British TV pulls Iraq abuse drama

Using the unfolding "Iran situation" of the captive British sailors as an excuse, British TV Channel 4 canceled its April 5 airing of the powerful drama "Mark of Cain" about the abuse of prisoners in Iraq by British soldiers. "The Mark of Cain" is a complex portrait of the British military presence in southern Iraq. The story involves three soldiers accused of abusing detainees after suffering losses in an ambush. The soldiers are found out when an angry ex-girlfriend denounces them after seeing trophy photos of the abuse. The soldiers are then put on trial. According to the film's press release:

THE MARK OF CAIN is inspired by real life events Iraq. The now notorious pictures and footage that emerged from the prisons of Iraq, showed British soldiers abusing and humiliating prisoners of war. The revelations rocked the army, an institution that prides itself on ‘fair play.’ It placed the role of the British army in Iraq in danger; appearing as the occupiers they had long sought not to be. It left the position of the British army exposed, leaving them vulnerable to further reprisals. Why did the soldiers behave in this way?

Teamed with the reported lack of essential supplies, it led people to question whether the British army was emotionally and physically equipped for such military action, or is this the way soldiers will be led to behave under such extreme pressure?

So controversial is THE MARK OF CAIN, that the release was postponed until the current trial of the British soldiers is concluded.

The film won the Movies that Matter at the Rotterdam International Film Festival. According to the Festival's site:

“It’s a fictional story, but it was triggered off by a small newspaper story [screen writer] Marchant saw about a young soldier who’d taken his camera to develop at a high street store in 2003,” director Marc Munden says. “The guy processing the film immediately phoned the police because the photos were of prisoners being humiliated. The soldier was totally naïve; he didn’t think he’d done anything wrong. So Tony started interviewing returning soldiers and their families. It’s completely fictional, but all the elements that occur in the film have taken place in real life.”

The result is a fierce, angry film that probes the events leading up to the British soldiers’ torture of their terrorist ‘suspects’ (arrested on the flimsiest of evidence following an ambush on the squad that leaves two British soldiers dead), and exposes the way senior officers turned a blind eye to the abuse. “He’s a very committed, political writer – there’s not that many like that any more,” Munden says of Marchant. Asked what he looks for in a screenwriter, Munden says: “You’ve got to be completely in love with what they’re trying to say. But it’s really important that I can stamp some kind of authorship on the film.”

Channel Four claims that the airing of the film depicting abuse of Iraqi prisoners by British soldiers could have put the British prisoners in Iran at risk. The Channel has rescheduled the film's airing for May 17.

In it together: Anglos dodging responsibility, spending (and earning) a fortune

In the UK, the acquittal of two British officers in the killing of Baha Mousa in Basra in 2003 led many to question the use of military trials. The proceedings against a number of officers involved in the death of Mousa all led to acquittals, an apparently cost the British taxpayer over £20 million. The judge who acquitted the men said there was no evidence against the men because there was an obvious, inpenetrable code of silence among those involved. And just today, we learn that 10 British detainees in Basra pulled a quite simple escape.

In Canada, the controversy over the investigation of the "handing over" and disappearance of a Taliban soldier captured on the battlefield to the Afghan Army rages on. Meanwhile, miltary lawyers appointed to defend Canadian Omar Khadr, the only juvenile brought to Guantanamo from Afghanistan, say the cards are stacked against him. The US has used coercion and torture to gather the majority of "admissable evidence." His lawyers also claim the Canadian government is abandonning the now 20-year-old Khadr.

In the US, the beginning of a hearing to determine whether the only officer charged with Abu Ghraib abuses shall face court martial hearings revealed that Sgt Steven Jordan plans to dispute the legality of evidence against him. He claims that investigating Generals Fay and Taguba did not properly inform him of his rights.

Also, Staff Sgt. Ray Girouard was found guilty of negligent homicide in relation to the killings of three prisoners north-west of Baghdad in May 2006. The maximum sentence for this is three years, whereas premeditated murder carries up to life without parole. He was also convicted of covering up the crimes. His attempts to prove he was under orders to "kill at military-age men" and pass responsibility up the military command seemed to have failed. But he raised significant questions about the orders he was given.

Australian Prime Minister's surprise visit to the troops in southern Afghanistan reminds that Australian David Hicks, captured in Afghanistan in 2001, is awaiting his military commission trial. His lawyers are attempting to delay the proceedings, challenging the his very detention in US courts. He will in any case appear in a hearing on March 23, the first time he will have seen his family in 2 1/2 years. Meanwhile, an Australian firm Morris Corporation, won the $65 million contract to supply meals at US Detention facilities in Iraq.

British judge lets off senior officers

In relation to the Baha Mousa homicide in Basra, it appears that command responsibility weighed into a judge's decision to drop charges against five officers blamed with the abuse that led to the Hotel receptionist's demise in 2003. He said in relation to the 36 hours of abuse that led to Mousa's death, some of the "techniques" were approved by the officer's superiors. Those techniques included "conditioning" the detainees for questioning by putting them in stress positions and requiring them to wear hoods. One wonders is the beatings sustained by Mr. Mousa were also approved.

Another officer, Col Jorge Mendonca also was recently acquitted for responsibility in the Mousa homicide.

Now the big question: will prosecutors move up the chain of command?

British clear officer in Basra abuse case

Colonel Jorge Mendonca, the highest ranking officer to be charged in relation to abuse allegations in a Basra detention center, was cleared on criminal charges relating to the death of a hotel employee Baha Mousa in 2003, who "who was attacked over a 36-hour period while handcuffed and hooded and suffered 93 separate injuries."



Robert Fisk wrote on this homicide for the Independent. An anonymous survivor recounted to him:

One of the detainees was to recount to The Independent an appalling story of cruelty: "We were put in a big room with our hands tied and with bags over our heads.

"But I could see through some holes in my hood. Soldiers would come in, ordinary soldiers, not officers--mostly with their heads shaved, but in uniform--and they would kick us, picking on one after the other.

"They were kick-boxing us in the chest and between the legs and in the back. We were crying and screaming. They set on Baha especially and he kept crying that he couldn't breath in the hood. He kept asking them to take the bag off and said he was suffocating.

"But they laughed at him and kicked him more. One of them said: 'Stop screaming and you will be able to breathe more easily'

"Baha was so scared. Then they increased the kicking on him and he collapsed on the floor. None of us could stand or sit because it was too painful.''

Other subordinates were also cleared in relation to manslaughter charges. Yet others are still being tried for abuse-related crimes.

More from the Guardian:

The court martial, being held at Bulford in Wiltshire, has heard how in September 2003, 10 civilians were arrested by members of the QLR during a raid at a hotel in Basra, southern Iraq. Handcuffed, hooded with sacks and deprived of sleep, they were forced to maintain a "stress position" - backs to the wall, knees bent and arms outstretched. If they dropped their arms they were punished with beatings.

[Corporal Donald] Payne, who was in charge of the guarding of the prisoners, was said to be at the centre of the ill treatment. At the start of the trial he made history when he became the first British soldier to admit a war crime. But he denied the manslaughter of Mr Mousa, 26.

Two other soldiers, Kingsman Darren Fallon and Lance Corporal Wayne Crowcroft, were also accused of inhumanly treating prisoners - a war crime. A third, Sergeant Kelvin Stacey, was said to have kicked and punched an Iraqi prisoner. But the case against them centred on the claims of a colleague who was attacked as a "fantasist" in court.

The case against Col Mendonca was that he should have known what was going on and ought to have acted to stop it. But the judge, Mr Justice McKinnon, yesterday directed the board hearing the courts martial to find Col Mendonca, Kingsman Fallon, Lance Corp Crowcroft and Sgt Stacey not guilty. He directed them to acquit Payne of manslaughter and of intending to pervert the course of justice. Mr Justice McKinnon told the board there was "no evidence" fit to put before them on which they could convict the men.

The Scotsman, which claims the court martial tribunal cost the British taxpayer £20 million, reports:

Before his court martial, Colonel Jorge Mendonca MBE, the decorated former commander of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment, was widely considered to be destined for the very top of the army.

Fellow officers speak of his exemplary leadership of the QLR during its extremely difficult tour to win "hearts and minds" in Basra following the Coalition Forces' invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The 43-year-old infantry commander's attention to detail and his gallantry in the Gulf, for which he won a DSO (Distinguished Service Order), won him plaudits both in the ranks and the officers' mess.

British Ex-SAS soldier speaks out

The Telegraph printed extensive excerpts of an interview with a 28-year old retired SAS soldier, who resigned after his first tour in Iraq. Groomed to be part of the elite SAS counter terrorism contingent, Ben Griffin had already served in Northern Ireland, Macedonia and Afghanistan. In Iraq he served for three months in the SAS G-Squadron, along side the US Army's Delta Force in early 2005.

To quote him:

I saw a lot of things in Baghdad that were illegal or just wrong. I knew, so others must have known, that this was not the way to conduct operations if you wanted to win the hearts and minds of the local population. And if you don't win the hearts and minds of the people, you can't win the war.

If we were on a joint counter-terrorist operation, for example, we would radio back to our headquarters that we were not going to detain certain people because, as far as we were concerned, they were not a threat because they were old men or obviously farmers, but the Americans would say 'no, bring them back'.

The Americans had this catch-all approach to lifting suspects. The tactics were draconian and completely ineffective. The Americans were doing things like chucking farmers into Abu Ghraib [the notorious prison in Baghdad where US troops abused and tortured Iraqi detainees] or handing them over to the Iraqi authorities, knowing full well they were going to be tortured.

The Americans had a well-deserved reputation for being trigger happy. In the three months that I was in Iraq, the soldiers I served with never shot anybody. When you asked the Americans why they killed people, they would say 'we were up against the tough foreign fighters'. I didn't see any foreign fighters in the time I was over there.

I can remember coming in off one operation which took place outside Baghdad, where we had detained some civilians who were clearly not insurgents, they were innocent people. I couldn't understand why we had done this, so I said to my troop commander 'would we have behaved in the same way in the Balkans or Northern Ireland?' He shrugged his shoulders and said 'this is Iraq', and I thought 'and that makes it all right?'

As far as I was concerned that meant that because these people were a different colour or a different religion, they didn't count as much. You can not invade a country pretending to promote democracy and behave like that.

On another operation, Mr Griffin recalls his and other soldiers' frustration at being ordered to detain a group of men living on a farm.

After you have been on a few operations, experience tells you when you are dealing with insurgents or just civilians and we knew the people we had detained were not a threat.

One of them was a disabled man who had a leg missing but the Americans still ordered us to load them on the helicopters and bring them back to their base. A few hours later we were told to return half of them and fly back to the farm in daylight. It was a ridiculous order and we ran the risk of being shot down or ambushed, but we still had to do it. The Americans were risking our lives because they refused to listen to our advice the night before. It was typical of their behaviour.

As far as the Americans were concerned, the Iraqi people were sub-human, untermenschen. You could almost split the Americans into two groups: ones who were complete crusaders, intent on killing Iraqis, and the others who were in Iraq because the Army was going to pay their college fees. They had no understanding or interest in the Arab culture. The Americans would talk to the Iraqis as if they were stupid and these weren't isolated cases, this was from the top down. There might be one or two enlightened officers who understood the situation a bit better but on the whole that was their general attitude. Their attitude fuelled the insurgency. I think the Iraqis detested them.

UK troops filmed beating detainees

A British tabloid released a video of what defense sources claim is 95% likely a number of UK troops beating Iraqi detainees. The video, currently under investigation by the Royal Military Police, is alleged to be a home video filmed by a British Corporal.

The video, quite clear and visible, with a sound recording of "callous commentary" by the camerman, shows a number of what appear to be UK troops dragging out a number of young detainees and delivering headbutts, kicks, baton blows. A number of the bodies are bloodied and unmoving. The Sunday Times writes that the victims "appear to be young rioters" who at times were pleading for mercy.

News of the World quotes the seller of the video, who viewed it in Europe:

"These Iraqis were just kids. Most haven't even got shoes on.

"Those eight soldiers were pumped up and out of control. They're an insult to the thousands of soldiers who have worked so hard in Iraq with courage and dignity for so long.

"They're nothing but a gang of thugs, a disgrace to themselves, their regiment and country."

Briton in British custody in Iraq for 9 months

The Guardian reported that the UK apprehended a dual Iraqi/UK citizen in October, 2004 in Iraq and have kept him in custody for the past 9 months without a hearing. A lawyer working on his behalf was able to petition in a London court yesterday that this detention was illegal. Hilal Abdul-Razzaq Ali al-Jedda, 47, believes he is being held for his friendship with a man British authorities allege is a bombmaker. Al-Jedda's lawyer argued that his client's "internment" was in breach of the European convention on human rights (which the Blair government has "opted out of" since 9-11). The judgement is scheduled for next month. Meanwhile Al-Jedda waits in Shu'aiba detention centre near Basra.

Iraqi secret torture centers: US and UK silent

The Observer/Guardian has revealed the scandalous results of its investigation into human rights abuses committed by Iraqi police and defense forces: proof of extrajudicial executions, heinous tortures, and some abuses even within the walls of the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior. One of the groups most feared by Iraqis, and according to the Observer report one of the most abusive, is the "Wolf Brigade," the Army batallion featured on a reality TV show that actually shows men threatening detainees and joking about abuses. The abuses and tortures are common knowledge in Iraq, and The Observer/Guardian proposes that the Iraqi government has diverted British and American aid to the police and defense forces to these activities, and that officials of both countries are aware of this. Read the gory details here. Or, read a summary here:

The Observer has seen photographic evidence of post-mortem and hospital examinations of alleged terror suspects from Baghdad and the Sunni Triangle which demonstrate serious abuse of suspects including burnings, strangulation, the breaking of limbs and - in one case - the apparent use of an electric drill to perform a knee-capping.

The investigation revealed:

- A 'ghost' network of secret detention centres across the country, inaccessible to human rights organisations, where torture is taking place.

- Compelling evidence of widespread use of violent interrogation methods including hanging by the arms, burnings, beatings, the use of electric shocks and sexual abuse.

- Claims that serious abuse has taken place within the walls of the Iraqi government's own Ministry of the Interior.

- Apparent co-operation between unofficial and official detention facilities, and evidence of extra-judicial executions by the police.

Soldiers convicted in the UK's "Abu Ghraib"

Three British soldiers were imprisoned after court martials this week for their involvement in abuses occuring at "Camp Breadbasket" in 2003. The "British Abu Ghraib" occurred when British military were attemping to secure a humanitarian warehouse from looters. Those accused of assault and placing a bound man in a forklift. But the Guardian reports much more serious allegations have come forward from the camp, and were captured on film. Allegations of forced simulation of oral sex were not prosecuted. Neither were allegations of sadistic beatings, including of a man who claims to have been a worker in the camp. Lawyers of the "abused" are saying that the three in prison are guilty of the least serious crimes, and have been scapegoated.

The defendants in the court martial held in Osnabruck claimed that they had been "scapegoated" and that senior officers were mistreating Iraqis in the camp. Statements - in draft form - from Mr Shiner's clients corroborate claims that the abuse was more widespread and that women soldiers were involved. They give a different picture to what happened in May 2003 than was put before the court.

The board of seven officers and Judge Advocate Hunter were told how Iraqi looters who had been stealing from Breadbasket were rounded up and punished in an operation dubbed Ali Baba.

But one man, Ra'id Attiyah Ali, said he was not a looter and in fact worked in the camp and had an identification card to prove it. He claims he was beaten on the nose and tied to a pole for an hour and a half.

"I saw the soldiers kicking and beating Iraqis, I saw the guy who was held in a net. I saw five Iraqis in their underwear holding milk cartons on their head, I saw a soldier urinating on them. They were about eight soldiers.

The saga of a UK detainee

The Independent reports the long journey of US detainee from life in Taliban-occupied Afghanistan, then as a refugee to Pakistan where he was kidnapped and shipped to Bagram Airbase and later to Guantánamo. Moazzam Begg had lived in Manchester for years before taking his wife and child to Afghanistan to teach boys and girls under the Taliban regime. He was forced to leave due to US bombing in late 2001, and was snatched from his dwelling in Pakistan to begin 1000 days of detention. He was released this week.

UK lawyers win inquiry on detainee death in Basra

A ruling in the UK held that the death of a civilian in custody of UK forces in Basra indeed fell within the jurisdiction of British courts, paving for an independent inquiry into the Iraqi's death.

Baha Mousa, 26, a Basra hotel receptionist, died in September 2003 after being arrested and taken to a British military base.

Mousa's family had asked the High Court to rule that European and British human rights laws applied to British soldiers in Iraq and that there should be an independent inquiry to determine whether he was unlawfully killed. The court agreed.