Rumsfeld okayed abuses says former US army general

[cal04]

Outgoing U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorised the mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, the prison's former U.S. commander said in an interview on Saturday.

Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski told Spain's El Pais newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation.

Karpinski, who ran the prison until early 2004, said she saw a memorandum signed by Rumsfeld detailing the use of harsh interrogation methods.

"The handwritten signature was above his printed name and in the same handwriting in the margin was written: "Make sure this is accomplished"," she told Saturday's El Pais.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L25726413.htm

[gratuitous]

1. Chip, chip, chip, chip

How curious that this information finally starts coming out. I wonder if the permanent Republican majority will get behind the effort to find out why the Bush administration set out to re-create the regime of the most notorious dictator of the 20th century?

[IndianaGreen]

2. Don't forget the role played by Attorney General Gonzales

in providing legal cover for torture, a practice which he still defends.

The crimes go all the way to the Oval Office!

[Lexingtonian]

3. funny how

ths sort of stuff comes out after an election, and never before. The heroism in the upper ranks of the military in this war takes on very curious forms.

[davekriss]

20. Further...

...it comes out after the Military Commission Act of 2006, passed before the election, which essentially pardons Rummy et al. of criminal consequences for initiating overt torture in our names, in violation of the Geneva Convention, and in violation of global humanity.

[MADem]

28. Upper ranks??? Karpinski was a junior general officer, low woman on the totem pole

who got swiftboated the minute she tried to speak out. But she was speaking out WELL BEFORE the election--years before, in fact. See??? http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0502-03.htm

If you take issue with "stuff" that comes out AFTER an election, look to the media, not to Janice Karpinski. That poor woman was a hotel executive whose skillset, per the reserves, translated to running prisons. She was shoved into a job where there was no need to make sure there was a goddamned chocolate on the pillow and no turn down service either. She had a shitload of responsibility, but NO authority. It was a recipe for failure and not of HER making.

But of course, that doesn't fit the paradigm.

Way too easy to shit on the military, even those who tried to get the word out, I guess...

[democrank]

30. I watched a Karpinski interview on Democracy Now

a few months ago. Karpinski said there were rooms at Abu Ghraib that she wasn`t allowed to enter. She seemed to not be certain of the identities of the Masked Marvels working for the U.S. government.

[MADem]

51. Yep, responsibility with NO authority. Total recipe for disaster. NT

[Big_Mike]

55. Excuse me, but I call bullshit

There is no way anybody in the military will limit where a General Officer can go. It just doesn't happen, particularly when the General Officer concerned commands the unit and the facility being inspected. If she is so weak that she buys off on them disallowing her to see something, it speaks volumes about her non-suitability for command.

This is simply the case of someone being promoted WAY above her abilities, and whom has stridently tried to cover her ass since then. I read MG Taguba's report. Further, before I retired from the Army, I worked in his unit. I trust his word implicitly. I have seen the reports about the "Command Climate" she generated, the idiots she put in charge and failed to remove upon their proving their inabilities, and believe she should be in jail along with little Miss England.

I believe we will come across the smoking gun that details exactly Rummy's idiocies. She is just not the vehicle to provide it.

**Edited to correct grammar.**

[LeahMira]

58. Better late than never...

I wonder what sorts of roadblocks and threats these military folks were dealing with.

Recall the bad old days of COINTELPRO when the FBIs and law enforcement generally were the bad guys. There's nothing so seriously low-down and foul that I'd put past the Bush crew. Hopefully, now that there's a glimmer of hope and a hope of some protection for themselves and their families, let's just be glad that the military is speaking out.

When they do the right thing, encourage it!

[AIJ Alom]

4. If they can now admit to waterboarding and defend it as a

necessary technique. Then Abu Ghraib is their brain child as well.

[HereSince1628]

5. Is Karpinski hoping that turning evidence will rehabilitate her?

What's in this for her?

[IndianaGreen]

8. Karpinski did not have command responsibility for the part of the prison

where torture and abuses took place. She was scapegoated to protect the brass and the Pentagon.

Please become familiar with the case against Rumsfeld and others that I posted elsewhere on this thread.

[FredStembottom]

9. She was sent out to have a cigarette a lot.............

or something along those lines. Then the torture would commence in the secret-y part of the prison.

You have to wonder if she wasn't set up for the fall all along?

[sfwriter]

43. She wasn't there at all...

She had responsibility for several sites. This happened after they relieved her of supervision at Abu Gharib.

She was uber-scape-goated.

[HereSince1628]

10. Sorry, I don't follow your posts closely enough. Should I ask permission from now on?

I think it remains fair to ask what she hopes she gets out of this. If this thing ever gets to a trial her motivation will be questioned.

[nealmhughes]

14. She is doing an old fashioned "public penance" and a prolonged mea culpa.

She is attempting, in this day and age, something strange: to regain her honor.

[Katzenjammer]

19. "her motivation will be questioned"

At this point, her only possible (overt) motivation will be to get the truth out. Her career is over. She'll retire as a colonel rather than a major general. If she's lucky. I don't know what the difference in monthly retirement pay is between those two ranks, but it's more than a dollar ninety-eight. So when they scapegoated her, they really did a number on her.

She got wedged into a very common situation among intel and specops units--the military has admin responsibility, and they "front" what goes on, but it's some plain-wrapper from CIA or somewhere that actually has operational control. If the military commander objects to being the Designated Goat, their career goes into the crapper and they get reassigned to checking Eskimos in and out of igloos til they throw in their papers.

[jmowreader]

17. A chance to repay the Chain of Command for all it did to her

Janis Karpinski basically has no career left in the Army. In today's Zero Defects Army, either a demotion--ESPECIALLY for an officer!--or a general officer letter of reprimand in your Official Military Personnel File is the kiss of death for your career. Karpinski has both.

If she hadn't received either one, she's still got "commander of 800th Military Police Brigade during the Abu Ghraib scandal" hanging over her head.

Given that, she's got something on her side: the ability to take down a LOT of the chain of command above her. I figure the idea to torture confessions out of Iraqi prisoners came from either Bush or Cheney, was handed to the troops by Rumsfeld, and was "legitimized" by Gonzalez. (Legitimized in quotes because you can't make such a blatantly illegal act legitimate no matter what you do.) If Karpinski has started to go after the administration, good for her.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. Karpinksi is one of the few

that has told the truth about what she knew and she's paid the price for her honesty.

[stepnw1f]

53. Who Cares... The Truth is Coming Out

now we can move forward because of her, regardless of her motivations.

[IndianaGreen]

6. Here is the complaint filed against Rumsfeld and others in Germany

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/GermanCase2006/germancase.asp

BACKGROUND BRIEF ON
THE CASE AGAINST RUMSFELD, GONZALES AND OTHERS
FILED IN GERMANY ON NOVEMBER 14, 2006

The November 14, 2006, criminal complaint is a request for the German Federal Prosecutor to open an investigation and, ultimately, a criminal prosecution that will look into the responsibility of high-ranking U.S. officials for authorizing war crimes in the context of the so-called “War on Terror.” The complaint is brought on behalf of 12 torture victims – 11 Iraqi citizens who were held at Abu Ghraib prison and one Guantánamo detainee – and is being filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Republican Attorneys' Association (RAV) and others, all represented by Berlin Attorney Wolfgang Kaleck. The complaint is related to a 2004 complaint that was dismissed, but the new complaint is filed with much new evidence, new defendants and plaintiffs, a new German Federal Prosecutor and, most important, under new circumstances that include the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense and the passage of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 in the U.S. granting officials retroactive immunity from prosecution for war crimes.

Executive Summary of the Complaint’s Allegations:

From Donald Rumsfeld on down, the political and military leaders in charge of ordering, allowing and implementing abusive interrogation techniques in the context of the “War on Terror” since September 11, 2001, must be investigated and held accountable. The complaint alleges that American military and civilian high-ranking officials named as defendants in the case have committed war crimes against detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and in the U.S.-controlled Guantánamo Bay prison camp.

The complaint alleges that the defendants “ordered” war crimes, “aided or abetted” war crimes, or “failed, as civilian superiors or military commanders, to prevent their commission by subordinates, or to punish their subordinates,” actions that are explicitly criminalized by German law. The U.S. administration has treated hundreds if not thousands of detainees in a coercive manner, in accordance with “harsh interrogation techniques” ordered by Secretary Rumsfeld himself that legally constitute torture and/or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, in blatant violation of the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the 1984 Convention Against Torture and the 1977 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – to all of which the United States is a party. Under international humanitarian treaty and customary law, and as re-stated in German law, these acts of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment constitute war crimes.

The U.S. torture program that resulted in war crimes was aided and abetted by the government lawyers also named in this case: former Chief White House Counsel (and current Attorney General) Alberto R. Gonzales, former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, and General Counsel of the Department of Defense William James Haynes, II. While some of them claim to merely have given legal opinions, those opinions were false or clearly erroneous and given in a context where it was known and foreseeable to these lawyers that torture would be the result. Not only was torture foreseeable, but this legal advice was given to facilitate and aid and abet torture as well as to attempt to immunize those who tortured. Without these opinions, the torture program could not have occurred. The infamous “Torture Memo” dated August 1, 2002, is the key document that redefined torture so narrowly that such classic and age old torture techniques as water-boarding were authorized to be employed and were employed by U.S. officials against detainees.

[Cameron27]

38. Thanks for that.

I saw Karpinski in an interview and the woman was stonewalled and lied to. Until there's evidence to show otherwise, I'm not ready to include her in with these bums.

[SusanaMontana41]

7. To the Hague!

My fondest wish for Cheney, Rummy, Gonzo and Bush is that they live long lives and die in jail.

[maseman]

11. Folks...this is just the beginning

We haven't seen anything yet. Wait until the Dems are actually in Congress. The shizzle will really hit the fan. The implosion continues. b

[spotbird]

23. Won't happen

the Democrats wouldn't want to look vindictive.

[ldf]

45. that's what i'm afraid of, too.

the democrats will refuse to grow a spine.

and if nothing is done to address the wrongs done this country, it will be entirely at the democrats feet.

if americans are told the truth, they too will want JUSTICE, not revenge.

the fact that the justice they deserve, and revenge that we want for the shock and aweing of THIS country, while they brazenly pissed on the constitution, amounts to six of one and half a dozen of the other, works for me.

i can live with that.

[maseman]

52. I don't think they will have to look vindictive

My theory is because the depth of the right-wing corruption from the Shrub on down throughout both houses of congress, they won't need to dig much. Things will start cropping up on their own and will easily be uncovered.

[NVMojo]

12. this man is worse than sick in the head ...at this point, torture has gained

us nothing but risk. This must be a perverted personal issue but then look at what aspartame has done and how Rumsfeld has benefited.

[BuyingThyme]

37. The reason they torture

has to do with their need to build a loyal following.

[greiner3]

13. They are just going to hang him out to dry;

Follow the money may not be apt, however I remember in both the book and the movie it was a tag line and something like that may work this time also. (All the President's Men) Then and now!

[EFerrari]

29. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

[LynnTheDem]

15. "mistreatment".

If Iraqis did that to OUR citizens, would we call it "mistreatment"?

Or would we call it what it was and is.

TORTURE.

[Golden Raisin]

34. Exactly.

I've always felt that the negation of & refusal to adhere to the Geneva Rules by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzales is a terrible double-edged sword that could be used against us. It is an open invitation to whatever enemies capture any of our brave troops to torture them. And if, God forbid, that happens, I can just hear the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, Limbaugh (let alone members of the actual Bush junta) screaming about how our boys/girls are being tortured by the "evil-doers". Well, evil works both ways boys. It was a very dark day for our Republic when Congress didn't rise up en masse against Bush & Co. when this whole Abu Ghraib story broke. There's SO much to hate about this war and era of American History but the fact that Bush made us a nation of torturers is one that really gets my goat. And if they want to bring Democracy to Iraq and the Middle East, you don't accomplish that by allowing Abu Ghraibs to exist.

[DemonFighterLives]

16. Mission Accomplished there Rummy

Now off to the Hague with your nasty ass.
:dem:

[ClintonTyree]

18. I smell a Medal of Freedom award coming up!

That's been the Bush White House's MO, so far, anyway. Fuck up beyond the pale and get awarded a Medal of Freedom. :puke:

Another nail in the coffin of the Bush White House. :grr:

[spotbird]

24. You've got it. nt

[JudyM]

42. ... and one pardon not far behind... n/t

[CueST]

22. .

Worst. Secretary of Defense. EVER...

[spotbird]

25. Without a copy of the letter

they'll just Swift Boat Karpinski. It's very difficult to believe that the letter will ever see the light of day again.

[Disturbed]

26. Congress has known about this for well over two years.

Further Evidence Rumsfeld Implicated in War Crimes

Please read this important post by Marty Lederman, Army Confirms: Rumsfeld Authorized Criminal Conduct.

Here's a key section, but there's more:

The Army's charges against Jordan reflect the view, undoubtedly correct, that the use of forced nudity or intimidation with dogs against detainees subject to military control constitutes cruelty and maltreatment that Article 93 makes criminal. It doesn't matter whether they are or are not "torture," as such; nor does it matter whether the armed forces should be permitted to use such interrogation techniques: As things currently stand, they are unlawful, as even the Army now acknowledges.

But then how can we account for the actions of the Secretary of Defense and his close aides?

On November 27, 2002, Pentagon General Counsel William Haynes, following discussions with Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz, General Myers, and Doug Feith, informed the Secretary of Defense that forced nudity and the use of the fear of dogs to induce stress were lawful techniques, and he recommended that they be approved for use at Guantanamo.
(The lists of techniques to which Haynes was referring can be found in this memorandum.) On December 2, 2002, Secretary Rumsfeld approved those techniques for use at Guantanamo -- and subsequently those techniques were used on detainee Mohammed al-Qahtani.

In other words, the Secretary of Defense authorized criminal conduct.

Today's Army charge under UCMJ Article 93 against Lt. Col. Jordan -- for conduct that the SecDef actually authorized as to some detainees -- demonstrates that Rumsfeld approved of, and encouraged, violations of the criminal law.

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2006/04/further_evidence_rumsfeld_implicated_in_war_crimes.html

[Disturbed]

27. There is no doubt t hat Rumsfailed is a War Criminal.

[Black Adder]

33. Ah yes, Reichsführer Rumsfeld inspects the camps..

[demgurl]

39. That is Janis in the picture. nt

[hijinx87]

31. if they can prove that rumsfeld authorized the abuse . . . .

how far away can * have been from this?

this is a much bigger deal than it may appear.

[MAX 1]

32. WHAT HAVE WE BECOME . . .

~ WHEN OUR LEADERS ARE WAR CRIMINALS?

~ WHEN MEMBERS OF OUR GOVERNMENT ENDORSE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY?

~ WHEN SECTIONS OF OUR SOCIETY APPLAUD CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY?

WE HAVE BECOME WHAT WE LOATHED 60 YEARS AGO,
WHAT WE FOUGHT TO PROTECT THE WORLD FROM,
SO THAT IT MAY NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN?

[PSPS]

44. But we dare not pursue impeachment, say many at DU

But we dare not pursue impeachment, say many at DU. I strongly disagree and feel that, without punuishing these bumbs, this country stands for nothing I believe in.

But I guess it's "bad form" or "bad policy" to punish war criminals, at least according to many at DU as well as those "liberals" covering for bush, like Ed Shultz.

[Mind_your_head]

49. This is a 'very popular' board that attracts a lot of intelligent ppl....

from a broad spectrum of economic strata. Of course this board is 'watched'. Of course this board is infiltrated by by ppl who are pushing a 'certain message' (don't impeach, for example....?).

THAT is what you are seeing, imo, when you see posters here saying "don't impeach" because it's "bad form" or "bad policy". :hide:

Peace,
M_Y_H

[NastyRiffraff]

35. Karpinski may have been in fear of her life

aka being "disappeared." But now, with Rummy fired, she could feel safe. Rummy was/is a thug; I wouldn't put anything past him. And I do mean anything.

Even now, she shouldn't fly in small planes. There's the German indictment coming up.

[Rex]

36. The BFEE loves to say 'do as I say'.

Not as I do. Rummy left and everyone is probably breathing a sigh of relief. Now off to the Hague! Take Kissinger with you!

[sakabatou]

40. If the evidence comes forth

May Rumsfeld be treated to a military tribunal or the Hauge... and I'll hope he gets a harsh sentence.

[cal04]

41. Translation of her interview

posted here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2986440&mesg_id=2986440

[Imagevision]

46. Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski was a scapegoat for Rumsfeld!!

and the high brass...

[Selteri]

47. Not surprised at all

Only surprised it took this long to come out.

[dailykoff]

48. Rummy's not the boss.

He's a sociopath like all of Junior's playmates, but it's Junior's football.

[Dumak]

50. Where do we go from here?

It's a scary thing that such a powerful military can come under the control of sociopaths. We need laws that can put a check on this sort of military adventurism. Perhaps a bi-partisan committee that is required to agree 100% to initiate any military offensive, with 90% congressional approval required within one week. We really need to do something fairly radical to help put the rest of the world at ease. The Germans banned the Nazi party, but simply banning the Republican party would not be enough - the same people will come back under a different guise. The propaganda machinery is still in place. Maybe it's time for some changes to the constitution. The status quo is just not acceptable.

[Drops_not_Dope]

54. Truthout

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/082405Z.shtml

Wednesday 24 August 2005

[NV1962]

56. Thanks!

It's obviously been awhile since I read it, and have lost track of it. Thanks again for the pointer!

[Jacobin]

57. Of course he did. We all knew it

He was desperate to find some evidence of those phantom WMDs