Female GI in abuse scandal felt nothing wrong was done

Female GI in abuse scandal felt nothing wrong was done

Kate Zernike, New York Times
Sunday, May 16, 2004



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In a sworn statement to investigators, Pfc. Lynndie England explained the mystery of why soldiers at Abu Ghraib took pictures of detainees masturbating and piled naked with plastic sandbags over their heads by saying, "We thought it looked funny, so pictures were taken."

England's statement, made May 5, narrates the photos now at the center of the prison abuse scandal in specific detail and a matter-of-fact tone, describing the abuse as routine and sometimes amusing, but almost never, to her mind, out of bounds.

She explains how she put a strap around a detainee's neck and forced him and others to run and crawl down a hallway for "approximately four to six hours"; how one soldier would regularly throw a Nerf football at detainees with bags over their heads "to scare them"; how one soldier would kick detainees and cause open wounds, then "would personally stitch detainees if the wound weren't too bad," according to a copy of her statement given to the New York Times.

Asked if she ever physically abused a detainee, England said, "Yes, I stepped on some of them, push them or pull them, but nothing extreme."


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/05/16/MNG156MHD61.DTL

Ah, the levity is uplifting

Well, at least she's being honest about her take on this whole sordid mess. I can't decide if I should be outraged by her lack of compassion, or appreciate the fact that she's not trying to 'feign' guilt.

Either way, this young lady has some serious problems with morality and compassion for other people. Did her parents teach her nothing? Did this little moron grow up in front of a TV set? Or maybe she was hatched from an egg.

Why didn't these people receive any education before they graduated high school?

More like a simple lack of morals, I'd say.

Her views are consistent with Coulter, Limbaugh, etc. Clear Channel has a mike waiting for this lovely, well-rounded young lady.

are coming home to roost. Let me guess what shows England watched. Hmmm.

or at least a captain in rank. Git her done edjikated at Bob Jones U, then she kan go to wirk at one of them think tanks.

I said this long ago these criminals are rich criminals now.

Even children with an inkling of decency knows it is wrong to hurt other people if the parents have not neglected to teach them! This type behavior had to begin before she started school, IMO! Piss poor upbringing.
:cry:

take your pick the goal is the same.

Remove all possibility of education in social responsibility OR suggest that social responsibility is akin to communism.

The end result is to make morale behavior to be seen as a losing proposition in the globalized free market.

Wow, we certainly have come a long way, baby.

"The incisive and sharply focused snapshots presented here give a telling portrait of some of the most dangerous forces undermining what is decent and hopeful in American and global society. A warning that should be taken very seriously."
--Noam Chomsky

http://www.corporatepredators.org/index.html

Multiple Corporate Personality Disorder
by Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
(snip)
After all, if a corporation means a legal structure to allow human
beings to get away with wrongdoing without paying a price, then it's a
machine that produces injustice.

Let's say that a corporation is caught fixing its books, committing in
effect a $2.7 billion fraud. That would be a case very similar to the
case of HealthSouth.

Under U.S. federal law, if a health care corporation is convicted of a
serious crime, that company can no longer do business with the
government, in this case the Medicare and Medicaid program. And in
HealthSouth's case, that means life and death.

So, the company hires one of the nation's best corporate crime defense
attorneys -- Bob Bennett and says to him, "Save us from the corporate
death penalty."

And Bob goes to the U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case and says, "Hey,
look, we blew it, here's my phone number, we'll give you everything you
want. Just don't indict us. Please don't indict us."

And the U.S. Attorney indicts 16 top executives. And the company is on
the road to getting off scot free.

That's one way a corporation morphs to get out of accepting
responsibility for its sins -- blame the human beings.

But sometimes, the corporate executives say, "Hey, we don't have to take
the heat. Let's cough up a defunct subsidiary to plead guilty -- and the
government can ban that unit from doing business with Medicare. Who
cares about a defunct subsidiary? That unit never did business with
Medicare anyway."
(snip)
http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/corp-focus/2004/000172.html

I seem to remember one of her legal team being quoted as saying that she claimed to have been posed in all those pictures. IIRC, the lawyer quoted her as claiming (for example) to have been merely walking by the scene of the infamous leash incident and being told to hold the leash and smile. If that's true, then she and her lawyers have a *long* series of conversations ahead of them!

He's got a beauty of a client on his hands. I am looking forward to seeing how he tries to spin this the next time he pops up on t.v. IF he pops up, that is. I don't know the whole story, but I did catch Dan Abrams the other day saying this attorney had legal troubles of his own. Anybody know what those troubles might be?

~snip~
In her first interview since all of this began, one of the more famous faces of the scandal Pfc. Lynndie England, the guard seen smiling and pointing at Iraqi prisoners, said she was ordered to pose for the pictures by “persons in my higher chain of command.” Correspondent Dan Rather reports.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I guess it just goes with stuff that happens during war time," England told reporter Brian Maass in an interview with CBS station KCNC-TV.

"Going in and interrogating, and doing what you’re told. People probably think that, ‘No, they thought of this on their own, and they were just doing this of their own free will, and this and that,’” said England.

“It’s not like we laid in bed one night and thought, ‘Oh, I want to do this tomorrow, let’s do this.’ We didn’t think of it."

~snip~

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/12/60II/main617121.shtml

It can't be that hard to threaten someone in the military if they don't start giving the right message.

This is way different than she told in her first exclusive interview last week. Last week she claimed she was reluctantly following orders from her superiors.

But perhaps now that it is known that Sivits is going to be treated lightly because he is going to say it was just spontanous fun on part of him and the Bad Apple Brigade -- perhaps on coaching from the Pentagon which involved threats not unlike those used on POWs at Abu Ghraib), Lynndie's changing her tune.

Yes, very different story, but somehow I don't see the Pentagon prosecutors challenging this version of things. It's up to the press, and folks with you who have a long term memory.

The statement to investigators is from May 5 and the interview was on May 11 or 12 I believe.

to testimony offered by holocaust survivors, about those who guarded them.

quite clear in describing her actions as something she was
requested to do, not something she wanted to do or thought
was acceptable behavior. I bet they have smoke coming out
of their ears.

I'm late, I'm late, for a very important date
no time to say hello-goodbye, I'm late, I'm late, I'm late!

:shrug:

That would be excusing her. She's nothing more tha a mean little ho who found herself on a power trip. She is a lowly little girl-private and she was given power over them, much more power than she had ever had before. Low self esteem, combined with xenophobic tendencies from where she came from and the way she was raised, a lethal combination. I am quite convinced she was capable of murdering any one of those Iraqi prisoners, if something like that had been suggested to her.

Juana Bormann was a murderous SS woman, who served in the deathcamp Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen. She was known as The woman with the dogs, who took sadistic pleasure in setting her wolfhounds on prisoners to tear them to pieces



Juana Bormann joined the SS as a civilian employee on March 1, 1938, because - as she later said during The Belsen Trial - I could earn more money ..

After World War 2 Juana Bormann was found guilty and convicted of war crimes and the execution was set for December 13, 1945. In his book of memoirs, Executioner, the English hangman Albert Pierrepoint described Juana Bormann's last hours. The afternoon before execution each prisoner was weighed so the correct drop could be calculated for them:

"She limped down the corridor looking old and haggard. She was forty-two years old, only a little over five feet high .. she was trembling as she was put on the scale. In German she said: I have my feelings .."

Nothing banal about that evil, she is truly chilling to look at.

Thanks saigon68. Evil knows no gender lines.

sorry but I enjoyed writing this parody so much I feel like I have an interest in spreading it around...

“Lynndie”

To the tune of Windy by The Association
(Ruthann Friedman)


Who's peekin' out from under a sandbag
Calling them names that never will air
Who's bending down to give me a thumbs up?
Everyone knows it's Lynndie

Who's skippin down the line up of prisoners
Smilin' at all the “willies” she sees
Who's reachin' out to capture a moment
Everyone knows it's Lynndie

And Lynndie has willing eyes
That smile at the sound of cries
And Lynndie’s friends are M-I
Above the law (above the law)
Above the law (above the law)

---Flute interlude here---

And Lynndie has willing eyes
That smile at the sound of cries
And Lynndie’s friends are M-I
Above the law (above the law)
Above the law (above the law)
Who's skippin down the line up of prisoners
Smilin' at all the “willies” she sees
Who's reachin' out to capture a moment
Everyone knows it's Lynndie

"Always Abusing"
Don Rumsfeld sings about Pfc. England to General Karen Karpinski
to the tune of “Always A Woman”

She can kill with a smile
She can wound with her eyes
She can ruin your life with her casual lies
She’s just making photos MI wants them to see
She’s signaling thumbs-up
Oh, she's always abusing for me.

She can lead you on all fours
She can bind you and leave you
She will push for the truth
But she'll never believe you
And she'll take what you give her as long as it's free
She’s dressed like a soldier
But she's always abusing for me

Oh, she takes care of herself
She can wait if she wants
She's ahead of her crimes
Oh, and she only puts out
And she never gives in
She’s adjusting their minds

She will promise you more
liberation and freedom
Then she'll carelessly strip you
And laugh while you're freezing
She'll bring out your best
by the worst she can be
Blame it all on Saddam
'Cause she's always abusing for me

Oh, she takes care of herself
She can wait if she wants
She's ahead of her crimes
Oh, and she only puts out
And she never gives in
She’s adjusting their minds

She is frequently kind
And she's suddenly cruel
She can do as she pleases
You know she's my tool
But she can't be convicted
From the Hague we are free
The most they can do
Is push court-martial at you
‘Cause she's always abusing for me

Mmm, mmm, mmm mmm mmm, mmm

For both of your song parodies. I hope you will do some more.

Sometimes sick humor is the only way to cope with the shit that's happening.

I too found myself thinking of this song when all this came up, but your effort here is a keeper. In the other song, the Billy Joel one, it seemed like you could keep quite a few lines intact, which was interesting (if I remember the original lyrics).

I also started thinking of the dance, the Lindie Hop. Maybe it is some kind of automatic distancing mechanism - even with this gruesome stuff, you just can't help having these weird sort of black comedy connections pop up.

This is a very young lady in a very authoritarian environment (military) she was encouraged and goaded to step her own boundaries. Young people and even older people can be made to do things when the environment becomes sick and hopeless. She is definitely not a strong young woman of character and therefore easily manipulated and influenced.


If I were her parents I would sue the military and government for abusing the young person and life I entrusted them with.

Now, 20 somethings should be seen not as adults but as misguided children?

The state of west virginia granted her a marriage and a divorce...

Seeing her as a victim is like seeing SS guards at Dachau as innocent victims of their political environment.

Sorry. As a veteran and a parent I am not buying into that.

but a young person w little character who was doing her job. A job that became dysfunctional and depraved and very hostile. She did not have the character or the disposition or even the wish to respect her own or others boudaries.


I am just saying that in this situation her own boudaries were stepped on and she probably did not even know it.


In any case what happened to the prisoners is exponentially worse than what happened to her and she did have a say and some control whereas the victims were at eveyone's mercy.

I expect that Lynndie England will not suffer the same result...

I DO hold senior officers and civilians responsible for the lack of training, discipline, and depraved morale that allowed people like Pfc. England to do these things.

If there is a Hell I expect to meet all these folks there.

Haven't seen anyone post Frank Rich's smart piece on Lynndie and Jessica (Lynch) yet. It's on the NY Times site (free registration required) at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/16/arts/16RICH.html

Here's a sample:
--------------
" . . . there's a more revealing story in these women than the cheap ironies of their good witch/wicked witch twinship might suggest. Our 13-month journey from Jessica Lynch's profile in courage to Lynndie England's profile in sadism is less the tale of two women at the bottom of the chain of command than a gauge of the hubris by which those at the top have lost the war in both the international and American courts of public opinion. And the supposedly uplifting Lynch half of the double bill is as revealing of what's gone wrong for us in Iraq — and gone wrong from the start — as is her doppelgänger's denouement at Abu Ghraib."'
_________________

I'm not endorsing anything less than 10-20 at Levenworth for Pvt. England, but she's the birdie the Bushies would like us to watch while they move their hands behind the curtain. Lynndie is a symptom, not the disease. This country always seems to need a figure to adore or despise, to bear the burden of our collective mood. The fact is that many "ordinary" people, especially those with little education, training, or authority in life, like Lynndie, might have descended into the depravity she displayed under the conditions she experienced. She is us, every one of us, until and unless we act collectively to root out the evil that created her as its agent. And that evil lives in each of us, requiring our constant attention. The very definition of "liberalism" is the refusal to accept that society cannot overcome this evil that dwells in every human heart, and that collectively we can become better than we are today. We make a predictable error by personifying evil, or virtue, in an iconic figure like Lynndie or Jessica. Each makes it easy for us to project our own anxieties. Lynndie is not more to be pitied than despised, but she is to be pitied nonetheless. We must not make the mistake the right would prefer us to make, and lay all the evil done in our names on the shoulders of a weak, ignorant, barely grown-up working-class woman. The blame belongs as much, not more or less, on those who trained her, sent her, looked the other way, dehumanized Iraqis, cast this "war" as "good vs. evil." We should blame every Rambo movie, every shoot-em-up video game, and all the child-abusing crap that passes for "culture" in the United States. And we should blame ourselves, no matter how much we stand on the right side of history with respect to this war.

I hate Bush because he's made me hate myself as an American. Luckily, this seems to be the trend lately. If so, it will be a casting-off of self-loathing that is this regime's undoing.

Over and out.

Realcountrymusic

:)

:democrat:

Maybe she was sexually and physically abused as a child - that's awful and tragic...Maybe she then was somehow "sexually" abused herself in Iraq - also awful and tragic...

However, all that and even more suffering in her life doesn't excuse or lessen the actions that she willingly participated in as it regards the torture and abuse of these Iraq prisoners, whether she was following orders or not. There is free will and choices and she is an adult and victim or not, pay the consequences.

She is an adult and should pay the consequences, but we need to examine what role militarism played in the abuse scandal. Militaries have done horrific things throughout history. It is silly to believe that it is the result of a few bad apples.

The soldiers that took part should be tried and dealt with accordingly, but they are also victims of militarism.

I see Cheney's smirk as something like the Chesire cat's grin.

There, but not really.

should sue them due to these soldiers coming home all screwed up big time!

There is no evidence, yet, to suggest that soldiers moral and ethical framework were undermined.

Before we get into lawsuits that needs to be determined.

Personally, I think that young people with few scruples were selected into MOS's that took advantage of these person's innate traits.

Is that biased against Pfc England? Yes, it is.

But over the recent past the military has made a point of recruiting such people. Bad recruits=bad soldiers. Bad officers=bad military. Bad civilian leadership= well, in our case, sadly, tyranny.

Wave of Mental Problems Follows GIs Home

May 13, 2004

- MARK BENJAMIN, United Press International
United Press International

COLORADO SPRINGS, May 13, 2004 (United Press International via COMTEX) -- Soldiers at Fort Carson report a wave of serious mental problems among troops back from the "war on terrorism," according to interviews with soldiers, their families and a therapist working with them.

The torment seems linked to troubling behavior -- including a suicide, violence and heavy drinking among a number of the 12,000 troops arriving back in Colorado Springs, nestled in the eastern foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 60 miles south of Denver.

They say the Army frequently fails to diagnose or properly help suffering soldiers. In some cases -- particularly in elite fighting units -- soldiers hide problems fearing damage to their careers, turning instead to alcohol and sometimes resulting in domestic violence.

"The pattern I'm seeing is that they are not being evaluated very thoroughly," said Kaye Baron, a clinical psychologist in Colorado Springs. Baron treats soldiers in her private practice and helps the Department of Veterans Affairs evaluate the mental health of soldiers leaving the Army.

http://magazines.ivillage.com/goodhousekeeping/hb/news/article/0,,comtex_2004_05_13_up_0000-2591-~dstfront_03~ew~xml,00.html

and that's why I posted the response I did..They've wronged these people big time and are trying to escape any which way they can.

are going to have PTSD, more psych problems, and what the rest of their lives are going to be like?

I think a lot of us are going to pay dearly for the sins of Bush&Co.

malleability . Her history with bad marriages and relationship problems seems to suggest that she has such problems.
Any idiot might also consider that to be a preferable trait for these trainers.

I remember when I was 20 I worked at a half-way house in England for a summer. There were 2 houses next door to each other, and a volunteer in charge of each house. We volunteers were 18-22, and almost all the residents were men, and were there because of drugs, alcohol, or easing them back into society after a prolonged stay in prison. We volunteers had little oversight, and were kind of adrift and it was easy to lose your bearings. The situation was frequently intense, and crises were common.

The woman who was at my house before me returned briefly during my stay. She was 19, and sweet. It turned out she had slept with every man in the house (which is stomach-turning, if you knew them). I don't imagine Lynndie is sweet, but people do things in fucked-up circumstances, that they don't do in normal ones.

in custody is perverted and very dangerous indeed. She needs to be held responsible for what she did, just like everyone else.

"England, who has been the most public face of the scandal, said that the prisoners were put on leashes to intimidate them, trying to get them to confess to raping a 15-year-old Iraqi boy."

"Pointing to picture 000019, which shows her pointing at a detainee masturbating, she explained, "Staff Sgt. Frederick had removed the bags from the detainee's head and motioned for them to masturbate themselves. The detainee I'm pointing at didn't stop, so we took a picture of it.""

So, basically they were raping people in order to get them to confess to rape (for the record, I am sure that forcing people to masturbate publicly would qualify as rape or sexual assault in any North American court room).

Or maybe they wanted someone to confess to a rape that somebody else had done, to cover their tracks. I have heard rumours of a teenage boy being raped, while soldiers video taped the rape. The more I think about that one, the more it seems possible.

be afraid...be very afraid.

but DAMN it was fun".

How in the HELL can these people not recognize right from wrong?

Symptom Bearer
The symptom bearer is an identifiable entity within unhealthy systems. It is the person who "carries the virus" or is "getting sick" due to a specific problem within the system. This person is carrying the problem for everyone, and in general, if the system doesn't change, the symptom bearer will leave. Interestingly, even if the symptom bearer does leave, the problem will stay and a new symptom bearer will emerge.
http://www.eneph.com/feature_archive/management/v24n9p500.html

The symptom bearer in any given family system –nay, in any given system—is not the problem. Rather, he or she is the voice, the standard bearer, the compass which points to a problem somewhere else in that system.
http://www.opednews.com/simon-noble_1203_bush_derangement.htm

person and to boot she is metally challanged, which is why they picked her to do this stuff shes a effing moron

'"Picture 000015 was basically us fooling around," she said, pointing to a photograph of detainees stacked naked in different positions...'

I'm glad they didn't decide to really humiliate them. Ack.

On the plus side, I have a new sig line...

The deal:

Say it was fun and games. Don't point fingers at anyone higher up and she skates.

I have a feeling this is going to be a theme we'll be hearing at the court marshals.

The military dehumanizes people. What the US Military - there were more people involved, it wasn't just Ms. England - did was wrong, but should we be surprised? The military trains people to kill. Those in the military are trained to kill people, should we really be that surprised when they treat people like this?

It's surprising to see liberals - the supposed open minded free thinkers - treat this woman so poorly. Go ahead and blame her. Forget about the people that dragged us into this war. Forget about the Democrats and Republicans that lied us into war. Forget about Bill Clinton and the millions of people that his sanctions killes. Forget about John Kerry and his pro-war vote. Forget about the real criminals and blame Ms. England.

Abuses occur with every war, but there are rules against what we saw in those pictures. The military has procedures for dealing with those abuses. They must be followed in the case of Ms England & her comrades.

And I definitely believe the higher-ups should not escape blame--the actions of the Officers & members of the Bush regime need to be examined in detail. You've mentioned Clinton & Kerry as culprits--can't you think of any Republicans?

Military culture dehumanizes the enemy. If it's alright to kill the enemy, why not torture them?

And I did mention Clinton and Kerry. I mentioned them for a very specific reason. The blame right now is being thrown on the Bush Administration and their fellow Republicans. And while I can't stand the Republicans in general and the Bush Administration specifically, I don't think it is fair for them to take all of the blame. I brought up Clinton and Kerry to show that war is a nonpartisan problem. Murder and atrocities can be and are committed by both parties. Kerry testified about the atrocities that he witnessed and participated in during Nam. Clinton continued the inhumane sanctions against the Iraqi people.

You want me to mention a Republican? No problem. Teddy Roosevelt was a hardcore imperialist. Here's an example of some of his war crimes:

from http://www.agitprop.org.au/nowar/20030418_z_coalition_of_the_unindicted.php


In the aftermath of the Spanish-American War, the U.S. fought a brutal war of conquest against Filipinos. By 1900, more than 75,000 American troops-three quarters of the entire U.S. Army-were sent to the Philippines. In the face of this overwhelming show of force, the Filipinos turned to guerrilla warfare. The February 5, 1901 edition of the New York World shed some light on the U.S. response to Filipino guerilla tactics: “Our soldiers here and there resort to terrible measures with the natives. Captains and lieutenants are sometimes judges, sheriffs and executioners. ‘I don’t want any more prisoners sent into Manila’ was the verbal order from the Governor-General three months ago. It is now the custom to avenge the death of an American soldier by burning to the ground all the houses, and killing right and left the natives who are only suspects.”

In an eerie presaging of Vietnam’s hamlets, Filipino villagers were herded into concentration camps called “reconcentrados.” Captive Filipino soldiers and civilians alike were submitted to the “water cure.” According to the Philippine-American War Centennial Initiative, this method “consisted of forcing four or five gallons of water down the throat of the captive whose body becomes an object frightful to contemplate, and then squeezing it by kneeling on his stomach. The process was repeated until the ‘amigo’ talked or died.” And if those amigos struck back, the U.S. was ready to up the ante.

When a U.S. platoon was wiped out in an ambush, Brig. Gen. Jacob W. Smith, a veteran of the Wounded Knee massacre, issued orders to kill “all persons of 10 years and older.” “The interior of Samar must be made a howling wilderness,” Smith declared. “I want no prisoners, I wish you to kill and burn, the more you kill and burn the better it will please me. I want all persons killed who are capable of bearing arms in actual hostilities against the United States.”

“The My Lai massacre had its predecessor in the Philippines in 1906,” says Howard Zinn. “The American army attacked a group of 600 Moros in southern Philippines-men, women, and children living in very primitive conditions, who had no modern weapons. The American army attacked them with modern weapons, wiped out every last one of these 600 men, women, and children.” The commanding officer responsible for this war crime received a telegram of congratulations from Theodore Roosevelt.
more http://www.agitprop.org.au/nowar/20030418_z_coalition_of_the_unindicted.php

I thought for sure that I would be hearing from you. . .

wrong and should be punished. I think everyone connected to this up and down needs punished. I don't believe letting this little ho off the hook is warranted. She did the crime. She does the time. Anything
less is an insult to the very notion of self-responsibility and adult hood.

By the way, someone who saw the pictures said there were many of her having sex with more than one man ... many men. They were green around the gills talking about it. I would love to hear her explain how having sex with a lot of men, sometimes in front of prisoners is
'fun'.

She's a ho.

Of course having sex in front of prisoners is wrong, but to call her a ho is just wrong. If she chooses to engage in consensual group sex then that is her business. Why would you care? Why would you bother calling her a ho? Are you the morality police? That's what I get from reading your post.

Moving away from Ms. England's sex life, it does appear that the higher ups are getting off (no pun intended) pretty easily. We don't really hear about them in the media. It's always the bad apples. There is also a constant attack on Ms. England (this is prevalent on the open-minded DU as well).

Much of the framework for policing is formalized through society's institutions, but it is nonetheless the scope and endurance of societal outrage that will see that the guilty are prosecuted by those societal institutions.

I am outraged by all the Americans (and perhaps others) who brought torture by Americans to Abu Graib. Because Pfc. England's character is so thoroughly involved, it follows that holding her entire life up to judgment is not only going to go on but is a logical expectation for behavior of members of our society. At present Pfc. England's various behaviors at the prison are looking very damning.

In conversations and in chat rooms all over the world her character is being found to be wanting. If calling her a "ho" is a judgment that doesn't adequately or precisely capture disgust with her behavior (though I think it kinda sorta does)the phrase criminal depravity seems rather lacking in emotion.

But, her self-professed amusement with tormenting prisoners is evidence of what seems, a priori, her depraved indifference to international standards for the well being of prisoners, a.k.a. human beings, entrusted (subjected?) to her care.

As you rightly say the stain of this seems to begin rather much higher in the chain of command than enlisted personnel.

Our society's appetite to see justice is the only thing that will see appropriate punishments done from the lowest ranking perp to the highest ranking policymaker/war criminals. Consequently, we have to pursue policing the morality of our national group behavior until that justice is complete.

Much of the framework for policing is formalized through society's institutions, but it is nonetheless the scope and endurance of societal outrage that will see that the guilty are prosecuted by those societal institutions.
Let's hope that the guilty are punished, however I am doubtful. I believe that Ms. England is being set up to take the fall.

I am outraged by all the Americans (and perhaps others) who brought torture by Americans to Abu Graib. Because Pfc. England's character is so thoroughly involved, it follows that holding her entire life up to judgment is not only going to go on but is a logical expectation for behavior of members of our society. At present Pfc. England's various behaviors at the prison are looking very damning.
We should examine certain aspects of her life. Unfortunately, we aren't examining a key aspect: militarism. The military dehumanizes people. Human beings are taugh to kill. If it's ok to kill, then why is it bad to "play some games?" Aby Ghraib should be used to examine military life, but it won't. It will be used to persecute Ms. England (although she hasn't helped her case much).

In conversations and in chat rooms all over the world her character is being found to be wanting. If calling her a "ho" is a judgment that doesn't adequately or precisely capture disgust with her behavior (though I think it kinda sorta does)the phrase criminal depravity seems rather lacking in emotion.
What makes her a ho? Is it the fact that she likes sex that varies from the status quo? I think group sex is odd, so I don't partake. If we want to condemn the people who had sex in front of criminals, that's one thing. But to call Ms. England a ho because she chose to have group sex is ridiculous.

But, her self-professed amusement with tormenting prisoners is evidence of what seems, a priori, her depraved indifference to international standards for the well being of prisoners, a.k.a. human beings, entrusted (subjected?) to her care.
This goes much deeper. We need to examine military culture. It is quite obviously not a case of a few bad apples.

As you rightly say the stain of this seems to begin rather much higher in the chain of command than enlisted personnel.
See Justin Raimondo's article http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2591

Our society's appetite to see justice is the only thing that will see appropriate punishments done from the lowest ranking perp to the highest ranking policymaker/war criminals. Consequently, we have to pursue policing the morality of our national group behavior until that justice is complete.
Justice? I don't think that our society has an apetite to see justice. If we did, there would be unanimous calls for Rumsfeld's head.

(I think its unfortunate you cited Ramaindo. Although antiwar.com sounds like a liberal name, the website isn't. To be sure it is an odd mixture politically, but generally speaking the site combines Buchannite Republicans and and Cato institute Libertarians with occassional comments consitent with the traditional conservative republican view that overseas entanglements should be avoided...
I do read antiwar.com on a regular basis but in keeping with DU policy of not promoting right wing viewpoints I generally don't cite it)

I appreciate your anxiety about the potential scapegoating of Pfc. England.

--but, frankly, Lynndie England's behavior really does seem to be abHOrrent. If on top of being amused by tormenting prisoners, having group sex, doesn't make her a "ho" (whatever that turns out to mean in a Funk and Wagnell's) or in the terms of my generation a "slut," she is at least dispicabile by most American standards of value. To recognize that is in some sense to admit to having been socialized into the American mainstream. The emotional content of the word "ho" better transmits disgust than cleaner phrases like alledged abuser of incarcerated Iraqis.

--many people serving in the military come from unfortunate and abused backgrounds. It is the nature of life that the enlisted ranks of the military are stoked with humans with few opportunities. But the vast majority do not succumb to purulent desires to see retribution (for 911 or other historic acts) through the degradation of prisoners. I am not going to be easily persuaded that she is not guilty be reason of a cultural psychosis defense.

--believe it or not, there ARE things that sane human beings believe are worth dying for. I am very unsure that any of the reasons proposed by the Bush administration for the war in Iraq are actually worth dying for. However, I accept that among those would be the protection of the innocent and helpless, and the struggle for human equality and, consequently, the suppression of abuses by aristocracies/ monarchies/ dictatorships which priviledge the comfortable lives of the wellborn/powerful over the rest of humanity.

--The idea that all military service is dehumanizing seems to me to be your personal belief. Not surprisingly you priviledge it above others. But that logic also applies to my belief which are buttresed by personal experience. So, I am not nearly convinced.

I served in Vietnam during the last seven months leading to the ceasefire. At that time it was an unpopular war even among the military. Members of the communications unit I worked with spent off-duty time installing electrical service and modifying motors needed to run pumps to get the neighboring village a dependable supply of clean water. Yes, some in the unit got drunk and behaved in ways they wouldn't like to share with their spouses...but at least as many (I think more) behavd in ways they and their families could be proud of in later life.

--I actually do believe there are broad if not universal calls for Rumsfeld to lose his job. However, that may not be significant enough punishment. Persons who are guilty of putting in place a global system of secret torture prisons intended to circumvent the application of US and International law are very very dangerous to the values and traditions of the way of life of Americans. Uemployment at retirement is far, far, far short of the consequence which should follow such depraved acts against humanity.

I don't have the time to reply to your entire post, but I would like to comment on antiwar.com.

While it is true that Raimondo is a libertarian, that is no reason that we can't use his articles. Opposing the war isn't partisan, it is ideological. When it comes to opposing military intervention in general, you will be hard pressed to find someone as consistent and powerful as Raimondo. In fact, some of the best antiwar pieces have come from (small "l") libertarians. Can you give me an example of a right wing viewpoint from the article that I linked?

That isn't to say that sometimes the interests and perspectives of people from various perspectives don't find their interests having an intersection.

Being democratic and progressive doesn't mean being anti-military.

If you are paying attention to the Kerry campaign you will realize that misconception about democrats is something he is working to overcome.

That dog won't hunt, so give it a rest.

It does have to do with Clinton, but it also has to do with everyone else that has played a role in the militarization of the world. I mentioned two prominent militarist Democrats to prove that it wasn't a partisan issue. If you read down to a later post, I provided an example of an imperialist Republican as well.

Everyone should read this and just try to put it in the context of a world where there is not just a simple assumption of obedience (What does a WHITE COAT do to our potential to follow basic orders?) Sit here, sit there, take off your clothes, lets stick a needle in your arm, etc.....,
--but a formal set of rules that DEMANDS obedience.

This says something about our very selves, and that consideration should say something about what that reality may have been like.
But that is only if a person is willinf to examine it objectivly. http://home.swbell.net/revscat/perilsOfObedience.html

That does not in sense imply absolution for these crimes, but it does give some consideration for the potential horrors these soldiers may experience eventually. The participants in the Milgram experiment were seriously screwed up afterwards. Realizing their potential was NO fun. Milgram's inspiration for this experiment came directly from his awareness of Nazi accomplices. http://designweb.otago.ac.nz/grant/psyc/OBEDIANCE.HTML

That is the point here. We abide by the Conventions for a number of reasons, but one is the do unto others principle. Would Ms. England like to be stripped naked, piled on top of other prisoners, forced to masturbate, equipped with a leather collar, and forced to crawl around on the cement floor for 4 to 6 hours? Nothing extreme she says.

Of course, let's not forget the sodomy and rape. Is this something that she wouldn't mind?

are coming hoe to roost. Let me guess what informed her sense of morality. Hmmmmm.

Fart jokes and women kissing does not bring this on. He is so championing the good fight now too.

guilty of promoting a everything-is-a-joke mentality.

the kind of mindset we see here. I'll have to dig that up.

I'll bet you right now that Lyndie England is a god-fearing Christian.
It's the hate radio of Hannity, Savage and Limbaugh combined with the politization of religion in the US that encourages this sub-humanization of all things non-Christian. I have talked to people who are devout Christians that don't have a clue as to where I stand and they have been talking about how Islam is a vile religion.

It was reported by a Congress person that she is in a Video having sexual intercourse with several fellow male gaurds in front of Iraqi detainees. Was she ordered to do this?

I still believe that the policy of humiliation, abuse and torture was general policy from Rumsfeld and his group and the gaurds, civi mercs carried out the policy with enthusiasm. It seems that the mgrs. picked Reservists and National Gaurd personnel on purpose because they were more pliable.

attends church regularly? That's all I want to know.

She smacks of a fucked up sexually perverted mindset that only needed a naziesque prison setting to act out. The whole fundie program will be seen for what it is in time: it produces this kind of morally bankrupt personality.

Perle's and Rummy's dehumanization of Iraqis to the soldiers is very responsible for this.

And Clinton had a lot of respect for the Iraqis?

How could she not see anything wrong with
this treatment? I guess she wouldn't mind
trading places with the prisoners since
she feels that torture is ok. :grr:


:puke:

...and ofcourse the scary thing is she is going to have a baby in 4 months....What is that poor child's future?

So stupid, they couldn't even put their own family in that situation in their minds and ask how they'd feel about it.

I'm getting pretty damn sick and tired of the US Military thinking -- because it's basically populated by a bunch of brats who think they're number one, like this is some kind of sick football game -- that they can do whatever they want without penalty. This goes for the USA too -- just who the hell do we think we are, anyway? We're punks in the scale of civilizations -- typically adolescent -- dumb and insensitive to the respect of elders.

having a prayer vigil for her tonight. They actually don't think any of that stuff was wrong, after all (they) attacked us on 911. I heard one talk show host say their only sin was having a digital camera.