In 2003 some 72% of Americans fully supported the Abandoning of the Missions and those Sent to Accomplish so extremely Quickly after 9/11!!

At least some 95%, if not more as less then 1% serve them, not only still support the, just below, total lack of Sacrifice, they ran from any and all Accountability and left everything still on the table to be continually used if the political/military want was still in play in future executive/legislative wants!!
DeJa-Vu: “With no shared sacrifices being asked of civilians after Sept. 11", Decades and War From, All Over Again!!

DEC. 21, 2014 - Prosecute Torturers and Their Bosses

‘Operation Inherent Resolve’

Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan

* * Operation Resolute Support * *

* * Iraq: 10 Years After, 19 March 2013 - Costs of War * *

CNN Map U.S. and Coalition Iraq/Afghanistan Casualties

Civilian Fatalities in Afghanistan, 2001–2012

* Bookshelf * Iraq War Inquiry * The Torture Archive * Donate * Subscribe *

Thursday, May 26, 2011

IHAT: Iraq Historic Allegations Team

Exploring the IHAT

Security and CBRN - DEFENCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, Issue 52 - DMJ's Hannah Leach looks at the recent establishment of the Iraq Historic Allegations Team, introducing the MoD's statement on the team's role and remit…

In recent years there has been a growing number of cases reported involving the abuse of Iraqi civilians by British Service personnel. Between 2003 and 2008, there were more than 200 individual accusations – including claims of sexual abuse, food, water and sleep deprivation, mock executions, verbal abuse, sensory deprivation and threats of rape levelled at the detainees' wives and children.

Following notable cases such as that of Baha Mousa, an Iraqi hotel worker who died after being hooded for 24 hours and repeatedly beaten while in British Army custody, the then Minister for the Armed Forces Bill Rammell, in a speech to the Royal United Services Institute in March 2010, stated that the MoD needed to investigate the training and behaviour of British soldiers, emphasising the need to make sure that troops "display aggression and single-mindedness in battle, coupled with self-control, judgment and sensitivity to situation and context". He continued: "The abuse of detainees, mistreatment of civilians and the unnecessary destruction of property or livelihood and tragic loss of civilian life – these are not only wrong but self-defeating."1

The lawyers representing the Iraqis who claim to have suffered exploitation in British-run detention centres asked the High Court for a public inquiry into what they claimed was 'systematic' abuse. This was turned down on appeal on 21st December.

The decision of the High Court supported a policy established by Defence Secretary Liam Fox. In a written ministerial statement issued on the 1st November 2010, Nick Harvey – Rammell's successor – explained the government's view as to why a public inquiry would not be the most conducive way to bring about justice for those abused.

'These allegations are as yet unproven, but their existence is corrosive to both the morale and reputation of our armed forces," he said. "We owe it to them, and the complainants, to properly investigate these allegations.

'There are those that argue that the government should host a public inquiry into these unproven allegations now – we disagree. A costly public inquiry would be unable to investigate individual criminal behaviour or impose punishments. Any such inquiry would arguably therefore not have the best interests of the individual complainants who have raised these allegations.'2 Instead, in November 2010 the Ministry of Defence established the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) to investigate claims of abuse by British soldiers.

Defence Management Journal contacted the MoD, which, through a spokesperson, provided the following information about the IHAT programme in answer to our questions. {continued}

No comments:

Post a Comment