Obama Orders Investigation of Massacre, Alleged Cover-Up

[ProSense]

Obama Orders Investigation of Massacre, Alleged Cover-Up

by jhutson

President Barack Obama told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that he has directed his national security team to look into the 2001 deaths of Taliban prisoners who allegedly were massacred by US-backed forces in Afghanistan. The President stated that the government needs to find out whether actions by the US contributed to possible war crimes.

The comments to Anderson Cooper were aired on CNN on Sunday as it promoted excerpts from Cooper’s exclusive interview with the President in Ghana that will air in full at 10 PM Eastern on Monday, July 13. Cooper raised new evidence from a New York Times report by James Risen that the Bush Administration impeded at least three federal investigations into an alleged massacre of as many as 2,000 prisoners in Afghanistan. The excerpts as transcribed by Physicians for Human Rights follow at the end of this post.

"Physicians for Human Rights praises President Obama for ordering his national security team to collect all the facts in the Dasht-e-Leili massacre and apparent US cover-up," said Physicians for Human Rights Deputy Director Susannah Sirkin.

<...>

Excerpt from CNN interview:

ANDERSON COOPER: And now it seems clear that the Bush Administration resisted efforts to pursue investigations of an Afghan warlord named General Dostum, who was on the CIA payroll. It’s now come out, there were hundreds of Taliban prisoners under his care who got killed...

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Right.

ANDERSON COOPER: ...some were suffocated in a steel container, others were shot, possibly buried in mass graves. Would you support – would you call for – an investigation into possible war crimes in Afghanistan?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, the indications that this had not been properly investigated just recently was brought to my attention. So what I’ve asked my national security team to do is to collect the facts for me that are known. And we’ll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it once we have all the facts gathered up.

ANDERSON COOPER: But you wouldn’t resist categorically an investigation?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think that, you know, there are responsibilities that all nations have even in war. And if it appears that our conduct in some way supported violations of the laws of war, then I think that, you know, we have to know about that.

Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) shared the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize. PHR was founded in 1986 on the idea that health professionals, with their specialized skills, ethical commitments, and credible voices, are uniquely positioned to investigate the health consequences of human rights violations and work to stop them. PHR mobilizes health professionals to advance health, dignity and justice and promotes the right to health for all. PHR has documented the systematic use of psychological and physical torture by US personnel against detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, Bagram airbase and elsewhere.

PHR’s International Forensic Program (IFP) has conducted forensic assessments and investigations of human rights abuses, crimes against humanity and genocide in many countries. IFP is dedicated to providing independent forensic expertise to document and collect evidence of human rights violations and of violations of international humanitarian law. Since the 1980s, PHR has mobilized forensic scientists and other experts worldwide to respond to inquiries by governments, organizations, families and individuals.

more

Edited to fix format.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

1. Good news... we need to hold everyone accountable for atrocities... glad Pres Obama agrees.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

2. Obama=Bush I can't take this any more.

Un-unrecced!

[bvar22]

3. Nominated for "The Most Misleading Headline"

"So what I’ve asked my national security team to do is to collect the facts for me that are known. And we’ll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it once we have all the facts gathered up."---Obama

That hardly qualifies as "Ordering an Investigation".

[johnaries]

4. "Collecting facts" = Investigation.

Unless you're a Republican, of course. They HATE facts.

[bvar22]

8. Gathering up what is already known....

...is NOT an investigation.

[johnaries]

25. A lot of the facts are not known. That's what "gathering the facts"

is all about. Investigating to discover what the facts are. It may be an "informal" invetigation, but informal investigations always preceded formal ones. Regardless, it's still an investigation. Therefore, the headline is not misleading.

[ProSense]

5. Yeah, it should have been "inquiry." Still,

I nominate your post for being the most ridiculous nitpick ever.

Yeah, the indications that this had not been properly investigated just recently was brought to my attention. So what I’ve asked my national security team to do is to collect the facts for me that are known. And we’ll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it once we have all the facts gathered up.

The President ask for a serious inquiry. It may not be a big deal to you, but investigations come in many forms: from inquiry to an official criminal investigation.

[bvar22]

10. In reality....

..it is just more non committal double speak.
It is enough for the parade followers to celebrate, but no real, unambivalent commitment to anything.

"we’ll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it..." (later...maybe....maybe not...)

[jefferson_dem]

6. Nominated for the "Debbie Downer Post of the Day."

"Asking national security team to collect facts"

Totally equals

"ordering an investigation"

Nice try though ---

[bvar22]

7. Yes. Facts and Accuracy can be such downers.

Enjoy the parade.

[ProSense]

9. What facts? n/t

[bvar22]

11. Thats what I'm asking....what facts?

"we’ll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it..." (later...maybe....maybe not...)

[ProSense]

12. No that's not what you're asking because if it is,

the question makes no sense.

[bvar22]

14. The FACT is....

...that the headline is misleading.
You admitted as much upthread.

[ProSense]

15. No, I didn't

I was being sarcastic. I said it probably should have said inquiry, but an inquiry is an investigation.

[bvar22]

18. Gathering up what is already known...

...is NOT an investigation.

"So what I’ve asked my national security team to do is to collect the facts for me that are known."---Obama

That if FAR from "Ordering an Investigation".

[ProSense]

19. Known?

Yeah, someone knows about it. That's usually the case in most investigations. If all the facts were known, there would be no need for inquiry.

[bvar22]

21. I'm going to post a reply here,

but it is not a reply to you, I have made my position clear. This reply FOR others who read this thread. Most won't bother to check the source, but will simply agree or disagree based on a partisan herd instinct.

But SOME will actually go back and look at the facts. Those people will agree that the headline IS misleading. Obama has NOT "Ordered an Investigation", but has merely said he will talk this over with his staff, and THEN decide whether to have an investigation.... or not.

I am cursed with a memory.
Unlike most, I REMEMBER.
If Obama orders an Investigation, then I remember, and will be asking for results in a few months.
But you know what happens at DU when someone asks about a "promise"?
They are met by a PR contingent who assault them with...."but Obama never really promised that. You should have read the fine print."
Sound familiar?
These are the very same people who trumpet misleading PR headlines like the one you posted.

It is to those people like me who are cursed with a memory that I post this reply.
I fully realize that we are a minority at DU.

[ProSense]

22. "I am cursed with a memory." Then remember this:

an inquiry is an investigation.

[chill_wind]

13. If, if, if. Trying to parse this for a straight answer

is one typically enough for the extrapolation of all the Philadelphia lawyers here, for sure.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, the indications that this had not been properly investigated just recently was brought to my attention. So what I’ve asked my national security team to do is to collect the facts for me that are known. And we’ll probably make a decision in terms of how to approach it once we have all the facts gathered up.

ANDERSON COOPER: But you wouldn’t resist categorically an investigation?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think that, you know, there are responsibilities that all nations have even in war. And if it appears that our conduct in some way supported violations of the laws of war, then I think that, you know, we have to know about that.

[bvar22]

16. It is also typical of his campaign rhetoric.

Everybody was happy with what he said, but no one could agree on what he had actually said or promised. :shrug:

[ProSense]

17. "but no one could agree on what he had actually said or promised."

What?

[chill_wind]

23. He could have cleared it up with a simple answer.

To this seemingly simple question.

"But you wouldn’t resist categorically an investigation?"

Even the most cautious politician in the world could have safely answered that one.

What he gave was not an answer. It's merely damage control for his freelancing "officials" yesterday who had made it sound like a possible probe was off the table. He's telling us an an investigation is not off the table. Period.

[ProSense]

20. Obama orders review of alleged Afghan mass grave

Obama orders review of alleged Afghan mass grave

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama has ordered his national security team to investigate reports that U.S. allies were responsible for the deaths of as many as 2,000 Taliban prisoners of war during the opening days of the war in Afghanistan.

Obama told CNN in an interview that aired Sunday that he doesn't know what how the U.S.-allied Northern Alliance behaved in November 2001, but he wants a full accounting before deciding how to move forward.

"I think that, you know, there are responsibilities that all nations have even in war," Obama said during an interview at the end of a six-day trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana.

"And if it appears that our conduct in some way supported violations of the laws of war, then I think that, you know, we have to know about that."

The president's comments seem to reverse officials' statements from Friday, when they said they had no grounds to investigate the 2001 deaths of Taliban prisoners of war who human rights groups allege were killed by U.S.-backed forces.

more

[grantcart]

24. thanks for the update

[chill_wind]

26. Here is the actual CNN video at the center of each of these pieces:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/12/obama.afghan.killings/index.html#cnnSTCVideo