ReportWire

Tag: iraq war

  • Moulton hits Markey over prior support for war authorization

    BOSTON — An expected vote by the U.S. Senate on a war powers resolution to restrict U.S. military action in Venezuela has become a campaign issue in the Democratic primary race between incumbent U.S. Sen. Ed Markey and challenger U.S Rep. Seth Moulton.

    The Senate on Thursday is poised to vote on a war powers resolution, filed by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, to halt President Donald Trump’s use of military force against Venezuela. The move comes after Trump ordered the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, who were brought to New York to face drug trafficking and weapons charges.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAms6>@4C2ED D2J %CF>A’D 2EE24< @? ‘6?6KF6=2 H2D :==682= 2?5 F?2FE9@C:K65] %CF>A 2C8F6D E96 >@G6 H2D ;FDE:7:65 E@ DE@A E96 7=@H @7 :==682= 5CF8D :?E@ E96 &?:E65 $E2E6D 7C@> ‘6?6KF6=2 2?5 6I6CE &]$] 9686>@?J @G6C E96 C68:@?]k^Am

    kAm|@F=E@?[ 2 7:G6E6C> s6>@4C2E D66<:?8 E@ F?D62E |2C<6J 😕 E96 $6AE6>36C AC:>2CJ[ 😀 2>@?8 E96 s6>@4C2ED 2?5 >:=:E2CJ G6E6C2?D 😕 r@?8C6DD FC8:?8 E96 #6AF3=:42?4@?EC@==65 $6?2E6 E@ 2AAC@G6 C6DEC:4E:@?D @? E96 FD6 @7 >:=:E2CJ 7@C46 😕 E96 $@FE9 p>6C:42? 4@F?ECJ H96? :E 4@>6D FA 7@C 2 G@E6]k^Am

    kAmqFE |@F=E@? 2=D@ D66D E96 FA4@>:?8 G@E6 2D 2? @AA@CEF?:EJ E@ 9:89=:89E 9:D A@=:E:42= C:G2=’D DFAA@CE 7@C E96 H2C 2FE9@C:K2E:@? 3J r@?8C6DD >@C6 E92? EH@ 564256D 28@[ H9:49 =625 E@ 9:D 56A=@J>6?E E@ xC2B 2D 2 J@F?8 |2C:?6 42AE2:?]k^Am

    kAmx? 2 G:56@ A@DE65 @? D@4:2= >65:2[ |@F=E@? A@:?ED @FE E92E |2C<6J — 2D 2 >6>36C @7 E96 w@FD6 @7 #6AC6D6?E2E:G6D — G@E65 😕 a__a E@ DFAA@CE C6D@=FE:@?D 2FE9@C:K:?8 E96 FD6 @7 7@C46 xC2B] |@F=E@? D6CG65 7@FC 4@>32E E@FCD @7 5FEJ 😕 xC2B]k^Am

    kAmw6 2=D@ 4C:E:4:K65 |2C<6J 7@C G@E:?8 E@ 4@?7:C> 7@C>6C u=@C:52 $6?] |2C4@ #F3:@ 7@C $64C6E2CJ @7 $E2E6] %CF>A 92D C6A@CE65=J AFE #F3:@[ 2 =@?8E:>6 |25FC@ 4C:E:4[ 😕 492C86 @7 @G6CD66:?8 E96 &]$] >:=:E2CJ @A6C2E:@?D 😕 ‘6?6KF6=2]k^Am

    kAm“t5 |2C<6J G@E65 7@C E96 xC2B H2C 32D65 @? 2 =:6[” |@F=E@? D2:5 😕 E96 G:56@] “%96? 96 2AA2C6?E=J =62C?65 ?@E9:?8 2?5 G@E65 E@ CF336C DE2>A |2C4@ #F3:@[ H9@ 😀 D6?5:?8 EC@@AD :?E@ ‘6?6KF6=2 32D65 @? 2 =:6]”k^Am

    kAm|@F=E@? 92D 42==65 %CF>A’D F?:=2E6C2= :?4FCD:@? 😕 ‘6?6KF6=2 “xC2B a]_” 2?5 😀 2>@?8 s6>@4C2ED H9@ 2C8F6 E92E E96 4@?7=:4E 😀 23@FE D6:K:?8 E96 4@F?ECJ’D @:= C6D6CG6D[ ?@E 5CF8 EC277:4<:?8 @C E6CC@C:D>]k^Am

    kAm“(6’G6 8@EE2 DE@A DFAA@CE:?8 E9:D #6AF3=:42? H2C >@?86C:?8] xE’D ?@E E96 <:?5 @7 =6256CD9:A E92E H6 ?665[” |@F=E@? D2:5 😕 E96 G:56@] “p?5 x 5@?’E E9:?< $6?2E@C |2C<6J F?56CDE2?5D E96 DE2<6D 7@C J@F?8 A6@A=6 =:<6 >JD6=7 H9@ 2C6 D6?E E@ 7:89E 2?5 5:6 😕 E96D6 H2C E92E H6 5@?’E ?665]”k^Am

    kAmx? C6DA@?D6[ |2C<6J’D @77:46 :DDF65 2 DE2E6>6?E A@:?E:?8 @FE E92E E96 G6E6C2? =2H>2<6C 324<65 2 D:>:=2C H2C A@H6CD C6D@=FE:@? E92E 42>6 FA 7@C 2 G@E6 😕 E96 $6?2E6 😕 }@G6>36C[ H9:49 “H@F=5 92G6 3=@4<65 s@?2=5 %CF>A 7C@> 2FE9@C:K:?8 >:=:E2CJ DEC:<6D @? ‘6?6KF6=2]” %96 C6D@=FE:@? 72:=65 E@ A2DD 2>:5 #6AF3=:42? @AA@D:E:@?]k^Am

    kAm“(96? $6?2E@C z2:?6 3C:?8D 9:D C6D@=FE:@? E@ E96 $6?2E6 7=@@C 7@C 2 G@E6 E9:D H66<[ $6?2E@C |2C<6J H:== DFAA@CE :E 282:?[” E96 DE2E6>6?E D2:5] “#6AF3=:42?D H:== 92G6 2 492?46 E@ 8@ @? C64@C5i 5@ E96J DE2?5 7@C s@?2=5 %CF>A’D H2C 7@C @:= @C 5@ E96J DE2?5 7@C A6246 7@C E96 p>6C:42? A6@A=6n $6?2E@C |2C<6J 49@@D6D E96 p>6C:42? A6@A=6 6G6CJ E:>6]”k^Am

    kAm%96 DE2E6>6?E 5:5?’E 255C6DD |@F=E@?’D 4C:E:4:D> @7 E96 D6?2E@C 7@C 9:D AC6G:@FD G@E6D @? E96 xC2B H2C C6D@=FE:@?D]k^Am

    kAm|@F=E@? 2?5 @E96C 4C:E:4D D2J E96 4=2:> 3J !C6D:56?E v6@C86 (] qFD9’D 25>:?:DEC2E:@?E92E xC2B 925 H62A@?D @7 >2DD 56DECF4E:@? 29625 @7 E96 ~4E@36C a__a G@E6D E@ 2FE9@C:K6 7@C46 😕 E96 4@F?ECJ H2D 32D6=6DD] }62C=J d[___ &]$] EC@@AD H6C6 <:==65 😕 E96 H2C] xC2B: 562E9D H6C6 6DE:>2E65 😕 E96 9F?5C65D @7 E9@FD2?5D]k^Am

    kAmx? a_ab[ E96 E96?s6>@4C2E:4=65 $6?2E6 A2DD65 2 3:A2CE:D2? 3:== E@ C6A62= E96 `hh` 2?5 a__a H2C A@H6CD 2FE9@C:K2E:@? 7@C xC2B 😕 2 DJ>3@=:4 >@G6 2:>65 2E 6?5:?8 5632E6 @G6C E96 =682= ;FDE:7:42E:@? 7@C E96 H2CD] qFE E96 3:== DE2==65 😕 E96 v~!4@?EC@==65 w@FD6 2?5 72:=65 E@ C6249 E96?!C6D:56?E y@6 q:56?’D 56D<]k^Am

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Capture of Maduro and US claim that it will run Venezuela raise new legal questions

    The Trump administration’s capture of Venezuela’s president and claims that it will “run” the country are raising stark new questions about the legality of the U.S. actions and its future operations in the South American nation.Related video above: U.S. strikes Venezuela, captures President Maduro in overnight operationThe middle-of-the-night seizure of Nicolás Maduro, who was transported with his wife on a U.S. warship to face narco-terrorism conspiracy charges in New York, is beyond even the most high-profile historical examples of aggressive American actions toward autocratic governments in Panama, Iraq and elsewhere, legal experts said. It came after a surprise U.S. incursion that rocked the Venezuelan capital with overnight explosions.”This is clearly a blatant, illegal and criminal act,” said Jimmy Gurule, a Notre Dame Law School professor and former assistant U.S. attorney.The stunning development caps months of aggressive U.S. military action in the region, including the bombing of boats accused of trafficking drugs and seizures of oil tankers off the coast of Venezuela. The Trump administration has conducted 35 known boat strikes against vessels, killing more than 115 people since September, and positioned an armada of warships in nearby waters.The bigger debate than legality is yet to come, said John Yoo, an early architect of the George W. Bush administration’s policy in Iraq and now a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley.”It’s easier to remove a dictator,” he said, based on his experience in the Iraq War. But ensuring the transition to a stable democratic government is “the harder part.”Maduro’s arrest on anniversary of Noriega’s surrenderMaduro’s arrest came 36 years to the date of the surrender of Panama’s strongman, Manuel Noriega, a notable milestone in American involvement in the Western Hemisphere. The U.S. invaded Panama in 1989 to arrest Noriega on drug trafficking charges.In Panama, however, U.S. national security interests were directly at stake in the form of the Panama Canal as well as the safety of American citizens and U.S. military installations in the country.Video below: Former Alabama exchange student reacts to Maduro captureBy contrast, Congress has not authorized any American military strike or law enforcement move against Venezuela.”The President will claim that this fits within a vast body of precedent supporting broad executive power to defend the United States, its citizens, and its interests,” Matthew Waxman, a Columbia University law professor who was a national security official in the Bush administration, said by email. “Critics will charge that this exceeds the bounds of presidential power without congressional authorization.”While U.S. agents have a long history of snatching defendants abroad to execute arrest warrants without authorization, federal courts have long deferred to the White House in foreign policy and national security matters.For example, U.S. bounty hunters, working under the direction of the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 1990 abducted in Mexico a doctor accused of killing DEA agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena.”Courts give great deference to the president on issues related to national security,” said Gurule, who led the prosecution against Camarena’s killers. “But great deference does not mean absolute deference and unfettered authority to do anything.”Congress has yet to authorize or ban US actionsTrump’s administration has declared the drug cartels operating from Venezuela to be unlawful combatants and has said the United States is now in an “armed conflict” with them, according to an administration memo obtained in October by The Associated Press.The memo appears to represent an extraordinary assertion of presidential war powers, with Trump effectively declaring that trafficking of drugs into the U.S. amounts to armed conflict requiring the use of military force. That is a new rationale for past and future actions.Congress, which has broad authority to approve or prohibit the president’s war powers, has failed to do either, even as lawmakers from both political parties grow increasingly uneasy with the military actions in the region, particularly after it was revealed that U.S. forces killed two survivors of a boat attack with a follow-up strike.Congress’ Democratic leaders, Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, demanded immediate briefings for the “gang of eight” leaders on Capitol Hill, which includes top members of the Intelligence committees, as well as for other lawmakers. Congressional leaders were not notified of the actions until after the operation was underway.”The idea that Trump plans to now run Venezuela should strike fear in the hearts of all Americans,” Schumer said. “The American people have seen this before and paid the devastating price.”Michael Schmitt, a former Air Force lawyer and professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval War College, said the entire operation — the boat strikes as well as the apprehension of Maduro — clearly violates international law.”Lawyers call it international armed conflict,” Schmitt said. “Lay people call it war. So as a matter of law, we are now at war with Venezuela because the use of hostilities between two states clearly triggers an internal armed conflict.”War powers vote aheadHouse Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said the administration “is working to schedule briefings” for lawmakers next week.Republican lawmakers in Congress largely welcomed the capture of Maduro as ridding the region of a leader they say is responsible for drug trafficking, but Democratic lawmakers warned that in veering from the rule of law, the administration is potentially greenlighting other countries such as China or Russia to do the same.”Beyond the legality, what kind of precedent does it send?” asked Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He said in an interview that the rebuilding plan ahead has echoes of the Iraq War as the Trump administration promises to use Venezuela’s oil revenue to pay the costs.Waxman, the Columbia University law professor, said seizing control of Venezuela’s resources opens up additional legal issues: “For example, a big issue will be who really owns Venezuela’s oil?”The Senate is expected to try again next week to curtail Trump’s actions, with a vote expected on a bipartisan war powers resolution that would block using U.S. forces against Venezuela unless authorized by Congress.Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he is grateful for the armed forces “who carried out this necessary action.” He said he spoke to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and wants more information.”I look forward to receiving further briefings from the administration on this operation as part of its comprehensive counternarcotics strategy when the Senate returns to Washington next week,” Thune said.Rubio said at a briefing Saturday with Trump that because of the nature of the surprise operation, it was not something that could be shared beforehand with the lawmakers.Goodman reported from Miami.

    WASHINGTON (AP) —

    The Trump administration’s capture of Venezuela’s president and claims that it will “run” the country are raising stark new questions about the legality of the U.S. actions and its future operations in the South American nation.

    Related video above: U.S. strikes Venezuela, captures President Maduro in overnight operation

    The middle-of-the-night seizure of Nicolás Maduro, who was transported with his wife on a U.S. warship to face narco-terrorism conspiracy charges in New York, is beyond even the most high-profile historical examples of aggressive American actions toward autocratic governments in Panama, Iraq and elsewhere, legal experts said. It came after a surprise U.S. incursion that rocked the Venezuelan capital with overnight explosions.

    “This is clearly a blatant, illegal and criminal act,” said Jimmy Gurule, a Notre Dame Law School professor and former assistant U.S. attorney.

    The stunning development caps months of aggressive U.S. military action in the region, including the bombing of boats accused of trafficking drugs and seizures of oil tankers off the coast of Venezuela. The Trump administration has conducted 35 known boat strikes against vessels, killing more than 115 people since September, and positioned an armada of warships in nearby waters.

    The bigger debate than legality is yet to come, said John Yoo, an early architect of the George W. Bush administration’s policy in Iraq and now a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

    “It’s easier to remove a dictator,” he said, based on his experience in the Iraq War. But ensuring the transition to a stable democratic government is “the harder part.”

    Maduro’s arrest on anniversary of Noriega’s surrender

    Maduro’s arrest came 36 years to the date of the surrender of Panama’s strongman, Manuel Noriega, a notable milestone in American involvement in the Western Hemisphere. The U.S. invaded Panama in 1989 to arrest Noriega on drug trafficking charges.

    In Panama, however, U.S. national security interests were directly at stake in the form of the Panama Canal as well as the safety of American citizens and U.S. military installations in the country.

    Video below: Former Alabama exchange student reacts to Maduro capture

    By contrast, Congress has not authorized any American military strike or law enforcement move against Venezuela.

    “The President will claim that this fits within a vast body of precedent supporting broad executive power to defend the United States, its citizens, and its interests,” Matthew Waxman, a Columbia University law professor who was a national security official in the Bush administration, said by email. “Critics will charge that this exceeds the bounds of presidential power without congressional authorization.”

    While U.S. agents have a long history of snatching defendants abroad to execute arrest warrants without authorization, federal courts have long deferred to the White House in foreign policy and national security matters.

    For example, U.S. bounty hunters, working under the direction of the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 1990 abducted in Mexico a doctor accused of killing DEA agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena.

    “Courts give great deference to the president on issues related to national security,” said Gurule, who led the prosecution against Camarena’s killers. “But great deference does not mean absolute deference and unfettered authority to do anything.”

    Congress has yet to authorize or ban US actions

    Trump’s administration has declared the drug cartels operating from Venezuela to be unlawful combatants and has said the United States is now in an “armed conflict” with them, according to an administration memo obtained in October by The Associated Press.

    The memo appears to represent an extraordinary assertion of presidential war powers, with Trump effectively declaring that trafficking of drugs into the U.S. amounts to armed conflict requiring the use of military force. That is a new rationale for past and future actions.

    Congress, which has broad authority to approve or prohibit the president’s war powers, has failed to do either, even as lawmakers from both political parties grow increasingly uneasy with the military actions in the region, particularly after it was revealed that U.S. forces killed two survivors of a boat attack with a follow-up strike.

    Congress’ Democratic leaders, Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, demanded immediate briefings for the “gang of eight” leaders on Capitol Hill, which includes top members of the Intelligence committees, as well as for other lawmakers. Congressional leaders were not notified of the actions until after the operation was underway.

    “The idea that Trump plans to now run Venezuela should strike fear in the hearts of all Americans,” Schumer said. “The American people have seen this before and paid the devastating price.”

    Michael Schmitt, a former Air Force lawyer and professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval War College, said the entire operation — the boat strikes as well as the apprehension of Maduro — clearly violates international law.

    “Lawyers call it international armed conflict,” Schmitt said. “Lay people call it war. So as a matter of law, we are now at war with Venezuela because the use of hostilities between two states clearly triggers an internal armed conflict.”

    War powers vote ahead

    House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said the administration “is working to schedule briefings” for lawmakers next week.

    Republican lawmakers in Congress largely welcomed the capture of Maduro as ridding the region of a leader they say is responsible for drug trafficking, but Democratic lawmakers warned that in veering from the rule of law, the administration is potentially greenlighting other countries such as China or Russia to do the same.

    “Beyond the legality, what kind of precedent does it send?” asked Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He said in an interview that the rebuilding plan ahead has echoes of the Iraq War as the Trump administration promises to use Venezuela’s oil revenue to pay the costs.

    Waxman, the Columbia University law professor, said seizing control of Venezuela’s resources opens up additional legal issues: “For example, a big issue will be who really owns Venezuela’s oil?”

    The Senate is expected to try again next week to curtail Trump’s actions, with a vote expected on a bipartisan war powers resolution that would block using U.S. forces against Venezuela unless authorized by Congress.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he is grateful for the armed forces “who carried out this necessary action.” He said he spoke to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and wants more information.

    “I look forward to receiving further briefings from the administration on this operation as part of its comprehensive counternarcotics strategy when the Senate returns to Washington next week,” Thune said.

    Rubio said at a briefing Saturday with Trump that because of the nature of the surprise operation, it was not something that could be shared beforehand with the lawmakers.

    Goodman reported from Miami.

    Source link

  • Iraq Prison Abuse Scandal Fast Facts | CNN

    Iraq Prison Abuse Scandal Fast Facts | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s some background information about the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal which took place during the Iraq war.

    Abu Ghraib prison was a US Army detention center for captured Iraqis from 2003 to 2006. An investigation into the treatment of detainees at the prison was prompted by the discovery of graphic photos depicting guards abusing detainees in 2003.

    The facility was located 20 miles west of Baghdad on 280 acres.

    At the height of the scandal, the prison held as many as 3,800 detainees.

    Most of the detainees lived in tents in the prison yards.

    The abuses took place inside the prison in cell blocks 1A and 1B.

    Eleven US soldiers were convicted of crimes relating to the Abu Ghraib scandal. Seven of those were from Maryland-based 372nd Military Police Company. A number of other service members were not charged but reprimanded.

    November 2003 – A detainee dies during an interrogation at Abu Ghraib.

    January 2004 – Spc. Joseph M. Darby discovers photos on a CD-ROM of Iraqi prisoners being abused. He reports the abuse to superiors, prompting an investigation.

    April 4, 2004 – Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba releases his report to Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez about misconduct in the 800th Military Police Brigade.

    April 28, 2004 – “60 Minutes II” broadcasts graphic photos of Iraqi detainees being humiliated and tortured.

    April 30, 2004 – The New Yorker publishes an article by Seymour Hersh reporting details in the Taguba report on the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

    April 30, 2004 – Taguba’s report detailing his investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade is released.

    Taguba’s report states that the following abuses happened in this incident:
    – Punching, slapping and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet.
    – Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees.
    – Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing.
    – Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time.
    – Forcing naked male detainees to wear women’s underwear.
    – Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped.
    – Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them.
    – Positioning a naked detainee on a box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture.
    – Writing “I am a Rapest (sic)” on the leg of a detainee accused of rape, and then photographing him naked.
    – Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee’s neck and having a female soldier pose for a picture.
    – A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee.
    – Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee.
    – Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees.

    May 4, 2004 – Gen. George W. Casey Jr. announces that in the past 16 months, the US Army has conducted more than 30 criminal investigations into misconduct by US captors during both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

    May 5, 2004 – US President George W. Bush records interviews with Al Arabiya and US-sponsored Al-Hurra networks expressing his disgust with the mistreatment of Iraqi detainees.

    May 6, 2004 – During a joint news conference with King Abdullah II of Jordan, Bush expresses remorse “for the humiliation suffered” by Iraqi prisoners at the hands of US troops.

    May 6, 2004 – The Justice Department announces that it is looking into three suspicious deaths of detainees, two in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, and the involvement of the CIA and contractors in the deaths.

    May 7, 2004 – US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld testifies before the Senate and House Armed Services Committees. “These events occurred on my watch…as Secretary of Defense, I am accountable for them and I take full responsibility…there are other photos – many other photos – that depict incidents of physical violence towards prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.”

    May 10, 2004 – Bush views some of the photos at the Pentagon and announces his firm support for Rumsfeld.

    May 12, 2004 – Rumsfeld testifies before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee.

    August 24, 2004 – An independent commission headed by former US Secretary of Defense James Schleslinger reports that what took place at the prison was due largely to “sadism” on the part of officers working the night shift, but that responsibility for the mistreatment of prisoners went higher up the chain of command, back to Washington, DC.

    August 25, 2004 – The Fay-Jones report on the Abu Ghraib scandal finds 44 instances of abuse, some of which amounted to torture.

    February 15, 2006 – A new set of graphic photographs and video from Abu Ghraib are aired on the Australian television network SBS’s program “Dateline.” The photos are reportedly from the same period in 2003 that the previous photos were shot, not new incidents.

    June 1, 2006 – Sgt. Santos Cardona, an Army dog handler, is found guilty of two of five counts against him, including aggravated assault and unlawfully using his dog to threaten detainees. He is sentenced to 90 days hard labor and a reduction of rank. He must also forfeit $600 of pay per month for a year.

    September 1, 2006 – Control of Abu Ghraib is handed over to the Iraqis after all of the detainees are transferred elsewhere.

    February 2008 – A documentary about the Abu Ghraib scandal by Oscar-winning director Errol Morris, “Standard Operating Procedure,” debuts at the Berlin Film Festival.

    June 30, 2008 – Former detainees of Abu Ghraib prison file a lawsuit against CACI Premier Technology, a military contractor who supplied the army with interrogators.

    February 21, 2009 – Abu Ghraib reopens after major renovations which include a new gym, barber shop, sewing room, outdoor recreational areas, a library, and computer room. Its name is changed to Baghdad Central Prison.

    September 2009 – Saleh et al v. Titan Corporation et al, a federal class action lawsuit alleging abuse at Abu Ghraib by civilian contractors from CACI International is dismissed by a federal appeals court.

    2012 – Defense contractor Engility Holdings Inc. agrees to pay 71 former detainees at Abu Ghraib and other sites $5.28 million to settle a lawsuit filed in 2008.

    April 2014 – Iraq closes the prison due to security concerns.

    March 20, 2015 – US District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein orders the Defense Department to release photos that show detainees being abused in detention centers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    January 18, 2017 – Hellerstein rules that the government must release an estimated 2,000 additional photos of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib and other military facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    August 23, 2019 – The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals allows a 2008 lawsuit filed by former detainees against CACI Premier Technology to move forward. The court denied CACI’s request to immediately appeal a lower court’s ruling that the company can be sued and is not immune from civil suit as a government contractor.

    June 28, 2021 – The US Supreme Court denies CACI Premier Technology’s petition, clearing the way for the 2008 lawsuit to proceed.

    Spc. Megan Ambuhl
    372nd Military Police Company
    October 30, 2004 – As part of a plea deal, Ambuhl pleads guilty to one charge of dereliction of duty. She is discharged from the Army without prison time.

    Sgt. Javal S. Davis
    372nd Military Police Company
    February 1, 2005 – Pleads guilty as part of a plea agreement.
    February 5, 2005 – Is sentenced to six months in a military prison.
    Late May 2005 – Is released after serving approximately three months.

    Pfc. Lynndie England
    372nd Military Police Company
    May 2, 2005 – England pleads guilty to reduced charges as part of a pretrial agreement.
    May 4, 2005 – A mistrial is declared after she pleads guilty but then states that she did not know her actions were wrong.
    September 21, 2005 – England’s second court-martial trial begins at Fort Hood, Texas.
    September 26, 2005 – England is found guilty of four counts of maltreating detainees, one count of conspiracy and one count of committing an indecent act.
    September 27, 2005 – Is sentenced to three years in prison and given a dishonorable discharge.
    March 2007 – Is released from military prison after serving half of her 36-month sentence.
    2009 – Her biography, “Tortured: Lynndie England, Abu Ghraib and the Photographs that Shocked the World,” is published.

    Staff Sgt. Ivan “Chip” Frederick II
    372nd Military Police Company
    October 20, 2004 – Pleads guilty to conspiracy, dereliction of duty, maltreatment of detainees, assault, and committing an indecent act under a plea agreement.
    October 21, 2004 – Is sentenced to eight years in prison and also sentenced to a forfeiture of pay, a dishonorable discharge and a reduction in rank to private.
    October 1, 2007 – Is paroled after serving approximately three years in a military prison.

    Spc. Charles Graner
    372nd Military Police Company
    January 14, 2005 – Graner is found guilty of nine of 10 counts under five separate charges.
    January 15, 2005 – Graner is sentenced to 10 years in prison, downgraded to the rank of private with loss of pay, and receives a dishonorable discharge.
    August 6, 2011 – Graner is released from prison.

    Spc. Sabrina Harman
    372nd Military Police Company
    May 16, 2005 – Is found guilty on six of the seven charges for her role in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal.
    May 17, 2005 – Sentenced to six months in prison. Harman is demoted to private, and receives a bad conduct discharge after she finishes the sentence.

    Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan
    Director, Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center during the fall of 2003. Jordan is the only officer charged with prisoner abuse.
    April 28, 2006 – Charged with eight counts, including disobeying an order, dereliction of duty, cruelty, false statements, fraud and interfering with an investigation.
    August 28, 2007 – Acquitted of charges that he failed to control soldiers who abused detainees, but is found guilty of disobeying a general’s command not to talk about allegations of abuse at the prison. On August 29, he is sentenced with a reprimand.
    January 10, 2008 – Cleared of all wrongdoing, and the conviction and reprimand are removed from his record.

    Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski
    Commander of the Army Reserve’s 800th Military Police Brigade, in charge of all 12 Iraqi detention facilities, including Abu Ghraib.
    May 5, 2005 – She is demoted from brigadier general to colonel by President Bush after an extensive investigation and is cited for two of four allegations against her, dereliction of duty and shoplifting. The probe clears her of “making a material misrepresentation to an investigating team” and “failure to obey a lawful order.”

    Col. Thomas Pappas
    Commander of the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade.
    May 2006 – Reprimanded, fined, and relieved of command after using muzzled dogs inside interrogation rooms.

    Lt. Col. Jerry L. Phillabaum
    Commander, 320th MP Battalion.
    April 2004 – He is reprimanded and relieved of command of the 320th Military Police Battalion for his role in the scandal.

    Spc. Jeremy Sivits
    372nd Military Police Company
    May 19, 2004 – Sivits pleads guilty as part of a pretrial agreement with prosecutors that leaves him open to testify against other soldiers charged in the scandal. He is sentenced to a year of confinement, discharge for bad conduct, and is demoted.

    Source link

  • Country Stations Refuse To Play Beyoncé’s Music After Artist Condemns Iraq War

    Country Stations Refuse To Play Beyoncé’s Music After Artist Condemns Iraq War

    HOUSTON—Calling the popular musician traitorous for failing to support President George W. Bush in a time of crisis, thousands of country stations across America reportedly refused to play Beyoncé’s music Thursday after the artist condemned the Iraq War. “If she doesn’t want to support our troops risking their lives out there for the cause of freedom, then we don’t need her,” said country radio executive Hunter Roeloffs, one of many station owners who blacklisted the recent singles “Texas Hold ’Em” and “16 Carriages” after controversial comments in which the star expressed reservations about the U.S.-led Coalition invasion of Iraq—remarks that also led to a reported drop in ticket sales and Beyoncé losing a sponsorship deal with Lipton. “Unlike Miss Knowles, we’re proud Americans here at 100.3 the Bull. We support freedom, whether it’s here or in the Middle East. So when she says innocent lives will be lost, I can’t help but wonder how she could possibly think a bloodthirsty dictator like Saddam Hussein is innocent. And then there’s that line of hers about being ashamed of President Bush? Well, we’re ashamed of her. How about that?” At press time, Beyoncé had attracted additional criticism from the country music scene after rebranding herself as the Chicks.

    Green Giant Unveils New Lettuce That You Can Put Wig On And Pretend Is Your Wife

    Source link

  • Inside tyrant Saddam Hussein’s abandoned palaces left crumbling for decades

    Inside tyrant Saddam Hussein’s abandoned palaces left crumbling for decades

    THE painful legacy of one of the world’s most bloodthirsty tyrants lives on through over 100 of his crumbling palaces and villas.

    After oppressing Iraq for three hideous decades – Saddam Hussein’s blood-stained empire of greed and decadence has been left untouched for decades after the chaos of war.

    12

    One of the Iraqi dictator’s estates boasted over 30 mini palaces
    The properties are now shells of their former splendour

    12

    The properties are now shells of their former splendourCredit: AFP – Getty
    The famed Babylon Palace built on the ruins of a village Saddam bulldozed to make room for his new monstrous home

    12

    The famed Babylon Palace built on the ruins of a village Saddam bulldozed to make room for his new monstrous homeCredit: Getty Images – Getty

    Saddam was the barbaric president of Iraq from 1979 until 2003 when the US and the UK invaded.

    He was dragged out of a hiding hole, put on trial for crimes against humanity and sentenced to death in November 2006.

    Gassing his own population, sending opponents to their death live on TV and a serial rapist, psychopathic son who tortured the national team’s footballers were all part of his twisted world.

    And plenty of the terror committed by the so-called “Beast of Baghdad” took place within the high walls of his lavish and closely guarded estates.

    read more on abandoned sites

    Seventeen years on, the power and wealth he once wielded is laid bare inside both the well-preserved properties and the rubble of others scattered all across Iraq.

    He appeared to have a penchant for murals of himself, marble staircases, ornate ceiling decorations, frighteningly heavy gates and rooms with a view.

    He threw lavish parties inside the opulent estates, often getting his guards to abducting girls off the street, dress them up and make them dance.

    His ridiculous property empire is a fitting reminder of his ultimate demise – a delusional man who thought he could live like a king as he battered and tormented his starving country.

    One palace was decorated from top-to-toe in the style of Arabian nights, complete with erotic murals and his own private torture chamber.

    The most luxurious of all was the Presidential Palace, where no expense was spared.

    The entire place was coated in marble flown in from Italy, bathrooms were made from gold and each wing had its own swimming pool.

    It was part of a far larger estate northwest of Baghdad on the Tigris river – known as the “city of palaces” after Saddam built over 30 villas.

    And close to the ancient ruins of Bayblon, a golden-walled castle has an almost panoramic view of the river, with endless hallways of gigantic stately rooms.

    It sits over the bones of the village of Qawarish, which was bulldozed so the murderous madman could enjoy the perfect view.

    Now, the palace at Babylon has been reclaimed by the public, but marks of Saddam are still littered all around.

    The iron-first ruler’s initials are carved into its stone walls alongside prayers for him.

    One says: “In the reign of the victorious Saddam Hussein, the president of the Republic, may God keep him, the guardian of the great Iraq and the renovator of its renaissance and the builder of its great civilisation, the rebuilding of the great city of Babylon was done in 1987.”

    It’s even said that Saddam only visited some of the palaces he had built only once or twice.

    Even in the monstrous, now splendour-less homes filled with shattered windows, looted halls and graffiti-covered walls – the ghosts of Saddam are present.

    Others still haunt hilltops and cast shadows over cities.

    In the turmoil of war, many were damaged in fighting or used as bases by US and other foreign forces.

    Others that escaped the violence are still falling apart having been looted and ignored for decades.

    His entire property empire belongs to the Iraqi government – but people are conflicted over whether to restore the palaces or allow them to fall into further ruin.

    One palace has been repurposed as a museum for ancient artefacts, while others have been left as is and opened to the public to explore their past history.

    Iraqis who grew up during the carnage of Saddam’s reign or the US occupation have been recently reclaiming the palaces as their own playgrounds.

    “It’s surreal,” a 22-year-old called Hakim told Al Jazeera, as he visited the Babylon castle in March with a crowd of others.

    “You don’t need security or bodyguards to escort you to a place that used to belong to Saddam, and I think that’s amazing.”

    Another young Iraqi told the outlet: “When I enter the palace, I can just imagine that guy [Saddam] sipping his coffee here.”

    “He would probably be waving his weapons around, too,” he joked.

    Seventeen years on and most of the palaces are in ruins

    12

    Seventeen years on and most of the palaces are in ruinsCredit: Getty Images – Getty
    Many were destroyed by the turmoil of war

    12

    Many were destroyed by the turmoil of warCredit: Reuters
    Saddam's ornate castles are scattered across war-ravaged Iraq

    12

    Saddam’s ornate castles are scattered across war-ravaged IraqCredit: Reuters
    One palace was targeted by UK and coalition forces after the Islamic State was believed to be using as a training ground

    12

    One palace was targeted by UK and coalition forces after the Islamic State was believed to be using as a training groundCredit: Reuters
    Ceiling of the Babylon Palace with a mural of the landmarks of Iraq

    12

    Ceiling of the Babylon Palace with a mural of the landmarks of Iraq
    Iraqis stand inside a marbled room, where Saddam supposedly once slept

    12

    Iraqis stand inside a marbled room, where Saddam supposedly once sleptCredit: 2009 Getty Images
    Saddam spent billions constructing over 100 palaces while his country starved

    12

    Saddam spent billions constructing over 100 palaces while his country starved
    All of the palaces were looted after the US invaded in 2003

    12

    All of the palaces were looted after the US invaded in 2003Credit: 2023 Kaveh Kazemi
    The Iraqi government now owns all the palaces and is struggling to decide what to do with such a haunted collection

    12

    The Iraqi government now owns all the palaces and is struggling to decide what to do with such a haunted collectionCredit: Getty – Contributor

    Iona Cleave

    Source link

  • The Iraq War Started 20 Years Ago. Most Senate Republicans Still Don’t Want to Repeal Iraq War Powers

    The Iraq War Started 20 Years Ago. Most Senate Republicans Still Don’t Want to Repeal Iraq War Powers

    With the 20th anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq just days away, a bipartisan group of senators has been working on an effort to repeal both the 1991 and 2002 authorizations for use of military force (AUMF) against the country. Congress had originally passed the authorizations unanimously for the wars waged by George H.W. Bush and then George W. Bush, the latter of which caused an estimated one million deaths.

    In recent years, the 2003 invasion has become increasingly shunned by Republican leaders, particularly after Donald Trump instigated his populist America First takeover of the party. Many of Trump’s congressional allies have cited the war in their denunciations of old-guard Republicans. But the party apparently has yet to rid itself of its neo-conservative roots, as the majority of GOP senators voted against a Thursday measure to debate revoking the AUMFs.

    The measure still passed with help from 19 Republicans, including Sens. Josh Hawley and JD Vance, self-styled “America First” lawmakers; Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, two of the more moderate Republicans in the chamber; and Sen. Rand Paul, a quasi-libertarian. Every Democratic member voted in favor of the measure.

    Paul, perhaps the most vocal anti-interventionist senator in the GOP, made known his displeasure with his colleagues’ votes. “It should be easy to remove,” he said, according to Insider. “But some Republicans will vote to continue a war that’s been over for 20 years.”

    Among the Republicans who opposed opening the debate for the bill were Sen. Mitt Romney, a leading Trump critic who has been known to join b; Tom Cotton, a conservative who has aligned themselves with Trump’s nationalist brand; and Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham, both of whom serve as a bridge between the hawkish establishment and Trump.

    In comments to Insider, Romney defended his nay vote by arguing that AUMFs are still needed today. “The world continues to be a troubled place, and I don’t want to remove any of the authorities that have been, or may be, relied upon to defend our interests,” he said. This feeling was shared by Sen. Rick Scott, a Florida Republican. “I don’t want to do anything that reduces the President’s ability to kill somebody like Soleimani,” Scott told Insider. “That’s probably what I care about the most.” And Sen. Jim Risch, an Idaho Republican who also voted against, told the outlet that he would only support revoking the AUMFs “when conditions are different in the Middle East than they are right now,” a sentiment often repeated in Washington to justify the US military’s constant presence in the region.

    The White House, though, supports the bill and said Thursday that its passage would “have no impact on current US military operations” and serve as a symbolic gesture of the administration’s “commitment to a strong and comprehensive relationship with our Iraqi partners.” 

    “President Biden remains committed to working with the Congress to ensure that outdated authorizations for the use of military force are replaced with a narrow and specific framework more appropriate to protecting Americans from modern terrorist threats,” the statement continued. “Toward that end, the Administration will ensure that Congress has a clear and thorough understanding of the effect of any such action and of the threats facing U.S. forces, personnel, and interests around the world.”

    Caleb Ecarma

    Source link