The Iraq thread 3

[Pathy 0]

Breaking news, The Mirror board of directors have admitted the photos of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner are fake. Piers Morgan has been forced to step down. The Mirror offers "unreserved apologies" for publishing the fake pictures.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3716151.stm

It is worth noting, i just saw an interview with a guy representing the QLR, and he says that although the pictures are fake, the regiment continues to investigate the alleged incidents.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Breaking news, The Mirror board of directors have admitted the photos of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner are fake. Piers Morgan has been forced to step down. The Mirror offers "unreserved apologies" for publishing the fake pictures.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3716151.stm

It is worth noting, i just saw an interview with a guy representing the QLR, and he says that although the pictures are fake, the regiment continues to investigate the alleged incidents.

some questioned the rebuttal by BBC and other sources who pointed out some inconsistencies in the photos. wonder what they have to say about that now.

anyways, whoever made those faked photos need to get their ass kicked severly. not only they costed a big controversy, they ended up making a man loose his job.

and i don't think the probe into any POW/detainnee abuse should stop. better checking to make sure.

[ralphwiggum 6]

right after i posted above post, went to English version of AJ, and was looking to see if they discussed about the prisoner abuse by Brits. couldn't find it.

but 20 minutes later i see that they updated their website with news about vandals attacking mosque in US, but no news about this matter.

[Pathy 0]

Well personally i think Piers Morgan deserves to loose his job, but thats only my personal opinion, i have a pretty low view of tabloids anyway.....(Times reader )

I don't know what to make of the claims that the Mirror posted them in good faith that they were real, what would clinch it for me would be validation or dismissal of the rumours i have heard:

some people came to the Mirror with the story, and were told to come back with pictures or not at all. A few hours later, pictures were produced......

Now if thats true, i cannot believe the Mirror would be naive enough to publish the pictures without thorough checking.....i mean, i doubt anyone here would refute that it sounds dodgy enough on the face of it, coming back a few hours later with pictures...if true, they must have known they were fakes...if that is the case, then Piers Morgan should be facing more than loosing his job.

If that rumour is nothing more than a rumour, and the Mirror genuinely was fooled, they should be cut a little slack, although Piers Morgan should still loose his job, as an editor of a national newspaper its his responsibility to ensure the validity of the content.......

And yes, every allegded incident should be checked, regardless.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]BREAKING NEWS

At least one technique removed from list of interrogation methods used by U.S. military in Iraq, sources tell CNN. Details soon.

Wonder which one. "Glow Stick Suppositories"? "$10000 Homosexual Pyramid"? Maybe "Mastabatory Manipulation"?

[Pathy 0]

LOL!

Dont make me laugh, i feel so nasty when i laugh at such things

[ralphwiggum 6]

My favorite oddity about the Berg case:

This is mine

http://rense.com/1.imagesG/se3s.jpg

http://rense.com/1.imagesG/040511nick-berg-video_n.jpg

Quote[/b] ]The chair that Berg was seated in during the filming was a standard issue military chair of the exact same kind as seen in a color photo taken at the Abu Ghraib Prison. The chances a terrorist cell would be using this same chair are minimal at best.

http://rense.com/general52/anom.htm

it's hard to see what kind of chair it is, but looks like a common patio chair to me.

common in many parts of the world.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]BREAKING NEWS

At least one technique removed from list of interrogation methods used by U.S. military in Iraq, sources tell CNN. Details soon.

Wonder which one. "Glow Stick Suppositories"? "$10000 Homosexual Pyramid"? Maybe "Mastabatory Manipulation"?

'taking pictures'?

[ralphwiggum 6]

the question about the mirror's 'fake' photo is who did it, why and how. it could be that some hooligan decided to mock Mirror on grand scale, or create negative image towards anti-war proponents.

the question i have is how the heck did this ppl get their hands on SA80 and other equipments, if not an airsoft. could it be that someone within British military decided to pull a prank using the equipment?

[Pathy 0]

My favorite oddity about the Berg case:

This is mine

http://rense.com/1.imagesG/se3s.jpg

http://rense.com/1.imagesG/040511nick-berg-video_n.jpg

Quote[/b] ]The chair that Berg was seated in during the filming was a standard issue military chair of the exact same kind as seen in a color photo taken at the Abu Ghraib Prison. The chances a terrorist cell would be using this same chair are minimal at best.

http://rense.com/general52/anom.htm

it's hard to see what kind of chair it is, but looks like a common patio chair to me.

http://www.dsbn.edu.on.ca/purchasing/auction/mw/mw197.jpg

common in many parts of the world.

Yeh ill nip outside with the digi camera and snap our garden chairs if you want......

Military issue chairs my arse. That gives me an idea, maybe i can flog the garden chairs as "standard issue US military chairs" over Ebay

[denoir 0]

some questioned the rebuttal by BBC and other sources who pointed out some inconsistencies in the photos. wonder what they have to say about that now.

The same thing as before. The alledged inconsistencies in the photos have been explained by British soldiers actively serving in Iraq. Furthermore several witnesses have come forward saying that the things that are shown in the photographs indeed occur on a regular basis and some of those witnesses have even admitted that they have participated in such acts.

There has been no proof presented of them being fabricated. So I think we're still at square one in that investigation.

I do however hope that they are fake as I've so far thought that the British troops were fairly competent in their handling of their region in Iraq. I have also worked with British soldiers and I have a high respect for their training and discipline.

However, if the picturues are real then it is certain that it was a question of policy rather than soldiers beahving badly. British officers keep the enlisted men on a very short leash and there is no way in hell they would have not known what was going on. Assuming that it did happnen, that is.

[Pathy 0]

Does the paper who published them coming forward and admitting they are fake not satisfy you?

Quote[/b] ]There has been no proof presented of them being fabricated. So I think we're still at square one in that investigation

I dont think you were watching the news earlier today, the army conducted a massive PR campaign showing up the photos....ill try and find a link to the news.....

[denoir 0]

the question i have is how the heck did this ppl get their hands on SA80 and other equipments, if not an airsoft. could it be that someone within British military decided to pull a prank using the equipment?

It's military, there's no question about it. The weapon and the truck are proof enough of that. The question is where it was taken. It could be in Afghanistan rather than Iraq.

Overall the only thing the British inquiry claimed was that they were not takin in Iraq. It didn't say that they were faked or arranged.

Which of course is a third possibility. That it was a prank or something with more sinister motives and that it was all arranged.

[denoir 0]

Does the paper who published them coming forward and admitting they are fake not satisfy you?  

Absolutely not as they don't have an answer either.

[bBC 1] [bBC 2]

Quote[/b] ]But in a news conference in Preston on Friday afternoon, the regiment demonstrated to reporters the aspects of uniform and equipment which it said proved the photographs were fake.

Two Army trucks were parked outside the press conference - one a four-ton Bedford MK, the type of vehicle in which the Army believes the pictures were taken, but which has never been to Iraq.

Quote[/b] ]I dont think you were watching the news earlier today, the army conducted a massive PR campaign showing up the photos....ill try and find a link to the news.....

Yeah, I saw the press conference here on the news. Also I saw the segment that followed of British soldiers serving in Iraq now commenting on how the arguments presented were rubbish. And they showed footage of a Bedford truck outside of Basra. Go figure.

[Pathy 0]

What are the chances of finding a guy in any other country than Iraq wearing an Iraqi flag across his chest?

The truck was also green, not desert. This was shown in the demonstration by the Army earlier today, as what happens when you put either into black and white is different.

So where does that leave us? A green truck implies somewhere not desert......where have we been where green trucks are used instead of desert ones? Kosovo? So whats a guy with an Iraqi T-shirt doing in Kosovo? You get my drift.

Plus as i said, when the paper that published them confirms they were fake, how long can you carry on supposing they are real?

But yes, the allegations behind the photos may very well be true, but lets clear up the photos first.....

[Pathy 0]

Does the paper who published them coming forward and admitting they are fake not satisfy you?  

Absolutely not as they don't have an answer either.

The mirrors statement in full:

Quote[/b] ]The Daily Mirror published in good faith photographs which it absolutely believed were genuine images of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner.

However, there is now sufficient evidence to suggest that these pictures are fakes and that the Daily Mirror has been the subject of a calculated and malicious hoax.

The Daily Mirror therefore apologises unreservedly for publishing the pictures and deeply regrets the reputational damage done to the QLR and the army in Iraq.

The paper will continue to co-operate fully with the investigation.

The board of Trinity Mirror has decided that it would be inappropriate for Piers Morgan to continue in his role as editor of the Daily Mirror and he will therefore be stepping down with immediate effect.

Des Kelly, Deputy Editor, will assume the role of acting editor.

[denoir 0]

What are the chances of finding a guy in any other country than Iraq wearing an Iraqi flag across his chest?

Fair point.

Quote[/b] ]Plus as i said, when the paper that published them confirms they were fake, how long can you carry on supposing they are real?

Did they fake the pictures? They obtained them somehow and thought until recently that they were genuine, right? What makes you think that they suddenly became exprets at evaluating the authenticity of the pictures?

Overall, all I'm saying is that the 'evidence' provided by the British Army is very vague. It may very well be true and correct, but it's IMO not nearly enough to consitute proof for the pictures being fake. Especially put in context with active duty soldiers in Iraq providing explanations for the stuff presented.

[Pathy 0]

Arguments for both sides:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3680327.stm

Hmmm yeh, are the "active duty soldiers" called "soldier A" and "Soldier B", though? There is a discussion like this on the UKF forums, a team which includes several ex-army guys...i hope they dont mind me quoting them.

JB, infantryman.

Quote[/b] ]Not having a dig mate, but its the regiment using the A2`s that are in iraq not the weapon itself, It is quite possible with shortages of equipment that the QLR have an A1 rifle in their stock (but i doubt it), secondly headwear cant be used as evidence, squaddies if not issued with kit normally buy there own. The QLR guys could be wearing the `Boonie` Type headwear, its not beyond possibility.

For what its worth i think they are fake photos anyway, The news picked up that experts (ha) have looked at the photos and claim the POW clothing is too clean, theres no sand in a so called desert enviroment - and the POW is wearing western style underwear?

well spotted anyway

Mav, ex para.

Quote[/b] ]Does the bloke being "tortured" look like a malnourished Iraqi to you?

Looks like a squaddie to me, as the missus picked up, look at the size of his thighs!

Not saying thier opinions are fact, but its interesting to get the opinions of guys who we know for sure have military experience.

[MLF 0]

some questioned the rebuttal by BBC and other sources who pointed out some inconsistencies in the photos. wonder what they have to say about that now.

The same thing as before. The alledged inconsistencies in the photos have been explained by British soldiers actively serving in Iraq. Furthermore several witnesses have come forward saying that the things that are shown in the photographs indeed occur on a regular basis and some of those witnesses have even admitted that they have participated in such acts.

There has been no proof presented of them being fabricated. So I think we're still at square one in that investigation.

I do however hope that they are fake as I've so far thought that the British troops were fairly competent in their handling of their region in Iraq. I have also worked with British soldiers and I have a high respect for their training and discipline.

However, if the picturues are real then it is certain that it was a question of policy rather than soldiers beahving badly. British officers keep the enlisted men on a very short leash and there is no way in hell they would have not known what was going on. Assuming that it did happnen, that is.

Sorry but im gonna have to clear up some things, i was ill all day so i watched it when the Lancastershire Regiment was talking to the press,

firstly thay have found the Bedford Truck from the photo, it was the stitching of the canvas and the metal grid inside the truck that gave it away,

Secondly its looking like TA people did this as the Truck was found in the TA section of the Base,

Thirdly yes Beatings do happen in war and 1 person has died in British custody and these investigations are ongoing and the details of these investigations are bneing held back due to legal reasons till the investigation has been finished, the RMP won't show the Truck to the press because it would jepordise future court action.

[ralphwiggum 6]

some questioned the rebuttal by BBC and other sources who pointed out some inconsistencies in the photos. wonder what they have to say about that now.

The same thing as before. The alledged inconsistencies in the photos have been explained by British soldiers actively serving in Iraq. Furthermore several witnesses have come forward saying that the things that are shown in the photographs indeed occur on a regular basis and some of those witnesses have even admitted that they have participated in such acts.

There has been no proof presented of them being fabricated. So I think we're still at square one in that investigation.

I do however hope that they are fake as I've so far thought that the British troops were fairly competent in their handling of their region in Iraq. I have also worked with British soldiers and I have a high respect for their training and discipline.

However, if the picturues are real then it is certain that it was a question of policy rather than soldiers beahving badly. British officers keep the enlisted men on a very short leash and there is no way in hell they would have not known what was going on. Assuming that it did happnen, that is.

the photos came in with claim that the photos were made in Iraq. not true. what does this inconsistency say? we can't say that this particular photo is how UK troops handle PoWs in Iraq war. there could be abuses by UK soldiers, but using false evidence is not a way to prove it.

just like when Powell talked about Nigerian Uranium. many criticzed Powell for bringing up shady evidence. and this photo of abuse was not from Iraq, so it is a shady evidence.

there is no proof of the photo being fake, but no proof that its genuine either.

Quote[/b] ]It's military, there's no question about it. The weapon and the truck are proof enough of that. The question is where it was taken. It could be in Afghanistan rather than Iraq.

Overall the only thing the British inquiry claimed was that they were not takin in Iraq. It didn't say that they were faked or arranged.

good point. it could be anywhere else, including UK itself. however, a person wearing a Tshirt with Iraq flag is not common. I can make those shirts, but certainly not get it so easily.

furthermore, the original supplier brought the photo as the evidence of abuse in Iraq. the photo was not pulished as 'UK troops abusing PoWs' but as abuse in Iraq. what would prompt someone to make such statement? the suppliment of the photo with claim that it was from iraq is clear sign that there is high possiblity that the photo was staged.

[Koolkid101 0]

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=27679

Quote[/b] ]Globe caught with pants down: Paper duped into running porn photos

By Herald staff

Thursday, May 13, 2004

The Boston Globe was reeling yesterday after graphic photos of alleged sexual abuse of Iraqi women by U.S. soldiers turned out to be staged shots from a hardcore porn Web site.

    ``This photo should not have appeared in the Globe,'' editor Martin Baron said in a statement. ``First, images portrayed in the photo were overly graphic. Second, as the story clearly pointed out, those images were never authenticated as photos of prisoner abuse. There was a lapse in judgment and procedures, and we apologize for it.''

    The ``lapse'' came after City Councilor Chuck Turner and perennial pot-stirrer Sadiki Kambon called a press conference in the wake of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal to display more purported abuse photos. Turner claimed they came from ``a very legitimate person'' but admitted they hadn't been authenticated. Kambon said he got them from a representative of the Nation of Islam. Neither Turner nor Kambon returned calls.

    But yesterday, WorldNetDaily.com reported the pictures - which show hard-core sex acts and genitalia - came from a pornographic site.

Didn't world net daily report about those fake pics a week before the herald ran those pics?

[quicksand 0]

For a good laugh:

Bush,spot on

Quote[/b] ]MEQUON, Wis. (Reuters) - President Bush on Friday blamed al Qaeda supporter Abu Musab al-Zarqawi for beheading American Nicholas Berg and cited him as an example of Saddam Hussein's "terrorist ties" before the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Bush's revival of accusations linking Saddam to terrorism comes as the president faces growing doubts among Americans over his Iraq policy.

At a fund-raising lunch in Bridgeton, Missouri, Bush said Zarqawi was an example of the threat posed by the ousted Iraqi leader. "We knew he (Saddam) had terrorist ties. The person responsible for the Berg death, Zarqawi, was in and out of Baghdad prior to our arrival, for example," Bush said.

A video of Berg's beheading was posted this week to an Islamist Web site. The grisly film included a statement, signed off with Zarqawi's name, that urged Muslims to take revenge for Iraqi prisoners abused by U.S. soldiers at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. The CIA on Thursday said Zarqawi was probably the one who beheaded Berg.

American doubts over Bush's Iraq policy have been fueled by the Abu Ghraib scandal, uncertainties over the planned June 30 transfer of sovereignty to Iraqis and a violent insurgency. Furthermore, the United States has failed to find alleged unconventional weapons in Iraq that were the heart of Bush's case for going to war.

Although Bush administration officials had raised the possibility Saddam helped al Qaeda plan the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, Bush eventually said there was no evidence. Bush has previously cited Zarqawi as a link between Saddam and al Qaeda.

The president, in his stops in two battleground states for this November's presidential election, sought to reassure Americans his Iraq policy was on track.

Bush said in Bridgeton the transfer of sovereignty could provide hope for Iraqis, although his administration has been criticized for lacking a clear plan.

"They're glad to be rid of Saddam," he said. "And they obviously want to run their own country. If I were them I'd want to run my own country too."

Speaking later at commencement ceremonies at Concordia University in Wisconsin, Bush said the Abu Ghraib scandal had consequences that WENT "well beyond the walls of a prison," but he did not elaborate.

He said the scandal "cannot diminish the honor and achievement of more than 200,000 military personnel who have served in Iraq."

Before setting off for the Midwest, Bush met at the White House with foreign ministers from the Group of Seven major industrial nations plus Russia. The seven are the United States, Britain, Italy, Canada, France, Germany and Japan.

The theme was mending fences with countries such as France and Germany, which bitterly opposed the war. Bush hopes to enlist their help with the Iraq sovereignty transfer.

"He (Bush) talked about putting aside past differences and all of us working together to help the Iraqi people realize a brighter future," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. (Additional reporting by David Morgan and Steve Holland)

As much as I trust Bush`s word(about as much as Iraqi information minister) isn`t it time for the edvidence to pop out?

WMD?Al-Queda?Actually this time I think he is on a good lead. We already know that Zarqawi was well welcomed in Baghdad where he had his leg amputated.

It appears the once one legged terrorist,was actually Saddam`s confidant and Bergs two legged killer according to Bush.He doesn`t have any reason to lie,has he?

[Balschoiw 0]

Why does Bush tell lies ? Saddam never was related to AQ. That has been proven. Why does he repeat that bull over and over ?

Make the mood right for his tumbling reelection plans ?

Kick him out of office. He´s incompetent and a harm to the world, not only to the US.

Oh and these are bad news for the TBA:

U.S. missed chances to stop abuses

Willingly ignoring ? Or don´t they read their post and mails also ?

Quote[/b] ]Pentagon (news - web sites) and White House officials missed numerous opportunities to head off abuses at Iraq (news - web sites)'s Abu Ghraib prison, according to interviews, testimony and public documents that have emerged since the scandal erupted last month.

From red flags raised months ago by prison guards at other facilities in Iraq to letters from lawmakers and non-government groups, the Pentagon and the Bush administration received a variety of complaints many months before the abuses began last fall.

Seven Army soldiers face criminal charges and seven others have been reprimanded in connection with abuse at Abu Ghraib in October, November and December of last year. The scandal, which has spawned six military investigations into misconduct, has damaged American credibility around the world and threatens to undermine the war effort in Iraq.

The missed warnings include reports by the International Committee of the Red Cross and at least one letter from a U.S. senator, concerns raised by military law specialists and commanders, and letters and phone calls from the relatives of U.S. troops serving at other prisons in Iraq.

• Last May, eight high-ranking military lawyers voiced concerns to Pentagon officials and the New York State Bar Association that new interrogation policies developed after the Sept. 11 attacks could lead to prisoner abuses. Scott Horton, former head of the New York Bar's committee on international law, said Thursday that the Army and Navy lawyers told him the new interrogation rules were "frightening" and might "reverse 50 years of a proud tradition of compliance with the Geneva Conventions." Horton said the lawyers came to him because they had been locked out of policy debates while the secret rules were being drafted. "It was a five-alarm fire," Horton said.

• Family members of guards at the Camp Bucca prison in southern Iraq told CBS' 60 Minutes II that they called Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's office repeatedly last year and wrote letters to the White House complaining of conditions at the prison..

• Numerous high-ranking U.S. officials, including Rumsfeld, visited Abu Ghraib last year before the abuses. Although an Army investigation has noted that guards had failed to follow basic procedures - including requirements that the Geneva Conventions' rules for the treatment of prisoners be displayed throughout the prison in English and Arabic - none of the visitors raised questions.

Other military officers began voicing fears about U.S. policies for handling prisoners earlier.

Walter Schumm, a retired Army Reserve colonel who once commanded a military police battalion, warned in an article that the U.S. military was headed for a catastrophe. In an essay published in 1998 in the influential journal Military Review, Schumm wrote that most military officers know very little about legal requirements for handling prisoners.

Schumm went on to write that most MPs designated to handle enemy prisoners of war were reservists with fewer than 50 days of training per year. In a passage that seemed to foreshadow problems at Abu Ghraib, Schumm wrote, "It only takes one improperly trained soldier among a thousand to commit an offense against the Geneva Conventions that would cause our nation considerable embarrassment."

In the past 12 months, independent groups that monitor treatment of prisoners, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites), complained about the treatment of prisoners in Iraq. The Red Cross characterized problems as more widespread than just at Abu Ghraib.

Last June, Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), D-Vt., wrote letters to the White House, the CIA (news - web sites) and the Pentagon complaining about the treatment of prisoners in Afghanistan (news - web sites) and "other locations outside the United States."

Leahy wrote that prisoners were being subjected to beatings, lengthy sleep- and food-deprivation, and "stress and duress" techniques. Pentagon and CIA officials wrote back to say the United States was not torturing prisoners

You be the judge.

[Bernadotte 0]

Why does Bush tell lies ? Saddam never was related to AQ. That has been proven. Why does he repeat that bull over and over ?

[bn880 5]

The really clear link is a religion. Yeah I know it's a good comic...