US soldier who exposed abuse at Abu Ghraib says he feared other GIs would kill him

Team Infidel

Forum Spin Doctor
This is a must read.

Media: The Associated Press
Byline: By RICHARD PYLE
Date: 10 August 2006


NEW YORK_The soldier who triggered the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal by sending incriminating photos to military investigators says he feared deadly retaliation by other GIs and was shocked when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld mentioned his name at a Senate hearing.

Within days, Joe Darby was spirited out of Iraq at his own request. But his family was besieged by news media, and close relatives called him a traitor. Ultimately he was forced to move away from his hometown in western Maryland.

"I had the choice between what I knew was morally right and my loyalty to other soldiers. I couldn't have it both ways," the 27-year-old military policeman said in the just-released September issue of Gentleman's Quarterly.

In an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday, Darby said that if presented with the same circumstances at Abu Ghraib today, he would do the same thing. "It was a hard decision to make when I made it, but it had to be done," he said.

Darby also said he later learned that Rumsfeld was not the first to identify him, and he did not see "anything intentional or malicious" on the Pentagon chief's part.

Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib were brutalized and sexually humiliated by military police and intelligence agents in the fall of 2003. Photos of the abuse _ the same ones that Darby provided to investigators _ stirred global condemnation of U.S. military practices in Iraq.

At least 11 U.S. soldiers have been convicted in the scandal. Spc. Charles Graner and Pfc. Lynndie England, who were depicted in the photos, are serving 10 years and three years in prison respectively.

Darby has not previously detailed his role at Abu Ghraib to the media, according to Dan Scheffey, a spokesman for GQ.

In the article, Darby said he never expected the Abu Ghraib story to "explode the way it did."

The abuse of prisoners, he said, was going on before his Army Reserve MP unit was assigned there in October 2003.

"The day we arrived ... we saw like 15 prisoners sitting in their cells in women's underwear," and MPs explained they were being punished for firing mortars at the compound, he said. "After we took over it just basically escalated."

Former Brig. Gen. Janet Karpinski, who commanded the jail housing hundreds of known criminals and suspected terrorists, was there only when dignitaries visited, Darby said. "Other than that, she had no idea what was going on," he said.

Karpinski was demoted to colonel last May. The Army cleared four other generals of wrongdoing, while 17 other officers drew lesser penalties after a broader inquiry into abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Darby said he discovered the abuse photos inadvertently in January 2004 while flipping through other pictures on a CD that Graner had given him. "To this day I'm not sure why he gave me that CD," he said. "He probably just forgot which pictures were on it, or he might have assumed I wouldn't care."

At first amused by some of the photos, Darby finally decided "it just didn't sit right with me," and sent the CD to the Army's Criminal Investigation Division. Although he did so anonymously, CID agents quickly pinpointed him as the source.

Darby said he was still being interviewed when Graner and two others were brought in, and the agents had to smuggle him out wrapped in rugs and blankets to conceal his identity.

Stunned when Graner and the others returned for a month's duty at the prison, he slept with a loaded pistol. "They'd be walking around with their weapons all day long, knowing somebody had turned them in and trying to find out who. That was one of the most nervous periods of my life," Darby said.

His worst moment, he said, came on May 7, 2004, during lunch with 10 fellow MPs in a mess hall filled with 400 troops.

"It was like something out of a movie," he recalled. Rumsfeld appeared on television, dropped Darby's name, "and the guys at the table just stopped eating and looked at me. I got up and got the hell out of there."

Only later did he learn he had been named in a New Yorker magazine article a few days earlier, he told AP in the telephone interview.

In response to queries from AP, Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said he recalled no effort to protect Darby's identity. It was known "very early and quickly became common knowledge," and people were "talking about his courage in coming forward," he said.

Darby is scheduled to leave the Army and the Reserves, after eight years of duty, on Aug. 31. He no longer lives in his hometown, where "a lot of people up there view me as a traitor. Even some of my family members think I'm a traitor."

He said he has returned home only twice, for a wedding and his mother's funeral.

"I'm not welcome there. People there don't look at the fact that I knew right from wrong," he said. "They look at the fact that I put an Iraqi before an American."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Team Infidel said:
"I'm not welcome there. People there don't look at the fact that I knew
right from wrong," he said....
That is quite sad. Especially if people close to him can't see the courage it took, and that he did the right thing.
 
This is where the leader failed.


Former Brig. Gen. Janet Karpinski, who commanded the jail housing hundreds
of known criminals and suspected terrorists, was there only when dignitaries
visited, Darby said. "Other than that, she had no idea what was going on,"
he said.
 
They're treating him worse than NAZI death camp commanders and guards. If I was him, I'd put my hometown in my rearview mirror.He'll at least have the knowledge that he did the right thing.
 
Missileer said:
They're treating him worse than NAZI death camp commanders and guards. If I was him, I'd put my hometown in my rearview mirror.He'll at least have the knowledge that he did the right thing.

I agree.. Kind of sucks when you have honor and integrity as well as a sense of ethics that you get treated this way.
 
Whatever happened to the chain of command? .......

I don't see any mention of the Seniors who were over him (other than Former Brig. Gen. Janet Karpinski). She was new to the command and had no idea of what was going on, yet she was busted to Colonel. This is what I'd expect under Bush's leadership ... blame someone who is junior to protect the boss ... typical.

As far as Joe Darby, just what the h*ll did he expect ... he sent photos which he absolutely had to know were going to blow up in his face, to a group of idiots (military investigators), that he had to know couldn't keep a secret (even if they tried). As soon as they figured out who sent the photos (and he had to know they WOULD figure out who sent them), he had to know his name wouldn't remain a secret.

Just what did he expect - messengers of bad news, were often subject to recriminations at a later date. Sometimes the reward was death.

IF he had taken the photos to Brig. Gen. Janet Karpinski (who was the next person up the chain of command), this problem could have been handled in-house and the scandal would not have been as extreme. The choice to go to the investigative agency instead of his own chain of command is what raises the eyebrows of military and former military members (yours truly included).The chain of command is there for a purpose and you violate the chain of command at your own peril.

I am sorry ... but ... I don't feel sorry for this turkey. I don't have a problem with whistle blowing ... but ... when you are in the military, you MUST use the chain of command ... it's not just the right thing to do ... it is mandatory. Going outside the chain of command is a no-no.
 
bulldogg said:
You dont use the chain of command if they are part of the problem.
You are wrong ... I realise that whistle-blowers always try to excuse their actions by saying they went outside the chain of command, because they had a problem with their chain of command. The fact remains that they are in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) when they do so ... you MUST use the chain of command starting from the bottom and work your way upwards hitting each level as you go. You ALWAYS have the right to apply to the next level above where you are turned down for review of the decision. There ARE guidelines and channels for reporting problems having to do with the chain of command ... to NOT use them is to place your own neck on the chopping block and your career at risk.

As I stated in my post
"I am sorry ... but ... I don't feel sorry for this turkey. I don't have a problem with whistle blowing ... but ... when you are in the military, you MUST use the chain of command ... it's not just the right thing to do ... it is mandatory. Going outside the chain of command is a no-no."
 
I didn't say they "had a problem" I said the members of the chain of command were the problem, they were a part of it. I was told time and again to use the chain of command but if members of your chain of command are part of the problem then you go over them to the next level or take it to the IG if you feel it necessary. I received that briefing verbatim at every PCS and change of command briefing.
 
I would tend to agree with the Chief: Brig. Gen. Karpinski should have been given the chance to put the situation right.

Nevertheless, all the people involved in the abuse should have known enough to do the right thing. They had no honor.
 
bulldogg said:
I didn't say they "had a problem" I said the members of the chain of command were the problem, they were a part of it. I was told time and again to use the chain of command but if members of your chain of command are part of the problem then you go over them to the next level or take it to the IG if you feel it necessary. I received that briefing verbatim at every PCS and change of command briefing.
That is what I said
You ALWAYS have the right to apply to the next level above where you are turned down for review of the decision.
Kirruth was correct
Brig. Gen. Karpinski should have been given the chance to put the situation right.
Joe Darby chose to go completely outside the chain of command, instead of trying to follow standard procedures by lodging a formal complaint with his chain of command. The General was the next level above his own command, and was the next step in the chain of command and the logical place to have lodged his complaint. They frown on going to the IG if you haven't tried to use your own chain of command - the IG is supposed to be the last link in the procedure for lodging complaints.
 
As a former soldier about to go back in I will say this... if my commanding general was only around for dog and pony shows and all other levels of the command structure were obviously aware of such abuse as was occuring at Gharaib I would not have gone to the press but I would not have gone to her Ladyship either but to the IG and doom on all of them. But then I am a candid :cen: who doesn't care what other people think when I know I am right. :)
 
bulldogg said:
As a former soldier about to go back in I will say this... if my commanding general was only around for dog and pony shows and all other levels of the command structure were obviously aware of such abuse as was occuring at Gharaib I would not have gone to the press but I would not have gone to her Ladyship either but to the IG and doom on all of them. But then I am a candid :cen: who doesn't care what other people think when I know I am right. :)
Bulldogg I have to agree with you ... speaking my mind has gotten me in trouble before and I agree with you. If it had been me and the situation was as you described ... I probably would go to the IG, but ONLY after having tried my chain of command first. I have been around the block a time or two and understand how the game is played if you are a 'lifer'.
 
I agree to a point I suppose. This guy has been in the Army as a reservist. It is unlikely he had the experience to know how to deal with an issue on this scale so he ewnt straight to the top. . . like many civilians would do. I am not coming down on reservists or anything. I am just saying his inexperience may have been part of the problem.

As for his comment on "Not expecting it to blow up like thi". . what the heck did he expect would happen? Of course if he had kept it in house then perhaps things would not have escalated to such a degree. it is hard to say. I just know that any time the US Deploys forces there is always a scandal in some form or another that puts a bad light on the US Military.
 
Do Marine Reservists have that problem? Chain of Command is one of the first things we learn in the military. Inexperience had nothing to do with it. He did the right thing.
 
Now why did he not pass it up the chain of command, if one section ignores him then have a go at the next, the officers know to ignore some thing like this would have put them in the brown stuff. Also why did he spend so much time photographing it all, or did he sell the picture to the press and keep the copyright to them so that he got paid every time they were reproduced in any where in the world. Did he consider that he could be putting other Americans lives at risk by putting the these photo's out on the international press
 
If I can find the room, I will like you all the final report on this incident and you can read it all....... I think a lot of the questions will be answered.
 
Back
Top