PDA

View Full Version : Delta Accused of Prisoner Abuse in Iraq


Roguish Lawyer
05-20-2004, 19:42
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5024068/

New front in Iraq detainee abuse scandal?
NBC News exclusive: Delta Force subject of investigation; Pentagon official denies abuse
By Campbell Brown
Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 8:10 p.m. ET May 20, 2004

BAGHDAD - With attention focused on the seven soldiers charged with abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison, U.S. military and intelligence officials familiar with the situation tell NBC News the Army’s elite Delta Force is now the subject of a Pentagon inspector general investigation into abuse against detainees.

The target is a top-secret site near Baghdad’s airport. The battlefield interrogation facility known as the “BIF” is pictured in satellite photos.

According to two top U.S. government sources, it is the scene of the most egregious violations of the Geneva Conventions in all of Iraq’s prisons. A place where the normal rules of interrogation don’t apply, Delta Force’s BIF only holds Iraqi insurgents and suspected terrorists — but not the most wanted among Saddam’s lieutenants pictured on the deck of cards.

These sources say the prisoners there are hooded from the moment they are captured. They are kept in tiny dark cells. And in the BIF’s six interrogation rooms, Delta Force soldiers routinely drug prisoners, hold a prisoner under water until he thinks he’s drowning, or smother them almost to suffocation.

In Washington Thursday evening, a senior Pentagon official denied allegations of prisoner abuse at Battlefield Interrogation Facilities operated by Delta Force in Iraq. And he said the tactics described in this report are not used in those facilities.

All of those practices would be violations of the Geneva Conventions. The conventions do not apply to stateless terrorists — the so-called non-enemy combatants like al-Qaida suspects caught by the United States in Afghanistan.

But as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has made clear, the Geneva Conventions do apply in Iraq.

“Iraq's a nation. The United States is a nation. The Geneva Conventions applied. They have applied every single day from the outset,” Rumsfeld has said.

So, does Rumfeld know about the BIF and what goes on there?

Several top U.S. military and intelligence sources say yes, and that he, through other top Pentagon officials, directed the U.S. head of intelligence in Iraq, Gen. Barbara Fast, and others to bring some of the methods used at the BIF to prisons like Abu Ghraib, in hopes of getting better intelligence from Iraqi detainees.

The Pentagon’s top spokesman in Iraq says the military will not comment on the BIF or what goes on there. He was unwilling to even confirm or deny its existence. Gen. Fast declined our request for an interview due to the ongoing prison abuse investigation, one that has so far yielded charges against only the military’s lowest ranks.

Several top U.S. military and intelligence sources say yes, and that he, through other top Pentagon officials, directed the U.S. head of intelligence in Iraq, Gen. Barbara Fast, and others to bring some of the methods used at the BIF to prisons like Abu Ghraib, in hopes of getting better intelligence from Iraqi detainees.

The Pentagon’s top spokesman in Iraq says the military will not comment on the BIF or what goes on there. He was unwilling to even confirm or deny its existence. Gen. Fast declined our request for an interview due to the ongoing prison abuse investigation, one that has so far yielded charges against only the military’s lowest ranks.

Denny
05-20-2004, 19:55
interesting post...... Thank you

The Reaper
05-20-2004, 20:04
Did they take their time sawing any of the prisoners' heads off while four Amereicans sat on them and chanted "Praise God"?

If not, I really don't care to hear any more whining.

TR

Sacamuelas
05-20-2004, 20:10
Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
Delta Force’s BIF only holds Iraqi insurgents and suspected terrorists

These sources say the prisoners there are hooded from the moment they are captured. They are kept in tiny dark cells. And in the BIF’s six interrogation rooms, Delta Force soldiers routinely drug prisoners, hold a prisoner under water until he thinks he’s drowning, or smother them almost to suffocation.


Based on the "clientele", it sounds like appropriate accomodations are being provided by our Soldiers. :boohoo

Ambush Master
05-20-2004, 21:33
Delta ?? Delta ??

Was it the Plumbing guys or the Fucking Airlines ??? Those Airline Union guys are pretty tough !!!

CPTAUSRET
05-20-2004, 22:05
As I stated in another thread, I have witnessed far worse than this, the interrogations (in question) were not conducted by American troops...But they undoubtedly saved American lives.

Terry

Radar Rider
05-21-2004, 05:54
"NBC News Exclusive"? They are incorrect; their "source" is wrong.

CommoGeek
05-21-2004, 07:39
Originally posted by The Reaper
Did they take their time sawing any of the prisoners' heads off while four Amereicans sat on them and chanted "Praise God"?

If not, I really don't care to hear any more whining.

TR

Sir, as you well know this point is sadly missed by everyone but a few Americans.

Signed, one of the minority

Bill Harsey
05-21-2004, 08:01
Originally posted by Radar Rider
"NBC News Exclusive"? They are incorrect; their "source" is wrong. That doesn't have anything to do with splashing a story around the globe.

QRQ 30
05-21-2004, 10:51
Time to be unpopular again but. . . .

IMHO barbaric, immoral and disgusting ations will never be a justification for my acting likewise. If we are to act like the enemy why are we fighting?

Abuse and torture are not interrogation. In the past our csoldiers were tortured and brain-washed by enemy governments for the purpose of getting FALSE confessions and other statements which the enemy wanted. Not to gain intelligence. Statements gained under duress are subject to doubt. A scared individual will give you what he thinks you want. This falls right into our own "Code of Conduct". After 48 hours do or say anything necessary to stay alive and healthy - short of giving up your fellow prisoners.

I don't know much about Delta and neither do many others. They are shrouded in mystery but I fail to believe BIF would be one of their functions.

CPTAUSRET
05-21-2004, 11:16
Originally posted by QRQ 30
Time to be unpopular again but. . . .

IMHO barbaric, immoral and disgusting ations will never be a justification for my acting likewise. If we are to act like the enemy why are we fighting?

Abuse and torture are not interrogation. In the past our csoldiers were tortured and brain-washed by enemy governments for the purpose of getting FALSE confessions and other statements which the enemy wanted. Not to gain intelligence. Statements gained under duress are subject to doubt. A scared individual will give you what he thinks you want. This falls right into our own "Code of Conduct". After 48 hours do or say anything necessary to stay alive and healthy - short of giving up your fellow prisoners.



QRQ 30:

I do not presume that you are taking an unpopular stance...The incident I alluded to took place in the VN Delta probably late 65, the Vietnamese had just taken 3 prisoners on a large op near Vi Tanh, Bac Lieu, or it may have been near the U Minh forest (old brain cells) they got one of these guys to give up a huge weapons cache. Undoubtedly it was morally wrong (and I was apalled at the time), but it without a doubt saved American lives. Is this morally justifiable? Probably not...

Not long after this incident I participated in a raid to rescue Nick Rowe, we did not get him but we got close enough that he heard the battle, but that's a topic unto itself.

Terry

Anakin
05-23-2004, 13:45
Originally posted by The Reaper
Did they take their time sawing any of the prisoners' heads off while four Amereicans sat on them and chanted "Praise God"?

If not, I really don't care to hear any more whining.

TR

I don't post much here but I completely agree with you on that Sir. I've said that to so many people recently, I've lost count.

Those Soldiers who abused the detainees did wrong but when comparing it to what those fanatics did to poor Nick Berg (which we hardly hear anything of anymore), it really is child's play.

If anything, it highlights media bias towards the USA.

QRQ 30
05-23-2004, 14:10
Originally posted by Anakin
I don't post much here but I completely agree with you on that Sir. I've said that to so many people recently, I've lost count.

Those Soldiers who abused the detainees did wrong but when comparing it to what those fanatics did to poor Nick Berg (which we hardly hear anything of anymore), it really is child's play.

If anything, it highlights media bias towards the USA.

I agree to the media bias but we seem to be somewhat inconsistant in our judgements.

When some soldiers are found to be abusing EPWs we say that it is only a small percentage of soldiers and not representative of the overall mentality. I agree!!

However, 5 terrorists go on TV and publicly execute an american. Now we say that it is Iraq as a whole and they all deserve what they get.

Is it right to have it both ways? Which of those five terrorists have ever been in U.S. Custody?

Baghdad is comparable in size and population to Chicago. When some homeboys in Cabrini Towers go wild and shoot up a few cops should the LEO go to the Cook County jail and proceed to abuse all of the prisoners in custody?:mad:

Maple Flag
05-23-2004, 15:30
Without prejudice:

I see two things that continually jump out at me during the articles and reports on prisoner treatment.

1. It is unclear if the treatment in each case is

a) sanctioned and calculated
b) non-sanctioned, but deliberatly ignored by leadership
c) is non-sanctioned undisciplined abuse discovered too late

There have probably been cases of each of the above, but it is still unclear as to what the distribution is, and what standards and limits are set on category A, if any, which bring me to my next point.

2. It has not been made clear (at least I don't have a clear picture) on where the U.S. government stands on prisoner treatment for non-soldiers. Certainly the Geneva convention is respected at least on paper, and probably in reality for the vast majority of cases, where it applies. Where it does not apply is the big gray zone. I have heard commentary that the Geneva convention does not apply to terrorists, insurgents, guerrillas, etc. IF that is true, what standards for prisoner treatment are applied? Are there any standards for suspected terrorists, or is this all an open field?

Are there any standards for establishing if a person is a "suspected terrorist" with usefull information subject to harmful interrogation methods, or if they are just a common armed criminal involved in looting or what ever and subsequently arrested.

If you aren't a terrorist, but know terrorists (your brother, your son, your father, your friend, etc) , are you also fair game for harmful methods of interrogation, or are you considered off limits to anything beyond normal investigative interviewing? Again, the line is very fuzzy.

The media's principle failure in my opinion has been in the area of identifying the standards that are supposed to be in place, and measuring the practices against the standards. They are too focussed on showing ugly photos and creating emotional reactions rather than intelligent ones. That is to be expected.

What has been especially absent is clarity from the U.S. government on the standards in place, and the mechanisms for supporting compliance.

At the end of the day, torture for sadistic reasons, or vengeance, are unprofessional, and the perpetrators deserve to stand before a judge in my opinion.

On the other hand, I can be more sympathetic to torture that is sanctioned, calculated, and very carefully metred out with a clear purpose and reasonable expectation of positive results.

I just wish the U.S goverment (and other nations) would either define and ban torture outright in all cases without exception and make sure the leadership acts to ensure compliance by all involved, or, if torture is a needed and valuable tool, have the integrity to stand up and say, "Yes, we use and support the use of prisoner torture in specific cases, and here are our standards for the application of torture, which we endevour to ensure all our practicioners adhere to."

Maybe I just like things to be a little too clean cut.

NousDefionsDoc
10-29-2004, 13:32
These sources say the prisoners there are hooded from the moment they are captured. They are kept in tiny dark cells. And in the BIF’s six interrogation rooms, Delta Force soldiers routinely drug prisoners, hold a prisoner under water until he thinks he’s drowning, or smother them almost to suffocation.

Torture? Sounds like CDQC or BUD/S or the training I will get yelled at for mentioning to me, except for the drugs.

To hell with them.

37F5V
10-29-2004, 21:09
Give me an F'ing break. Like Delta and other Operator types have nothing better to do than torture prisoners..... Kind of out of their span of control don't you think? 'ol Campbell Brown needs to pull his head out of his 4th POC and start using it. :rolleyes:

rubberneck
10-29-2004, 21:23
Give me an F'ing break. Like Delta and other Operator types have nothing better to do than torture prisoners..... Kind of out of their span of control don't you think? 'ol Campbell Brown needs to pull his head out of his 4th POC and start using it. :rolleyes:


Cambell Brown is a chick and a pretty hot one at that. I'll admit that she looks much better in person than on TV.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3080796/

brownapple
10-29-2004, 21:32
So Miss Hot Chick has a poser for a source or just plain is making up a story after listening to some body talking about something or other. Sounds like someone was trying to get into her pants by telling her "No shit" stories.

I have ZERO confidence in this story as accurate.

flyboy1
10-29-2004, 21:36
Having seen some of the tapes, I am an advocate of whatever it takes to get credible information to save lives of American's and for that matter foreigners on our side. However, the prison escapades were not in our best interest and have made our job tougher to say the least.