Death in RAF Chinook in Iraq
 

RAF helicopter death revelation leads to secret Iraq detention camp | World news | guardian.co.uk

Difficult to read, harder to stomach.

Has the venerable service come to this at the behest of politicians.

If true and it appears well researched, its letting down a century of heroes.

Disgusting, and those involved should hang their heads in shame... At least one of the crew had the balls to speak out, but only one?..
All this does is bring the RAF into disrepute, I wonder how many future terrorists were produced over acts like this...
One hopes those involved have trouble sleeping at night.
It amazes me in this day and age when we as a Nation fervently show our abhorrence to the likes of Hitler and his Jew murdering cronies, the ethnic cleansing in the likes of Bosnia, the genocide in Rwanda, that it appears OK for us to be involved in murder and torture.

Completely agree. Transporting people for interrogation is completely acceptable.

Transporting people to inhuman interrogation is not, neither is doing it in an inhuman manner.

The key to COIN is to alienate the insurgents, not yourselves.

FFS. If true, then people should hang their heads in shame.
War crimes allegations should start with the PM of the time and cascade down.
:ugh:

Before I jump on the outrage bus and lay the blame on anybody can we sort out what the jumbled report says?

Australian SAS detain 64 personnel
Responsibility for detention given to a lone US Serviceman.
Chinook called in to transport detainees in groups of 8
RAF Regiment provide detainee handling on Chinook
Detainees restrained, hooded, made to lie down on floor of helicopter for transit.
2/3 detainees struggle and are forced to floor and knelt on to restrain them.
On arrival at destination 2 detainees were 'unresponsive' it is not clear whether these were the same ones who were restrained.
One detainee was found to have died because hood was taped too tight around the neck.
Investigation was c/o by US authorities and concluded: **** happens.
A year later crewman on Chinook raises a complaint.
It takes a year for UK authorities to start investigation.
There is a disagreement between expert witnesses on the validity of exhumation and insinuation by one that deliberate mistreatment occurred.
Questions have been raise over the competency of the RAFP investigation.
The US detention centre was unknown to The Red Cross and had not been inspected by them.
The senior British lawyer was unaware of the existence of this detention centre.
There are insinuations that people were murdered by the US authorities at this detention centre.
Movement of prisoners was always conducted at night and therefore the insinuation is that it was illegal.
The MoD responded with its' normal inefficiency, possibly due to lack of records, lack of sufficient time to deal with a reporter, lack of information from our allies who had declared the man dead, written the death certificate and buried him.

There's a lot more about the US operation of the detention centre; some of which may be true, equally, it may not.

By my reckoning this one event required the use of 8 Chinook, the aircrew may or may not have been used to seeing detainees who resist being forced to the floor and restrained; the description in the article is no different to footage one sees of UK police officers detaining a fleeing suspect (minus the hood of course).
I suspect movement of prisoners at night was not through sinister motivation but part of self protection tactics for the helicopter.
Handling of prisoners; the UK takes a bunch of soldiers, gives them 2-3 weeks detainee handling training and expects no problems.

I am not defending the death in custody, I am trying to bring a little clarity to what I feel is a sensationalist report.

Harley

Don't disagree with your good clarification and I am no bleeding heart when it comes to these type of things, but, if we (UK, USA et al) want to take the high moral ground, then I think the world expects us to behave in a way that justifies it.

Certain elements of all forces have shown that they are not capable of that in Iraq.


""One detainee was found to have died because hood was taped too tight around the neck.""
Isn't it our responsibilty to check on the welfare of the detainees.
After all, they held them as they thought some were senior Baath Party so
possibly useful info to be obtained. That can't be obtained if they are dead.

Interesting what Ben Griffin said "My commanding officer at the time expressed his concern to the whole squadron that we were becoming the secret police of Baghdad". I would have thought an SAS Major or above would be able to say what was on his mind to higher authorities ?

I wonder what the Aust Gov't is going to say about this. They will not be happy.

If only we knew the truth of it all. It's probably a good thing we don't and never will really. If we had knowledge of how many times a "blind eye" has been turned to incidents such as this, we may well be stunned rather than shocked.

At least in private, and to themselves, I would hope that people involved in incidents such as this have a troubled mind when they cast their minds back over their career if they have been involved in the mistreatment of others in any way or helped others in their own involvement.

Lots of "Blind Eyes" here. A shameful incident from 2003.

Death of Baha Mousa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nutloose
 

Thats right fella, climb aboard that outrage bus. 'one of the crew had the balls to speak out' ' but only one'.

Consider this. The aircraft pitches up rotors turning. The crew have not been told where they are going to on final destination. It's dark. The cab has a large internal fuel tank that blocks out most of the cabin. One crewman works in front of it and one works behind it. The front crew are unlikely to witness any abuse at all. One crewman may not be in a position to see it.

No excuse for the abuse of detainees. A good reason why only one of the crew saw it.



But you just crack on and sling mud around....
Ding ding, all aboard Le bus d'outrage.

I seem to recall that the chap who died had recently had major open heart surgery and had suffered a trauma when he was held down. How could the restraining troops have known in the heat of battle?

HPT

Sounds like more than one Brit knew what was going on at this facility. There's mention of MI6 and SF involvement, not to mention the presumably numerous RAF crews involved in transfers.

As for the 'un-responsive' detaineers, it beggars belief that they were simply given over to the Americans without checking on their well-being. As for the detainee with two prosthetic legs, WTF was going on there?

Err, what battle was that? They were guarding detainees on a helicopter.

"heat of battle
Err, what battle was that? They were guarding detainees on a helicopter."


And it all started at a road block !!! Not exactly a fire fight.


deadpan

Re the "two prosthetic legs", yes, agree.

With all the easy restraints now available, I find it hard to believe that
they couldn't easily restrain 8 detainees.

Where have I heard all this before? Ah, Mull of Kintyre and the post-Nimrod Review investigation allegedly undertaken by RAF plod.

• When the Guardian heard about it and began to ask questions, the MoD responded with an extraordinary degree of obstruction and obfuscation, evading questions not just for days but for weeks and months.
• The RAF's own police examined ....... but this ended with some of the most salient facts remaining deeply buried. The alleged culprits faced no charges.
• Asked where the men were being taken, the MoD had initially indicated .....
  
• Later it became clear that this was not correct.
• One of the first hints that something untoward had happened aboard one of the RAF Chinooks came six years later
  
• This raised many other questions, which the MoD appeared sometimes reluctant to answer.
• At this point in the inquiries, a report ..... was leaked.
• Were it not for the anonymous complaint, this would have been the end of the matter.
• After receiving the complaint, the RAF police moved slowly.
• According to the MoD, they waited more than a year ......
• After this advice was received the case was passed to RAF's prosecutors, who advised that there was insufficient evidence to bring any charges. They also concluded that any further investigation was pointless.
• The RAF police investigation appeared to have been so superficial .......
• ...... there were some at the MoD who were concerned about the possible consequences of a more thorough inquiry.
• ... the MoD appeared to be stumped.

500N...Ever been on ops you muppet...?

I doubt half the bloody cheeseburgers posting on here have ever pulled on a uniform let alone strapped on a gun and gone into harms way :}

No, but I can't help it if I was in during the great peace of the 80's.

But training during raids in restraining "exercise" prisoners (typically uncooperative as they usually are), loading them onto a helicopters, at night. OK, not active service so sorry if I offended.

To be honest, 500N, I'm not sure what you said to offend anyone. I thought the response to you was a bit abrupt.

We are supposed to accept this forum is the place for that?:uhoh:

We are supposed to operate with the information put forth in these posts?:rolleyes:

Talk about a Fool's Errand!:ugh:

What Tribunal operates on "Insinuations"?

What Tribunal operates without benefit of a proper investigation?

At what point after the multiple investigations are reported out does One have to accept the conclusions of those multiple investigations?

Can one be totally satisfied with a result of an investigation if one has one's very own mind made up to question those results?

high spirits point taken, but then again they are all on intercom, and by the report no one appears to have attempted to do anything about it, the bagging was banned so should never of happened and the crew no doubt talked about the issue afterwards. Suprised that nothing was done at the time when the death was known...

Agree with CM. don't see what you said wrong 500