Pentagon to release about 200 photos of tortured Afghan, Iraqi prisoners

Link

Pentagon to release about 200 photos of tortured Afghan, Iraqi prisoners

Pentagon will publish 198 photos of tortured detainees in the US prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan on Friday, a top American civil rights group said. The release comes after a decade-long lawsuit ended in the group’s favor in March.

Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU’s Center for Democracy, announced on Wednesday that the US Department of Defense (DoD) would provide public access to previously disclosed images of prisoners being tortured in US detention centers after more than 10 years of staunch resistance to do so.

The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding the government to reveal records, including photos of the alleged abuse of prisoners by US officers in the American detention facilities overseas back in 2004.

Despite President Obama’s initial promise to release the requested materials back in 2009, he then urged Congress to pass a special exemption clause to block the release of photos citing security reasons, adding that the publication of the photos “would not add any additional benefit to our understanding of what was carried out in the past by small number of individuals” and would “further inflame anti-American opinion and put our troops in great danger.”

After a long-running court battle, the US District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled that the government should “disclose each and all the photographs” referring to the ACLU’s lawsuit in last March.

However, only about 200 images out of some 2,100 pictures will be released on Friday. The major part of the evidence comprising approximately 1,900 photos will remain concealed after US Defense Secretary Ash Carter had invoked his authority under 2009 exemption provision last November.

“I have determined that public disclosure of any of the photographs would endanger citizens of the United States, members of the United States Armed Forces, or employees of the United States Government deployed outside the United States,” he wrote in the certification renewal in support of his decision to appeal the ruling on November 7.

Yet the Pentagon has made some minor concessions in the case with Carter refusing to extend his certification to 198 photographs which are now being processed for release. However, Carter didn’t explain the difference between this series of photos and those remain withheld from the public domain, according to Politico.

The still-classified images consist of collection of photographs taken by the DoD in the period from September 11, 2001 to January 22, 2009 and relate to the treatment of “engaged, captured or detained individuals”, according to the court documents.

The ACLU said it would insist on releasing the whole package of documents. The last major scandal in connection with the release of photos and footages depicting scenes of prisoners’ abuse and humiliation by the American soldiers in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq broke out in 2004. The exposure of horrendous human right violations in the detention center prompted authorities to launch an investigation into the matter as a result of which 11 soldiers accused of sexual abuse in martial trials were incarcerated.


The notorious prison was used for detention purposes by US-led coalition in Iraq until 2006 when the US government handed control over prison to the local authorities. The prison ceased functioning in 2014.

Destroying Cultural Sites: Something ISIL and US Army Have in Common

Link

Destroying Cultural Sites: Something ISIL and US Army Have in Common

A former US Foreign Service employee reveals the scale of the destruction of ancient artifacts in Iraq during the occupation of the country.

ISIL Destroying 2,000-Year-Old City of Hatra in Iraq – Kurdish Official

As Iraqi officials are estimating the extent of the damage done by the Islamic State militants to one of the country's UNESCO World Heritage Sites, the ancient city of Hatra, a former US Foreign Service employee, Peter van Buren, has revealed that the US Army also wrought a lot of damage to some of the country’s historical landmarks.

On Saturday, Islamic State militants started destroying the 2,200-year-old site, having looted all of the ancient gold and silver coins that had been preserved.

Several days earlier, the Iraqi government said that ISIL fighters had attacked the ancient Assyrian city of Nimrud in northern Iraq and bulldozed it with trucks.

But as it turns out, the ISIL fighters are not the only ones who damaged sites in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys.

A former US Foreign Service employee, Peter van Buren, who was embedded with the US Army in Iraq in 2009, has revealed that the US also contributed to the destruction of ancient places.

A Polish soldier walks back to his tent just outside the ancient City of Babylon, 80 km (50 miles) south of Baghdad, Iraq on Wednesday July 16, 2003

“Early in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, US Marines built a helicopter pad on the ruins of Babylon,” van Buren writes in his article for the Reuters. “They filled sandbags with archaeological fragments, pulverized ancient pottery and bricks engraved with cuneiform characters and christened the place Camp Alpha.”

“The scale and intent were obviously different from what the Islamic State is doing, but a loss is a loss, in big bites or small ones,” he adds.

Peter van Buren also wrote about how the country’s ancient villages, which he calls “tells”, attracted the US soldiers, who would sometimes drive their military SUVs there, doing “donuts” and enjoying kicking up dust plumes.

Razing of Ancient City in Iraq by ISIL Constitutes War Crime, UN Says

“People said that when the US Army first built the forward operating base and dug up truckloads of dirt, soldiers found ancient skulls and long bones,” he wrote. “You could sometimes still spot old bones in the earthen barriers protecting the base. The Army used one ancient tell nearby for artillery practice, blowing off most of its top. As one soldier said, 'If it’s old and already broken, why does it matter if we shoot at it?' That same area was turned over to the Iraqis, who use it today as a live-fire exercise zone. Forward Operating Base Hammer is still open for business, now as a depot for the M1A1 tanks the United States is selling to the Iraqis. I’m not sure of the status of what’s left of the on-base archaeological site.”

On Monday, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called the reported destruction of Hatra by Islamic State extremists a war crime, and called on the international community to protect cultural artifacts.

But nobody so far commented on the leftovers from the US Army. Baghdad's Iraqi Museum was plundered in 2003 shortly after the city capitulated to American troops, prompting widespread censure that nobody had taken steps to protect its world-class collection of Sumerian and Babylonian artifacts.


The museum, which re-opened several weeks ago, estimates that approximately 15,000 items were taken in the chaos. Only one-third have been recovered.

How Russia Will Eventually Kick the US out of Iraq

Link

How Russia Will Eventually Kick the US out of Iraq

Earlier this week I wrote about a strange occurrence in Iraq, involving a Russian machine gun loaded with Iranian ammunition, that was found mounted on an American tank. The Iraqi military had apparently lent this vehicle to a Shia militia (against the orders of the US Government), who wasted no time equipping it with the weapons they had acquired from their Iranian and Russian allies. All signs suggest that this event is a harbinger of things to come.

The Iraqi government happens to be an awkward transitory phase with their foreign policy. They are currently being supported by both the United States and the Russian-Iranian alliance. As we speak, there are two Russian generals stationed in an intelligence center in Baghdad, and Iranian advisers are helping the Iraqi military direct their war against ISIS. Iraqi officials have even said that they would welcome Russian airstrikes in their country, and they want a “full blown military alliance” with Russia, Iran, and Syria.

As you might expect, the United States isn’t taking this news very well. In fact, they’ve recently given the Iraqi government an ultimatum: It’s us or them.

The U.S. has told Iraq’s leaders they must choose between ongoing American support in the battle against militants of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and asking the Russians to intervene instead.

Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday that the Iraqis had promised they would not request any Russian airstrikes or support for the fight against ISIS.

Shortly after leaving Baghdad, Dunford told reporters traveling with him that he had laid out a choice when he met with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and Defense Minister Khaled al-Obeidi earlier Tuesday.

“I said it would make it very difficult for us to be able to provide the kind of support you need if the Russians were here conducting operations as well,” Dunford said. “We can’t conduct operations if the Russians were operating in Iraq right now.”

Of course, this has less to do with our ability to work alongside the Russians, and more to do with our willingness. It’s also very telling. We didn’t tell the Iraqi’s that they can’t under any circumstances, work with the Russians. Like a scorned lover in an unfaithful relationship, we delivered a final, impotent demand to our former puppet regime. “You have to choose between him or me.”

Five years ago there wouldn’t have been a choice. We could just tell the Iraqi government what to do, and they had to fall in line because their country was such a mess. Our military was the only thing keeping the crazies from burning their nation to the ground.

But after we left, their country burned anyway. It was clear that they needed real help, and they’ve found it with Russia. We can longer tell them what to do because they’re in a desperate situation, and we no longer have the military prowess to boss them around, or to save them. That’s why our demands are so revealing. We’re no longer in a position to give orders. Russia’s campaign in the Middle East has revealed that our military is a paper tiger in the region.

So far the Iraqi government hasn’t made a decisive choice. They probably want to ditch the Americans, but they can’t quite bring themselves to do it. Here’s what Iraq’s Prime Minister had to say on the matter.

Reuters reports that the U.S. ultimatum to Iraq puts Abadi in a difficult position, as his own country’s ruling political alliance and some powerful Shiite groups have been pushing him to request Russian air support.

The news agency said a proposal to request Russian strikes had been put to Abadi last week, but that he was yet to respond.

“Abadi told the meeting parties that it wasn’t the right time to include the Russians in the fight because that would only complicate the situation with the Americans and could have undesired consequences even on long-term future relations with America,” Reuters quoted a senior Shiite politician close to Abadi as saying.
He says he wants to maintain a long-term relationship with the US, but his willingness to work with our government’s enemies would suggest otherwise. However, they can’t afford to lose America’s support, at least not yet.

I suspect that they’re trying to decide on which superpower to side with, but the Russian-Iranian alliance isn’t quite ready to give them their full support. Their military forces are still tied down in Syria. So for now, Prime Minister Abadi is stuck with the Americans and their limited help, while he quietly allows Iraq’s militias to work with our Cold War enemy. Some help is better than no help, I suppose.


However, if the Russian’s successfully defeat all of the rebel factions in Syria, including ISIS, then all bets are off. They’ll be able provide full military support for Iraq, in which case their government will be able to kick our personnel out of the country, and welcome their new friends. The Russian-Iranian alliance will be able to finish what they started in Syria, and mop up what’s left of our proxy forces. At that point, everything our government has worked for in the Middle East will completely unravel, as well it should.

Iraq Authorises Russia to Strike Islamic State Inside Country

Link

Iraq Authorises Russia to Strike Islamic State Inside Country

Iraqi security officials have told MEE that US-led coalition strikes, which follow a stringent protocol, have been too slow, ineffective.

The Iraqi government authorised Russia to target Islamic State group convoys coming from Syria, a senior Iraqi official said.

The authorisation for Russia to target IS inside Iraq comes amid security coordination between Iraq, Russia, Iran and Syria.

Hakem al-Zamli, chief of the Iraqi parliament’s security and defense committee, told Anadolu Agency on Friday that the measure contributed to weakening IS by cutting off its supply routes.

Earlier this month, Iraqi security officials told MEE that Russia would likely be invited to bomb IS within their country because the US-led coalition air strikes have proved slow and ineffective, largely because stringent protocols were followed.

“They [the US-led coalition] refuse to strike private cars, mosques, bridges, schools despite the fact Daesh militants are mainly using these places as headquarters,” a senior military officer, who declined to be named, told MEE, using an Arabic acronym to refer to IS.

The US-led rules, which enforces verification of targets, regularly give IS militants time to save their supplies, equipment and fighters, they said.

“This is an exceptional war and our enemy has no rules,” one of the officers said. “How [can] you ask me to stick to the rules while my enemy is brutally killing my people every day, enslaving my sisters and destroy my towns and cities?

“Russians have no red lines, no complicated and restricted rules, so it would be easy for us to deal with them,” he said.

Russia, an ally of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, began carrying out air strikes in Syria on 30 September. According to the Kremlin, the strikes are aimed at weakening the IS militant group, an avowed enemy of the regime.

Turkey and several Western countries, however, accuse Russia of targeting rebel groups in Syria opposed to Assad, many of which enjoy the support of Ankara and Washington.


Iraq has been gripped by a security vacuum since June 2014, when IS stormed the northern city of Mosul and declared a self-styled caliphate in parts of Iraq and Syria.

Guess Who is Behind the Islamic State: Israeli IDF Colonel Leading ISIS Terrorists Arrested in Iraq

Link

Guess Who is Behind the Islamic State: Israeli IDF Colonel Leading ISIS Terrorists Arrested in Iraq

“The security and popular forces have held captive an Israeli colonel,” a commander of Iraq’s popular mobilization forces said on Thursday.

“The Zionist officer is ranked colonel and had participated in the Takfiri ISIL group’s terrorist operations,” he added.

Noting that he was arrested along with a number of ISIL terrorists, the commander said, “The Israeli colonel’s name is Yusi Oulen Shahak and is ranked colonel in Golani Brigade of the Zionist regime’s army with the security and military code of Re34356578765az231434.”

He said that the relevant bodies are now interrogating the Israeli colonel to understand the reasons behind his fighting alongside the ISIL forces and the presence of other Zionist officers among ISIL terrorists.

The Iraqi security forces said the captured colonel has already made shocking confessions.

Several ISIL militants arrested in the last one year had already confessed that Israeli agents from Mossad and other Israeli espionage and intelligence bodies were present in the first wave of ISIL attacks on Iraq and capture of Mosul in Summer 2014, but no ranking Israeli agent had been arrested.

Political and military experts told FNA that the capture of the Israeli colonel will leave a grave impact on Iraq’s war strategy, including partnership with Israeli allies.

In a relevant development in July, Iraqi volunteer forces announced that they had shot down a drone that was spying on the Arab country’s security forces in the city of Fallujah, Western Iraq.

Iraq’s popular forces reported that they had brought down a hostile surveillance aircraft over the Southeastern Fallujah in Anbar Province.

They said that the wreckage of the ISIL’s spy drone carried ‘Israel-Made’ labels.

This was not the first Israeli-made drone downed in Iraq.


In August an Israeli Hermes drone was shot down in the vicinity of Baghdad Airport.

‘Which side are you fighting for?’ Russia blasts US for refusing to share intel on ISIS

Link

‘Which side are you fighting for?’ Russia blasts US for refusing to share intel on ISIS

A still image captured from U.S. Navy video footage shows a Tomahawk Land-Attack Missile (TLAM) is launched against ISIL targets from the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea in the Gulf, September 23, 2014.

Washington’s failure to share data with Russian intelligence about terrorist positions in Syria makes one question the goals that Americans have in their anti-ISIS campaign in Syria and Iraq, a senior Russian diplomat has said.

The refusal to share intelligence on terrorists “just confirms once more what we knew from the very start, that the US goals in Syria have little to do with creating the conditions for a political process and national reconciliation,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said Thursday.

“I would risk saying that by doing this the US and the countries that joined the US-led coalition are putting themselves in a politically dubious position. The question is: which side are you fighting for in this war?”

Sergey Ryabkov, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation

Earlier, the Russian military said they would welcome American intelligence on the forces of terrorist group Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) to help with Russia’s bombing operation in Syria. But the US State Department said it would not be possible because Russia and the US do not share the same goals in Syria.

LISTEN MORE:

“I don’t know how you can share intelligence when you don’t share a basic, common objective inside Syria. We’re not at that – we’re nowhere near that point. There’s no shared, common objective here about going after ISIL,” said John Kirby, a State Department spokesman.

The US has accused Russia of failing to target ISIS and instead bombing moderate rebel forces, which Washington wants to replace the government of President Bashar Assad. Russia denies the allegations.

Ryabkov said that without US intelligence Russia would remain quite effective in the Syrian operation, considering that it has plenty of other sources.

“There are our own means of reconnaissance. We get intelligence from a number of other countries and coordinate its flow through the Baghdad information-sharing center,” the Russian diplomat said, referring to a facility in the Iraqi capital that is used by Syria, Iraq, Iran and Russia to coordinate their efforts in fighting ISIS.

The US-led coalition has been bombing ISIS targets for over a year and provided supplies and assistance to forces such as Iraqi and Kurdish militias, which are fighting the terrorists on the ground. But it has refused to deal with either Damascus or its key regional ally Tehran, saying that the downfall of the government of President Assad is part of the solution to the crisis. Despite the coalition’s efforts, ISIS has enlarged the territory under its control over the last year.

Senior Syrian and Iranian officials questioned America’s determination to defeat ISIS, saying that the coalition airstrikes are more of a show and are not intended to actually harm the terrorists. Instead Washington is trying to get ISIS topple the Assad government, hoping to deal with them later.

Russia voiced similar concerns on Wednesday, after reporting that its week-long effort had done serious harm to the jihadists in Syria.


“The US Air Force and other parties has been conduction airstrikes for a year. We have reasons to believe that they don’t often hit terrorist targets, or rather do so very rarely,” said Igor Konashenkov, the spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry.

Meanwhile Russia’s effort seems to have paid off, as on Tuesday the Syrian Army announced a major offensive against various terrorist groups. Commenting on what role Russia’s support played in turning the tables on the jihadists, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said that Russia “has produced significant results in several days that greatly surpass those achieved by the [US-led anti-ISIS] coalition in over a year.”

Blair promised UK support to US in Iraq 1 year before invasion – report

Link

Blair promised UK support to US in Iraq 1 year before invasion – report

Former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, committed the UK to joining the US invasion of Iraq a year before it began, a newly disclosed White House memo reveals.
The US documents obtained by the Daily Mail and published on Sunday are part of the batch of emails from the private server of former US State Secretary, Hillary Clinton, which US courts have made her disclose.

Among the leaked papers is one written in March 2002 by former US Secretary of State Colin Powell to then-President George W. Bush, where he said: "On Iraq, Blair will be with us should military operations be necessary…He is convinced on two points: the threat is real; and success against Saddam will yield more regional success."

Meanwhile, at the time Blair was quoted by the British media as saying that “this is a matter for considering all the options,” and “we’re not proposing military action at this point in time.”

The document was written a week before the famous meeting between Bush and Blair at the Crawford ranch in Texas, where the latter for the first time signaled his readiness to support military action in Iraq.

In the note titled “Secret …Memorandum for the President,” Powell also said that “the UK will follow our lead in the Middle East.”

According to the document, Blair also was going to provide Bush with “strategic, tactical and public affairs lines that he believes will strengthen global support for our common cause.” It added that Blair has the presentational skills to “make a credible public case on current Iraqi threats to international peace.”

Five months after the meeting at the Crawford ranch, the British government published a dossier on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD), claiming that Saddam Hussein possessed chemical and biological weapons and even had a nuclear weapons program. This dossier was one of the reasons for US invasion to Iraq and later all its claims were proved to be false.

The newly disclosed documents also reveal that Blair agreed to act as de facto PR person for Bush and convince skeptical lawmakers and public that Iraq posed a real and imminent threat. He also reportedly suggested “how to… handle calls for UN Security Council blessing.”

In response, Blair wanted the US to treat the UK as an equal partner in a “special relationship” aiming to boost his public support, the new media report said. In one of the documents, Powel wrote Bush that Blair wanted to minimize “the political price” of joining the US in its Iraqi campaign, adding that the PM’s voters “will look for signs that Britain and America are truly equity partners.”

The new revelations sparked a wave of criticism of Tony Blair’s actions among the British politicians.

“The memos prove in explicit terms what many of us have believed all along: Tony Blair effectively agreed to act as a frontman for American foreign policy in advance of any decision by the House of Commons or the British Cabinet,” said former Conservative Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, as quoted by The Daily Mail.

“He was happy to launder Bush’s policy on Iraq and sub-contract British foreign policy to another country without having the remotest ability to have any real influence over it … for George Bush pretending Blair was a player on the world stage to impress voters in the UK,” he added.

Scottish National Party foreign affairs spokesman and the former Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond, said on Sunday that “the evidence against Blair is piling up” and the “net was now closing” around him, eported the Guardian.

“The memo contradicts claims from Mr Blair that all that time he had been seeking diplomatic ways to avoid an invasion. It also adds weight to the evidence given by Sir Christopher Meyer, the former UK ambassador to the United States – to the Chilcot inquiry – that the military timetable and preparation for invasion took precedence over any diplomacy and specifically over the timetable for the weapons inspectors led by Hans Blix,” Salmond said.

"The illegal invasion of Iraq has been unequivocally proven as a fraud and a massive deception by Tony Blair and the then UK Labour government," he said as quoted by the Mail.

READ MORE:Chilcot to apportion Iraq blame far beyond Tony Blair’s inner circle

At the same time, Blair’s spokesperson claimed that the content of the newly revealed documents corresponds with both the former prime minister’s public statements at that time and to what he told the Chilcot inquiry investigating the circumstances of the 2003 Iraq invasion. However, Blair previously repeatedly denied that he was planning military action in Iraq before the invasion.

In 2010, Blair told the inquiry that, before the invasion, he said that the UK would only join the US “in confronting and dealing with this threat” referring to Iraq.

"I think what he took from that was exactly what he should have taken, which was if it came to military action because there was no way of dealing with this diplomatically, we would be with him," Blair told the investigation.

The newly disclosed documents could potentially lead to calls for reopening the inquiry into the circumstances of the Iraq invasion, although the chair of the investigation, Sir John Chilcot has recently announced that he was ready to publish a final report. At the same time, he continues to avoid announcing an exact publication date.

READ MORE: 2003-2011: Half million Iraqis died in war, occupation

Last month, Chilcot said he would consult with Prime Minister David Cameron in order to set a timetable for publication.

In the meantime, relatives of British soldiers that lost their lives in Iraq threaten to file a legal complaint if the report is not published by December, BBC reports.

The UK participated in the US-led coalition that invaded Iraq in 2003 without a UN mandate on the premise that they would find WMD, although such weapons were never discovered there. The invasion and subsequent occupation claimed the lives of more than half million Iraqis only between 2003 and 2011 and cost the UK lives of 179 British soldiers.

LISTEN MORE:

Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers

Link

Classified Evidence: US Soldiers Raped Boys In Front Of Their Mothers

Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to keep it under the radar

(TheAntiMedia) According to a number of global mainstream media sources, the Pentagon is

covering up a disturbing video that was never made public with the rest of the recent torture report.

According to various well respected journalists, including Seymour Hersh, the appalling video was recorded at Abu Ghraib, the notorious US torture dungeon in Iraq that made headlines roughly a decade ago, when the inhumane tactics being used at the prison were exposed.

Sadly, it seems that the evidence released years ago was only scratching the surface.

While the video has remained under wraps thus far, Hersh says it is only a matter of time before it comes out.

Giving a speech at the ACLU last week after the senate torture report was initially released, Hersh gave some insight into what was on the Pentagon’s secret tape.

In the most revealing portion of his speech he said that:

“Debating about it, ummm … Some of the worst things that happened you don’t know about, okay? Videos, um, there are women there. Some of you may have read that they were passing letters out, communications out to their men. This is at Abu Ghraib … The women were passing messages out saying ‘Please come and kill me, because of what’s happened’ and basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. And the worst above all of that is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror. It’s going to come out.”

“It’s impossible to say to yourself how did we get there? Who are we? Who are these people that sent us there? When I did My Lai I was very troubled like anybody in his right mind would be about what happened. I ended up in something I wrote saying in the end I said that the people who did the killing were as much victims as the people they killed because of the scars they had, I can tell you some of the personal stories by some of the people who were in these units witnessed this. I can also tell you written complaints were made to the highest officers and so we’re dealing with a enormous massive amount of criminal wrongdoing that was covered up at the highest command out there and higher, and we have to get to it and we will. We will. You know there’s enough out there, they can’t (Applause). …. So it’s going to be an interesting election year.”

Put into context with another speech that Hersh gave earlier this year, it becomes clear that the women who witnessed these young boys being raped were actually their mothers.

At a speech in Chicago this past June Hersh was quoted as saying:

“You haven’t begun to see evil… horrible things done to children of women prisoners, as the cameras run.”

Other stories at the London Guardian also talked of young Iraqi detainees getting violently raped by US soldiers.

Ten years ago when the initial Abu Ghraib scandal was in the news, the Guardian published the testimony of an Abu Ghraib detainee who allegedly witnessed one of these brutal attacks.

Former detainee Kasim Hilas said in their testimony that:

“I saw [name blacked out] fucking a kid, his age would be about 15-18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard the screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [blacked out], who was wearing the military uniform putting his dick in the little kid’s ass, I couldn’t see the face of the kid because his face wasn’t in front of the door. And the female soldier was taking pictures.”

Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to keep it under the radar. That is why now more than ever, it is important to keep the pressure on and force the release of this evidence, while the torture report is fresh in the minds of the general population.

John Vibes is an author, researcher and investigative journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture and the drug war. In addition to his writing and activist work he is also the owner of a successful music promotion company. In 2013, he became one of the organizers of the Free Your Mind Conference, which features top caliber speakers and whistle-blowers from all over the world. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. You can find his 65 chapter Book entitled “Alchemy of the Timeless Renaissance” at bookpatch.com.

Politicians in Iraq work to salvage power-sharing deal

Link

Politicians in Iraq work to salvage power-sharing deal

PM Nuri al-Maliki walks past lawmakers in Baghdad on Thursday -- leaders Friday were trying to salvage the power-sharing deal.

Baghdad, Iraq (CNN) -- Politicians and foreign diplomats said they were doggedly working Friday to salvage a newly-minted Iraqi government power-sharing deal, a long-awaited agreement that threatened to unravel just hours after it was announced with great fanfare.
Mahmoud Othman, an Iraqi Kurdish lawmaker, told CNN mediation efforts by Kurdish officials, Americans and the Arab League began Thursday after a dramatic walkout by Sunni Arab lawmakers and will continue ahead of Saturday's scheduled parliament session.
Saying that the walkout stemmed from political misunderstandings and deep distrust among politicians, Othman said he hopes the power-sharing agreement will not fall through, but if the situation is "not amended" and "they don't come back I am afraid it will."
Othman believes that Saturday's session will be a key indicator of the deal, hammered out to meet the demands of Shiites, Sunni Arabs and Kurds. The compromise announced Thursday was designed to end an eight months' long stalemate that drew fears of a resurgence in sectarian and insurgent violence in Iraq.

The Sunni walkout, staged by lawmakers in the Iraqiya bloc, was prompted by what it said was the failure of parliament to actually cast a vote on the power-sharing agreement.
It threatened to undermine political amity and lead to the formation of a government without adequate Sunni representation. The squabbling, regarded as a political hiccup by some politicians, was considered possible disaster by others.
President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials praised the power-sharing agreement.
"There are still challenges to overcome, but all indications are that the government will be representative, inclusive and reflect the will of the Iraqi people who cast their ballots in the last election," Obama said at a Friday news conference at the G-20 summit in Seoul, South Korea.
But Ayad Allawi, the former Iraqi prime minister who heads the Sunni-backed and cross-sectarian Iraqiya, told CNN that he scorned what he viewed as a political double-cross.
"This is a new dictatorship that is happening in Iraq," said Allawi, a secular Shiite who walked out with his Sunni allies.
Under the proposed deal, the three major governmental positions were to have been filled by three members of the country's largest ethnic groups -- the Shiites, the Kurds and the Sunni Arabs.
Politicians forged a compromise that left Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a Shiite, and Jalal Talabani, the Kurdish president, in power for another term.
The deal created a powerful new office that was expected to be headed by Allawi, his rival. That office would be called the National Council for Strategic Policies and it would be a check on al-Maliki's power.
Iraqiya also issued demands, including that legislators pass a law within 30 days forming the national council and form a committee to review the files of people illegally detained, a great concern for Sunni Arabs who have accused Iraq's Shiite-dominated government of persecuting them.
It also called for a final agreement on outstanding legislation and for canceling a ban on several Sunni Arab politicians from running in elections. Those politicians have been accused of ties to Saddam Hussein's outlawed Baathist movement.
After lawmakers elected Talabani for a second term, the president gave al-Maliki 30 to 45 days to form a government. Parliament also elected Osama al-Nujaifi, a Sunni Arab from the Iraqiya bloc, to be the parliament speaker.
But Sunnis walked out when parliament didn't accept its demand for a vote on the actual power-sharing agreement and decided to go ahead and make the key vote for a president.
Shiite lawmakers said the vote for power-sharing couldn't be taken because it was not on the agenda, but Allawi disputed this.
"The proceedings were going in the right way. Then suddenly they said we are going to elect the president," Allawi said.
"We said, 'Wait a minute here we agreed that there are points that we agreed that are going to be announced and voted on.' "
"I was very surprised, I was extremely surprised. This agreement was done after talking to Obama, the Arab League." Allawi said.
"It's a joke in a way. What this reflects really, it reflects the intentions of these guys. They don't have the intention to really work on a power sharing formula."
"We don't want to be puppets for a government that does not respect the will of the people, that does not respect power sharing. After all the compromises I am not going to be a puppet running around being a false witness to history."
But Othman said what happened in parliament Thursday was a result of a "misunderstanding" between the country's leaders.
He said al-Iraqiya was under the impression that a U.S. -brokered agreement between al-Maliki, the Kurdish region's president, Massoud Barazani and Allawi would be formalized in a parliamentary vote, while the other blocs thought it was a political deal that would not go to parliament.
Othman said the scenario on Thursday reflected a state of "widespread mistrust" among the political groups and a result of hasty negotiations and a deal that was put together very quickly.
He said while Iraqiya had the right to demand a parliamentary vote, he said their timing was off kilter. He said Iraqiya got its choice for speaker elected and it should have waited for the Talabani to be voted on before pushing for their demands.
Allawi said on Friday he expects the boycott to continue and that he doesn't see himself accepting a role in the new government.
"I personally have made up my mind. I will not be a part of this theater," he said. "I am thinking of forming a council for opposition from inside parliament to start building the issues that we think are right for this country and to use all possible peaceful means to achieve the objectives."

Pilgrims killed in Iraq bombings

Link

Pilgrims killed in Iraq bombings

The Shrine of Imam Hussein in the holy Shia city of Karbala is one of the sites frequented by pilgrims

Iranian pilgrims targeted in twin attacks near Karbala and in Najaf, both Shia holy cities.

Twin bombings targeting Iranian pilgrims have killed at least 13 people in Iraq's holy Shia cities of Karbala and Najaf.

In the first attack a bus carrying pilgrims was hit by a bomb explosion in Touirij town near Karbala in central Iraq, killing at least 10 people and injuring another 38 on Monday.

In the second incident, a car bomb exploded near buses transporting Iranian pilgrims in the city of Najaf, killing at least three people and wounding 10 others.

The revered Imam Ali shrine in Najaf attracts hundreds of thousands of Shia Muslims from Iraq, Iran and other countries every year.

According to officials, the first explosion occurred at a parking lot in the northern part of the Karbala.

"It was a suicide bomber who drove up against a bus carrying Iranian pilgrims and detonated the explosives," a police official told AFP news agency.

The explosion wounded another 38 people, most of them Iranians, hospital officials said.

Mohammed al-Moussawi, head of the Kerbala provincial council, said that the Iranian pilgrims were the targets of the attack.

Some 1,500 pilgrims from neighbouring Iran visit Shia shrines in Iraq a day, mainly in the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala.

Separate attack

Also on Monday, a car bomb exploded in the southern city of Basra killing at least 12 people and wounding 39 others.

The blast happened near a busy street filled with restaurants and shops in the city's Qibla district.

Political tensions in Iraq have been stoked by the failure of its leaders to agree on a new government eight months after an inconclusive election.

Nouri al-Maliki, the incumbent prime minister, a Shia, is close to securing a second term but is still trying to win over leaders of a Sunni-backed cross-sectarian alliance.

The attacks come ahead of the Islamic month of Muharram, in which Shia Muslims mourn the historic battle of Karbala.

Fears over fate of Iraqi Christians

Link

Fears over fate of Iraqi Christians

Iraqi Christians in UK want co-religionists to leave their country in the wake of the Baghdad church massacre.

More than 50 Iraqi Christians were killed when an al-Qaeda-linked group attacked a Baghdad church last Sunday.

The assault has reverberated among Iraqi Christians in the West.

The leader of one such church in London believes it is time for Iraq's 300,000-strong Christian minority to leave the country.

Al Jazeera's Jonah Hull reports from West London.

Tariq Aziz sentenced to death

Link

Tariq Aziz sentenced to death

An Iraqi court handed down the death sentence against Aziz for his role in eliminating Islamic parties 

Former deputy PM of Saddam Hussein issued with execution order by high tribunal for persecution of Islamic parties

Iraq's high tribunal has passed a death sentence on Tariq Aziz, one of deposed leader Saddam Hussein's most prominent deputies.

The death sentence, announced on Tuesday, was the first to be handed to Aziz, who had previously been convicted for his role in the execution of dozens of merchants for profiteering. 

"The court today issued the death sentence on Tariq Aziz and four others for committing crimes against humanity. The charge of elimination of religious parties was classified as crimes against humanity," Judge Mohammed Abdul-Sahib, a spokesman of the Iraqi High Tribunal, said.

"The nature of the crimes is wilful killing, torture and the enforced disappearance of persons."

Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh, reporting from Baghdad, said that the charges against Aziz are related to the persecution of Shia Muslim parties in the 1980s.

Aziz, 74, was at the centre of explaining Iraq's policy in the months leading up to the first Gulf War after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, and in the years after as Iraq faced sanctions and arms inspections.

Face of Saddam's rule

As a former foreign minister and deputy prime minister for Saddam, he was often seen as the face of the president's government in foreign capitals and at the United Nations.

In 2003, he met with Pope John-Paul II in an unsuccessful effort to avert the threat of military action by the US and its allies.

The Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal (SICT) was set up to try former members of Saddam's rule.

"Aziz's lawyers have 30 days to present an appeal. The court then has another 30 days to look into that appeal," Rageh said.

"Assuming his appeal is turned down there are 30 more days before the death penalty would be carried out."

Badee Aref, Aziz's lawyer, told Al Jazeera that from a legal perspective the sentence was "unreasonable, irrational and wrong".

"I don't recognise this court because it sentenced Saddam Hussein to death and all the decisions it took are void because they are based on murder and assassination," Aref said.

"It is an invalid sentence from both legal and ethical perspectives."

Aref said that the timing of the sentence was aimed at diverting attention away from crimes that happened in Iraq that were outlined by WikiLeaks on Saturday.

'Forced to sign'

Al Jazeera has reported extensively on findings from the thousands of classified documents released by the organisation that implicate many senior Iraqi politicians.

"Before the court passes any death sentences it informs us a month before the date of the sentence. They didn't this time," Aref said.

"I was told by my sources inside the court that three of the judges do not approve of the sentence and were forced to sign it."

Tariq Aziz was previously handed a 15-year jail term for the 1992 executions of 42 merchants

After US forces entered Baghdad in April 2003, Aziz was number 43 on the list of the 55 most wanted Iraqi senior officials.

He turned himself in to US forces on April 25 and has been in their custody ever since.

Aziz was brought to trial on April 29, 2008 and accused of signing an order for the execution of 42 merchants who allegedly manipulated food prices in July 1992 at the height of the country's economic downturn under UN sanctions. He denied the charges.

On March 11, 2009 an Iraqi court found Aziz guilty of the July 1992 executions and handed him a 15-year sentence.

Prosecutors had also hoped that Aziz, would testify against Saddam, but the former foreign minister refused to condemn his one-time boss and continued to refer to him as "the president".

Amnesty plea

The family of Aziz, who is a Christian, say his health has deteriorated considerably since he suffered a stroke prior to the US invasion. Senior members of Iraq's Assyrian Church have called on US forces to release him.

The Vatican urged Iraqi authorities not to carry out the death sentence against Aziz. This would help reconciliation, peace and justice, the Vatican spokesman said in a statement.

The Vatican did not rule out the possibility of making a humanitarian intervention on behalf of Aziz, but said this would be done through diplomatic channels, the spokesman added.

His lawyer confirmed that he was in poor health and in deep shock and astonishment.

"The sentence was a big blow to him and he is still under the effect of the shock, a matter that could end his life before he is executed," Aref said.

Two other defendants, Sadoun Shakir, a former interior minister under Saddam, and Abed Hamoud, the former president's private secretary, were also sentenced to death by the SICT on Tuesday.

Amnesty International called on the Iraqi authorities not to execute Aziz or the two other former officials.

"Saddam Hussain's rule was synonymous with executions, torture and other gross human rights violations, and it is right that those who committed crimes are brought to justice," Malcolm Smart, a director of Amnesty International, said.

"However, it is vital that the death penalty, which is the ultimate denial of human rights, should never be used, whatever the gravity of the crime."

US condemns Iraq war leaks

Link

US condemns Iraq war leaks

The documents released by WikiLeaks contains allegations that the US turned a blind eye to torture

Officials say leak of Iraq war documents endangers the safety of US troops and Iraqi collaborators.

US officials have condemned the leak of about 400,000 classified documents related to the Iraq war, saying it endangers American troops and possibly hundreds of Iraqi collaborators.

The documents, released to Al Jazeera and a number of other media outlets by WikiLeaks, contain details of civilian casualties and allegations that the US turned a blind eye to abuse committed by Iraqi forces.

While declining to discuss the specifics of the documents, Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, said: "I do have a strong opinion that we should condemn in the most clear terms the disclosure of any classified information by individuals and or organisations which puts the lives of United States and partner servicemembers and civilians at risk."

Geoff Morrell, the press secretary of the Pentagon, echoed her remarks, saying the details revealed "could potentially undermine our nation's security".

"The biggest potential damage here, we think, could be to our forces ... because there are now potentially 400,000 documents in the public domain for our enemies to mine, look for vulnerabilities, patterns of behaviour, things they could exploit to wage attacks against us in the future."

He said about 300 Iraqis mentioned in the documents are "particularly vulnerable to reprisal attacks" because of the documents' release and that US forces in Iraq are trying to protect them.

'Negative impact'

Anders Fogh-Rasmussen, the Nato secretary-general, also warned that the release could endanger individuals' safety.

"I can't comment on the details of the exact impact on security, but in general I can tell you that such leaks ... may have a very negative security impact for people involved," he said.

However, aware that releasing data such as names of individuals might raise concerns about their safety, Al Jazeera and its media partners have blanked out all the names of people who appear in the files before publishing.

The US made similar comments about the possible danger to US servicemen and those working with them after WikiLeaks released 90,000 documents about the Afghan war in July.

But so far, the Pentagon has not reported any incidents of reprisals against Afghans named in the leaked documents.

In an assessment outlined in a letter a month after the leak, Robert Gates, the defense secretary, said: "The initial assessment in no way discounts the risk to national security; however, the review to date has not revealed any sensitive intelligence sources and methods compromised by this disclosure."

A 120-strong Pentagon task force was scouring an Iraq war database before media published the documents to prepare for potential fallout from the release.

Iraq's rights ministry said the leaked document's "did not contain any surprises".

"The report did not contain any surprises, because we had already mentioned many things that happened, including at Abu Ghraib prison, and many cases involving US forces," Kamil al-Amin, the ministry spokesman, said.

Left to die in jail

Link

Left to die in jail

How a secret order given by the Pentagon could have led to the death of a detainee who the US knew was being tortured.

In a single sentence, the US military blocks its officers from investigating torture committed by Iraqi security forces, condemning thousands of prisoners handed by US forces to Iraqi authorities to potential mistreatment and even death. 

FRAGO 242, issued in June 2004, just two months after the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, is smoking gun evidence that the US forces knowingly flouted international law in the way they dealt with the prisoners they took in the country.

The UN Convention on Torture blocks states from handing individuals to the authorities of another state where this would place them at serious risk of torture.

The decision to turn a blind eye to prisoner abuse, despite more than 1300 individual reports of torture made to senior American officers, is evidence that the US knew exactly what was happening to the prisoners it took in the country

Ending torture was one of the stated aims of the war in Iraq. For those being held in Iraq's torture chambers, the order was more than a contradiction of these aims- it was a matter of life and death. 

Adnan Awad Al Jumaili was arrested by Iraqi security forces on the May 17, 2007, on suspicion of involvement in armed attacks. He was taken to an Iraqi military base for interrogation, where he was visited four days later by a US military officer.

The officer photographed him and noted that he had "no visible physical injuries”. Eight days later, on May 29, another US military officer arrived at the jail, and noted that Adnan had bruises to his back and arms.

Despite these obvious signs of mistreatment, the US officer appears to have followed the 2005 order. A subsequent medical examination found no broken bones or internal injuries, but the following day, Adnan was dead.

A post-mortem revealed an appalling catalogue of serious injuries. His body was extensively bruised, and he had suffered from internal bleeding in the brain, neck, abdomen, and his lungs had suffered tearing.

The Iraqi ministry of defence ordered an investigation into Adnan's death. Two guards stated that on the May 27, he had appeared to be in good physical condition, but had emerged from interrogation badly bruised and unable to stand. A guard reportedly struck him over the head with a fire extinguisher as he tried to stand.

An arrest warrant was issued against the Iraqi officer who had carried out the interrogation. The officer fled, and was finally arrested in 2008, a year after Adnan's death. He was held for three months before being released for lack of evidence.

Adnan's body was never returned to his family, but photographs of him taken before and after his death show the horrifying extent of his injuries. The pictures show his back is deeply bruised, and marked with angry welts.

Adnan's story is one of the few cases of torture in Iraqi prisons that has been properly documented. It is, however, representative of the treatment received by thousands of prisoners held in Iraq.

It is also a graphic example of the human cost of the policy pursued by US troops in the country, best summed up by then-US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld in November 2005.

Following an assertion by Peter Pace, the chairman of the joint chiefs-of-staff that US troops had an obligation "to intervene and stop" abuse committed in Iraqi prisons, Rumsfeld corrected his general.

"I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it," Rumsfeld said. "It's to report it." It was a distinction that cost Adnan his life. 

Death at a checkpoint

Link

Death at a checkpoint

The tragic story of Nabiha Jassim, a pregnant woman who was killed by US troops as she rushed to hospital to give birth.

This is the US military's record of the death of a pregnant woman shot by its soldiers at checkpoint while on her way to give birth at a maternity hospital. 

Nabiha Jassim was 35 years old when she was killed in the town of Samarra, 110km  north of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad. She was being rushed to hospital by her brother, Khalid, when their car approached a US military checkpoint and observation post that had recently been set up. It was a journey the family would never complete.

The Iraq war files reveal that US troops manning the checkpoint believed that Nabiha's car posed a threat. As the vehicle carrying the family approached the checkpoint, the soldiers opened fire.

Nabiha was killed in the hail of bullets that ripped through the car, shattering the windscreen and leaving Khalid badly cut. Her cousin, Saliha Hassan, 57, was also shot dead in the incident, which left the road covered in blood and broken glass.

Nabiha's body was rushed to the hospital in an effort to save her baby, but the unborn child died in her womb. Had she reached the hospital safely, she would have given birth to a boy.

Her story is just one of the hundreds of human tragedies that are catalogued in the Iraq war logs, which reveal that over the course of the conflict, almost 700 civilians were killed in more than 14000 violent incidents that took place at US military checkpoints.

These so-called "escalation of force" incidents follow a repetitive and deadly pattern. An Iraqi civilian approaches a US checkpoint, fails to understand soldiers' demands to stop, and is shot dead after being assessed as a threat to the platoon manning the checkpoint. 

Just as repetitive is the US military response to such incidents: they are put down as a sort of collateral damage, seen as part of the inevitable cost of conflict, as victims of the accidents that happen under the fog of war. 

After Nabiha's death, the military said that the vehicle had entered a "clearly defined prohibited area" when they opened fire on it.

The war log makes no warning of any warning given to Khalid as he drove his sister and cousin towards their deaths, and he has said none was given.  

"I was driving my car at full speed because I did not see any sign or warning from the Americans. It was not until they shot the two bullets that killed my sister and cousin that I stopped," he told the Associated Press news agency, shortly after the incident.

A brief statement was issued by military authorities in the aftermath of the incident that said: "US forces killed two women by mistake... when they were heading to a maternity hospital."

At the time of Nabiha's death, US soldiers in Iraq were facing intense and regular attacks on the country's roads. Checkpoints had been targeted by gunmen and suicide bombers on a regular basis. There is no suggestion that her killing was anything other than a deadly mistake.

But for the friends and families of the innocent Iraqis mistakenly killed at US military checkpoints, knowing that their deaths were not intentional is scant consolation when such mistakes were repeated again and again.  

Expressions of regret from the US military, however well-intentioned, are worth little to ordinary Iraqis if no lessons were learned from mistakes that had such devastating consequences.

Faith held hostage by violence

Link

Faith held hostage by violence

The kidnapping and killing of one of Iraq's most prominent Christians exposed al-Qaeda's brutal fundraising methods.

The murder of Paulos Faraj Rahho, the Chaldean Catholic Archbishop of Mosul, marked a nadir in interfaith relations in Iraq. He was kidnapped by al-Qaeda in Iraq operatives in February 2008 in what appears to have been a desperate attempt by the group to raise money. 

His story demonstrates how al-Qaeda in Iraq operated with little regard for the people of Iraq as they waged war against the US presence in the country, using them as little more than cannon-fodder and cash-cows. 

Bishop Rahho had lived almost his entire life in Mosul, which has a long established community of Chaldean Catholics. In 2001 he became the Archbishop of Mosul, becoming the leader of about 20,000 Catholics in 10 parishes. 

When Iraqi Christians found themselves at the wrong end of a growing campaign of violence as the war progressed, Rahho stayed with his flock, continuing to preach a message of forgiveness and religious tolerance in the face of the attacks. 

As one of the most prominent Christians in northern Iraq, it was a matter of time before Rahho found himself attracting the attention of al-Qaeda. After he had finished giving a mass on February 29, 2008, the archbishop's car was attacked with gunfire and he was bundled into the boot of a waiting vehicle. 

His kidnappers demanded the release of foreign fighters captured in Iraq and that they be paid $ 3m for his release. The kidnappers also demanded that Iraqi Christians form a militia to fight US forces in the country. 

But the money was never paid. Church officials said that Rahho had managed to call them on his cell-phone while in the boot of the car and had instructed them not to pay any ransom for his release. 

“He believed that this money would not be paid for good works and would be used for killing and more evil actions,” the church officials said. A month later Rahho's body was found in a shallow grave after a note describing its whereabouts was passed to church members. 

His death provoked international condemnation. Pope Benedict XVI described it as "an act of inhuman violence". George Bush, the then US president, said the archbishop’s killing was "savage and cruel", while Nouri al Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, condemned it as "the work of a criminal gang intent on provoking religious strife."

In his will, Rahho called on Christians to build bridges between the different faiths of Iraq.  One of his killers, an al-Qaeda cell leader call Ahmed Ali Ahmed, was captured and sentenced to death soon after his death. Rahho's church opposed the use of capital punishment against the killer.