"There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes."

[MinM]

attytood: "There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes."

That quote in the headline doesn't come from Michael Moore or some commenter on Democratic Underground or Daily Kos.

It comes from a retired major general of the U.S. Army, Antonio Taguba (top). It was Taguba, you may recall, that President Bush asked to investigate the original claims of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib back in 2004.

His comment is in the preface to this report:

WASHINGTON - A Cambridge-based human rights organization said it has found medical evidence supporting the claims of 11 former detainees who were allegedly tortured while in American custody between 2001 and 2004, in what a former top US military investigator said amounts to evidence of war crimes...
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/There_is_no_longer_any_doubt_as_to_whether_the_current_administration_has_committed_war_crimes.html

[ingac70]

1. K&R!

Bookmarked too!

[Radical Activist]

2. We knew that after shock & awe.

How is a military strategy that deliberately targets civilians not a war crime?

[rebel with a cause]

3. The comments after this article are very telling.

Defending torture because it supposedly has gone on thoughout our history. Well golly, I guess that makes it alright. I mean some of our ancestors came from Europe and took this country from the American Indian while torturing, raping and killing them; so it is alright for us to take Iraq from the Iraqis and treat them the same. We brought people from Africa to use as slaves, so I guess it would be okay for us to start using another country's people for the same purpose. So what if we torture prisoners who we give no rights to and who are not accused of crimes or have been serving in any army. I am sure we did it sometime in the past, so that makes it alright for us to do now. So what that no president has been recorded okaying such behavior, our resident did it and that makes it okay. :sarcasm: :grr:

[chill_wind]

4. "The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account." CNN story.

WASHINGTON (CNN) --
Former terrorist suspects detained by the United States were tortured, according to medical examinations detailed in a report released Wednesday by a human rights group.

updated 3 hours, 6 minutes ago


The Massachusetts-based Physicians for Human Rights reached that conclusion after two-day clinical evaluations of 11 former detainees, who had been held at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and in Afghanistan.

The detainees were never charged with crimes.

"We found clear physical and psychological evidence of torture and abuse, often causing lasting suffering," said Dr. Allen Keller, a medical evaluator for the study.

In a 121-page report, the doctors' group said that it uncovered medical evidence of torture, including beatings, electric shock, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation, sodomy and scores of other abuses.

The report is prefaced by retired U.S. Major Gen. Antonio Taguba, who led the Army's investigation into the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in 2003.


"There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes," Taguba says. "The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/18/gitmo.detainees/?iref=mpstoryview

[Phred42]

5. K & R

[chill_wind]

6. It is hitting: WAPO-- Special to washington.post 1 hr ago (Dan Froomkin) General - "WH War Crimes"

General Accuses WH of War Crimes

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Wednesday, June 18, 2008; 12:44 PM

The two-star general who led an Army investigation into the horrific detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib has accused the Bush administration of war crimes and is calling for accountability.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/18/BL2008061801546.html?hpid=opinionsbox1



UPI reporting:
Report: Detainees tortured in U.S. custody

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/18/UPI_NewsTrack_TopNews/UPI-32041213791591/

[Larkspur]

7. But can it be proved in a court of law?

Is there enough evidence to convict the war criminals? Or is it just circumstantial evidence?

I want Bush, Cheney. Rumsfeld, etc tried AND convicted of war crimes. But we need real evidence that they ordered the crimes.

[tavalon]

8. I don't remember having a shred of doubt since about the middle of 2003

5 years ago or so.

[27inCali]

9. And who is the presidential candidate

with the guts to call this what it is:

Wrong and FUCKING UNAMERICAN.

and then go further:

investigate and prosecute.

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

[Senator]

10. Impeach For Torture -- Full Stop

Force McCain to defend the indefensible.

Force ALL Members/Senators to become heroes or co-conspirators -- with the world, history, and their families watching.

HONOR our (greater) generations that died to forge these treaties.

Begin the Redemption of Our National Soul.

Finish this thing.

---

[DeeDeeNY]

12. K & R

[Vote4Change]

13. And there is no "consent"!

And what, exactly, can I ... Mr. Joe Average American ... do to get Pelosi and Reed to proceed with impeachment and then try these blatant war criminals for their crimes? Here at DU, you are preaching to the choir and absolutely nothing is accomplished other than the ever-so-slight gratification we get from hearing folks of like mind rant about the problem.

But ... I repeat ... absolutely NOTHING is accomplished! King George the Prevaricator and his merry band of gas-bag, neocon criminals get off scott free? I don't live where I can vote against Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reed and, thus, feel totally powerless as I watch my country destroyed while these spineless Democrats(?) sit idly by and do nothing. Sure ... I will quit wasting my vote on a Libertarian candidate and vote for the man (Senator Obama) who represents the best chance evidenced to date of actually investigating and trying these war criminals. But that just doesn't seem enough, at least not to me.

I seem to remember reading somewhere (rubbing my chin ala Jon Stewart) that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government."

27% is NOT "consent". What the hell are we waiting for?