And the buck stops ... with a private???

[Flashermac]

Military higher-ups get to the bottom of abuse scandals

 

By JOSEPH L. GALLOWAY

Knight Ridder Newspapers

 

28 Sep 2005

 

 

WASHINGTON - Well, they finally got to the bottom of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal this week. An Army court martial convicted Pfc. Lynndie England and sentenced her to three years in prison and a dishonorable discharge for holding that leash, pointing with scorn and other offenses.

 

They've gotten to the bottom, all right. With Pfc. England's conviction, that wraps up the cases against nine enlisted soldiers who starred in those terrible digital photos in late 2003.

 

So that's it, huh? Not exactly. We still haven't gotten to the top of this scandal, the Guantanamo problems and the questions that were raised last week by an Army captain from the 82nd Airborne Division who is troubled by, of all things, a conscience.

 

Capt. Ian Fishback, a West Point graduate, was a lieutenant in both Afghanistan and Iraq when he became troubled by what he was seeing: American soldiers beating Iraqi detainees until their arms and legs were broken. Death threats. Extreme forced physical exertion. Sleep deprivation. Exposure to the elements.

 

He began a 17-month journey, or attempted journey, up the chain of command, asking, then pleading for simple guidance on whether American troops in Iraq were bound by terms of the Geneva Conventions. He wrote a letter to the two top Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee, John Warner, R-Va., and John McCain, R-Ariz.

 

"This is a tragedy," he wrote. "I can remember, as a cadet at West Point, resolving to ensure that my men would never commit a dishonorable act; that I would protect them from that type of burden."

 

What did this honorable American officer ask that was so hard? "Give (our soldiers) a clear standard that is in accordance with the bedrock principles of our nation."

 

Capt. Fishback added: "Some argue that since our actions are not as horrifying as al-Qaeda's we should not be concerned. When did al-Qaeda become any type of standard by which we measure the morality of the United States?"

 

Nobody in his chain of command showed the slightest concern about what the captain reported and what he sought. Nobody showed any interest until Human Rights Watch revealed details of his case last week.

 

Then the Army got very interested. Orders went down to interrogate the captain and demand that he identify two sergeants who also witnessed some of the abuse. Once again, the powers-that-be were eager to get to the bottom of the issue. Find some enlisted men or non-coms and hang them out to dry.

 

Shame on them.

 

And unless the good senators are ready at last to step up to the plate and hold independent hearings on the question of how the Unites States treats prisoners or detainees who end up in American custody anywhere in the world, shame on them, too.

 

We've been treated to the spectacle of a Republican-controlled House and Senate abdicating their constitutional responsibility to conduct rigorous oversight of actions and failings of the executive branch of government. This has gone on for the four-plus years that George W. Bush has occupied the White House, and it looks as if we'll get more of the same for three more years and a bit.

 

There have been 17 separate investigations of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and other prisoner abuse scandals. All have gone straight to the bottom of every case. All have consistently claimed that no one higher up the chain of command, including the civilian leadership in the Pentagon, bears any responsibility for any of this.

 

Hogwash. BS. Nonsense.

 

If the lowest private fails, then others have failed in training, leading and directing that private. The chain runs from sergeant to lieutenant to captain to lieutenant colonel to colonel to one, two, three and four stars, on to the longest serving, most arrogant secretary of defense in our history, Donald H. Rumsfeld, and beyond him to the commander in chief, President Bush.

 

It's long past time for responsibility to begin flowing uphill in this administration. It's time for our leaders to take responsibility for what's being done in all our names and under our proud flag. It's time for Congress to do its job if the administration won't do its job.

 

The Teflon is wearing off this administration in a hurry. It's past time for an end to strutting, victory laps, crowing to the skies and boasting "Bring 'em on!" Now is the time to provide the leadership our troops deserve. Now is the time to state plainly and unequivocally that we are Americans, and we live by a rule of law that protects everyone, even the worst terrorist who ever fell into our hands. Maybe especially the worst terrorist who ever fell into our hands.

 

---

 

 

ABOUT THE WRITER

 

Joseph L. Galloway is the senior military correspondent for Knight Ridder Newspapers and co-author of the national best-seller "We Were Soldiers Once ... and Young." Readers may write to him at jgalloway@krwashington.com

[limbo]

Great article.

[Flashermac]

The Sunday Times October 02, 2005

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1806906,00.html

 

Andrew Sullivan: How America tiptoed into the torture chamber

 

Meet an American hero. He?s Army Captain Ian Fishback, a decorated graduate of West Point, and in training to become a member of the elite special forces.

 

He has served two combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is described by friends as a devout Christian who prays before every meal and carries a copy of the US constitution in his pocket. And while serving at Camp Mercury near the Syrian border in Iraq, he observed horrifying abuse of prisoners, in testimony that was released last week by Human Rights Watch.

 

He has testified to habitual beatings to the face and body before interrogation, the pouring of burning chemicals on prisoners? faces, routine shackling in positions that led to physical collapse, forced exercises that led prisoners to lose consciousness, and stacking prisoners in pyramids in the same mode as Abu Ghraib.

 

These abuses occurred before, during and after the Abu Ghraib scandal broke. Fishback testified that commanders directed and condoned the abuse. ?I would be told, ?These guys were IED (improvised explosive device) trigger men last week.? So we would f*** them up. F*** them up bad. ... But you gotta understand, this was the norm.?

 

Prisoners were apparently called ?PUCs?, for ?Persons Under Control?. Another sergeant testified: ?Everyone in camp knew if you wanted to work out your frustration you show up at the PUC tent. In a way it was sport. One day (another sergeant) shows up and tells a PUC to grab a pole. He told him to bend over and broke the guy?s leg with a mini-Louisville slugger, a metal bat. As long as no PUCs came up dead, it happened. We kept it to broken arms and legs.?

 

Fishback finally decided to take a stand when he saw Donald Rumsfeld testify to the Senate on television that the Iraq war was subject to the Geneva conventions. He went to his superiors and told them he believed that what was going on was a clear, continuing violation. They ignored him and told him his career would suffer if he persisted in his complaints.

 

But Fishback went all the way to the secretary of the army and Senate aides. Finally one man responded: Senator John McCain, another war hero, who endured five years of torture by the Vietcong.

 

Fishback?s letter to McCain is a poignant illustration of what has happened to America these past three years: ?Some argue that since our actions are not as horrifying as Al-Qaeda?s we should not be concerned . . . Others that clear standards will limit the president?s ability to wage the war on terror. Since clear standards only limit interrogation techniques, it is reasonable for me to assume that supporters of this argument desire to use coercion to acquire information from detainees. This is morally inconsistent with the constitution and justice in war. It is unacceptable.?

 

Of course it is unacceptable. But we have presidential memos dating from 2002 exempting the US military from the Geneva conventions in the war against Al-Qaeda and somehow those exemptions ?migrated? to the war in Iraq. It is now beyond dispute that the abuses were condoned, enforced and tolerated by commanders throughout the war zone.

 

We know, for example, that the general in charge of Guantanamo, where torture was formally permitted, was told to Guantanamo-ise Abu Ghraib in the early stages of the insurgency. The notion that the widespread abuse was the invention of a few ?bad apples? on the night shift in one prison is preposterous. Reports of inhumane treatment can now be found throughout Iraq and Afghanistan involving hundreds of prisoners, with 36 confirmed deaths in interrogation.

 

This summer Republican Senators McCain and Lindsey Graham have tried to pass legislation laying down clear guidelines for humane interrogation of prisoners. Behind the scenes Vice-President Dick Cheney has threatened to veto any such attempt to curtail presidential power in wartime. Alberto Gonzales, the man who helped craft the memos redefining torture to meaninglessness, is now attorney-general of the United States. The one sane, principled man who objected to the policy change, Colin Powell, got the boot.

 

Even now, while the administration insists that it doesn?t condone torture, its definition of what is permitted short of ?torture? is murky. In written answers to a senator?s inquiry, leaked last week to The Washington Post, a key official in the White House counsel?s office who helped craft the new policy, Timothy Flanigan, gave nonanswers to clear questions.

 

He was asked if ?water-boarding? was inhumane. ?Water-boarding? entails tying a prisoner to a wooden plank and immersing his head in water to the moment of drowning, saving him at the last second, and then repeating this terrifying process again and again. Flanigan replied that ?whether a particular interrogation technique is lawful depends on the facts and circumstances?. Without knowing these, ?it would be inappropriate for me to speculate about the legality of the techniques you describe?.

 

Suddenly you understand what has been going on. The Bush administration has abandoned the Geneva conventions for the war against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda on the grounds that they are not legitimate warriors as defined by Geneva. And Flanigan is nominated to be Gonzales?s deputy at the Justice Department. You can?t make this up.

 

In the US military, responsibility goes directly up the chain of command, even if the commanders are unaware of misconduct. But Fishback shows that they were fully aware and condoned it. US law, international treaties and military law have all been junked.

 

Last Thursday a judge finally ruled that the remaining photos and tapes from Abu Ghraib will be released, and Bush administration memos specifically related to torture will be made public. There will be appeals, but we will soon be reminded of what really went on: rape and murder.

 

One wonders when the American public will demand accountability for the abandonment of civilised warfare in their own military and by their own president, who is after all commander-in-chief and ultimately responsible.

 

Fishback is now sequestered at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, being interrogated by military officials. From all we know of Fishback he will not crack under pressure. He wrote something to McCain that still rings in my ears: ?If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. I would rather die fighting than give up even the smallest part of the idea that is ?America?.?

 

Alas, I fear a large part of that idea has already been abandoned ? by a president who swore an oath to uphold it.

[limbo]

Very interesting.

 

I wonder if a 'captain' can change the system, but stranger things have happened.

It'd be important now to keep this affair in the spotlights, than maybe there's a small chance something may stir up.

[..]

"This summer Republican Senators McCain and Lindsey Graham have tried to pass legislation laying down clear guidelines for humane interrogation of prisoners. Behind the scenes Vice-President Dick Cheney has threatened to veto any such attempt to curtail presidential power in wartime. Alberto Gonzales, the man who helped craft the memos redefining torture to meaninglessness, is now attorney-general of the United States.

 

I used to like and respect McCain and would have voted for him having given the chance. After he took the fucking Bush gave him in 2000 without fighting back, my support started to waiver. But I held out hope.

 

But after he sat through the Gonzeles confirmation hearings and did not raise a single peep about Gonzeles and his justification of the use of torture, I threw him out the window. Fuck you McCain. It's too little too late -- you have had your nose stuck so far up party-line ass that you forgot how to be a leader. And you Mr McCain, OF ALL PEOPLE, should understand why this is true!!!!!!!! I already knew the whole of the rest of the GOP are scumbags...why did you have you join them???

 

That said, his autobiography is a great book. Too bad he is not that man anymore.

 

Regards,

SD

[Flashermac]

See if this changes your mind!

 

BRAVO McCain! Three cheers for the senators!!!

 

______________________________________________________

 

Senate rebuffs Bush on torture

10/6/05

 

By Danielle Knight (AP)

 

The Senate overwhelmingly agreed late yesterday to set standards for treatment, interrogation, and detention of prisoners held by the U.S. military. In a strong break from the Bush administration, the measure passed 90 to 9, with 46 Republicans joining 43 Democrats and one independent in favor.

 

The measure, attached to a $440 billion defense-spending bill, was proposed in response to reports of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the U.S. naval facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The move was led by Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, who was tortured as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War and who would make interrogation techniques outlined in the Army Field Manual the standard for treatment of detainees in military custody. The provision would also forbid "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment of prisoners.

 

The White House has said President Bush would veto the defense-spending bill if the amendment were attached. Republicans opposing the amendment, including Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, argue that the measure would limit the president's ability to carry out the war on terrorism and that interrogation techniques should vary depending on the circumstances. The amendment faces strong opposition in the House.

 

In an impassioned speech on the Senate floor, McCain recalled his more than five years as a prisoner of war. The allegations of prisoner abuse, he said, were harming the U.S. image abroad, and the confusion about the prisoner-treatment rules results in abuses and could lead to mistreatment of captured U.S. troops.

 

"The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights," said McCain. "They don't deserve our sympathy. But this isn't about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies."

 

The emotional speech clearly moved many of his colleagues. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, voted in favor of the amendment. Before the August recess, Frist had pulled the defense authorization bill from the floor after White House officials said the president would veto the bill if it contained the amendment, and Vice President Cheney lobbied to defeat the measure.

 

More than 25 retired senior military officials, including Colin Powell, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, announced their support of the amendment on Wednesday. "It is now apparent that the abuse of prisoners in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and elsewhere took place in part because our men and women in uniform were given ambiguous instructions, which in some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what was allowed by the Army Field Manual," said their letter of support.

 

The military usually uses the Army Field Manual but veered from it at Guantanamo Bay, allegedly using techniques such as sleep deprivation. Administration officials confused matters, according to McCain and the retired officials, by declaring that U.S. personnel are not bound by long-standing prohibitions of cruel treatment under the Geneva Conventions when interrogating suspected terrorists who are non-U.S. citizens on foreign soil. As a result, there was one set of rules for interrogating prisoners of war, and there was another for "enemy combatants."

[..]

Flashermac said:

"The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights," said McCain. "They don't deserve our sympathy. But this isn't about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies."

He is saying all the right things, but why did he NOT do this when he had the chance a few years ago or even last year with the Gonzales thing? Even if he did not have the votes to make it pass. THAT is what leaders do.

 

Maybe he found his balls...or maybe he just has them when he knows he can win. If the later, that is not a leader, but a politician. We need less politicians and more leaders!

 

I may listen to him a bit, but it will take more than that to regain my trust, especially since he is a member of a party where I disagree with 95% of their social platform.

 

Cheers,

SD