I was first aware of this case from reading National Review. The case was quite different than the snippet they talked about there. Andrew McCarthy wrote this:
Camp CropperI’ve been too busy to write about the ruling by a sharply divided three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit U.S. appeals court that former Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld can be sued personally by two contractors who were detained in Iraq on suspicion of supplying weapons to insurgents. Were it to be upheld, the decision would be a disastrous blow against our armed force ...
McCarthy then quotes Rumfeld's attorneys at great length, here is part of it:
Today’s decision by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals is a blow to the U.S. military. According to two judges on the court, the judicial branch is best-suited to decide how to handle detainees captured and held in foreign war zones.
Naturally if you only quote one side's lawyers you are not interested in providing unbiased information. If I had not read it elsewhere I would not have known the full story. What is the major point they totally ignore? These "detainees" are US Citizens arrested and tortured without trial. I cannot imagine why they left that fact out of the post!
Patriotism?Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, who worked for a private security firm in the Middle East country, were allegedly beaten and punished for months in 1996 ((sic) typo, it was 2006, two years after the Abu Ghraib scandal) at Camp Cropper near Baghdad before being dumped at the airport without charge. ... The pair argue that their rights of 'habeas corpus' - the legal term for unlawful detention - were violated, and are seeking damages from 79-year-old Rumsfeld ... ...Vance and Ertel had been hired by Shield Group Security, an Iraqi firm who the duo believed were involved in some questionable dealings, including illegal bribery and other corruption activities. They flagged up their concerns to the U.S. authorities and began co-operating with the Federal Bureau of Investigation - and in early 2006 they were taken into custody and slung into Camp Cropper, the notorious holding facility for security detainees near Baghdad International Airport.... U.S. Circuit Judge David Hamilton wrote yesterday: 'There can be no doubt that the deliberate infliction of such treatment on U.S. citizens, even in a war zone, is unconstitutional.'
Yes this is clearly illegal. A US Soldier is told that he has to obey any legal order. But this order was not legal and they obeyed it any way. Rumsfeld is being sued because he authorized the rules that allowed detainees to be tortured. What was done to them? Since National Review quoted one side it seems fair to quote the other side:
"The lights were kept on at all times in their cells." "Their cells were kept intolerably cold, except when the generators failed.” "There were bugs and feces on the walls of the cells." "They spent most of their time in complete isolation." They "had a concrete slab for a bed." "Guards would wake them if they were ever caught sleeping." "Heavy metal and country music was pumped into their cells at 'intolerably-loud volumes.'” They "had only one shirt and a pair of overalls to wear during their confinement." They were "often deprived of food and water." They were "repeatedly deprived of necessary medical care" "They experienced 'hooding.'” They "were 'walled,' i.e., slammed into walls while being led blindfolded with towels placed over their heads to interrogation sessions."
Of course torture like this is unusual. Isn't it? More tomorrow.