Comments
Earlier today I e-mailed Ron Rosenbaum, a radio host at AM 1500 KSTP, the radio station that used to host Joe Ryan's Iraq Diary. Ron Rosenbaum was kind enough to promptly reply to my inquiry. Ron Rosenbaum said that Joe Ryan requested that the site be removed, and while he could provide no further information, he mentioned that he suspects Joe Ryan's request had something to do with the recent revelations of abuse at the prison in Iraq where Joe Ryan works. He also mentioned that Joe Ryan says he will be back stateside shortly, and Ron hopes to have Joe Ryan on the air to answer questions.
So maybe we'll will have the opportunity to ask Joe if 'Steve Stefanowicz' is the same CACI interrogator 'Steven Stephanowicz' mentioned by Seymore Hersh's new article in The New Yorker. It would be fascinating to learn if the man that Joe Ryan knew well enough to socialize with is the Steven Stephanowicz that appears in the report. If so, Joe Ryan might be able to offer some insight into the recent allegations and the contents of General Tabugas' report.
Posted by: Richard Parker on May 2, 2004 at 9:15 PM | PERMALINK
Google has the AM 1500 page cached. Search Google with this URL (
http://www.google.com/search?q=Steve%2DStefanowicz+iraq) and then click the Cached link on the sole result to see Steve's diary.
Posted by: Paul Long on May 2, 2004 at 9:22 PM | PERMALINK
Joe Ryan is likely a witness to and maybe an accomplice to multiple felonies. He should be arrested and taken into custody as soon as he enters the U.S.
Posted by: KenStarr on May 2, 2004 at 9:25 PM | PERMALINK
(Posted this under a different section, but that thread seems to have died down and I'd genuinely like to see a resonse.)
Think I'll weigh in with a non-haiku post.
First off, I support the war. I'm here (on this site) because I actively look for evidence that I'm wrong about stuff, and you're more likely to get it from the opposition.
So. I absolutely agree with all of you who find this story sickening and awful, and I whole-heartedly want to see the men and women responsible punished.
(I do think some of y'all are a bit quick to blame it on the President, on some very thin pretexts. But I've learned better than to touch that issue, since it looks to me like if Bush did every single thing most of his detractors want, plus donated his family fortune and both his kidneys to the UN, most of them--you--would still hate him. But that's neither here nor there.)
It seems like a salient fact, though, to point out that as bad as these (from what I've seen so far) mostly psychological tortures were, they pale in comparison to the stuff Hussein was doing to Iraqis for the past 20+ years. (Well documented by AI, by the way, since that's a source most posters here seem to trust.) That fact, plus the Abu Ghraib incident, leaves us with a couple of responses.
A. Oh well, as long as there are fewer torturings per capita, it's an improvement, so quit your bitching.
B. It's good that Hussein can't do those things anymore, but this is still unacceptable. My support for the war is unshaken, but this must be punished.
C. Hussein, shmoosein. The torture that took place before we invaded doesn't register on my moral outrage scale, since Americans weren't doing it.
People in column A are cynical and excessively pragmatic, I'd tend to think. I'm in column B myself. So, for all of you who strenously opposed the war, could you explain to me how you don't fit in column C? Or, if that's unfair, how about this: Did you feel anything like what you're feeling now back when the Mother of all Bloodthirsty Dictators was feeding his political opponents into plastic shredders or sending his rape squads after their female relatives?
Just a question.
Posted by: Praetorian Jellyfish on May 2, 2004 at 9:26 PM | PERMALINK
Jellyfish, it's got nothing to do with support for the war, before or after, and everything to do with the impact this has on any chance of success we may have in that war.
So the correct answer is:
D) This may well and truly have f*cked our chances of success in Iraq and has materially damaged our chances of "winning" the "war on terror."
Posted by: PaulB on May 2, 2004 at 9:30 PM | PERMALINK
"feeding his political opponents into plastic shredders"
Has this ever been documented as true?
And some of the prisoners in US custody HAVE been raped and beaten to death. Sure, we're not on the scale of Saddam (yet?), but we're supposed to be better!!!
Posted by: alias on May 2, 2004 at 9:31 PM | PERMALINK
WHAT SHOULD BE DONE -
An independent prosecutor should be appointed today. Full hearings in the House and the Senate starting next week.
Posted by: KenStarr on May 2, 2004 at 9:32 PM | PERMALINK
In any case, Jellyfish, your question is a classic troll, since it's insulting, condescending, incredibly stupid, doesn't describe anyone who posts here, and has little, if anything, to do with Kevin's topic. It's classic flame bait designed to start a flame war, not a serious discussion. Care to try again?
Posted by: PaulB on May 2, 2004 at 9:33 PM | PERMALINK
Anyone we punish will just be the sacrificial sheep marched out for us to vent our righteous indignation on.
Works the same way here in America. Police and guards rough up prisoners. Someone somehow gets proof. Everyone is shocked. Someone gets the boot. That someone usually applys for a police or prison job in another state. The cycle continues.
I'm just suprised no one has connected the two. Wasn't the anniversary of the Rodney King beating just recent? How soon the jaded public forgets.
Posted by: IXLNXS on May 2, 2004 at 9:36 PM | PERMALINK
Your choices don't leave any room for the large numbers of people who loathed Saddam and opposed the war, because we expected (and it appears to be coming true, unfortunately) that the result of the war would be a worse situation than we started with, and that the result would be an abandonment of the effort to capture the far more dangerous Osama bin Laden.
Because this is a democracy, as citizens we each bear moral responsibility if we don't try to stop our government from committing crimes, while it's not possible for us to conquer every criminal in the world. We need to hold ourselves to the same high standard we claim to hold others to, or higher.
I must admit, though, that I have a selfish interest. I frequently travel internationally on business, as do people I care about. The brutal torture committed by Americans makes it more likely that I, as an American, or one of my friends or colleagues, might be physically attacked.
Posted by: Joe Buck on May 2, 2004 at 9:41 PM | PERMALINK
It seems obvious to me that private contractors
were used for abusive interrogations because
they would be beyond the reach of military
justice. The Cheney-Rummy-Pearl-Wolfowitz bunch
believes in ends over means and avoiding responsibility.
Contracting out torture is simply the epitome
of thier flim-flam.
Posted by: jimbo on May 2, 2004 at 9:50 PM | PERMALINK
PAULB: In any case, Jellyfish, your question is a classic troll, since it's insulting, condescending, incredibly stupid, doesn't describe anyone who posts here, and has little, if anything, to do with Kevin's topic. It's classic flame bait designed to start a flame war, not a serious discussion. Care to try again?
Yeah, no kidding. I especially like the part where he says he doesn't want to touch the issue of blaming the president, and then goes on to write a paragraph defending Bush. As for his laughable assertion that "most posters here seem to trust" Al, that is true insofar as we can trust him to ignore facts. With Praetorian Jellyfish's claim that he "actively look
for evidence that wrong about stuff," it looks as if we can count on developing the same sort of "trust" with him.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_05/003826.php