WP: U.S. to Cut Count in Iraq Prison

General Vows to Ease Overcrowding, Bans Use of Hoods

Wednesday, May 5, 2004; Page A01

BAGHDAD, May 4 -- The U.S. general overseeing Army-run prisons in Iraq said Tuesday that the population of overcrowded Abu Ghraib prison would be cut by more than half and that he has ordered military intelligence operatives to stop placing hoods over detainees' heads as an interrogation tactic.

Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, 54, who previously commanded the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was unapologetic about the use of tough tactics designed to draw out information from detainees, but said that he had directed interrogation supervisors to strictly follow Army rules detailing what techniques can be used.

"We're here to enable the armed forces to win this fight that's ongoing," Miller said he told his subordinates. "At the end of the day you'd better make sure that what we've done will make America proud."

(snip)

Miller said the use of physical contact and threats against detainees is prohibited. Last week, he said, he banned the use of hoods to cover the heads of detainees during transport. Instead, military officers have been directed to use "pressure bandages" or goggles to cover the eyes of detainees when transporting them.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A707-2004May4.html

You won't be seeing any more pictures of soldiers and mercenaries torturing hooded prisoners, then. No more hoods! Problem solved.

That, and possession of a camera within 100 miles of Abu Ghraib will be punishable by summary execution.

Well, I don't know that for sure, but I'll bet there's something like it in the fine print.

...but the count of Murricans.

It just looks a little better from a distance.

Interesting that this problem didn't even exist until CBS got their hands on the pictures.

whose article was due to come out the day after the 60 minutes segment; heard that the pending publication is what encouraged 60 minutes to run with the story after sitting on it for 2 weeks at the request of the (mis)administration.

However, most people only look at the New Yorker for the cartoons, so the whole thing would have been overlooked otherwise.:7