Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Iraq Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: How many of the torture pictures are fake?
Blackwood    4/30/2004 9:27:14 PM
There's questions about the alleged torture pictures being passed around on the internet. The BOTTOM set of photos on the arab site link that are not from link are obviously from a porn film and not legit Their uniform is nothing at all like the Iraqi issue. They're wearing jungle fatigues in a desert. The tire props are cheap and look like from a Honda, not a Hummer They have no indentifying insiginia of any army at all. Some clothing is too large and ill fitting. (One guy's shirt reaches down to his knees in the third from the bottom photo, which was laughed at by a veteran looking over my soldier here.) Their shoes are cheap and not military issue. The women gang raped appear to be hispanic and russian, not iraqi. But the photos on: link are harder to dismiss. The guy in a hospital gown standing on a box does NOT have wires connected to his testicles, despite the earlier verbal reports. The man "beaten to death" leaves the question, "beaten by whom"? He's certainly not in a US Army body bag, but appears to be wrapped in saran wrap from some arab deli. He may be a shopkeeper beaten to death by a gang. It definately is out of sequence with the rest of the series. The series with the woman and hooded naked men appears to be legit, the uniform fatigues correct. But is it a training exercise with American GIs playign Iraqis that later fell into goofing off for the camera? One man has "Rapeist" written across his buttock. He later appears stacked in a naked pyramid with this same word displayed. He may or may not also be the one miming forced oral sex to another man with a bag also still on his head. While the guy with glasses has rubber gloves for body excavation, the girl who this exercise seems to be about does not. Her role mostly seems to be not laugh outloud at her crew appearing in the buff. The men pose for the camera and strut their stuff while keeping hooded anonymnousness. Most importantly, all the men are in a jail cell, outnumbering the army staff 8-2, hooded, but with unobstructed hand usage. You can even see one taking off his hood in boredom in the lower right picture, carefully obscurred by a body in the front. Wouldn't prisoners undergoing a body cavity search usually be in handcuffs, at least until any concealled weapons were cleared? There unfortunately are no tattoos visible in the pictures released. which would be a sure sign of GIs, not Iraqis. There do appear to be bikini tan lines, but that may be a trick of the pixillation. The prisoners do seem to be much more well fed and exercised than you'd expect of someone who's been in prison for a long time. And they're into American frat boy stunts like stacking in a pyramid for the camera. Arab culture also has a severe taboo about exposing the soles of one's feet that seems to be disregarded here. Currently, I can't conclusively rule out the link photos as a training exercise, but I can say it's possible.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
leoatwork    RE:making a case for the looting   5/20/2004 12:14:32 PM
As for the looting, I certainly considered the issue of Marines with orders to shoot on sight and how that would go over on Al Jazeera. You're right, this would have been a legitimate concern. Except for a couple of things -- all of the evidence shows that neither this or anything else was a concern folloing the fall of Baghdad. If Don Rumsfeld and Tommy Franks carefully considered whether or not to stop looting once they overthrew Saddam and decided that this was the best course then fine, intelligent people can disagree. But that's not what happened and you know it; they didn't have a plan, they were cought completely by surprise by the looting and by the time they did consider all of these issues it was too late. If they were going to intentionally allow people to loot, as Rumsfeld himself suggested was the case, (to "blow off steam") then you'd think they would have been ready with replacement medical supplies, equipment for government offices, etc. Which they weren't. And was allowing Iraqis to loot nuclear waste part of the plan? I know that if the looters glow in the dark they're easier to find, but come on... Also, we were obligated to stop the looting under the Geneva Convention. And lastly, if we had enough troops, we wouldn't have had to shoot people -- the definition of looting is that it happend when there is no security presence. No one loots a building guarded by American soldiers with rifles..
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy