Not only male Iraqis... Sexual abuse and rape of women in detention

Remove all ads!

Not much time has passed since the last topic covering child rape in coalition detention camps (also this one, this one, this one, or this one), or this one, or this one) and we have more and more news of such things coming and coming.

For the beginning, a relatively dated news:

The photos and tales of hooded male Iraqis don't seem to move anyone anymore and pretty much everyone who gives a damn already knows those by heart. Therefore, I'm going to spare these.

It's no mystery, contrary to what Rummie or Dubya or a couple of generals might think, that there are female detainees in the camps. And they give birth to children. What happens to those children? See:

Now you can read about the oh so chivalrous defenders of freedom disrobing 12 (twelve) year old girls to satiate their sick fancy by pouring water on her. God knows if water was the only liquid with which she came into contact:

(here)

Another source (Village Voice, not an impressive name, I admit) claims that, "Practically ignored in the Abu Ghraib torture scandal are the Iraqi female prisoners who have told their attorneys they were raped by U.S. soldiers."

A question needs to be asked: WTF are those women ignored? Is the Western world able to digest the bizarre piramids of naked and hooded male Iraqis also from time to time forced to "simulate" intercourse, but not plain old rape in which real women are being forced into real intercourse?

Not even the whole of the US administration denies the accusation. General Taguba, for example, does not. Here's a snip:

Can't get any more direct than that.

It's not like we only have the victims' or other Iraqis' words on which to rely. Far from that. There are photos. Obviously, I don't have links to such photos. But consider this:

Next:

What is even more aggrieving is that the good Uncle Sam's boys were given lots and lots of quality time with female detainees and no one up there cared about that until it came out and saw daylight. Spoils of war? Soldier's reward?

If you don't want to rely on pure testimony of being raped, how does pregnancy sound to you?

Even the Iraqi resistance knew, while the rest of the world wouldn't know or care. Here's a little excerpt which reflects the desperation of the Iraqis, deciding to kill their own women with their own bombs rather than allow the shame to continue:

The case is a very difficult one also because the women involved would do all they could to keep the matter secret. Reasonably so, as the shame would be unbearable for their families. They have husbands and they have children. Here's an excerpt:

Ultimately, there's quite a suggestion that the US administration blocked the display of photos showing the abuse of female detainees. As:

From here.

Now let's consider a woman given the name of Nadia for the purpose of the article:

Further:

From here

Here's more:

According to the same source quoting Newsweek on this one:

An article about new photos now including women and juveniles: http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-05/11/article04.shtml

From here

From the very Guardian:

(here)

Surprising as it may seem to you, Islam Online didn't come up with the stories. The rest of the Guardian's article gives hint that it could actually have been the source of those.

Anything familiar?

More:

More:

I wonder who of SPers will be the first one to say it was a justifiable method of collecting information to save the lives of Americans.

Even more, this time of shouting and wailing women with whom the visiting journalists were not allowed to talk - for WTF reason, I wonder?

I also wonder how many of those women will die in "accidents".

Next example of the guards' creativity:

A bit of a conclusion on Professor Shaker's part:

The Islam Online's account of Nadia's rape ordeal is also confirmed by PeaceWomen - Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, here.

As if going to prison with no charge weren't enough. In Iraq and generally in the Muslim world, if a woman goes to prison, it's assumed that she has been humiliated and males have touched her in improper ways. Rape is practically a given, and even a whisper of rape is enough to damage the reputation of the woman and her family, who knows, maybe even have her killed in an honour killing.

From Seoul Times, in an article which deals with the effects of many fake rape photos being circulated and connected with the real ones and the victim accounts:

Letters like the one below surely don't help amend the situation:

More:

Yeah, how democratic and liberating it is, let alone Christian, to rape 14 year old girls. I wonder how many of those guys call themselves Christians. Yeah, I'm Christian myself and I don't see the connection between Christianity and rape of little girls, but how are Muslims going to perceive Christianity after such things? Especially given the label of a terrorist they are all given just because of being Muslim.

Next:

More:

Kind of a conclusion:

From Seoul Times, here. Surprisingly, the article originally comes from The Christian Science Monitor, here.

Whatever you are going to say about the above quotes, please, please don't tell me any more of that bull**** about isolated cases being inflated by the media.

(from here)

More about the women fearing to testify because of the stigma associated with rape in the Muslim culture:

(from here)

And about women getting out of Abu Ghraib pregnant and being killed by their families:

(from here)

And a little bit about the method of dealing with sexual abuse reports:

(from here)

Yeah, fine and demote them for being there and consider the case closed.

Talk About Network has another article, claiming that:

More:

For God's sake, they would even rape a woman in front of her husband:

The link: http://www.talkaboutrecovery.com/group/alt.sexual.abuse.recovery/messages/111548.html

From SBS:

(here)

That would be it, so far as we consider quotes. As a somewhat personal reflection, I wonder how many of those monsters will come back undisturbed to their country and their local communities and will play war heroes, advocates of all sorts of freedom and liberty and good Christians, taking their wives and daughters to church and praying with them.

You were born to give us pleasure! said the noble crusader to the pagan woman, as he...

As regards male detainees, you can talk about bad guys, vital information to save the lives of American people, or what those men would do to you if they caught you. But women?

Before you say, "this is war,", think twice what you would say if Saddam's boys came over and did the same to your women.

Before you start going on and on about vital information, terrorist attacks etc, think what could those women have done, what crime could they have committed and what information could they have held.

No matter what you say, I see no justification whatsoever for that. War on terror doesn't justify that. Even 9/11 does not.

[ January 19, 2005, 18:04: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Really not a lot anyone can add to that.
I don't believe anyone could possibly justify it.

It has to be said the only thing I'm surprised about is the fact it has come to light at all.

Shame that the perpetrators won't face Iraqi justice, if indeed any at all.

 

Kill all the soldiers. Twice. In the face.

 

I would agree that prisoner abuse in Iraq has been systematic, extending well beyond a few isolated incidents. The base impulse of some people to take advantage of those completely under their control was not served well at all by an administration that hedges around the issue of torture. I am astounded that Gonzales will most likely be sworn in as attorney general after his role in providing a legal fig leaf for torture.

I would, however, question the reliability of many of your news sources. Reading the more reputable ones, such as the csmonitor, the charges, though still sickening, fall far, far short of the systematic rape that you describe. While the csmonitor, in refering to the photographic, video, and other evidence brought forward in congress but not released publically, does bring up the use of nudity as a way of humiliating prisoners, and does refer to at least one case of rape of a female prisoner by a guard, it mostly focuses on how female prisoners are tainted by their stay in Abu Graib regardless to what happened to them, not only because of the abuses that happened there, but also because of the undeniable use of Abu Graib as propaganda by the Iraqi insurgency. Note that the article begins with a reference to published photographs in Iraqi newspapers supposed to document the rape of female prisoners, which were actually photoshopped stills from porn films. The rest of the article addresses not the abuse in Abu Graib, but the problems faced by female prisoners released from custody within a society that assumes that they were all sexually abused, which is I think absurd.

Again, I'm not denying that abuses occured, and I share your disappointment at the lack of accountability. But many of the charges you cite beggar belief, and I think many of them come from insurgent propaganda, occasionally picked up as news by the more intensely anti-war websites. The charge of systematic rape, that every female in US prisons has been sexually assaulted and is pregnant, is simply absurd. That Iraqi Police were allowed to participate in in this systematic rape is doubly absurd, and was probably designed to further justify insurgent attacks on the ING and IP.

I'm not at all saying that abuse didn't occur. Thanks to the stupidity of Rummie and co, Abu Graib is a propaganda goldmine. Of course the insurgency is going to play it up for all it's worth, but many of the allegations you bring up here are vastly exaggerated. No surprise here: they're very effective, and there seems almost no limit to the depravity of US soldiers in the eyes of certain elements of the Sunni Arab press (not to mention elements of the European and American press). So again, I would look very carefully at the reliability and motives of the sources you cite.

 

Yes chev, we know that horrible things happen in the prison camps, the rape of women seems the most normal among them.
With given power, the human turns into animals, it changes the gaoler to torturer, the leader to dictator, the husband to raper.
It affects me, it affects you, it's how we are.
Ecce homo, Behold human.

Yes chev, there is no justification, justification is what we call 'agreeing with the act', I don't justify it, and neither should anyone here.

 

We all agree it's horrific and inexcusable -- it's been said over and over and over and over. And let's all remember of course that US soldiers are the only savages in military history that have engaged in this type of disgusting behavior.

 

Spell, we all *seem* to attack to US on every little thing, we talk about America's crimes, but not about China's and Turkey's.

But you know why? Because you are on top, on the mountain of civilisation America is on top, we all bash America because we all see it, we all moan about everything America does because we feel it will affect us.
And as the old Dutch saying goes "High trees catches many(or was that much?) wind".

 

I feel so sick and saddened by what I have read. I have only read a few of news stories - the quotes were bad enough. Nothing can justify such vile acts.

I never cry at movies, even as a child but this brought tears to my eyes. I was hoping that the story that I posted a while back was just a 'one-off' - this would have been bad enough.

If there is a hell I hope all involved including their friends and supporters rot there for eternaty.

I used to support the war - removing a dictator and bring peace. I honestly beleive that the Iraqi's may have been better off Sadam in power. At least he didn't claim to bring freedom.

I expect they will get a demotion and a few years in prison for what they have done and a heroes welcome.

I wonder what their wives and chilren will think of these brave soldiers protecting the world from terrorism?

I wonder if this will sway the opinion on the 'war on terror'.

 

This is so sick!

All those soldiers deserve to raped themselves.

[ January 20, 2005, 20:57: Message edited by: Jesper898 ]

 

1) Granted: some US troops are responsible for abuses in Iraqi prisons, and some of these abuses, including the humilation of prisoners, could be described as systematic: i.e., with the tacit approval and design of the Pentagon.

2) Media outlets like islamonline have published some of the most outrageous propaganda, such as the charge that US troops have continually used poison gas (that is, not tear gas, but real live chemical warfare) on Fallujah, etc. This is entirely and absolutely absurd; given the huge number of photographs and videos to come out of Fallujah, why are none of the troops wearing masks?

3) The charge of systematic rape of female prisoners by US forces and by the ING and IP is similarly absurd, and basically constitutes propaganda. This is not unexpected; islamonline, like aljazeera, leans heavily toward the prejudices of much of its Sunni Arab constituency (similar to Fox News leaning toward a certain US constituency). This not only means leaning toward negative reporting of the US, but also toward Shia Arabs and Persians, and even toward (Sunni) Kurds, Turks, etc. Its negative view of the US occupation of Iraq has led some of these media outlets to publish raw insurgent propaganda as though it were news.

4) I am amazed at how quickly people on these boards will believe the most terrible accusations against US troops and US intentions. Granted, our re-elected leader doesn't really inspire the most confidence, but I think a lot of you guys have taken leave of reality here, and my question is why?

 

There is a purpose why I pointed at Islam Online and not directly at the sources of their articles. Look beneath their texts and you will find references. Or follow the links I gave below the Islam Online quotes. And what? Yeah, it seems those are the same texts, letter by letter. It was sort of a bait on my part - I foresaw that the first and foremost argument will be that the source is biased. Well then, read the Guardian, CSM and others for the exact same passages.

Why? Not enough victims? Not enough witnesses? Not enough photos? What numbers will satisfy you?

Saudi Arabia, Kuwait... they so hate the US.

OK, we need to draw a line between Dubya and America herself, OK? It's not fair to blame the whole nation for Dubya's boys, but the same way is it not exactly right to let the good legacy of the America excuse the current wrongdoings of Dubya and his lads. And no matter how great a nation it is as a whole or how good intentions it has, it in no way legitimatises what is going on in detention camps.

So much as those happenings aren't the norm in the light of the American system of values and they do outrage your average American (I believe and I hope), the theory of isolated cases has long been dead. We are practically being bombed with new and new cases and while probably some of them are exaggerated and a few downright false, there's clearly too much still to believe that there is no wide-spread tendency.

So much as I don't believe in a planned policy of abuse and humiliation on the part of the chief authorities in Bush's administration, I don't believe in isolated cases or in officers, including high ranking commanders, not knowing about the criminal developments. So much as I do believe that the individual opressors may have been so ordered by their superiors, I don't believe that all of them were only grudgingly complying with orders.

Wherever you look, there is blame. From direct, physical and sexual assualt, through silent concessions to negligence and oversight.

My theory is that:

• US Army recruitment rules need to be reviewed
• US Army Staff training, promotion and assignment procedures need to be reviewed
• Ethics needs to be included in soldiers' and officers' training
• The military needs more screening, from private soldiers to five star generals
• Civilian contractors carrying arms and performing military duties need to be subject to military justice
• The accountability of commanders for their troops needs to be extented or at least enforced more strictly
• There must be some recognition of the fact that the problem is when bad things happen, not when bad things are brought to daylight
• There must be some recognition that human rights apply to all people by nature and not by virtue of treaties
• Of course, treaties still exist and they are actually meant to be observed

There was that old saying, "do unto others as you wish to be done unto". If, for a change, one would drop the pretence of exceptionalism and put an end to double standards and hiding the dirty laundry under the carpet until it stinks too hard.

If you want to have the latter answered, you need to have the former conceded, so it's more or less pointless.

Not all armies believe themselves to be soldiers of light, defenders of the opressed, avengers of the wronged and promotors of peace and justice.

Humanitarian intervention... War on terror... Campaign against evil... The fight for freedom (for whom?)...

[ January 20, 2005, 20:15: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Chevy, you forgot the main thing: The fight for Freedom.

Freedom for whom?

 

How is it pointless?? He's already conceded it, yet you failed to answer his question.

Oh come on....sure there may be one or two armies in the history of time that didn't feel they represented all of those things, BUT NOT MANY. It's a fairly typical trade for the threat of one's own death.

 

Maybe the fact that so many people are not prepared to give the US even the benefit of the doubt is saying it all, Bion. And I am not speaking of the SPers. Nor do I think it has all that much to do with Bush. US reputation is ruined, and its their own fault.

People have heard and seen just too many stories and reports over the years, the sum of which have led them to see the actions and attitude of the US (and especially its military) in a very negative light.
You say we are leaving behind reality when believing this 'propaganda' against the US. Maybe we leave your reality and it just perfectly fits the impression we gained. What with all those reports of torture - everywhere. Afghanistan, Guantanamo, suspects sent to Syria to be tortured. Propaganda, fed to us by your enemies - with the assistence of our media no less. I guess we are expected to see the US forces as the victim.

Thats the unfortunate thing about having a bad reputation: Nothing seems to be a far stretch anymore. The US has become prone to the worst accusations - by its own doing.
Not that I am saying that your military/intelligence doesnt make use of torture. There is too much evidence open for all to see. My opinion is set in that regard.

How to explain the different perception of the US, or rather its military? Do we see things that you dont get to see? Or is it because we are not Americans? I tend to assume the latter.

 

You bring up a good point....I wonder how each of you would feel if you could be an American for a day or a month....you love your country and stick by it (even though YOU didn't elect it's President)...but it's still where you were born and where you live. And every couple of days you come in here (and other places on the net) and see the US criticized, slammed, made fun of, etc....ad nauseum. Do you think it makes any of us feel real good? Do you think that we Americans are so insensitive here that posts like this don't really matter? Do you think that when we read crap like this, we're not supposed to wonder why people keep posting stuff like this over and over and over?? It was discussed once -- you, me and all the Americans and Europeans and every other nationality on the planet are quite aware of the atrocities that occurred at the hands of the evil imperialists. To what point is it to post this kind of thing ad nauseum??? Perhaps you're not aware of how the Americans here feel?? I tend to doubt that....so try putting yourself in our shoes and just think a minute how we might feel, if that even matters.

 

In the cases on this thread, the issue for me is how quickly people make the jump from fact to accusation to raw supposition: in the case of Abu Graib, from reporting the documented cases of abuse that everyone knows about, to plausable but not yet fully substantiated accusations of further abuse, which using Chev's sources would be the abuse or harrassment of several women prisoners, to the implausable supposition of systematic rape (which in Chev's sources are based on one note, one interview, and a raft of propaganda which even suggests that the insurgents kill all the women in Abu Graib to save them from their shame) with apparently every female prisoner becoming pregnant, involving not only US forces but the IP and ING as well.

The interesting thing is how the substantiated material is positioned as the basis for people to believe whatever they please. For example, read the csmonitor article; it's not nearly as condemning as its positioning among the rest of the material would lead you to believe, and it actually says a few things about how the Abu Graib rape accusations were peddled in the Sunni press, with blurred porn images printed in newspapers to stand in for photographic evidence.

If the Guardian chooses to comment on these images as possibly being news, so much the worse for them. The Guardian has been a case in point of the European press twisting itself into knots trying to softpedal some of the worst examples of religious fundamentalism and nationalism. In my opinion this all began with Bosnia: before the intervention, much of the Left complained that the uncaring West was doing nothing because the victims were Muslim, while after NATO stepped in, much of the Left was suddenly crying about violating the sactity of Serbian nationalism. If in the end the Left, of which I count myself a member, is only capable of complaining about and opposing the use of power in whichever direction it flows, it will never go anywhere, and will always be sitting on the historical sidelines. The Guardian treated Afghanistan as being colonialist and almost genocidal; suddenly they're much more silent after the popular enthusiasm that greeted the elections there. Towards the beginning of the insurgency, the Guardian also reported "for the sake of balance" reports (from Sunni sources) that bomb attacks on Shia marketplaces were from Coalition troops, a charge that no one would take seriously now that the insurgency's tactics are obvious for everyone to see.

The US (and to a lesser extent the UK) has shot itself in the foot by softpedaling the Geneva conventions, by playing around with the definitions of POWs in Gitmo, and they should be taken to task for that. But tell me how this justifies accepting unsubstantiated propaganda at face value?

 

Of all of the things that have been said on this thread, this sticks out to me.

While I certainly agree that the United States has stuck its metaphorical foot up its own metaphorical tail-pile many times, both in recent history and further back, and I almost wholeheartedly agree with about eighty-five percent of the anti-Bush rhetoric that comes flowing so freely from the Alley, (note that I have specifically said anti-BUSH, not anti-American - we can just nip that little playing card right in the bud!) there comes a point where you must draw the line between (as Bion so nicely put it) "accepting unsubstantiated propaganda at face value" and trying to find the truth.

Now, I am certainly no expert on this conflict and the multitudinous issues surrounding it, but it would seem to me that all that is really going on here is some foot-stamping and teeth-gnashing about something that noone can do anything about anymore, and a great deal of beating upon dead equines. If we're trying to figure out the truth of what's really going on "over there," then fine, but if all we're really doing is bemoaning the fact that the United States is (as Morgoth succintly put) a tall tree catching a lot of wind, then this argument is nothing more than ego-petting and horn-blowing.

/off-topic rant over.

 

Hmm. Spellbound - I really do understand you. I can only try to put myself in your place with that much success, of course. Still, I think I can imagine what it must be like.

Perhaps you in turn can understand the sheer anger that people over here feel. After being insulted, ridiculed, threadened by certain individuals for oppsing this idiocy... something like this happens. Its like an invitation to attack. And knowing people that invitation will be accepted.
What eggs people on is the smugness with which responsibilty is avoided by those who ought to be held responsible. (but no - they are being re-elected...)
Plus the way the abuse and suffering of the victims is belittled. Here and in other places.

Like Falstaff said: Refusing to let this matter rest is nothing other then doing some venting. But how to do that without hurting people one doesnt want to hurt!

That being said I agree with everything posted by Bion and Falstaff.

 

It keeps getting posted again and again because we expect better from the America. We dont want to believe that the US is not better than the USSR or Red China, we want the US to be one of us. We dont want the one and only superpower who loudly trumpets its good intent and whose population we are quite familiar with be a warmongering, torturing, greedy, arrogant and contempous entity inspiring fear in us instead of respect and admiration.

With great powers come great responsibility.
In my eyes and in the eyes of many others the US does not live up to that responsibility at the moment.

 

That was decided long ago. It's been said fifty different ways on a million different posts....that point HAS BEEN MADE. Why keep bringing this garbage up? If there is a purpose then it escapes me.....but I do see the effect...it makes me and I suspect, many others here, feel bad.

Dendri -- thanks for your understanding.