Humiliation at Abu Ghraib, and Then at the Prosecution Table

[BurtWorm]

Strange post from Dana Milbank on a waste of a case against the sole officer charged in the Abu Ghraib crimes. Dana doesn't have the depth to ask why the government's buck stops with Lt. Col Steven Jordan, though the answer is obvious. If they'd gone any deeper themselves, they'd have opened the World Court's war crimes case against US brass for them.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202387_pf.html





By Dana Milbank
Thursday, August 23, 2007; A02

"Don't speak," the judge advised a prosecution lawyer at one point yesterday during the court-martial of the lone officer charged in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

It was good advice.

The more prosecutors and prosecution witnesses speak in the trial of Army Lt. Col. Steven Jordan at Fort Meade this week, the better Jordan's defense looks.

"To the best of my knowledge, had nothing to do with interrogations," testified Staff Sgt. James Beachner -- and he was a prosecution witness.

Pvt. Chip Frederick testified, also (ostensibly) for the prosecution, that Jordan "had nothing to do with those detainees being abused."

"I never saw Lieutenant Colonel Jordan sign off on anything," testified yet another prosecution witness, Sgt. Michael Eckroth, who described Jordan as a good leader who was "trying to get something done to improve our less-than-austere conditions."

With a prosecution like this, who needs a defense?

...

[hootinholler]

1. That speaks volumes. n/t

[BurtWorm]

2. kick