“Unity” at Work in Prisons

Bushbremermedaloffreedothumb On Saturday, a group of parliament members paid a surprise visit to a detention facility run by the Interior Ministry in Baqubah, north of Baghdad. "We have found terrible violations of the law," said Muhammed al-Dayni, a Sunni parliament member who said as many as 120 detainees were packed into a 35-by-20-foot cell. "They told us that they’ve been raped," Dayni said. "Their families were called in and tortured to force the detainees to testify against other people."

"The detention facilities of the ministries of Defense and Interior are places for the most brutal human rights abuse," he added.

Despite broad U.S. efforts to encourage the Iraqi government to improve conditions in prisons, the problem of militia control could prove particularly intractable. Shiite militias such as the Badr Organization and the Mahdi Army, loyal to cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, are backed by dozens of members of parliament whose political parties run the armed groups.  Washpost

"You can’t even talk to the militias, because they are the government," Yei said. "They have ministers on their side."


This is how Saddam ran his prisons.  You say the picture is not fair?  Hah!  Who do you think made all the decisions that led to this point?  There are a few missing? Yes.

Pat Lang


This entry was posted in Current Affairs. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to “Unity” at Work in Prisons

  1. Fred says:

    Sounds like we defeated the Iraqi army only to defeat justice, or impose a new injustice, on Iraq. What do you suggest our political leadership do?

  2. searp says:

    These are the kind of facts that make a more intense civil war increasingly likely.
    Let’s recall the bidding. We went into Iraq to assure OUR security, in part by giving the Iraqis “freedom”, at least from Saddam. Now that we’ve done that, it appears as if they want to fight each other.
    Why, exactly, is it important that we act as referee? What do we get out of that?

  3. zanzibar says:

    The trade I suppose was a dictator we once supported for another “dictatorship” under the label of “democracy” which we would also support for a time until the next one.
    The more things change the more they stay the same. At least under Saddam people knew which side of the bread was buttered and either belonged to the right group or played along. Now I am sure its hard for the average Iraqi to figure out which of the sectarian groups and their militias to support. Make a wrong turn in the road and you better not have a name called Omar.

  4. nykrindc says:

    If you are going to quote that part of the article, you should also cite this one:
    “We cannot control the prisons. It’s as simple as that,” said the deputy minister, Pusho Ibrahim Ali Daza Yei, an ethnic Kurd. “Our jails are infiltrated by the militias from top to bottom, from Basra to Baghdad.”
    As a result of this, and acknowledging the problem, Yei “asked U.S. authorities to suspend plans to transfer prisons and detainees from American to Iraqi control. “Our ministry is unprepared at this time to take over the facilities, especially those in areas where Shiite militias exist,” he said in a letter to U.S. Army Maj. Gen. John D. Gardner, the official in charge of American detention facilities.”
    In addition Gen. John D. Gardner, “We will not transfer the facilities and legal custody of the detainees until each respective facility and the Iraqi Corrections system have demonstrated the ability to maintain the required standards, especially in the areas of care and custody.”
    That demonstrates that we know there is a problem and together with Iraqis who want a better future for Iraq are trying to address it.
    Like I told Mr. Johnson on his post on this subject, I don’t like the manner in which Bush has handled this war, nor its aftermath, but rather than using the mudsling I would rather have you and Mr. Johnson providing solutions to these problems and a means whereby the opposition in our government can gain enough leadership positions to effect change in policy and to move forward with regard to Iraq and the GWOT.

  5. W. Patrick Lang says:

    My advice was rejected regarded this situation and I am not responsible for fixing the mess that you and your fellow neocons have made. pl

  6. nykrindc says:

    Mr. Lang,
    First of all, I don’t think Neocons would appreciate your including me as one of them. In fact most of the ones I know, consider me a liberal as I have consistently argued against an invasion of Iran which they are very much for.
    That said, is it your position that just because your advice was rejected by this administration, you no longer have a responsibility to the American people to provide an alternative to the administration’s policies?

  7. nykrindc says:

    My apologies, I meant earlier to address you as Col. Lang.
    I also wanted to point out that you did not address my point about your selective quoting from the Post article.

  8. W. Patrick Lang says:

    What I quote is my business. pl

  9. W. Patrick Lang says:

    Yes. pl

  10. nykrindc says:

    So much for objective analysis. Thanks for the clarification.

  11. W. Patrick Lang says:

    With regard to your initial point, the material you mention is in the citation I provided which is in the post.
    I have no interest in producing results which will please you or anyone else.
    With regard to your point about courses of action, I am putting up this blog to inform not to make policy recommendations to the government. If they ask me I give them my opinions, but it is not my intention to advise them. pl

  12. angela says:

    I find appeals for reasonable criticism to be dishonest. Informed and experienced people have commented on various isses since before the war and since the beginning of the operation.
    The administration and the far right have ruthlessly worked to keep these from public debate simplifying the issue into those who love America and terrorist lovers.
    Now warning after warning has proven true and we are supposed to think that the administration and the right have suddenly developed a taste for different opinions?
    All they desire is that this be presented as a glorious success. The costs to the nation are irrelevant when it comes to the elections.
    By refusing to look at literally thousands of observations big and small the right and administration have done far more to guarantee failure than the radical left.
    Constructive dialogue can only begin with the removal of Rumsfeld and Cheney.

Comments are closed.