Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Female GI In Abuse Photos Talks
CBSNEWS ^ | 5/12/04 | CBSNEWS.com

Posted on 05/12/2004 7:21:05 AM PDT by NYC Republican

Army Pfc. Lynndie England, seen worldwide in photographs that show her smiling and pointing at naked Iraqi prisoners, said she was ordered to pose for the photos, and felt "kind of weird" in doing so.

In an exclusive interview with Brian Maass of Denver CBS station KCNC-TV, England also confirmed that abuses worse than those depicted in the photos were carried out at the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, but she declined to discuss them.

England, 21, repeatedly insisted that her actions were dictated by "persons in my higher chain of command."

In the photos, England is seen smiling, cigarette in her mouth, as she leans forward and points at the genitals of a naked, hooded Iraqis. Another photo taken at Abu Ghraib shows her holding a leash that encircles the neck of a naked Iraqi man lying on his side.

"I was instructed by persons in higher rank to stand there and hold this leash and look at the camera," she said.

England said the actions depicted in the photos were intended to put psychological pressure on the Iraqi prisoners.

"Well, I mean, they [the photos] were for psy-op reasons," she said "And the reasons worked. I mean, so to us, we were doing our job, which meant we were doing what we were told, and the outcome was what they wanted. They'd come back and they'd look at the pictures, and they'd state, 'Oh, that's a good tactic, keep it up. That's working. This is working. Keep doing it. It's getting what we need.'"

England, an Army reservist from West Virginia who is four months pregnant, is now stationed at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. The interview was taped Tuesday at Fort Bragg.

England is among seven soldiers from the 372nd Military Police Company who face charges for allegedly degrading and humiliating Iraqi prisoners. One soldier, Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits of Hyndman, Pa., will face a court-martial in Baghdad next week.

"To all of us who have been charged, we all agree that we don't feel like we were doing things that we weren't supposed to, because we were told to do them. We think everything was justified, because we were instructed to do this and to do that," England said.

She told KCNC she was looking forward to having her baby and hopefully one day putting the abuse scandal behind her.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: iraqipow; r2i
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-237 next last
To: Auntie Toots
And I also think she is one tough, little cookie to be able to go along with it without mentally falling apart.

Well, this "little cookie" liked to be in pictures. It has also been reported that much of the video we've heard about is her and her boyfriend having sex.

Evidently this group of 7 on the night shift had a taste of power gone mad and indulged in it. These pictures were taken with their personal cameras and were NOT shown to other prisoners to intimidate them. Per Gen. Taguba yesterday. The only person to say they were was the heavy woman lawyer for England.

81 posted on 05/12/2004 8:15:32 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: snooker
Why should we be so worked up over these college level pranks.
___________

Can you share what college you went to in which you had lightbulbs and broom handles shoved up your a$$?

I still have one child yet to go to college (she's 12) and I don't think we'll need to visit that one.

82 posted on 05/12/2004 8:16:03 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: monday
And you know this HOW? Were you there? If you have evidence to back up your claim lets hear it. If not, STFU.

There was a hearing yesterday and those who have been investigating much of this testified.

You have your nerve chastising someone for their comment when you apparently are ill-informed.

83 posted on 05/12/2004 8:17:14 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
- BUT WHO GAVE THE ORDERS?

Per General Taguba: Nobody.

84 posted on 05/12/2004 8:19:41 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dmz
I haven't seen any broom handles. But you might want to try Disneyland on gay day.

Search the web see what you can find. The truth is out there.
85 posted on 05/12/2004 8:20:27 AM PDT by snooker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
...."I was instructed by persons in higher rank to stand there and hold this leash and look at the camera,"....

Well, PFC England, just about everybody there were persons in higher rank, even your boyfriend.

Will your lawyers allow you to be a bit more specific???
86 posted on 05/12/2004 8:24:08 AM PDT by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
then this trailer-park 21-year-old shouldn't be the only one of trial, don't you think?

She's not. That's absurd. Back in March the military announced that 6 soldiers were being charged. Expect more. England is not being singled out...she was not even in the first group to be indicted. Now she has been.

87 posted on 05/12/2004 8:25:40 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
She's a lying disgrace.

I don't know. Most of what she said sounded plausible.

88 posted on 05/12/2004 8:26:57 AM PDT by TheSpottedOwl (Torrance Ca....land of the flying monkeys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vandykelastone
Hey, Agnes - you certainly have a way with words. God love you. BTW, did you see the glorious one about the elephant and the ecologist in FR this morning?

No, I didn't catch that one. Have you got a link?

89 posted on 05/12/2004 8:29:01 AM PDT by Agnes Heep (Solus cum sola non cogitabuntur orare pater noster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
So, what do you have against elephants?!

Good point. After getting a Muslim's head up his behind the elephant would need a serious cleaning out.

90 posted on 05/12/2004 8:31:21 AM PDT by Agnes Heep (Solus cum sola non cogitabuntur orare pater noster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy
Military troops can be represented by military counsel at no cost to them. They can obtain civilian counsel at their own cost. I have known many over the years who took this route. It is not uncommon. Remember, Lt. Calley of the Vietnam massacres had civilian counsel on his team.

She was downright stupid to speak out. Her statements WILL be used against her. If her civilian counsel told her to speak out, they did a disservice to her case. She may indeed be facing time at the United States Disciplinary Barracks, no?

91 posted on 05/12/2004 8:32:07 AM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Proud
"For those who have served in the military. Don't you have a right to question authority when you think it's wrong? Hasn't "I was ordered to" become a flimsy or non-excuse? What are the repurcussions to questioning authority. "

Absolutely you have that right, and the duty to refuse illegal orders. In the USAF, in 1965, we were taught that in basic training, during classes on the UCMJ.

What happens if you disobey an illegal order? That depends. Often, you are immediately punished in some way, but only until a hearing takes place. If the order was illegal, you'll have your day.

92 posted on 05/12/2004 8:33:01 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
She was doing what she was ordered to do. If any prisoners were actually killed, I'm sure the NYTimes would have it covered on page 1.

I don't see hazing as a particularly abusive interrogation technique. I am upset that American servicemen and women are going to be killed due to this disruption in our intelligence gathering.
93 posted on 05/12/2004 8:33:22 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane
"but isn't that power moot now that the photos have been sold or leaked?"

It wouldn't be if the average American wasn't such a sissy. I never did understand what the big deal was. Sure it wasn't a nice thing to do, so slap the guards on the wrist and get over it. I think the President made a huge mistake by apologizing. Should have just said that war is hell and bad things happen.

If the bad guys don't want to risk being embarrassed they should quit killing American soldiers and behave. Is that such an unreasonable request?
94 posted on 05/12/2004 8:33:52 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
The Taguba Report has an "Annex 26", which is of course missing from the online version, which claims to have written statements from PFC England as well as others regarding the incidents. I suspect we will hear some of those statements real soon now.

On Page 17, Gen. Taguba writes : "These findings are amply supported by written confessions provided by several of the suspects, written statements provided by detainees, and witness statements. In reaching my findings, I carefully considered the pre-existing statements of the following witnesses and suspects"

PFC England is listed as one of the five 'suspects'. To her credit, she is the lowest ranking soldier marked as a suspect (SGT is highest). but this does bring some doubt on the comment: "To all of us who have been charged, we all agree that we don't feel like we were doing things that we weren't supposed to, because we were told to do them.

I get the feeling this woman is not too mature, and is causing herself some grief by not keeping her trap shut. Did the interview end with her dancing on an SUV by any chance?

95 posted on 05/12/2004 8:34:33 AM PDT by Jalapeno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snooker
Well, Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba apparently finds the report of broom handles and lightbulbs being used to sodomize detainees credible.

You, too, can find that report online.

With all due respect, snooker, Taguba's words carry a bit more weight than yours.

96 posted on 05/12/2004 8:36:42 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Core_Conservative
Who knew she was pregnant and When did they know it?
97 posted on 05/12/2004 8:36:51 AM PDT by showme_the_Glory (No more rhyming, and I mean it! ..Anybody got a peanut.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: monday
The brass wants to limit the damage. If they can, they will set it up so that the guards take the fall.

The military was addressing this and started filing charges against people before the photos hit the media. They are not reacting to "limit the damage", they found wrongdoing and were and continue addressing it.

And Janis Karpinski will be charged, I am confident. Taguba more or less called her a liar yesterday.

98 posted on 05/12/2004 8:37:56 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: CatoRenasci
509. Defense of Superior Orders

a. The fact that the law of war has been violated pursuant to an order of a superior authority, whether military or civil, does not deprive the act in question of its character as a war crime, nor does it constitute a defense in the trial of an accused individual, unless he did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the act was unlawful. In all cases where the order is held not to constitute a defense to an allegation of war crime, the fact that the individual was acting pursuant to orders may be considered in mitigation of punishment.

b. In considering the question of whether a superior order constitutes a valid defense, the court shall take into consideration the fact that obedience to lawful military orders is the duty of every member of the armed forces; that the latter cannot be expected, in conditions of war discipline, to weigh scrupulously the legal merits of the order received; that certain rules of warfare may be controversial; or that an act otherwise amounting to a war crime may be done in obedience to orders conceived as a measure of reprisal. At the same time it must be borne in mind that members of the armed forces are bound to obey only lawful orders.

It has been a number of years since my class on UCMJ, but as the Rirst Sergeant, who taught it explained, asking for written orders generally stops BS orders.

IMHO, good NCOs could have stopped this in its' tracks.

99 posted on 05/12/2004 8:38:23 AM PDT by razorback-bert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Fury
" Her statements WILL be used against her."

She's trying the case in the media. She's just a poor airhead victim of circumstances. It was tourist guy that ordered her to do it under orders from Rumsfeld to ruin her life.

100 posted on 05/12/2004 8:39:39 AM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-237 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson