Rumsfeld is Right.

He stated earlier today that the media should not be given credit for breaking the story. I didn't believe it but I checked and he was right. CentCom released the investigation and the media never reported it. They would rather report Janet and Michael Jackson 24/7.

What the media reported were pictures....which is all they can understand...they even held back for a couple of weeks at the request of Centcom.

Which leads me to this unpopular point I feel I must make.

Now, honestly....and everyone here can flame me for this....Rumsfeld is not at fault here. He is the Sec of Def and his job is to run a war and win a war. Every war that we engage in produces atrocities...and anyone who thinks a Kery presidency would end the atrocities is naive in my opinion. We torture people in every conflict...the difference here is that we had photos to go along with it. If there were no photos, would the media have reported the investigation? Nope.

That is why, once again, I have to reiterate that the Dems that voted for this war are just as much to blame. They were the gutless wonders who gave the green light to this escapade.

It's really easy to just blame Rumsfeld, and he certainly should get blamed, but in all honesty..our spineless, corrupt "leadership" gave Bush a blank check to run this war because they are all gutless fucking COWARDS who were trying to do what was popular at the time.

Well, a blank check is what we got.

Ya happy now, Lieberman, Kerry, Hillary, etc. etc.?


*note that I am still voting for Kerry over Bush, but I am holding my nose to do it*

Whatta fuck-up that was.

I guess Janet's tit distracted us:shrug:

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/01/20/sprj.nirq.abuse/

Sources have revealed new details from the Army's criminal investigation into reports of abuse of Iraqi detainees, including the location of the suspected crimes and evidence that is being sought.

U.S. soldiers reportedly posed for photographs with partially unclothed Iraqi prisoners, a Pentagon official told CNN on Tuesday.

A second source confirmed that the Army's Criminal Investigation Division has focused on these pictures, which may depict male and female soldiers.
...
In addition, a senior Pentagon official said the investigation is focused on Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, which had been notorious for torture of Iraqis during the regime of captured Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

So CNN did pick up the original story, and talked to the Pentagon. Reading the story, it sounds less serious than it was - 'partially clothed' - 'not widespread' - 'one case is one too many'.

Did we all ingore it? Did we want to believe this was an isolated case of just photographing a prisoner naked? Quite possibly. Seeing really has been believing in this case.

...until the photos were circulating. Admittedly, the impact of the story is MUCH more devastating when accompanied by photos, but I suspect you're right-- this would have been a sidebar note at best-- as have many similar stories since the beginning of the Cold War.

the same. They all care about one thing and one thing only. Staying in office.

if it was after January then Rummy stinks, cuz no changes were made in spite of the "investigation"

Any body heard a date for the photos?

The Taguba report according to the New Yorker was completed in late February. (NOT meant for public release)

I'll keep saying it without a PICTURE the media has no story. No picture of the other crimes of the BushCO cabal, no story. (Hey this is almost worse than Laci Peterson, now if they have the cute pregnant Iraq being raped and murdered it can trump Michael Jackson)

Pathetic, but you're right, I heard that too. He was right. Of course, he's still scum because he doesn't care what the soldiers do to win.

Four more years for the Gutless wonders! Oh, why, bother. I agree.

Too many on the Left are once again do their typical joyous dance of Self-Righteousness and are once again missing the larger issue. The Military had responded properly to this. No one could read the report and argue that there is some kind of cover-up in effect. And yes, the investigation was announced to the press back in January and we completely missed it (thanks to the press burying the damn thing).

However, Rumsfeld is the one who ultimately deserves to have his feet held to the fire for a number of reasons.

First and foremost, the buck ultimately stops with him. This is not an isolated incident. The abuses in the prison are long-standing, severe and relatively widespread. And this leads me to my second point that Rumsfeld doesn't seem to give a damn. It seems that I've read more of the report than he has and its taken a complete meltdown to get him involved in this. With such a widespread problem that goes right to the heart of our credibility, the SecDef needs to be directly involved and send a message. His response has been a combination of panic and obstinance. Which leads me to the final point that this ties to his entire management style. The Army hates him because he is distant and arrogant. His reponse to this has been distant and arrogant. His response to war planners who pleaded for troops was distant and arrogant. It's a pattern on every level. And he has to answer.

and he must answer for the crimes...

But there are a lot of people here who would like to just blame it all on him and not take a look at the bigger picture and that's what I am addressing with this post.

...but that doesn't make Rumsfeld right. He is the architect of a plan to circumvent international law, the Conventions and the UCMJ.

America's political institutions have been irrevocably damaged by election 2000, Patriot Act, the 911 conspiracy, and the fraudulent war. The press has totally abdicated its constitutional function along with the legislature.

Nevertheless, Rumsfeld is personally responsible for what happened in Abu Ghraib and other camps, along with the Chimp, Myers and the undersecretaries.

...a systemic vacuum (and a line of competing authority) was caused deliberately by civilian leadership and intel personnel abandoning traditional command and control and the UCMJ. It was premeditated to get around traditional military resistence to breakdown in discipline. By having a divided chain of command dominated by intelligence, CIA and civilian contractors, an environment was intentionally created where torture, psychological and physical could take place. "Breaking the detainees." Such a policy needed unaccountability caused by the legal vacuum of civilian intervention in military functions.

Rumsfeld admitted the key policy evidence, that he linked prisoner/detainee maintenance functions under the Conventions with interrogation requirements. This is civilian experimentation on a political level. He called it "lessons learned" from Gitmo, another operation which regularly violated the Conventions.

These soldiers were following the example, roadsigns and orders of their superiors. The evil side of human nature will manifest itself given the right circumstances, such as abandonment of the Conventions by America's top political leadership and having civilian spooks not subject to the UCMJ controlling detainee camps.

How does a corporatist avoid liability? He hires independent contractors.

any less despicable and evil. Or murderous.

This country is only upset that there are pictures of u.s. citizens doing what we pretend that we don't.

kudos

...is emblematic of fascism and dictatorship. So is an illegal war and the Rheinhard Heydrich tactics that got us there. That's just my political opinion based on my studies of history and political science.

The problem with the pictures is that they are undeniable legal evidence. Even the patriotic propaganda and disinformation this country has been swimming in since 911 can't conceal the truth now.

I don't see much difference between Gitmo and Abu Ghraid. But that's just my professional evaluation as a former officer with some training in these matters. We here at DU along with a few NGOs were voices in the wilderness crying out about Gitmo. The military JAG defense counsel were fired for Christ's sake!

Once Hitler convinced Germany not to pay attention to Dachau, the rest was a cinch.

To a point I agree with you. Without the pictures,, an accusation of mishandling prisoners could seem like just someone else whining. BUT, when this soldier reported this to his superior and gave him the pictures, why didn't that superior send it up the command chain? He would have had to be brain dead not to realize the disaster this would cause EVERYWHERE!

I was a senior manager in the business world for a lot of years, and I can't even imagine any of my employees not turning to me in a panic! I also must say, if they hadn't, and a problem caused this much trouble for my company, I WOULD HAVE BEEN FIRED!

Had the photos not been released to the media would we have ever heard any more about this? Or would we have been told that the charges had been unfounded after a thorough investigation? And that would have been the end of that.

Don

OOOO Donny's right and us lefties are hyperventilating over here... Fuck the pictures, fuck this incident.... Let's look at the big Picture shall we. Why was a er Business Consultant (Karpinski) in charge of 4 prisons and the folks who ran them when she had no previous experience running Prisons? Why were Civilian Contractors allowed to give orders to our Military Soldiers. Why were Gitmo rules allowed to be applied to Iraq Prisoners? Why is there such a shortage of trained agents in Iraq to ferret out dangerous prisoners and non-dangerous prisoners. I could on with several more whys here because there's just so much that's fucked up about Iraq and especially this scandal.

You can investigate abuse all you want but why not investigate the folks who set up the situation to allow said abuse? No....Me-thinks that Rummy and Gang and knee deep in this shit and anyone who is defending this incompetent bastard just ain't seeing the big picture.

It is about the US image abroad, especially in the Arab world. Rumsfeld not resigning equals a "in your face".

Besides: he took responsibility. What is responsibility without a consequence? nothing .
Who wants an irresponsible SecDef?

Big Pic folks...who's ultimately responsible for putting the players in the game?