British troops charged with "systemic" torture and killings

[Garbarsardar]

The court will rule on whether the abuses were isolated incidents of which commanders, senior ministry officials and politicians were unaware, as the government insists, or "systemic" and authorised as policy.

The MoD contends that any general problems of detention and interrogation were dealt with by an inquiry into the death of Baha Mousa, an innocent hotel worker killed while in British custody in Basra in 2003, and continuing internal investigations by its own Iraq Historic Allegations Team.

But the author of a book on the killing of Baha Mousa, Andrew Williams – a law professor at the University of Warwick – says what happened to Baha Mousa "may have shone a torch into a dark corner", but what is before the court next week is more like "a stadium in which we will switch on the floodlights".

His counsel team, led by Michael Fordham QC, will present five so-called "state practices" they claim were "unlawful, right to the top", including illegal interrogation techniques taught at the army intelligence facility at Chicksands, north of London, unlawful detention and unlawful use of lethal force.

Shiner's files are deeply shocking. Insults to Islam and sexual depravity feature frequently in the statements: a soldier is alleged to have :wub:d over a prisoner, another to have committed sodomy with his finger; female interrogators are claimed to have stripped and feigned seduction in exchange for "information".

There is a number of issues here:

First, what kind of evidence of institutionalized abuse will be accepted by the court. Second, how this will reflect on the investigations currently held by the MoD. Third, what impact the proceedings will have on public perception in a number of hot zones, like Afghanistan.

I sincerely hope that the whole story will not go the Haditha way, where 1 marine received a slap on the wrist for the murder of 24 civilians and all other prosecutions were abandoned.

[Pielstick]

If systematic abuse or mistreatment of prisoners did take place then let's hope it isn't covered up and those responsible are brought to justice, otherwise it will be a stain on the reputation and honour of those in the British Armed Forces who do their job properly.

[Denny Crane!]

Well no I don't think it will and I can honestly say I don't think the British are that bad in covering crap up except for Blair of course. It will be interesting for sure.

Garb for gods sake, just link a small part of the text in future?

[grouchy13]

How is Female Interrogators stripping off and attempting fiegned seduction quantified as torture?

and I mean that as a serious question

In regards to your first point,

First, what kind of evidence of institutionalized abuse will be accepted by the court

What constitutes as institutionalised abuse?, were these cases connected by a group group of intelligence officers or was it prevelant practice, following the death of Baha Mousa and other issues such as Guantanamo detainees returning with claims of being interrogated by British forces in undisclosed countries while in transit the MOD instituted a number of reforms in regards to interrogation including the reform of the intelligence corps with the inclusion of Naval and RAF staff consolidating all interrogation branches.

Second, how this will reflect on the investigations currently held by the MoD

None at all, despite a media furore little will change as the reforms have already been made over the last 8 years, the afore mentioned consolidation of the interrogation branches means the way that the MOD conducts its buisness will have already changed over the course of nearly a decade.


Lets get one thing clear I would say the British may not be paragons of standards as seen by these examples in case, but who are we comparing these actions to?, the Russians?, the Chinese?, The Saudi's?

I think those responsible for these cases of bad practice should be punished to the full extent of the law but lets not make out like these guys are the worst interrogators in the world.

Third, what impact the proceedings will have on public perception in a number of hot zones, like Afghanistan.

Very little they may get jumped on by the anti war crowd but any rational person will most likely realise that these guys are under immense pressure,they may be working under the constraints of having intelligence an attack is imminent or may be simply overworked, either way abuses of this nature must be dealt with in the correct fashion but does it not say something of the nature of British forces that these cases are coming to light and are being dealt with in a public arena with full transparancy?

[Garbarsardar]

Well no I don't think it will and I can honestly say I don't think the British are that bad in covering crap up except for Blair of course. It will be interesting for sure.

Garb for gods sake, just link a small part of the text in future?

Just realised it. Done...

How is Female Interrogators stripping off and attempting fiegned seduction quantified as torture?

and I mean that as a serious question

Psychological torture?

[Denny Crane!]

Just realised it. Done...



Psychological torture?

Big thank you.

I'm actually not sure what opinion to offer more than that mind until I've heard more, not to say that I don't appreciate the post.

[priam11]

How is Female Interrogators stripping off and attempting fiegned seduction quantified as torture?

I have had that happened to me a few times. Trust me, it is torture.

On topic,

Much to go over. It will be interesting to see what the courts deem as to have gone too far. Does embarrassment and insults to one's religion, fall into that category? Obviously beatings and assaults are simple to qualify but I am not sure on some of the others.

And systematic? It really comes down to either the higher ups blissfully ignoring reports that could have stopped the above mention practices or there were part and parcel, taught techniques from the outset.

[Dr Zoidberg]

How is Female Interrogators stripping off and attempting fiegned seduction quantified as torture?

Outside of a select few, have you seem the majority of women in the military?

[The Alcotroll]

I'd care about this more if it wasn't Phil Shiner and his Public Interest Lawyers. They were the who tried to pin a raft of Kenyan rapes on Britsh troops who'd been training there. The media made a huge furore over it until it transpired that the women had been promised huge payments if they testified. Turned out they were just making it up and the papers all went suspiciously quiet.

I'm sure something nasty happened to Baha Mousa, and I hope that the fall-out goes straight to the top of the chain of command, rather than just burning all the squaddies and NCOs who were in the room at the time. As for the rest of the allegations; I'll take them with a hefty pinch of salt for as long as it's anecdotal stories provided by Iraqis hiding behind pseudonyms interviewed by a notorious ambulance chaser. The MOD has forked out a huge ammount of money to the families of genuine cases of abuse like Mousa. Hardly surprising that word has got around and every ex-mahdi in Basra is now looking for a quick cash injection. It suits Phil Shiner's adgenda to make their cases for them, and he's probably being paid out of the public purse.

When the Iraqi Police finally nail the bastards who murdered the RMPs in Majar Kabir, then I'll consent to relinquish the moral high ground.

[The Black Mark]

I sincerely hope that the whole story will not go the Haditha way, where 1 marine received a slap on the wrist for the murder of 24 civilians and all other prosecutions were abandoned.

Surely we should hope that the truth will be established, rather than hoping for punishment?

[s.rwitt]

Exactly. People tend to drop the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing when it comes to the military or police.

[Garbarsardar]

Surely we should hope that the truth will be established, rather than hoping for punishment?

When I mentioned the "Haditha way" what I had in mind was the initial attempts to cover up, the subsequent erosion of evidence in the 4 months it took to initiate investigation and the inability of U.S. military to properly prosecute. Punishment is a secondary issue.

[s.rwitt]

But you specifically pointed out the punishment (or lack therof) recieved...

[Garbarsardar]

But you specifically pointed out the punishment (or lack therof) recieved...

I also mentioned specifically prosecutions being dropped. Presumption of innocence is a valid concept and impartiality of investigation and prosecution is an equally valid concept. Why should I not compare the prosecutions failure to the one that preceded United States v. Price?

However, in Haditha's case there was is no higher authority to bring charges.

[Diglytron]

Nothing new here. All countries involved in both Iraq and Afganistan have soldiers who are charged for the same as those British soldiers. I think it actually happened already quite a lot of times with British troops.

First, what kind of evidence of institutionalized abuse will be accepted by the court.

Good question. Its a interesting point in almost every conflict. From the mass rapes in East-Germany by Russian troops, which were clearly insisted by propaganda of Ilya Ehrenburg , crimes against Vietnamese citizens By the Americans and the rape and shooting of Palastinian citizens by Israeli IDF soldiers. In ever of those points the question pops up if it might be allowed by the Army top which is aware of it.

For me interesting is; what are the motives of the army top to cover up these crimes and what happened to those soldiers that they did such horrific crimes. They grow up without mass hate against the Iraqi people, where not indoctrinated in their childhood and as far as I know they were also not indoctrinated (at least not in this way) in the army. So why they done it? The pressure, the situation what?

Second, how this will reflect on the investigations currently held by the MoD.

Well I don't think it will inflect each other that much? Not sure though...

Third, what impact the proceedings will have on public perception in a number of hot zones, like Afghanistan.

depends on the Taliban or other insurgent groups and what will be revealed during the process. For now it seems that its just another case sadly enough.

Here; some cases similar to this one, but with different nationalities involved.

A scandal unfolding in Denmark over the transfer of Iraqi prisoners by Danish forces to Iraq authorities, even as they knew they would be tortured, threatens to implicate the current Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen, formerly prime minister of Denmark from 2001-2009.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/5929:...levels-of-nato

Torture for Confessions
A major conclusion from the report is that much of the torture was specifically aimed at obtaining confessions from prisoners during torture. UNAMA notes, “Confessions are rarely examined at trial and rarely challenged by the judge or defence counsel as having been coerced.” Hence, there’s very little to constrict government prosecutors in using torture to get their confessions, and confessions are “[i]n most cases… the sole form of evidence or corroboration submitted to courts to support prosecutions.” There are few procedural safeguards for defendant prisoners, and what few there are are routinely ignored.

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/201...an-on-torture/

Intresting;

http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraqi-t...-of-nato/28538

The defense ministry in the government of former Prime Minister Rasmussen is charged with withholding its knowledge of Iraqi torture from legislators when a copy of a 2004 inspection at Al Makil prison in Basra was sent to Parliament.
According to an article last month in the Danish paper Politiken, portions of the report describing prisoner abuse were “blacked out,” with the reason given that such “information could harm Danish-Iraq cooperation.”

http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Ir...gs,_2004-2009/

[grouchy13]

How is a case in the US pertinent to one in the UK, both have different Legal Systems and both Nations armed forces act in different degree's to Interrogation, I could very hold examples up of other Countries policies in regards to Interrogation but that does not validate my own policies nor does it detract from theirs.

Yes they may all be associated by and confrom to the Geneva convention but in terms of highlighting cases of abuse by a lone agent or a whether acting in concert as a group and then comparing the legal fallout in different legal systems and what actions the government take to prevent such measures or punish those involved is like comparing apples and oranges.

[justicar5]

How is a case in the US pertinent to one in the UK, both have different Legal Systems and both Nations armed forces act in different degree's to Interrogation, I could very hold examples up of other Countries policies in regards to Interrogation but that does not validate my own policies nor does it detract from theirs.

Yes they may all be associated by and confrom to the Geneva convention but in terms of highlighting cases of abuse by a lone agent or a whether acting in concert as a group and then comparing the legal fallout in different legal systems and what actions the government take to prevent such measures or punish those involved is like comparing apples and oranges.

The ONLY way that could cross over is if (and it's a huge and unlikely if) the intelligence gained this way was shared, and the organisation receiving it knew it was the product of torture (sharing is likely, means and methods? Not so likely.) Then they may be complicit in the crime (a lot of may and if in that sentence)

[Sharpe's Company]

One of the reasons why I believe we should adopt the policy of armed neutrality.

I'm sick to death of all those foreign conflicts and now we're being told we could be fighing in Africa for a decade! All the while we have murdering terrorists on our own streets in Northern Ireland, except they are given the policy of appeasement treatment.

Makes you wonder who's interest the UK governments defends.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Makes you wonder who's interest the UK governments defends.

Those guys who own the City of London it seems.

[The Black Mark]

I'm sick to death of all those foreign conflicts and now we're being told we could be fighing in Africa for a decade!

Are you referring to David Cameron's statement that it could take decades to defeat terrorism in Northern Africa? If so that's not exactly the same thing. Do you think it would be productive for Britain to ignore the rise of terrorism in Northern Africa, to the extent that Islamist fanatics take over entire states, and the consequences that would have for us at home?