Click here to support CAE
   
 
16beavergroup.org ARTicles 16beavergroup.org About Mondays ARTicles Journalisms Events


Rene -- DOCUMENTS SHOW TROOPS DISREGARDING RULES -- 09.08.07

Printer-friendly verion

For more on this, visit the ACLU site:
http://www.aclu.org/natsec/31540prs20070904.html

-rg

DOCUMENTS SHOW TROOPS DISREGARDING RULES
by Ryan Lenz

by the Associated Press
Published on Tuesday, September 4, 2007

New documents released Tuesday regarding crimes committed by
U.S. soldiers against civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan detail a
troubling pattern of troops failing to understand and follow the
rules that govern interrogations and deadly actions.

The documents, released by the American Civil Liberties Union ahead
of a lawsuit, total nearly 10,000 pages of courts-martial summaries,
transcripts and military investigative reports about 22 incidents. They
show repeated examples of soldiers believing they were within the
law when they killed local citizens.

The killings include the drowning of a man soldiers pushed from
a bridge into the Tigris River as punishment for breaking curfew,
and the suffocation during interrogation of a former Iraqi general
believed to be helping insurgents.

In the suffocation, soldiers covered the man's head with a sleeping
bag, then wrapped his neck with an electrical cord for a "stress
position" they insisted was an approved technique.

Chief Warrant Officer Lewis Welshofer was convicted of negligent
homicide in the death of Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush following a
January 2006 court-martial that received wide media attention due to
possible CIA involvement in the interrogation.

But even after his conviction, Welshofer insisted his actions were
appropriate and standard, documents show.

"The simple fact of the matter is interrogation is supposed to be
stressful or you will get no information," Welshofer wrote in a
letter to the court asking for clemency. "To put it another way,
an interrogation without stress is not an interrogation - it is
a conversation."

Welshofer said in the same letter that he was "within the appropriate
constraints that both the rules of law, and just as importantly -
duty, imposed on me."

The documents were obtained through a federal Freedom of Information
Act request the ACLU filed with the military more than a year ago
asking for all documents relevant to U.S. military involvement in the
deaths of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. Only the Army responded.

Considered against recent cases, including soldiers from the 101st
Airborne Division convicted of killing detainees in Samarra, Iraq,
last year and the ongoing courts-martial of Marines accused of killing
24 civilians in Haditha, these new examples shed light on the frequency
soldiers and Marines may disregard the rules of war.

Nasrina Bargzie, an attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project,
said the documents also show that theres an abundance of information
being withheld from public scrutiny.

"The government has gone out of its way to hide the human cost of this
war," Bargzie said. Releasing the documents now "paints at least a part
of that picture so people at least know what's going on," she said.

The lawsuit seeks to compel the military to produce all documents
related to all incidents of civilian deaths at the hands of U.S. troops
in Iraq and Afghanistan since January 2005. The ACLU contends the
materials are releasable under federal law.

The Defense Department declined to comment on the lawsuit until it
could review its claims.

Among the files released to the ACLU were the court-martial records
for two soldiers convicted of assault in the drowning of a man pushed
into the Tigris for violating curfew and three soldiers convicted in
the "mercy killing" of an injured teenager in Sadr City.

The teen had been severely injured; one soldier explained that he
shot and killed the teen "to take him out of his misery."

Other killings included:

- A man shot after a search of his home near Balad uncovered illegal
weapons and anti-American literature. Immediately after the shooting,
according to testimony, Sgt. 1st Class George Diaz, who was convicted
of unpremeditated murder, said, "I'm going to hell for this." Diaz also
was convicted of mistreating a teenage detainee when he forced the
youth to hold a smoke grenade with the pin pulled as Diaz questioned
him at gunpoint.

- A suspected insurgent in Iraq by Staff Sgt. Shane Werst, who said
the man appeared to be reaching for a weapon. Werst was acquitted of
murder despite acknowledging he had fired and then planted a chrome
Iraqi pistol on the suspect to make his claim of self defense more
believable.

In a previously unreported case, Pfc. James Combs was convicted of
involuntary manslaughter for shooting an Iraqi woman from a guard
tower in what he claimed was an accident, though court documents and
testimony indicate his weapon was set to fire multiple shots despite
a regulation advising against such a setting.

Another previously undisclosed case involved Sgt. Ricky Burke, who
was charged with murder for killing a wounded man alongside the road
following a firefight.

Staff Sgt. Timothy Nein, a member of Burke's military police company,
testified he heard Burke say before the shooting, "It's payback time."

Burke, a member of the Kentucky National Guard, was found not guilty
of the charges that stemmed from the same battle that led to the
first woman since World War II being awarded the Silver Star.

In closing arguments, Burke's attorneys asked the jury to recommend
that soldiers be trained better for handling detainees. "They are
not trained to standard," said an attorney not identified in the
transcript.

The attorneys also insisted that the rules of engagement are clear
and in favor of soldiers, contending that the perception of hostility
merits deadly action.

Michael Pheneger, a retired Army intelligence colonel who reviewed the
materials for the ACLU, said the documents suggest many allegations
of war crimes in Iraq are not being made public.

"Wars are messy by their very nature. These are dangerous
circumstances, and the fog of war is out there," said Pheneger, who
served in Vietnam. "But it's perfectly obvious that there is no rule
of engagement that would authorize someone to kill someone in custody."






Email this article to a friend:
Friend's email (required):
*Separate multiple emails with commas.



Your email address (required):



Message (optional):



 
Post or contact
Subscribe

Search
Archives
April 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003


Recent
Slavoj Zizek: “Neoliberalism is in Crisis”

Rene -- A revolution against neoliberalism?

Independent -- The US bank and the secret plan to destroy WikiLeaks

Counterpunch -- The Libyan Labyrinth

Rene -- In search of an African revolution

Democracy Now -- Chomsky -- “Democracy Uprising” in the U.S.A.?

Counterpunch -- How Democracy Could be Hijacked

LRB -- After Egypt

Dan -- Nettime -- Wisconsin report

Nettime -- Decentralizing the Internet So Big Brother Can’t Find You