Spc. Charles Graner, Before Iraq -- Some Background Reading

Apparently, at least one of the fact checkers at USA Today is suffering from a severe case of cranial-rectal inversion. In the May 6th, 2004 edition of the paper, an article about Charles Graner and Lynndie England stated the following:

The only known blemish on [Graner's] work record came when he refused to work mandatory overtime one night because he had to care for his kids.

Um, not exactly. Apparently, putting Mace in a co-worker's coffee or a razor blade in an inmate's food don't count as 'blemishes' on one's record, at least when one is employed in a prison system where inmate abuse is epidemic and systematic, and officials routinely refuse to investigate allegations of abuse. Some individual accounts of abuse at Graner's alma mater can be found here.

More info about Graner, sadist and wife-beater extrordinaire, can be found here, here and here.

So here's the $64,000 question: How does someone become a guard at a prison which houses prisoners ostensibly considered a high risk to our national security? Theoretically, wouldn't said person need to pass some sort of background check? And if so, how would someone like Graner slip through?

At best, it suggests serious incompetence higher up the chain of command. At worst, it implies that Graner might have been just the sort of guy the military was looking for. All things considered, it doesn't seem much of a stretch.


Technorati Tags:

Abu Ghraib
Impeach Bush
Charles Graner
Lynndie England
USA Today
prisoner abuse