What does this mean? Well, apart from everything else, it means that many of the unspeakably brutal prison guards in Afghanistan — and yes, there were many — became sadists as a direct consequence of the Bush administration's failure of leadership. And this failure can be linked, directly, to the president's own public renunciation of basic principles of decency: specifically those outlined by the Third Geneva Convention, which governs the treatment of prisoners of war.
Tim Golden in the New York Times reported at length (May 20, 2005) on the torture which was daily fare at the US detention center in Bagram, Afghanistan. If you can read this article without experiencing palpable nausea, then I suspect you would be very much at home in the ranks of those prison guards.
The details are appalling. They make Abu Ghraib seem a minor infraction by comparison.
The taxi driver's was the second death by torture in December 2002. It was distinguished, however, by the fact that the victim, known by the single name Dilawar, was widely assumed by his torturers to be innocent. Dilawar was 5' 9". He weighed 122 pounds. To take this man to the extremes of excruciating pain, it was hardly necessary to bring in Specialist Damien M. Corsetti - a tall guard known generally as "Monster," and affectionately referred to, by his superior officer, as "the King of Torture." It's a reasonable bet that even the sadistic woman assigned to interrogate Dilawar weighed more than her victim. He was described as "shy" and "unadventurous." His family had bought him a used Toyota sedan only a few weeks before, which he was driving as a taxi. He made the fatal error of driving three passengers past an American base which had been targeted by a rocket earlier that day.
Even though there was scant reason to believe that he or his passengers had anything whatsoever to do with that assault, the three fares were shipped to Guantánamo, where they spent over a year before it was decided that they would not be charged; and Dilawar was tortured to death.
The favorite technique at Bagram seems to have been the "common peroneal strike." This common practice - clearly outlawed by the Geneva Conventions (which were deemed not to apply) involved striking a prisoner on the side of the leg, in a particular place above the knee. Golden reports: "The M.P.'s said they were never told that peroneal strikes were not part of Army doctrine. Nor did most of them hear one of the former police officers tell a fellow soldier during the training that he would never use such strikes because they would 'tear up' a prisoner's legs." Surely they must have got some sense of this, however, when Dilawar's orange prison pants repeatedly fell down while he was chained: one guard noticed, for instance, that the bruise on his leg was "the size of a fist."
Article comments
1 - Barry Stoller
Very well written with a devastating conclusion. Funny, I don't hear all the usual blogcritic rightwingers make their usual glib remarks. That's quite an accomplishment on this forum.
2 - Dave Nalle
It's still early Barry.
But you know what, most right wingers don't endorse torture either. Even President Bush who does believe in some extreme measures when dealing with terrorists, doesn't endorse what went on at Abu Ghraib. What happened there was clearly in violation of miitary policy, and what has come out in these trials is that the soldiers knew that and chose to act as they did anyway. Some responsibility goes up the chain of command, but soldiers still aren't required to obey unlawful orders, especially when - as in this case - they really originated from outside the chain of command in the first place.
Dave
3 - alienboy
Fabulous piece of work Mr Cooper, thanks for writing it.
Isn't it odd that no officers have been convicted?
4 - steve
I could care less about the terrorists being held at guantanamo bay. I hope they all rot there. they are guilty until proven innocent
5 - The Searcher
The Stanford experiment was very revealing indeed.
If only Gort would come down and ensure everyone plays fair.
6 - Christian
"Isn't it odd that no officers have been convicted?"
The soldiers involved in the Bagram, Afghanistan incident have suffered for their actions.
By the way - Specialist Damien M. Corsetti was never accused of taking "this man to the extremes of excruciating pain". Get it right.
7 - Silas Kain
George Walker Bush -- the man elected to embody the soul of the nation --
Um, like it or not, but doesn't G.W. Bush, in fact, embody the soul of this nation? From the liberal POV we have an apathetic, disconnected leader who only takes interest in issues when the shit hits the fan. From the conservative POV we have a leader who is the bastion of all that is good and righteous about America, praise Jesus. Now, my friends, I ask you -- which side is wrong?
8 - Douglas Anthony Cooper
>By the way - Specialist Damien M. Corsetti was never >accused of taking "this man to the extremes of >excruciating pain". Get it right.
By the way, my article says that it did *not* take Corsetti to do this. Which is to say, they didn't need him, and didn't call him in. Learn to read.