Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

US general linked to Abu Ghraib abuse (Sanchez)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 06:24 AM
Original message
US general linked to Abu Ghraib abuse (Sanchez)
Edited on Sat May-22-04 06:36 AM by JoFerret
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1222348,00.html

Leaked memo reveals control of prison passed to military intelligence to 'manipulate detainees'

Julian Borger in Washington
Saturday May 22, 2004
The Guardian

Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, head of coalition forces in Iraq, issued an order last October giving military intelligence control over almost every aspect of prison conditions at Abu Ghraib with the explicit aim of manipulating the detainees' "emotions and weaknesses", it was reported yesterday.
The October 12 memorandum, reported in the Washington Post, is a potential "smoking gun" linking prisoner abuse to the US high command. It represents hard evidence that the maltreatment was not simply the fault of rogue military police guards.

The memorandum came to light as more details emerged of the extent of detainee abuse. Formal statements by inmates published yesterday describe horrific treatment at the hands of guards, including the rape of a teenage Iraqi boy by an army translator.

At present, one prison guard has pleaded guilty to abuse of detainees, and six more are facing courts martial. A separate inquiry is underway into the role of military intelligence, but it is unclear whether any private contractors implicated will face prosecution.

<more>

Another story with more info here:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2004/05/22/468536.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. AAAH THE PISTOL BOY
knew it was only a matter of TIME
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 06:36 AM
Original message
sanchez


SORRY SANCHEZ a/k/a Pistol Boy consiglieri to the Viceroy Pontius Paul Bremer I

His quote “ We are going to Kill the Shia Cleric Criminal Muqtada al-Sadr !! ”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Citizen Daryl Donating Member (693 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 06:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. I just call him "Dirty" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buns_of_Fire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. Y'know, I was going to post something similar
...but I couldn't for the life of me think of a genteel way to explain "why?". ;-) (P.S. I still can't.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 06:36 AM
Response to Original message
2.  hard evidence
What penalty for lying to the Senate under oath?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 06:44 AM
Response to Original message
4. Sanchez lied
Edited on Sat May-22-04 06:58 AM by JoFerret
Despite the efforts of some of the senators — notably two Republicans, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and three Democrats, Carl Levin, Jack Reed and Hillary Clinton — each new panel of witnesses simply adds to the fog of misunderstanding. This week, for example, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of the troops in Iraq, said he had never seen a protocol permitting the harsh treatment of prisoners until it surfaced at a hearing a week earlier. The Army's subsequent claim that the orders were the work of a single captain seemed even more implausible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/22/opinion/22SAT1.html
- from the Editorial in today's NYTimes


Sanchez says he never saw rules for investigation

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/20040520/ts_usatoday/sanchezsaysheneversawrulesforinterrogation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 07:14 AM
Response to Original message
5. Sanchez is publicly branded a liar
In the Army that is the end. His career is over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. that may very well be but....
Will it be the end of his career in THIS Army. The top brass all seem to lie and cover for each other. When I think of the rummy purge of generals in the pentragon since he has been there, it makes me wonder if there are any honest people left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Who's Army is it now anyway?
Edited on Sat May-22-04 08:22 AM by teryang
Breaking down the Army as an institution was a necessary objective for this administration, which seeks total power.

You are right, lying has gone from being endemic in the Army, to being forbidden (if you are caught and labeled), now we have definitely entered another stage of gross dissembling.

The corruption process is not yet complete as the institutional resistance of the Army to the deliberate undermining of its traditions by corrupt civilians, especially that of following the law of land warfare and the Geneva Conventions is ongoing. It could be a losing battle.

In the effort to appease and to suggest the appearance of political normalcy before the election, Sanchez could be sacrificed. That might stop the effort to get Cambone and Rumsfeld.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. So why was the Female General made the escape goat
Sanchez was in charge
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alerter_ Donating Member (898 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
8. War Crimes Trial under Nuremburg laws
It's the only way to restore our dignity as a nation and win back our reputation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
11. Sanchez/Abizaid deer-in-headlights a couple of days ago.
This explains something I saw on CNN a day or two ago.

Rummy, flanked by General Sanchez and General John Abizaid was coming out of one of their "rug dance" sessions in front of one of the congressional committees. There seem to be so many now, it's hard for me to keep up any more.

The bright camera lights came on and a reporter thrust a mike in front of Rummy. I don't remember what the question was, and I'm sure the answer was as enlightening as the rest of them he gives.

I just watched these two generals, one just behind each of Rummy's shoulders.
Both of them had the same expression on their faces. Kind of a combination of the thousand-yard-stare of utterly overwhelmed, battle-weary combat soldiers and the "Oh Shit!" deer-in-the-headlights look. I almost feel sorry for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snellius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Abazaid said M.I. contractors were "doing god's work"
He actually said that at the hearings, defending the mercenary contractors, hired to do interrogations in Iraq.

These guys are all gung-ho Christian soldiers on their own suicide mission. They busted all the competent generals who didn't march in ideological step, like Shinseki, and now only the true-believer crusaders are left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
12. More discussion from last night:
Please click here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. and another on the memo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
14. Let's not forget who is really responsible
From Democratic Underground
Dated Tuesday May 11

Who is Responsible?
By Jack Rabbit

Is it sufficient to court martial some enlisted personnel, reprimand some officers and fire some civilian contractors for the abuses of Abu Ghraib? Would it be sufficient to dismiss Mr. Rumsfeld from his post? No, the problem goes beyond that.
It is Mr. Bush himself who is responsible for the crimes at Abu Ghraib. The circumvention of international humanitarian law is Bush administration policy. He is responsible whether he directly ordered any particular case of abuse at that prison or even whether he knew about it in January, as Mr. Rumsfeld said, or while watching 60 Minutes, as Mr. Bush said, or knew all along, which no one suggests. The crimes at Abu Ghraib are the result of the peculiar detention system established by Mr. Bush and his subordinates in the wake of the war on terror.
The centerpiece of the detention system is the prison camp at the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. A feature of the detention system is that it is, in the words of separate statements by Human Rights Watch and the International Committee for the Red Cross, "a legal black hole." This administration claims that the detention center is beyond the reach of the jurisdiction of any court. The detainees at the facility are presumed to be terrorists; no review of their cases can occur except by the good graces of this administration itself. The administration further asserts that all detainees at Guantanamo are "unlawful combatants" with no rights as prisoners of war. Again, because the administration claims that no US or international court has any jurisdiction over inmates at Guantanamo, their status cannot be reviewed by anyone outside the Bush administration.
This arrangement contradicts the Third Geneva Convention, under which a detainee is to be treated as a prisoner of war until a competent tribunal rules otherwise (Article 5). Since the administration's rules preclude judicial review of any detainee's status, no detainee has ever been had a review by any competent tribunal and so could not be ruled anything but a prisoner of war.
Moreover, the catch-all phrase under international law for those who are not prisoners of war is not "unlawful combatants," a term which is not found in any recognized body of international law, but rather "protected persons." The rights of protected persons are spelled out in the Fourth Geneva Convention; the rights of protected persons under the authority of a hostile power are little different than those prisoners of war. Even assuming that the detainees at Guantanamo are not prisoners of war, their rights under international law are being violated systematically and willfully by Mr. Bush and his subordinates . . . .
The conditions under which prisoners are kept at Guantanamo are the subject of some international concern. Few outsiders have seen the camp and reported on it. Those who have, condemn it. Prisoners are housed in small cages with little protection from the elements. Human Rights Watch called the conditions "a scandal" long before Abu Ghraib made headlines. A British jurist looking into the situation at one of the Guantanamo camps called the conditions one of "utter lawlessness."
The detention camp at Guantanamo Bay was set up to circumvent international law. Mr. Bush cannot claim to know nothing about it or to not be responsible for it. He signed the executive orders authorizing this circumvention of international law.

Read more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riverwalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
16. Abuzaid and Sanchez on C-Span now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moderator DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-04 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
17. Please discuss on the earlier thread, thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC