The Washington Post reports that a Pentagon investigation has confirmed the reports of female interrogators at Guantanamo using sexually provocative behavior as an interrogation tactic, and smearing prisoners with what they said was menstrual blood.
"Female interrogators repeatedly used sexually suggestive tactics to try to humiliate and pry information from devout Muslim men held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a military investigation not yet public and newly declassified accounts from detainees.The prisoners have told their lawyers, who compiled the accounts, that female interrogators regularly violated Muslim taboos about sex and contact with women. The women rubbed their bodies against the men, wore skimpy clothes in front of them, made sexually explicit remarks and touched them provocatively, at least eight detainees said in documents or through their attorneys.
A wide-ranging Pentagon investigation, which has not yet been released, generally confirms the detainees' allegations, according to a senior Defense Department official familiar with the report. While isolated accounts of such tactics have emerged in recent weeks, the new allegations and the findings of the Pentagon investigation indicate that sexually oriented tactics may have been part of the fabric of Guantanamo interrogations, especially in 2003.
The inquiry uncovered numerous instances in which female interrogators, using dye, pretended to spread menstrual blood on Muslim men, the official said. Separately, in court papers and public statements, three detainees say that women smeared them with blood. (...)
Even detainee lawyers doubted that interrogators would spread menstrual blood on prisoners when a recently released British detainee first made the allegation in early 2004. A month ago, a Pentagon spokesman confirmed it had verbally reprimanded one female interrogator who, in early 2003, had smeared red dye from a marker on a detainee's shirt and told him it was blood.
In a yet-to-be-published book, former Army translator Erik Saar said he saw a female interrogator smear red dye on a Saudi man's face, telling him it was blood. Saar's account was first reported by the Associated Press last month. And Mamdouh Habib, an Australian man released from Guantanamo Bay last month, said he was strapped down while a woman told him she was "menstruating" on his face.
One lawyer, Marc Falkoff, said in an interview that when a Yemeni client told him a few weeks ago about an incident involving menstrual blood, "I almost didn't even write it down." He said: "It seemed crazy, like something out of a horror movie or a John Waters film. Now it doesn't seem ludicrous at all." "
I hate this so much. I hate that it has now been confirmed by official sources. I even hate trying to think of titles for this post ('More Menstrual Blood' was one possibility that I rejected more or less instantaneously.) I hate the details (menstruating on his face??) I hate the fact that things that everyone, myself included, seems to have dismissed as just too bizarre and abhorrent to be true turn out to be true. Most of all, I hate that it's my country, which I love, that let this happen.
Huh. And here I thought you were referring to the fact that North Korea has, at long last, offically admitted to having nuclear weapons. Frankly, I'm not sure whether I'm happy or sad to be wrong.
Posted by: Anarch | February 10, 2005 at 02:15 AM
Most of all, I hate that it's my country, which I love, that let this happen
Your country isn't a person. George Bush let it happen during his first term in office. The people who voted for George Bush let it continue to happen during his second term in office. That's where the buck stops.
Posted by: felixrayman | February 10, 2005 at 02:27 AM
At least we weren't crucifying these detainees for hours or beating them to death.
Posted by: rilkefan | February 10, 2005 at 02:33 AM
Is it just me, or are people more upset about this one than anything else?
Posted by: praktike | February 10, 2005 at 09:02 AM
(what I mean is: I don't quite grok why THIS, of all things, seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back.)
Posted by: praktike | February 10, 2005 at 09:08 AM
The party of Family Values strikes again.
People have been abusing and torturing one another forever, but this weird sexual stuff we've added to the mix . . . wonder where it comes from? The ubiquity of porn? I dunno.
Praktike - americans aren't interested in anything unless it has a sexual angle. Plame, Iraq, this, none of it matters. Bush is untouchable unless he's got his own Monica.
Posted by: Brian | February 10, 2005 at 09:56 AM
Uh... praktike: what makes you think the camel's back is broken? AFAICT, the critter hasn't even gotten so much as a sprain yet. Sure, the "menstrual blood" stuff is icky, and good for lurid headlines on blogs, but what do you want to bet that somewhere on LGF, some commentor is lavishly praising our brave girls in uniform for being so creative in their "interrogation" techniques, and sneering at the "humiliated" prisoners (After all, it wasn't real blood!).
Disgusting as it may be, I sadly doubt this will do much to change (American) public opinion on Iraqi prisoner-abuse issues one iota. I hope I am wrong, but I doubt that, too.
Posted by: Jay C. | February 10, 2005 at 10:03 AM
praktike: I don't know. Personally, I'm not more upset about this than about, say, beating people to death. But I think there might be two things at work. First, it is (as I think I said to rilkefan in a comment when this story first emerged) not nearly as bad in one sense (no permanent physical damage, etc: in this sense obviously the guy who was beaten to death and stored in ice is obviously much worse), but there are other aspects os 'awful' on which this one trumps. Two that leap to mind are: (1) sick and twisted, and (2) something you can't imagine happening in a command structure that hadn't gone completely loopy. (I mean: in some sense it's possible for me to see how, in a reasonably well-run prison in which torture is generally out, someone might start beating up a prisoner, and maybe even kill him. Whereas it's hard for me to read this without thinking of Heart of Darkness: "Do you think my methods are unsound? -- I don't see any method at all, sir."
The other thing is that this was a story which I discounted when I first read it, and if I discounted it, I assume that people on the right surely did. When it got confirmed, my basic reaction not to its having happened, but to my having been wrong about what we were doing, was to think: yet again my take on them was too favorable. Who'da thunk? But I would imagine that people who have more invested in believing them might have felt a special sense of betrayal. Especially since, as I said, it's hard to think of a story according to which this was part of a generally well-run operation; and thus hard not to see it as showing that their trust was much more generally misplaced. Or so I'd imagine.
Posted by: hilzoy | February 10, 2005 at 10:08 AM
praktike: I see nothing but extraordinarily healthy camels loaded with the multitudinous straws of the past 4+ years loping toward the hay baler. Or something.
Just yesterday, our President responded to a question regarding the ballooning cost estimates for the Medicare drug benefit (his program; low-balled) by cheerfully and smirkingly pointing out that the "unfunded liabilities" of the Medicare program will be next on his list of "bold" initiatives. Raising the Medicare tax will be off the table, of course.
What does this have to do with smearing mentrual blood on Islamic prisoners? Nothing.
And everything.
You'll notice there is nary a peep to the FCC about broadcasting this news of these miniskirted, fulsomely fertile interrogators and their wardrobe malfunctions.
Posted by: John Thullen | February 10, 2005 at 10:10 AM
rif: "At least we weren't crucifying these detainees for hours or beating them to death."
I don't know about crucifying detainees (though the admittedly used "waterboarding" seems to me to come close), but several detainees are known to have died in US custody in Iraq. At least one appears to have been beaten to death. Another had a sleeping bag put over his head and an interrogator sit on his face, leading to suffocation. Don't assume that just because this is the current scandal that it is the only or even the worst abuse going on.
Posted by: Dianne | February 10, 2005 at 10:19 AM
praktike: I see nothing but extraordinarily healthy camels loaded with the multitudinous straws of the past 4+ years loping toward the hay baler.
I was wondering how they were getting the raw materials for strawman. Mystery solved!
Posted by: liberal japonicus | February 10, 2005 at 10:21 AM
Is it just me, or are people more upset about this one than anything else?
Personally, I'm more upset about things like this:">http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives/dispatches/000196.php">this:
Posted by: votermom | February 10, 2005 at 10:24 AM
A couple of random cites to back up the claim I made in my previous post (sorry about the length, I never have learned to do the links properly):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17092-2004Aug19.html
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/006560.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/10/14/news/abuse.html
I could go on...
Posted by: Dianne | February 10, 2005 at 10:26 AM
votermom: The following is a link to the story that made me finally think that it might be time to just give up on the US...especially the description of US soldiers shooting a 6 year old boy while he cried over the bodies of his parents, whom they had also recently shot.
http://scrivovivo.typepad.com/bookofdays/2005/02/meanwhile_dont_.html#comments
Posted by: Dianne | February 10, 2005 at 10:29 AM
Ooops....sorry all, in my 10:03 post above I should have put ".....public opinion on Guantanamo prisoner-abuse issues...." rather than "Iraqi".
Not, I am sure, that it would make much difference in in the public mind anyway......
Posted by: Jay C. | February 10, 2005 at 10:31 AM
"Two that leap to mind are: (1) sick and twisted, and (2) something you can't imagine happening in a command structure that hadn't gone completely loopy."
I guess that's part of it. But still ... in the grand scheme of things, putting a red marker on someone seems less morally problematic than, say, beating the crap out of them. I guess it's also that (a) menstrual blood is widely viewed as icky (b) it smacks of religious warfare (c) it reminds one of Rafael Patai's The Arab Mind (sex as a taboo vested with shame and repression in Arab culture).
Posted by: praktike | February 10, 2005 at 10:36 AM
I see the same camels that John Thullen so eloquently describes.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | February 10, 2005 at 10:56 AM
OK, so the camel's back is not broken. Is it bowed?
Posted by: praktike | February 10, 2005 at 11:10 AM
Here's something worse.
There are credible reports that a U.S. citizen was arrested in Saudi Arabia at the request of the United States because he was suspected of working with Al Qaeda. Other defendants were arrested in Saudia Arabia in connection with the same case, but they were extradited and tried here. Ali apparently was not because a grand jury found the evidence against him insufficient to issue an indictment. Ali was questioned by FBI agents in custody, and possibly tortured.
I apologize for the length of this, but I think it's worth posting and I can't find a link. These are excerpts from U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates' ruling in Abu Ali v. Ashcroft, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25239. This was issued last December; I don't know how I missed it. I have elided a lot and deleted the citations to make it shorter & more readable.
Posted by: Katherine | February 10, 2005 at 11:10 AM
Here's an update on that same case.
He was apparently arrested in Saudi Arabia at the same time as they were making the arrests in the Riyadh bombing, so it may be that they plan to indict him on that instead of the stuff in Northern Virginia. I don't really know--I'm not real familiar with how indictments actually work.
Posted by: Katherine | February 10, 2005 at 11:22 AM
I just heard about Abu Ali this morning on Morning Edition on my way to work -- I was burning mad by the time I got to my desk. The administration has been delaying a hearing on the detention as long as possible, and the latest development as I understand it is that all the evidence against him has been declared secret, so that his lawyers have no way to challenge any of it. It's all just too horribly maddening.
Posted by: kenB | February 10, 2005 at 11:31 AM
Oh, here's a link to the audio.
Posted by: kenB | February 10, 2005 at 11:32 AM
He explains that the prosecutor "smirked and stated that 'he's no good for us here, he has no fingernails left.'"
This is sickening. Is the prosecuter's name known?
Posted by: votermom | February 10, 2005 at 11:45 AM
Many of the sexual molestation "techniques" seem to resemble the acts of older adolescence on younger adolescence and toddlers.
The brutality some young men and women can inflict on their younger counterparts...this looks a lot like that stuff.
Posted by: NeoDude | February 10, 2005 at 03:39 PM
U.S. soldier claims gay panic made him kill
Guardsman says he shot Iraqi soldier after consensual sex
A North Carolina National Guard soldier claims he shot an Iraqi soldier 11 times and killed him last spring after the two men had consensual sex while on duty near Tikrit, Iraq, according to a court martial report released by the military to media outlets.
Pvt. Federico Daniel Merida, 21, pled guilty to second-degree murder in the death of Falah Zaggam, a 17-year-old Iraqi national guardsman, military records claim. After officials began an investigation into the death, Merida, who is married and has a 2-year-old son, used a gay panic defense as one of his three excuses for the crime.
more:
http://www.newyorkblade.com/2005/1-7/news/national/panic.cfm
Posted by: NeoDude | February 10, 2005 at 03:49 PM
The problem with the fake menstrual blood thing is that it's stupid and amateurish. This is supposed to be an important project. Is it too much to ask that it be handled professionally? This is just another example of people making stupid things up as they go along. Whoever thought this was a good idea is a moron and should be fired, but there is no accountability. Not just for abuse, but for the fact that none of this idiocy has any practical usefulness whatsoever. Now the real cops in the FBI, who know something about successfully interrogating and turning terror suspects, are ashamed to have anything to do with the incompetent spook psychos running these sessions. Great. Way to handle the war, guys.
Posted by: moniker | February 10, 2005 at 05:45 PM
Pratike,
Your worry about the sexual obsession of the torture-scandal is entirely justified: people are being beaten--and some to death--making ideological dehumanization seem tame by comparision.
Still, the political attention should, if oppositional parties use it carefully, be able to leverage the conservative digust-factor towards a more effective investigation of the means currently used to interrogate prisoners.
Given the current administrational whitewash and popular affirmation of trust, any tactic that will crack trust should be embraced, at least provisionally.
I'm not afraid of inflaming passions on this issue--as a feminist, I'm absolutely against forcing people into a sexual relationship, no matter the peculiarities of their culture. (When cultures prevent sexual relationships is trickier, but this is a separate question, or should be.)
Posted by: Jackmormon | February 10, 2005 at 11:22 PM