DeadCanDance
Senior Member
- May 29, 2007
- 1,414
- 127
- 48
What's to be surprised about?
One, Rumsfeld viewing pictures the night before testifying that he did not know the extent of the abuse are not contradictory. That he viewed pictures is indicative of only the fact that he viewed pictures.
If I was Commanding General and had something like this happen on MY watch, you're damned right I'd have the investigation corroborated. Tagabu's comment on THAT appears to be nothing but over-sensitivity to me.
From the article...Rummy didn't see the photos till the night before, but he had been informed of the graphic nature of the pictures months before:
Taguba also knew that senior officials in Rumsfeld’s office and elsewhere in the Pentagon had been given a graphic account of the pictures from Abu Ghraib, and told of their potential strategic significance, within days of the first complaint. On January 13, 2004, a military policeman named Joseph Darby gave the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division (C.I.D.) a CD full of images of abuse. Two days later, General Craddock and Vice-Admiral Timothy Keating, the director of the Joint Staff of the J.C.S., were e-mailed a summary of the abuses depicted on the CD. It said that approximately ten soldiers were shown, involved in acts that included:
"Having male detainees pose nude while female guards pointed at their genitals; having female detainees exposing themselves to the guards; having detainees perform indecent acts with each other; and guards physically assaulting detainees by beating and dragging them with choker chains.
Taguba said, “You didn’t need to ‘see’ anything—just take the secure e-mail traffic at face value.”