because I more-or-less agree with the leftists and agreeing is boring, but this is just silly:
    Where do you suppose officials in the Iraqi government would have gotten the idea that it's acceptable to torture detainees?
    Iraq wasn't exactly a shining star of equality and fairness before we showed up. So now instead of directing this crap at women for not dressing right, they're directing it at accused terrorists. Sailor will be along shortly to accuse me of supporting torture...

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    gosh secret detention centers in plain sight. The CPA must have been busy looking for for Antiquities looted from the museum. Bush was never told, only his lawyer knew.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#6)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    two appeared paralyzed and others had some of the skin peeled off their bodies
    Hey, it ain't organ failure or death is it? Is it? And of course we can all trust Bush when he says: "The administration has said in a statement that while it does not condone torture" and then opposes any moves to ban it because it might "restrict 'the president's ability to conduct the war (on terrorism) effectively under existing law.'" Can't we? I mean, he wouldn't want to go leading by example now, would he?

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#7)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Roy, Iraq was secular under Hussein, the way women dressed wasn't an issue leading to punishment or torture. That was the Taliban. (Does anyone remember Afghanistan?) Though Saddam certainly did love his torture, just for different reasons.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#8)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Iraq was secular under Hussein, the way women dressed wasn't an issue leading to punishment or torture. That was the Taliban.
    Right, my bad. My basic point still stands, if it stood at all to begin with. Iraq wasn't torturing people for religious reasons, but for political. Now it's apparently still for political reasons, but directed at accused violent political enemies rather than the peaceful dissent type.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#9)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Roy, I think the point is that we no longer have any moral authority to criticize this behavior by the Iraqis. If you think we do, explain why.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#10)
    by legion on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:10 PM EST
    Roy- Here's one for you to ponder: how exactly does one torture people _accused_ of terrorism? I mean, it's easy to build a wack-ass strawman about some hypothetical bad guy we _know_ has vital & timely information, but what concievable value is there in torturing people when we don't know if they have any info to give? Doesn't that boil down to simple, unfocused revenge?

    Posted by Dadler: "Our shameful example" What do you mean 'our'? This is Bushevik Blowback, and it was NOT IN OUR NAME from the start. Yeah, they stole our 'our.' But that doesn't mean we went quietly. Please reconsider such general reference, Dadler. THEIR shameful example. "With such a powerful lack of imagination in their cobweb ridden skulls, this administration should continue to produce blowback for decades." Not from LACK of imagination. This is an INTENTIONAL DISPLAY OF TREASON to our national security, the 'by all means possible' dredging of racial and religious hatred, which the Busheviks know(ingly) will cause blowback that allows them (or others with similar spirochetes) to profit off the chaos. The next terror attack is BUSH'S FAULT. I'm sure he's missed a few nights' sleep thinking of the rope stretching his neck for his murderous crime spree.

    Posted by aw: "any moral authority to criticize this behavior by the Iraqis. If you think we do, explain why." WE have the same moral authority we have had for criticizing these crimes, but we're going to have to prove it, for the first time in history, by prosecuting and OUTING Bushevism for the criminal psychosis it is. Their hope is McCain or J. Bush in 2008, who will Ford their Nixons. We cannot let that happen, for our own safety. We have to PROVE that America stands for the rule of law, not the rule by traitors. And then we will be paying reparations for a long time indeed.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#13)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    From the post:
    Where do you suppose officials in the Iraqi government would have gotten the idea that it's acceptable to torture detainees?
    Uh, Saddam? NO! Saddam was a sweetheart. It must have been the evil US. (Not) Tell me. Can anyone here criticize our enemies??? aw - When we discovered what was going on we investigated/charged/tried. That is the difference, and if you don't see that you are past any understanding.

    Jim: "Tell me. Can anyone here criticize our enemies???" I criticize our enemies every day here, Jim, while you defend them. And as for Hussein, I criticized him and his crimes and the Ronald Reagan abetting his crimes back in 1988-89. Where were you? Defending his crimes, as you defend Bush's.

    La LA Paulie The next terror attack is BUSH'S FAULT. And I know all you lefties just can't wait can you? Chomping at the bit... like little kids in an amusment park... hoping more Americans die so you can blame Bush! I criticize our enemies every day here, Jim, while you defend them. Yes...and to you our enemies are us...LOL...right Paulie? Not the actual people that want to kill us...but us... the ones trying to keep that from happening...right Paulie? As far as I'm concerned, the next terrorist attack is firmly on the libs shoulders.... probaly being set free because of all of you screaming about holding them 'illegally' ...and so we set them free...to complete their mission.... to kill Americans. No no Paulie...the next blood is on your hands and people like you who stick up for these animals!

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    BB spews:
    Chomping at the bit... like little kids in an amusment park... hoping more Americans die so you can blame Bush! As far as I'm concerned, the next terrorist attack is firmly on the libs shoulders... ...No no Paulie...the next blood is on your hands and people like you
    I think BB has just lost what little credibility he might once have had, long long ago in a galaxy far, far away... and forfeited any expectation of response to his posts in future.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#17)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    Roy, I think the point is that we no longer have any moral authority to criticize this behavior by the Iraqis. If you think we do, explain why.
    Sure we do, we have the same inhernet moral authority that any nation does to call out a wrong. Just because we may be guilty of the same offense doesn't mean we lose the ability to condemn the activity. It makes us hypocrites, but doesn't take away from the merits of the discussion... only leave us open to ad hominum rhetoric. For example. Just because we used nukes in WWII doesn't mean we should be prevented from saying nukes should never be used again. We, along with any other nation had a right to express concern when India and Pakistan were at the brink of nuclear war a couple of years ago. Messenger doesn't equal message.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    bt-although it is not credible that the US did not know about this 'secret' operation. It is convenient to blame it on the Iranian trained shi's, and get the pr for 'discovering' the torture site cause Bush says the "US does not support torture"..... but Bush will veto a the Defense Spending bill that has language reflecting his, um.... er...cough cough.... torture statement.

    Ha, if the US occupation forces can't find a secret torture prison in Iraq they could easily be overlooking weapons of mass destruction. Cheney could STILL be right, couldn't he? I mean, maybe they just didn't look hard enough, maybe those nuclear bombs are just sitting in the basement of some building. I'm holding my breath till I see them..

    I'm turning a bit blue now..

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    Tell me. Can anyone here criticize our enemies???
    OUR enemies? Iraq didn't have AQ until bush invaded, so in that vein: You mean gwb who invaded a country that had no connection to 9/11 and then had his staff write memos authorizing torture? You mean gwb who denied the US tortures folks on the same day that cheney was trying to get a pass for the cia to torture folks? You mean gwb who instituted a series of prisons and 'extraordinary rendition' so we could torture folks? Not that they needed much encouragement, but where do you think the iraqis got the idea it would be OK to torture folks AFTER saddam was deposed? John McCain, who actually has been tortured has this to say about the US torturing folks:
    "This battle we're in is about the things we stand for and believe in and practice. And that is an observance of human rights, no matter how terrible our adversaries may be."
    Shorter iraqi interior minister (in whose building the victims were found): I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find that torture is going on here ... round up the usual suspects! The money quote is:
    government spokesman Laith Kubba defended the Interior Ministry, saying all the detainees were legally arrested and most were referred to courts for prosecution. They were kept at the detention center in the Jadriyah district because of a lack of jail space, he said.
    Sound familiar!?

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#22)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    For example. Just because we used nukes in WWII doesn't mean we should be prevented from saying nukes should never be used again.
    Hey Tex, I'd agree with your point, except that bushco has continued to pursue nukes and refuses to say they won't use them. (disclaimer: somewhat like previous admins.) In general, one has no credibility condemning acts that one still does.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#23)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    PIL - To my knowledge you have never criticized Islamic terrorists. If you have, please provide proof. As to your assine comment about who our enemies are.... what else should we expect from a far left winger who claims to be a Democrat. There was a time, PIL, in which Democrats disagreed with Repubs, but there was no doubt that Democrats stood read to defend the country, and politics ended at the water's edge. Sadly you, and people like you, have destroyed that great tradition. Enjoy what you have sown, for so shall you reap. Sailor - You know exactly what I mean. Read my reply to PIL. BTW, Sailor. Please keep on subject. The post was about an Iraqi torture center.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    Sadly you, and people like you, have destroyed that great tradition.
    Ahh yes, that great tradition of torturing folks. Wasn't our country founded on not torturing people? (all men are created equal) Giving them the right to challenge their accusers?(See the constitution.) bushco and it's supporters have negated all that was great about this country. Gee, I bet I'm about to be labeled unpatriotic (again) by some a$$hole.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#25)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    In general, one has no credibility condemning acts that one still does.
    Okay, I'll agree with that statement. But why does that matter in the end? If an act is seen as ill, why should it matter who raises the rally against the act? Isn't the internal merits of the act enough to see to it that the act should be stopped? Using another example, if the US were to come up with an alternative to Koyoto, wouldn't the good in the end be enough to give the idea consideration? Yes we are the biggest emitter of COsub2, but the end result of limiting the emissions should by it's own merits give the idea some discussion and possible implementation because of the inherent benefits of the proposal... a bite of the apple isn't the whole apple, but it's better than letting the apple rot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but simply do not see why a someoe cannot cry out against a moral wrong, even if they commit the moral wrong. The inherent moral law should be enough to allow the cry. Now, the crier may be called to task for their actions in the same vein when they cry out, but that in no way diminished the moral law, it only changed who is affected by the cry. Why doest the moral authority rest with the criere, rather than the inherent morality involved with the situation? I ask, not to be difficult or obtuse, but rather because I do not see how a nation's action affects the inherent moral law. What am I missing?

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#26)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    Big Tex, The hypoctrites ar the ones in Bushco and those who voted for them that want to condemn this act.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#27)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:12 PM EST
    I'm not trying to be difficult here, but simply do not see why a someoe cannot cry out against a moral wrong, even if they commit the moral wrong. The inherent moral law should be enough to allow the cry.
    We can't do that until we admit our wrongs and take responsibility for them.

    Jim, Jim, Jim....
    PIL - To my knowledge you have never criticized Islamic terrorists. If you have, please provide proof.
    Is that what qualifies as "patriotism" in your world, PPJ? Obtuse and pathological denial of the acts perpetrated by one's own "representatives" while parroting the Party's talking points regarding the evil misdeeds of others, whom you have no ability whatsoever to influence?
    As to your assine comment about who our enemies are.... what else should we expect from a far left winger who claims to be a Democrat.
    Actually, I believe the word you were after was "asinine." And they say irony is dead...
    There was a time, PIL, in which Democrats disagreed with Repubs, but there was no doubt that Democrats stood read to defend the country, and politics ended at the water's edge.
    When exactly was that, PPJ? Before or after Reagan's tireless efforts to turn the word "liberal" into an expletive? Before or after McCarthy's inquisition? And the idea itself that you try to pass off as "defense" the invasion of a country which never ONCE attacked or in any way threatened the United States shows how mindlessly susceptible you are to the propaganda machine you so flailingly defend.
    BTW, Sailor. Please keep on subject.
    Pot, meet kettle.

    Posted by Jim: "PIL - To my knowledge you have never criticized Islamic terrorists. If you have, please provide proof." The difference between you and me, Jim, is that I don't just restrict my definition of TERRORIST to Islamic fanatics trained by the CIA to be our deadly enemies. • Posada Carriles, a Venezuelan, blew up a civilian airliner, and Bush is harboring him in TEXAS. • Moahmar Kadafi, an ISLAMIC TERRORIST, blew up a US airliner, and Bush is his pal. • CIA-asset Allawi, an ISLAMIC TERRORIST, blew up school buses and movie theaters in Baghdad in 1995, and when he took power for USPNAC, he walked up to five UNTRIED/UNINTERROGATED new detainees and in front of US military shot them point blank with his own pistol, saying "This is how you do it." Bush lauded this criminal as a great hero to the Iraqi people. "As to your assine comment about who our enemies are.... what else should we expect from a far left winger who claims to be a Democrat." You're a lying supporter of TERRORISTS, Jim. Interpret my middle finger. I have voted as a Democrat for my entire life, and in distinction to 'leftists' I support political change within the two-party system. YOU don't talk like an American to me. You are a bigot, a jingoist, a supporter of traitors, and a willing fool. Those aren't good qualifications for American patriotism. "There was a time, PIL, in which Democrats disagreed with Repubs, but there was no doubt that Democrats stood read to defend the country, and politics ended at the water's edge." You mean like John Kerry, who volunteered TWICE to go into combat? Look at how you treated him. Your disgusting Purple Heart Bandaids, WHILE MEN ARE COMING BACK WITH BLOWN OFF LIMBS FROM AN ONGOING WAR, was despicable. Shame on you.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:13 PM EST
    To my knowledge you have never criticized Islamic terrorists
    Not for nothing, but doesn't this go without saying?

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:13 PM EST
    sailor - You brand yourself. BTW - Again. Can you keep on subject? This post was about an Iraqi detention center that may have been associated with torture, not the perceived sins of the US. ClayP - I don't know how long you have been following this blog, but if you have for more than 15 minutes you now that PIL has a huge potty mouth, calls any and all liars, racists and is well known to define words to fit his own desires. And no, I have never seen him do anything but criticize the US. I wonder why that is? And yes, "assine" is wrong. My typing is suspect and so is my spelling. If you make a decent pot of coffee I might consider hiring you as a secretary. Or would you like me to do a spell check on every comment you make? I would be happy to do so. If you fail to understand the connection between Iraq and the terrorists, I have a list of them. Later today I will post them on the Open thread. I will start with the 11/98 Indictment by the Clinton JD that details how al-Qaeda and Iraq cut a deal on developing WMD's, followed up with the UN Inspector who said Saddam tried to bribe by offering $2,000,000. (I have done nothing wrong, but here is $2,000,000 for you to not tell anyone I have done nothing wrong. Uh huh, sure.) Plus a host of other information. All of which I am sure you will ignore. Gotta go now. TaTa! PIL! No proof, eh? We all knew that.

    Re: Secret Detention (Torture?) Center Discovered (none / 0) (#32)
    by BigTex on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:13 PM EST
    The hypoctrites ar the ones in Bushco and those who voted for them that want to condemn this act.
    Okay Che, even assuming this as a default position for the sake of discussion, the question remains. Why can't we condemn torture? Okay, we're hypocritical, and should listen to our own statements, why does that mean we can't say torture is wrong? To borrow a line from Cool Hand Luke What we have here is a failure to communicate. The sentiment here is that we can't condemn torture because we torture. My question is why? So far the answers have been variations on the same theme of we can't do it.
    In general, one has no credibility condemning acts that one still does.
    I agree with this, but it doesn't go to why the inherent wrongness of torture isn't enough to sustain a cry against torture. The power of the cry comes not from whom the statement is made, but rather in inherent in the cry.
    We can't do that until we admit our wrongs and take responsibility for them.
    Why? Or more specifically, why isn't the power of the claim derived from the claim itsself, as opposed to the one who makes the claim. If we take the position that torture is wrong, then it shouldn't matter who makes the statement. The inherent worth of the statement flows from the statement itsself, not the speaker.

    I'm with you Tex. As a small aside, to use the language correctly, hypocrites profess beliefs and opinions that they does not hold. Whether or not they themselves uphold those beliefs and opinions is not relevant to the definition of hypocrite. If they themselves don't uphold the beliefs and opinons they profess they will lack credibility, but that does not lessen the truth of their message.

    I don't know how long you have been following this blog, but if you have for more than 15 minutes you now that PIL has a huge potty mouth, calls any and all liars, racists and is well known to define words to fit his own desires. And no, I have never seen him do anything but criticize the US. I wonder why that is?
    There's no doubt that PIL is more, shall we say, passionate in his arguments than I would choose to be, but I certainly understand his outrage. Anyone who can fail to be outraged at the current state of affairs in this country is either in a state of deliberate denial or simply isn't paying attention. I can't speak for Paul, but from my point of view, the outrage comes from watching people like George Bush and all his little toadies systematically soil and dismantle every remaining good in this nation. Bush is hardly a pioneer in this aspect, but he's taking it to a level I don't think we've ever seen before. The difference, I suppose, is whether you define "the US" as the people of this great nation and the ideals upon which it was founded, or the behavior of its government, which almost always acts at the behest of the richest of the rich, often in direct conflict with what we're all brought up to believe this country stands for.
    And yes, "assine" is wrong. My typing is suspect and so is my spelling. If you make a decent pot of coffee I might consider hiring you as a secretary. Or would you like me to do a spell check on every comment you make? I would be happy to do so.
    (There's more that's "suspect" about you than your typing and your spelling, buddy. Just sayin'...) If you're going to resort to insulting someone by using using obscure adjectives in an effort to appear smarter than you are, you should probably double-check your spelling...at least on those words.
    If you fail to understand the connection between Iraq and the terrorists, I have a list of them. Later today I will post them on the Open thread.
    I can hardly contain my excitement. :-p

    Jim: "PIL! No proof, eh? We all knew that." I just spoke out against TWO Islamic terrorists, namely Iyad Allawi and Moahmar Kadafi. NOT FOR THE FIRST TIME, but you don't notice when Bushie french kisses Kadafi, kisses up to Musharaf, who harbors Khan, the nuclear scientist who helped N. Korea threaten us. There, that's four Islamic terrorists I despise, but you don't notice. You're too busy APPLAUDING THEM. You apparently cannot read. Quit stuffing gerbils up your rear and open your eyes.