More evidence that this is a witch Hunt...

[insein]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto..._on_go_ca_st_pe/announcement_text_1&printer=1

Text of Investigation Announcement

Fri May 7, 2:40 PM ET Add White House - AP Cabinet & State to My Yahoo!


By The Associated Press

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress on Friday that the U.S. military had "told everyone in the world" in January it was investigating alleged abuses of prisoners in Iraq (news - web sites).



Here are Rumfeld's remarks Friday followed by the full text of the announcement by the U.S. Central Command in Florida on Jan. 16:


"Now, with respect to when were we knowledgeable of this, the situation was this: Specialist Darby told the CID that he had information about abuses in the prison. I believe it was on the 13th or 14th of January. By the 15th or 16th, an investigation had been initiated. And the Central Command public affairs people went out and told the world; they told everyone in the world that there were allegations of abuse and they were being investigated." — Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in testimony Friday before the Senate Armed Forces Committee.


___


"Release Number: 04-01-43


"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


"DETAINEE TREATMENT INVESTIGATION BAGHDAD, Iraq An investigation has been initiated into reported incidents of detainee abuse at a Coalition Forces detention facility. The release of specific information concerning the incidents could hinder the investigation, which is in its early stages. The investigation will be conducted in a thorough and professional manner. The Coalition is committed to treating all persons under its control with dignity, respect and humanity. Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the Commanding General, has reiterated this requirement to all members of CJTF-7." News release, U.S. Central Command, Jan. 16, 2004.

Sounds like a responisble Secretary of Defense to me. Why is it only now becoming an outrage and not back then when he issued the investigation? Pictures. Nothing plays on people emotions like pictures and 24/7 coverage of said pictures. Why do you think we don't see any pictures of 9/11 anymore? the media is afraid people would remmeber that day and become sympathetic to the War on terror instead of Anti-war like they want.

 

[DKSuddeth]

It looks like the damage has already been done anyway.

arab reaction

The Arab reaction was similar to that which greeted President Bush's televised pledge on Wednesday to punish Americans who abused and killed Iraqi prisoners.

Many said the gesture was too little, too late.

Al Arabiya showed pictures of the alleged abuse next to shots of the Rumsfeld hearing, including one showing a female American soldier holding a leash around the neck of a naked Iraqi lying on the floor.

"The Americans are playing God and they don't want to be answerable to anybody. This is really shameful," said Jassem Ali Hussein, watching the broadcast in a restaurant in the Bahraini capital Manama.

"It (hearing) is not going to stop torture completely but the Americans are going to be more careful," he said.

Of the 47,000 respondents to a poll carried out on Al Jazeera's Web site alongside the hearing, 87.4 percent said the United States would be unable to improve its image tainted by the abuse scandal which has infuriated Arabs and Muslims.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
It looks like the damage has already been done anyway.

arab reaction

The Arab reaction was similar to that which greeted President Bush's televised pledge on Wednesday to punish Americans who abused and killed Iraqi prisoners.

Many said the gesture was too little, too late.

Al Arabiya showed pictures of the alleged abuse next to shots of the Rumsfeld hearing, including one showing a female American soldier holding a leash around the neck of a naked Iraqi lying on the floor.

"The Americans are playing God and they don't want to be answerable to anybody. This is really shameful," said Jassem Ali Hussein, watching the broadcast in a restaurant in the Bahraini capital Manama.

"It (hearing) is not going to stop torture completely but the Americans are going to be more careful," he said.

Of the 47,000 respondents to a poll carried out on Al Jazeera's Web site alongside the hearing, 87.4 percent said the United States would be unable to improve its image tainted by the abuse scandal which has infuriated Arabs and Muslims.

Yea that just goes to show you the type of propaganda war we're facing over there. When you show the images while rumsfield is speaking, i wonder what people will think. Thats like if an Arab official speaks about the misinterpretation of Islam and we show pictures of the Towers falling right beside his speech.

 

[DKSuddeth]

the 'propoganda war' wouldn't matter. Those would only have to have been seen once. remember, I said that thier's is a shame culture and that religion is what binds them together. One time viewing, even hearing about this was all it would take. Would we then condone secrecy and coverup of the abuse?

 

[acludem]

Having watched most of the hearings today on TV, I can tell you that Rumsfeld's comment about "telling the world" is a crock. He didn't tell the world. He told a few reporters some vague story. He didn't give a full disclosure of the allegations, he didn't inform congress or the President, and he did so to cover his own sorry ass.

The best questioning of Rumsfeld was done, IMHO, by John McCain, who jumped all over Rumsfeld for trying to let his underlings answer questions he should've know the answers to. The Senator from Rhode Island (his name escapes me right now) also hammered Rummy pretty well. It should be no surprise that most of the Republicans asked softball questions designed to let Rumsfeld argue his case.

The most troubling aspect of what Rumsfeld said today is the fact that we allow private contract companies to do our interrogations for us. Also, it appears that these privately contracted interrogators asked that prisoners be "softened up" before questioning. That statement came from a report from the General who performed the preliminary investigation.

This is America. We went to fight a war against terrorists and thugs, and now we have our own troops acting like thugs. These troops not only discredit themselves, they disgrace their country, and make it so much harder for the good and decent soldiers trying to their jobs all over the world.

acludem

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by acludem
Having watched most of the hearings today on TV, I can tell you that Rumsfeld's comment about "telling the world" is a crock. He didn't tell the world. He told a few reporters some vague story. He didn't give a full disclosure of the allegations, he didn't inform congress or the President, and he did so to cover his own sorry ass.

Stop being a liberal for a moment and be a realist. If you were in charge of half a million men and women, and 150,000 of them were off doing something, would you be able to track what was going on with each? C'mon be honest here, I am not setting you up for flames. About three years ago, I was in direct supervision of 65 Marines, and had indirect responsibility for numbers that ranged up to 200. In order to be fully informed, and not micromanage, Google Definition I had to rely heavily on subordinate leaders who reported to me. Please count the layers of command between the alleged abusers and the SECDEF. The CG CENTCOM is a General (4 of them Stars) and the press release was very appropriate. The SECDEF would not be briefed on every detail of every day. And unless the crystal ball was issued, no one knows how a JAG may grow. I'm sure someday a missing property investigation will turn up a black market operation. "Hey Ma, I mailed home a jeep."

Originally posted by acludem The best questioning of Rumsfeld was done, IMHO, by John McCain, who jumped all over Rumsfeld for trying to let his underlings answer questions he should've know the answers to. The Senator from Rhode Island (his name escapes me right now) also hammered Rummy pretty well. It should be no surprise that most of the Republicans asked softball questions designed to let Rumsfeld argue his case.[/b]

Item one: It's subordinate, not underling. The subordinate in question was a general officer with about 25 or so years of service to his country. To call him an underling is rude, crude, and socially insulting. Do you need a separate period of instruction on the general workings of the military promotion process? It's totally at odds with the ACLU or other social engineering wizards. It requires several factors of which Time Served, Time in Grade, Skill, Willpower, Teamwork, Results, Loyalty, Integrity, and the ability to operate under stress are only the beginning. Of course it's no surprise that most republicans allowed him to plead his case. Kind of like the 911 commission allowed some guy (his name escapes me right now) free publicity for his book. What amazed me was the Honorable Senator McCain, who knows firsthand what real abuses feel like, would be taken in so well. In his time in the Hanoi Hilton, a female pointing and giggling would've been a good day.

Originally posted by acludem The most troubling aspect of what Rumsfeld said today is the fact that we allow private contract companies to do our interrogations for us. Also, it appears that these privately contracted interrogators asked that prisoners be "softened up" before questioning. That statement came from a report from the General who performed the preliminary investigation.[/b]

I agree. As 'ist (sexist, right-ist, realist) as it sounds: A war zone is no place for women, children, or civilians. They get in the way and divert combat resources to protecting them.

Originally posted by acludem This is America. We went to fight a war against terrorists and thugs, and now we have SOME OF our own troops ALLEGEDLY acting like thugs. IF FOUND GUILTY BY A COURT-MARTIAL These troops WILL HAVE not only discreditED themselves, they WILL HAVE disgraceD their GOD, FAMILY, country, and THEMSELVES. THIS WILL make it so much harder for the good and decent soldiers trying to their jobs all over the world.

acludem [/B]

Please note that I modified what you ACTUALLY SAIDto reflect the facts. I understand your point, but other readers may not.

 

[acludem]

I think the allegedly can be removed for those soldiers shown in the photographs. Let's take your comments individually, first Rumsfeld is the SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. That means he is responsible for overseeing every unit of our armed forces. The allegations of abuse (many of them already proven) should have been fully disclosed in January, not dragged out of Rumsfeld after CBS got wind of them and ran a story on 60 Minutes II over three months later. Secondly, you can call them subordinates or underlings, the semantics don't matter. McCain correctly pointed out that the basic facts should be known to Rumsfeld without him having to ask a subordinate. As for your second comment about McCain, the fact that he was an abused POW should tell you why allegations of American soldiers doing to others what was done to him would be so deeply troubling to him. Next comment, I don't have a problem with civilians handling some aspects of military operations, but having them handle something as important as interrogating prisoners is a massive mistake. As for your modifications to my paragraph, I think they are garbage. Some soldiers HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPRIMANDED. That means the army believes they abused prisoners. Others are soon to stand trial and there will be more. You continually try to minimize this in order to protect President Bush. If you want more terrorist attacks, by all means, minimize it. It wasn't that big of a deal, they just stripped 'em naked and took some dirty pictures. Oh wait, being naked in front of another man is a very big no-no for Muslim men. Oh come on, they just tried to make them talk so we could get information. Oops, that's what the Viet Cong did to our POWs in Vietnam...I guess it's only okay if we do it. Just admite for one second that abuses occurred, that those who engaged in them have done themselves, their country, and their fellow soldiers a major disservice.

acludem

 

[insein]

Originally posted by acludem
I think the allegedly can be removed for those soldiers shown in the photographs. Let's take your comments individually, first Rumsfeld is the SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. That means he is responsible for overseeing every unit of our armed forces. The allegations of abuse (many of them already proven) should have been fully disclosed in January, not dragged out of Rumsfeld after CBS got wind of them and ran a story on 60 Minutes II over three months later. Secondly, you can call them subordinates or underlings, the semantics don't matter. McCain correctly pointed out that the basic facts should be known to Rumsfeld without him having to ask a subordinate. As for your second comment about McCain, the fact that he was an abused POW should tell you why allegations of American soldiers doing to others what was done to him would be so deeply troubling to him. Next comment, I don't have a problem with civilians handling some aspects of military operations, but having them handle something as important as interrogating prisoners is a massive mistake. As for your modifications to my paragraph, I think they are garbage. Some soldiers HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPRIMANDED. That means the army believes they abused prisoners. Others are soon to stand trial and there will be more. You continually try to minimize this in order to protect President Bush. If you want more terrorist attacks, by all means, minimize it. It wasn't that big of a deal, they just stripped 'em naked and took some dirty pictures. Oh wait, being naked in front of another man is a very big no-no for Muslim men. Oh come on, they just tried to make them talk so we could get information. Oops, that's what the Viet Cong did to our POWs in Vietnam...I guess it's only okay if we do it. Just admite for one second that abuses occurred, that those who engaged in them have done themselves, their country, and their fellow soldiers a major disservice.

acludem

I did admit it as well as condemned it. This is a terrible act that these soldiers committed. I merely pointed out that calling for Rumsfield's head his purely partisan politics. I don't have any facts in front of me but could you tell me if the 2 or 3 SOD's of the Vietnam era resigned or were even asked to resign because of those Atrocities? Were the SOD's from Korea and WW2 asked to resign for handling POWs in a manner unbefitting to a soldier?

The LMM and liberals in general are trying to play on everyone's emotional sense when the plaster these pictures over and over on the news. Yet they forbid to show the 9/11 towers on TV anymore. Utterly Transparent. Another blatant attempt to pin something to Bush.

 

[acludem]

I was primarily aiming my response at Pegwinn. Sorry for the confusion.

acludem

 

[insein]

Originally posted by acludem
I was primarily aiming my response at Pegwinn. Sorry for the confusion.

acludem

np. just wanted to clarify in case there was some.

 

[pegwinn]

I think the allegedly can be removed for those soldiers shown in the photographs. Not until the Court Martial returns a guilty verdict. For all I know 60 Minutes II is good with Photoshop. You, are applying guilt before trial. Didn't you learn anything from OJ Simpson?

Let's take your comments individually, first Rumsfeld is the SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. That means he is responsible for overseeing every unit of our armed forces. The allegations of abuse (many of them already proven) should have been fully disclosed in January, not dragged out of Rumsfeld after CBS got wind of them and ran a story on 60 Minutes II over three months later.

Correct on all counts except for the part about being fully disclosed. The investigation is ongoing if I understand what I read in the papers. It would be wrong to "disclose" something this heinous without all the facts being in. Another poster asked the question about previous SecDefs being asked to resign. I am attempting to educate here without resorting to undue sarcasm. Please take the time to read and understand the relationships between a theatre commander, a unified commander, the JCS, and the Service Secretary. I still aint heard anyone call for the firing or resignation of the SecArmy

Secondly, you can call them subordinates or underlings, the semantics don't matter. McCain correctly pointed out that the basic facts should be known to Rumsfeld without him having to ask a subordinate. As for your second comment about McCain, the fact that he was an abused POW should tell you why allegations of American soldiers doing to others what was done to him would be so deeply troubling to him.

The semantics do matter. Use a dictionary. Show some respect. "American soldiers doing to others what was done..." Huh? Which Iraqi was hung in a cage and not fed for days? Who was beaten? Which pet Iraqi celebrity did we pose with prisoners and broadcast over the airwaves? Assuming that every allegation is substantiated, there is still no evidence of actual torture. McCain should know better

Next comment, I don't have a problem with civilians handling some aspects of military operations, but having them handle something as important as interrogating prisoners is a massive mistake.

Agreed, and I said so before

As for your modifications to my paragraph, I think they are garbage. Some soldiers HAVE ALREADY BEEN REPRIMANDED.

A reprimand is not a guilty verdict. And, were the reprimands for actual abuse, or for allowing abuse, or for not knowing about the abuse? I missed the full story

That means the army believes they abused prisoners. Others are soon to stand trial and there will be more.

You continually try to minimize this in order to protect President Bush. If you want more terrorist attacks, by all means, minimize it. It wasn't that big of a deal, they just stripped 'em naked and took some dirty pictures. Oh wait, being naked in front of another man is a very big no-no for Muslim men. Oh come on, they just tried to make them talk so we could get information. Oops, that's what the Viet Cong did to our POWs in Vietnam...I guess it's only okay if we do it. Just admite for one second that abuses occurred, that those who engaged in them have done themselves, their country, and their fellow soldiers a major disservice.

The only part of your rant worth debating is your idea that anyone supports this. What we oppose is the witch hunt without even a pretense of a trial. Remember, you should praise god/allah/budda that I am not in charge. The body count on the other side would be higher and the cost levied for every American casualty would also be higher. This administration has shown admirable restraint. Say thank you on Sunday



acludem Phil

 

[Avatar4321]

CROWD: We have found a witch may we burn her?

BEDEVERE: How do you know she is a witch?

CROWD: She looks like one!

BEDEVERE: Bring her forward.

WOMAN: Im not a witch! Im not a witch!

BEDEVERE: But you are dressed like one.

WOMAN: They dressed me like this. And this isnt my nose its a false one.

VILLAGER #1: Well we did do the nose.

BEDEVERE: The nose?

VILLAGER #1: ...and the hat. But she is still a witch!

CROWD: YEAH! Burn her! burn her!

BEDEVERE: Did you dress her up like this?


CROWD: No! No! No! No! Yes Yes..a bit. She has got a wart!

BEDEVERE: What makes you think she is a witch?

VILLAGER #2: She turned me into newt!

BEDEVERE: A Newt?

VILLAGER #2: I got better..

CROWD: Burn already! Burn

BEDEVERE: Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.

CROWD: Are there? What are they? Tell us! Tell us!...

BEDEVERE: Tell me. What do you do with witches?

CROWD: Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...

BEDEVERE: And what do you burn apart from witches?

CROWD: More witches!

VILLAGER #3: Wood?

BEDEVERE: So why do witches burn?
Long silence.....

VILLAGER; Because they're made of wood?

BEDEVERE: Gooood, So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?

VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.

BEDEVERE: Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?

VILLAGER #1: Oh, yeah.

BEDEVERE: Does wood sink in water?

VILLAGER #2: No, No, it floats! It floats!

CROWD: The pond! Throw her into the pond!

BEDEVERE: What also floats in water?

RANDOM VILLAGERS: Bread...Apples....Very small rocks! Cider! Churches! Churches! Lead! Lead!

KING ARTHUR: A duck!

BEDEVERE: Exactly! So logically..

Villager #1: If she weighs the same as a duck...she's made of wood...

BEDEVERE: And therefore?

CROWD: A witch!

Compliments of Monty Python and the search for the Holy Grail.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
CROWD: We have found a witch may we burn her?

BEDEVERE: How do you know she is a witch?

CROWD: She looks like one!

BEDEVERE: Bring her forward.

WOMAN: Im not a witch! Im not a witch!

BEDEVERE: But you are dressed like one.

WOMAN: They dressed me like this. And this isnt my nose its a false one.

VILLAGER #1: Well we did do the nose.

BEDEVERE: The nose?

VILLAGER #1: ...and the hat. But she is still a witch!

CROWD: YEAH! Burn her! burn her!

BEDEVERE: Did you dress her up like this?


CROWD: No! No! No! No! Yes Yes..a bit. She has got a wart!

BEDEVERE: What makes you think she is a witch?

VILLAGER #2: She turned me into newt!

BEDEVERE: A Newt?

VILLAGER #2: I got better..

CROWD: Burn already! Burn

BEDEVERE: Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.

CROWD: Are there? What are they? Tell us! Tell us!...

BEDEVERE: Tell me. What do you do with witches?

CROWD: Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...

BEDEVERE: And what do you burn apart from witches?

CROWD: More witches!

VILLAGER #3: Wood?

BEDEVERE: So why do witches burn?
Long silence.....

VILLAGER; Because they're made of wood?

BEDEVERE: Gooood, So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?

VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.

BEDEVERE: Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?

VILLAGER #1: Oh, yeah.

BEDEVERE: Does wood sink in water?

VILLAGER #2: No, No, it floats! It floats!

CROWD: The pond! Throw her into the pond!

BEDEVERE: What also floats in water?

RANDOM VILLAGERS: Bread...Apples....Very small rocks! Cider! Churches! Churches! Lead! Lead!

KING ARTHUR: A duck!

BEDEVERE: Exactly! So logically..

Villager #1: If she weighs the same as a duck...she's made of wood...

BEDEVERE: And therefore?

CROWD: A witch!

Compliments of Monty Python and the search for the Holy Grail.

I love that show.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
CROWD: We have found a witch may we burn her?

BEDEVERE: How do you know she is a witch?

CROWD: She looks like one!

BEDEVERE: Bring her forward.

(snipped, scroll up and read his original post already. I hate people who quote a ba-zillion lines only to say "Hail Yeah")

Compliments of Monty Python and the search for the Holy Grail.

Hail Yeah!!!!

 

[acludem]

I guess the new evidence that has come out in the last day or so as well as new photos showing even WORSE abuse doesn't convince you? You are still so blinded by your love of President Bush you still don't see how wrong this is? How many problems this will cause our good and decent men and women in uniform? How much this hurts the reputation of the U.S. around the world? None of that matters...just another liberal witchunt.

acludem

 

[insein]

Ummm yea i am aware aclu as i have stated since day one of this.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5963&highlight=abuse

This is indeed awful for the troops that are doing alot of good over there.

What i am merely stating is that by calling for Secretary of Defense's head before the investigation is completedly based on a few pictures and allegations is partisan politics at its worst. I am outraged just like every other American should be at these crimes. But i also see what the Dems are up to in Washington and im calling them on it.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by acludem
I guess the new evidence that has come out in the last day or so as well as new photos showing even WORSE abuse doesn't convince you? You are still so blinded by your love of President Bush you still don't see how wrong this is? How many problems this will cause our good and decent men and women in uniform? How much this hurts the reputation of the U.S. around the world? None of that matters...just another liberal witchunt.

acludem

WHO you talking to?
IF it's me, then pls say so. That way IF a nuclear flame is required there are no friendly fire casualties.

BTW, I just got home from work, haven't seen the news yet.