From the Washington Post ------------------------------ Mr. Rumsfeld's Responsibility Thursday, May 6, 2004; Page A34 THE HORRIFIC abuses by American interrogators and guards at the Abu Ghraib prison and at other facilities maintained by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan can be traced, in part, to policy decisions and public statements of Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld. <b>Beginning more than two years ago, Mr. Rumsfeld decided to overturn decades of previous practice by the U.S. military in its handling of detainees in foreign countries. His Pentagon ruled that the United States would no longer be bound by the Geneva Conventions; that Army regulations on the interrogation of prisoners would not be observed; and that many detainees would be held incommunicado and without any independent mechanism of review.</b> Abuses will take place in any prison system. But Mr. Rumsfeld's decisions helped create a lawless regime in which prisoners in both Iraq and Afghanistan have been humiliated, beaten, tortured and murdered -- and in which, until recently, no one has been held accountable. The lawlessness began in January 2002 when Mr. Rumsfeld publicly declared that hundreds of people detained by U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Conventions. That was not the case: At a minimum, all those arrested in the war zone were entitled under the conventions to a formal hearing to determine whether they were prisoners of war or unlawful combatants. No such hearings were held, but then Mr. Rumsfeld made clear that U.S. observance of the convention was now optional. Prisoners, he said, would be treated "for the most part" in "a manner that is reasonably consistent" with the conventions -- which, the secretary breezily suggested, was outdated. In one important respect, Mr. Rumsfeld was correct: Not only could captured al Qaeda members be legitimately deprived of Geneva Convention guarantees (once the required hearing was held) but such treatment was in many cases necessary to obtain vital intelligence and prevent terrorists from communicating with confederates abroad. But if the United States was to resort to that exceptional practice, Mr. Rumsfeld should have established procedures to ensure that it did so without violating international conventions against torture and that only suspects who truly needed such extraordinary handling were treated that way. Outside controls or independent reviews could have provided such safeguards. Instead, Mr. Rumsfeld allowed detainees to be indiscriminately designated as beyond the law -- and made humane treatment dependent on the goodwill of U.S. personnel. Much of what has happened at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay is shrouded in secrecy. But according to an official Army report, a system was established at the camp under which military guards were expected to "set the conditions" for intelligence investigations. The report by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba says the system was later introduced at military facilities at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, even though it violates Army regulations forbidding guards to participate in interrogations. The Taguba report and others by human rights groups reveal that the detention system Mr. Rumsfeld oversees has become so grossly distorted that military police have abused or tortured prisoners under the direction of civilian contractors and intelligence officers outside the military chain of command -- not in "exceptional" cases, as Mr. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, but systematically. Army guards have held "ghost" prisoners detained by the CIA and even hidden these prisoners from the International Red Cross. Meanwhile, Mr. Rumsfeld's contempt for the Geneva Conventions has trickled down: The Taguba report says that guards at Abu Ghraib had not been instructed on them and that no copies were posted in the facility. The abuses that have done so much harm to the U.S. mission in Iraq might have been prevented had Mr. Rumsfeld been responsive to earlier reports of violations. Instead, he publicly dismissed or minimized such accounts. He and his staff ignored detailed reports by respected human rights groups about criminal activity at U.S.-run prisons in Afghanistan, and they refused to provide access to facilities or respond to most questions. In December 2002, two Afghan detainees died in events that were ruled homicides by medical officials; only when the New York Times obtained the story did the Pentagon confirm that an investigation was underway, and no results have yet been announced. Not until other media obtained the photos from Abu Ghraib did Mr. Rumsfeld fully acknowledge what had happened, and not until Tuesday did his department disclose that 25 prisoners have died in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan. Accountability for those deaths has been virtually nonexistent: One soldier was punished with a dishonorable discharge. On Monday Mr. Rumsfeld's spokesman said that the secretary had not read Mr. Taguba's report, which was completed in early March. Yesterday Mr. Rumsfeld told a television interviewer that he still hadn't finished reading it, and he repeated his view that the Geneva Conventions "did not precisely apply" but were only "basic rules" for handling prisoners. His message remains the same: that the United States need not be bound by international law and that the crimes Mr. Taguba reported are not, for him, a priority. That attitude has undermined the American military's observance of basic human rights and damaged this country's ability to prevail in the war on terrorism.
Yeah, he should be fired for trying to get information out of terrorists and protect our country. This liberal garbage never ends... next...
1. What information do you have that suggests the prisoners in Iraq were terrorists? 2. You are aware that Bush is not real happy with Rumsfeld, right? Let's see if you can give a response with going to the insult card right away. I'm telling you right now...if Rumsfeld worked for me...and he kept me out of the loop on the crap that went down in those prisons...he'd be fired faster than he could say Fallujah.
So Rumsfeld ordered the soldiers to rape detainees with broomsticks? Never knew that, T_J. Thanks for providing us with information that you just can't find in the dadburned mainstream Liberal media!
Max, read the first two paragraphs of the article and then apologize to me. One of them is even bolded so you can see it better.
You know who else should be fired? Myers. Guy seriously hasn't got a clue, which is scary as hell, considering his position. In the past two weeks he has: A) Categorically denied that there was any systemic abuse/torture of POWs in Iraq...without having read the report. B) Categorically denied that the US military was pulling out of Fallujah, and berated the media at length for reporting that they were...a day before the US forces pulled out of Fallujah.
Responsibility starts at the top. The command structure is so messed up, and we've got civilian mercenaries interrogating prisoners, and running loose over there. Rumsfeld shouldn't be fired, because he should resign.
This mess is so big, someone at the 'top' has to take responsibility and get fired or resign. Bye Bye Rummy.
Oldy but Goody for Rummy I think the mistake with sidestepping Geneva is primarily that it added to our international PR debacle of losing the high road after 9/11.
maybe, maybe no... WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Thursday that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "will stay in my Cabinet" despite calls for his resignation by congressional Democrats in the wake of abusive treatment of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of American captors "Secretary Rumsfeld has served our nation well," Bush told reporters in an appearance in the White House Rose Garden. Speaking slowly for emphasis, he added, "Secretary Rumsfeld has been the secretary during two wars, and he is an important part of my Cabinet." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../20040506/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_prisoner_abuse
I guess this means conservatives like TJ are in favor of this- The latest allegation involved an elderly Iraqi woman said to have been abused by U.S. military guards. The woman, arrested last July, was reportedly put into a harness and forced to crawl on her hands and knees while a guard rode her donkey-style. British Prime Minister Tony Blair's human rights envoy to Iraq, Ann Clwyd, told the BBC she had investigated the allegation and believed it to be true. The woman was held six weeks and never charged. And liberals are against it.
Bush says that he's sorry, oh so sorry. I think Blair should follow suit as british troops are also involved. Gotta support the troops, but its too bad that many of our troops are not our country's best and brightest. a few idiots could turn our efforts around. meanwhile im glad the administration is finally taking responsibility for this screwup. Bush is calling some of our troops 'wrongdoers', does that make him an unpatriotic liberal to be against torture? or did he miss T_J's memo that all the torture being done there is done for the greater good of saving lives? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/06/iraq.abuse.main/index.html Bush 'sorry for humiliation' of Iraqi prisoners Rejects calls for Rumsfeld's resignation President Bush said the photos of prisoner abuse made him and others "sick to our stomachs." WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Thursday said he told visiting king of Jordan that he is "sorry for the humiliation suffered" by Iraqi prisoners at the hands of U.S. troops in Iraq. Bush said he told King Abdullah II that the photos made him and others "sick to our stomachs." And he said he made it clear that "wrongdoers will be brought to justice." Bush made his comments at a joint Rose Garden news conference with the king. Bush rejected calls for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign for his handling of the Iraqi prisoner abuse controversy. "He is an important part of my Cabinet and he will stay in my Cabinet," Bush said. Earlier in the day, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, demanded Rumsfeld leave office. "For the good of our country, the safety of our troops, and our image around the globe, Secretary Rumsfeld should resign," Harkin said in a statement. "If he does not resign forthwith, the president should fire him." "He has to go. Nothing, I think, less will suffice," Harkin told CNN. "It's not enough just for Secretary Rumsfeld to say that some people in the lower ranks are responsible for this -- this goes all the way up." Rumsfeld is scheduled to testify Friday morning about the U.S. military abuse of Iraqi prisoners in both open and closed hearings of the Senate Armed Services Committee. An internal report by the U.S. Defense Department determined that Iraqi prisoners were being abused by members of the U.S. military. Investigators, led by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, interviewed dozens of witnesses and looked at "numerous photos and videos portraying in graphic detail actual detainee abuse" that were taken by personnel at Abu Ghraib prison on the outskirts of Baghdad. The report said the abuse included threatening detainees with a pistol and with military dogs, sodomizing a prisoner with a chemical light and perhaps a broomstick, forcing naked prisoners into compromising positions and accusing them of being homosexuals. Six soldiers have been criminally charged in the case and six others have been reprimanded, with two of those relieved of duty, Rumsfeld has said. After last week's CBS broadcast showing images of Iraqis being humiliated and abused, both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill have expressed outrage that they were not informed of the problem earlier. House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said Rumsfeld's statement that the Army made the abuse investigations public in January was an insufficient explanation for not telling Congress about details of the abuse problem. "Mr. Rumsfeld has been engaged in a coverup from the start on this issue and continues to be so," Pelosi said Thursday. Like Harkin, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, also called for Rumsfeld to resign or be removed from office, saying the Pentagon chief concealed the matter from Bush and Congress. The Economist magazine Thursday called for Rumsfeld to resign as did an editorial in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman called on Bush to fire Rumsfeld "today, not tomorrow or next month." Rumsfeld canceled a planned speech Thursday to the World Affairs Council in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to spend the day preparing for his testimony, Pentagon officials said. In a private meeting between Rumsfeld and President Bush on Wednesday, Bush told Rumsfeld he was "not happy" that he learned about the photos by watching television, a senior administration official told CNN. "He was not happy, and he let Secretary Rumsfeld know about it," the official said. Bush also was concerned that he was not kept up to speed on the scope of the problem -- and how the Pentagon was handling it, the official said. Rumsfeld also made clear that he, too, felt "he didn't know some things he should have," according to the senior official, along with another official. (Full story) Meanwhile, the Red Cross said Thursday it had "repeatedly requested U.S. authorities to take corrective action." Antonella Notari, chief spokeswoman for the International Committee of the Red Cross, said "some measures have already been taken," without revealing the ICRC's recommendations. "I do think that our recommendations were taken seriously and I do think that now, yet even more, there are other measures that are being planned," she said. "And we do, of course, intend to continue our visits." (Full story) Other developments # The Washington Post on Thursday published more photos apparently depicting U.S. soldiers mistreating prisoners at Abu Ghraib. One shows a female soldier, the same one shown in previous photos released by CBS, holding a leash tethered to the neck of a naked Iraqi prisoner lying on the ground. Another photo shows an Iraqi prisoner chained to a bed frame with women's underwear covering his face. # A bipartisan group of senators is urging the Pentagon to demolish the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq in order to exorcise a symbol of both Saddam Hussein's torture chambers and an embarrassing episode for the U.S. military. (Full story) # On Wednesday, Bush told two Arabic-language television networks that abuse of Iraqi prisoners was "abhorrent" and would reinforce anti-American sentiment in the region. "I think people in the Middle East who want to dislike America will use this as an excuse to remind people about their dislike." Bush told the Al-Arabiya network. "I think the average citizen will say, 'This isn't the country I've been told about.'" (Full story) CNN's Ed Henry and Dana Bash contributed to this report.
Honestly, you know where I stand, but T_J did not post any advocation of torture. Rumsfeld's avoidance of Geneva conventions does not even directly advocate torture, but that is a clear implication, and most people seem to be saying "the proof is in the pudding" here. But how many of these abuses would have happened if Rummy was not in his current post? I think many. They happen in nearly all wars, with few exceptions from what I understand. That does not excuse it at all. The right step would be for Rummy to now go strictly back to Geneva, to hold our security forces to wholly new standards of conduct, and to invite monitoring groups to prove our newly enforced humanity. I would rather see that than his resignation, and I'm no fan of his.
I don't think it's all Rummy's fault. But occasionally the top guy has to take the axe. I think this situation is serious enough to warrant that. Perhaps it would be a PR move -- but we could certainly use some good PR at this point.
Does the outraged "arab world" even know who Rummy is, by in large? They might say "oh yeah, one of those old white guys I see on TV who is not Bush. Whatever." That's pretty much what I would say.
