September 27, 2005

A quick trip through prison.

For Lynndie England. At the sentencing:
In a calm, deliberate voice, England recounted how her relationship with Graner, 14 years her senior, developed as they prepared for deployment to Iraq with the 372nd Military Police Company in 2003.

"He was very charming, funny and at the time it looked to me like he was interested in the same things I was. ... He made me feel good about myself," she said. "I trusted him and I loved him. ... Now I know it was just an act to lure me in."
Well, you already know what I think about that.

12 comments:

Eli Blake said...

Ultimately, it isn't about just the actions of either Lynndie England (who is getting what she deserves, no question about that) or Charles Graner, or even the other enlisted people who were involved.

It is about the atmosphere created by Gonzalez' now infamous 2002 memo and other actions taken by commanding officers, not only at Abu Graib but elsewhere as well.

That does not in any way excuse the actions of the MP's who did the deeds, but we have come a long way from Harry Truman's famous 'The buck stops here.'

Condoleesa said...

I agree with you she has to take responsibility for her own actions. I do think she got the shaft though. Not because she was found guilty (she was) but because Graner got off easier than she did. He is pond scum.

APF said...

Doesn't the phrase "the buck stops here" have to do more with who ultimately has to make difficult decisions in an Administration (like using nuclear weapons) than it has to do with who should absorb punishment whenever something happens in the world? I think the meaning has shifted over time, much like paring of "carrot and stick."

The media interpreted Harry's sign to mean he was accepting responsibility, but he may well have had something else in mind. Truman was a poker player. He knew exactly what the "buck" was -- it was the marker that identifies the person who calls the game, or in essence, sets the rules. Truman may have been saying that he was in charge and would set the rules - a bit different than just accepting responsibility.
(via)

Sloanasaurus said...

"...It is about the atmosphere created by Gonzalez' now infamous 2002 memo and other actions taken by commanding officers, not only at Abu Graib but elsewhere as well...."

How far should we spread the blame? Based on your logical conclusion, I would argue that Clinton is far more responsible for 9-11 than Gonzolez is for Abu Garib. After all Clinton perpetuated the environment that allowed 9-11 to occur.

tee bee said...

According to the article, Graner got 10 years, which is hardly easier than the three years for England.

Not that he isn't pond scum, but at least he's getting his due. Unfortunately, she's still the subject of the photos, and will remain the symbol of Abu Ghraib long after her sentence is served.

Brando said...

It is about the atmosphere created by Gonzalez' now infamous 2002 memo and
other actions taken by commanding officers, not only at Abu Graib but elsewhere
as well


Some of this now seems to be leaking
out
.

Troy said...

And there are no quick trips through prisons. Having toured (no really -- just toured -- honest! Monopoly fashion Just visiting) my share of Texas prisons; each tour -- while fascinating -- had a bit of "when are we going to get the hell out of here?" to it. Except for the high security cells -- those guys always gave a good show for my classes. Echo Pod -- bldg. 12 William Clements Unit -- thanks for the memories.

Freeman Hunt said...

"I trusted him and I loved him. ... Now I know it was just an act to lure me in."

Oh bah! You poor, little dear--lured in and tricked by the big, mean man. Give me a break. I hate it when women say stupid things like this. It makes me embarassed on behalf of my gender.

HaloJonesFan said...

She may not be too bright, but she sure does know how to play to the camera. And she's certainly aware that it's better to be dumb than to be evil.

Jacques Cuze said...

Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, the 82nd Airborne.... Coincidence? Or intentional?

What do you think of the role of General Miller? How well do you think this has been investigated? What do you think should be done to the higher ups?

Al Maviva said...

Right, it’s all about the atmosphere that is created at the top. Because Gonzalez and John Yoo explored the legal limits defining the distinctions between torture and interrogation, it caused Lyddie England to put troops in a dogpile and take pictures of it for fun.

That would explain why I kept having urges to employ cigars as sex toys and sexually harass my female troops while I was on active duty in the Army, while Clinton was POTUS. It sure would explain Tailhook, too. The attitudes of the President and his legal team’s deliberation clearly have a cause/effect relationship on what the troops do.

Oh wait a minute, sorry, now that I think about it, I didn’t sexually harass my troops or employ cigars in extracurricular activities. Sorry, I must have confused what I read in the NY Times this morning, with what actually happened in the real world.

Eli Blake said...

If you really believe that it was limited to England and that the atmosphere from Rumsfeld on down had nothing to do with it, or that it was an aberration, then why is this still going on? Brando also linked to this.

Lynndie England, Charles Graner and that crew have long since departed anyplace where they could mistreat any prisoners, so clearly what the NYT revealed this past Saturday has to be considered as part of a deeper problem (and therefore one with roots farther up the chain of command).