Obama Reopens Massacre Investigation Obstructed By Bush

[babylonsister]

Obama Reopens Massacre Investigation Obstructed By Bush

First Posted: 08-24-09 10:41 AM | Updated: 08-24-09 11:05 AM


For eight years, the Bush administration obstructed investigations into a massacre carried out in the name of Americans in Dasht-e-Leili, Afghanistan.

Earlier this month, a representative from Physicians for Human Rights, the group that originally brought the incident to the attention of the Bush White House, met with officials from the new administration, which has reopened the investigation into the incident.

The massacre dates back to 2001. Two months after the September 11th attacks, in a rural corner of Northern Afghanistan, thousands of alleged Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters surrendered to a coalition of United States Special Forces and Afghan forces led by the notoriously brutal warlord, General Abdul Rashid Dostum. They were told they would not be harmed. Soon after, they were stacked into metal shipping containers to be transported to a nearby prison. As numerous reports since 2002 have made clear, in increasingly gruesome detail, hundreds of prisoners never made it to the prison; they suffocated in the airless containers beneath the bodies of fellow prisoners -- and were interred in an unmarked mass grave.

The Bush White House thwarted inquiry into the incident on three separate occasions and terminated a Department of Justice investigation that involved survivors of the incident interned at Guantanamo Bay. By contrast, the inquiry President Obama has commissioned could result in war crimes charges.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/24/obama-restarts-massacre-i_n_265455.html

[Windy]

1. I think this is what I heard Babylon... coupled with the interrogation panel

to be run by the whitehouse. We'll see what happens when the report regarding torture comes out later today.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

2. Hmmmm.....Curiously silent around here

Where's the crowd that normally complains about Obama not prosecuting/investigating Buscho?

*crickets*

[Orsino]

4. Well, I'm trying to be optimistic...

...though it's early days yet. I'll applaud, though, if we see the prosecution of anyone above enlisted and junior officers. No, scratch that--an investigation should tell us who the hell should be prosecuted. If this was a low-level fuck-up, or brutality outside of orders by those on the spot, let's find out.

Meanwhile, the goddamned war escalates.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

8. I would like to see some higher-level prosecutions myself

Unlikely, but it's good at least he's not completely ignoring things altogether. I think he is, like with all things, taking it slowly and deliberately. It's not easy, politically or otherwise, to sweep into office and, more or less right off the bat, announce that you're going to go after former government officials legally and I never expected Obama to just dive right into it. I certainly don't envy Obama for all of the 8-year cesspool that Obama has to sort through.

[blm]

10. Sometimes this is the ONLY way to get even the smallest truths into the historic record

Look what we learned when a few honest Dem lawmakers would not stop pursuing IranContra, BCCI, Iraqgate and CIA drugrunning. Every bit of testimony helps maintain some record - the corporate media sure doesn't - not any more.

[Captain Hilts]

3. This is good news. We need to be honest and show an honest effort. nt

[formercia]

5. The video: Warning: Graphic violence and gore

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3879703582207034825

[formercia]

6. US Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 118, 2441

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4902904


US Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 118, 2441

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/usc...
§ 2441. War crimes

(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
(b) Circumstances.— The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
(c) Definition.— As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a grave breach of common Article 3 (as defined in subsection (d)) when committed in the context of and in association with an armed conflict not of an international character; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.
(d) Common Article 3 Violations.—
(1) Prohibited conduct.— In subsection (c)(3), the term “grave breach of common Article 3” means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
(A) Torture.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.
(B) Cruel or inhuman treatment.— The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions), including serious physical abuse, upon another within his custody or control.
(C) Performing biological experiments.— The act of a person who subjects, or conspires or attempts to subject, one or more persons within his custody or physical control to biological experiments without a legitimate medical or dental purpose and in so doing endangers the body or health of such person or persons.
(D) Murder.— The act of a person who intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill, or kills whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause.
(E) Mutilation or maiming.— The act of a person who intentionally injures, or conspires or attempts to injure, or injures whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation thereof or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of his body, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose.
(F) Intentionally causing serious bodily injury.— The act of a person who intentionally causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants, in violation of the law of war.
(G) Rape.— The act of a person who forcibly or with coercion or threat of force wrongfully invades, or conspires or attempts to invade, the body of a person by penetrating, however slightly, the anal or genital opening of the victim with any part of the body of the accused, or with any foreign object.
(H) Sexual assault or abuse.— The act of a person who forcibly or with coercion or threat of force engages, or conspires or attempts to engage, in sexual contact with one or more persons, or causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, one or more persons to engage in sexual contact.
(I) Taking hostages.— The act of a person who, having knowingly seized or detained one or more persons, threatens to kill, injure, or continue to detain such person or persons with the intent of compelling any nation, person other than the hostage, or group of persons to act or refrain from acting as an explicit or implicit condition for the safety or release of such person or persons.
(2) Definitions.— In the case of an offense under subsection (a) by reason of subsection (c)(3)—
(A) the term “severe mental pain or suffering” shall be applied for purposes of paragraphs (1)(A) and (1)(B) in accordance with the meaning given that term in section 2340 (2) of this title;
(B) the term “serious bodily injury” shall be applied for purposes of paragraph (1)(F) in accordance with the meaning given that term in section 113 (b)(2) of this title;
(C) the term “sexual contact” shall be applied for purposes of paragraph (1)(G) in accordance with the meaning given that term in section 2246 (3) of this title;
(D) the term “serious physical pain or suffering” shall be applied for purposes of paragraph (1)(B) as meaning bodily injury that involves—
(i) a substantial risk of death;
(ii) extreme physical pain;
(iii) a burn or physical disfigurement of a serious nature (other than cuts, abrasions, or bruises); or
(iv) significant loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; and
(E) the term “serious mental pain or suffering” shall be applied for purposes of paragraph (1)(B) in accordance with the meaning given the term “severe mental pain or suffering” (as defined in section 2340 (2) of this title), except that—
(i) the term “serious” shall replace the term “severe” where it appears; and
(ii) as to conduct occurring after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the term “serious and non-transitory mental harm (which need not be prolonged)” shall replace the term “prolonged mental harm” where it appears.
(3) Inapplicability of certain provisions with respect to collateral damage or incident of lawful attack.— The intent specified for the conduct stated in subparagraphs (D), (E), and (F) or paragraph (1) precludes the applicability of those subparagraphs to an offense under subsection (a) by reasons of subsection (c)(3) with respect to—
(A) collateral damage; or
(B) death, damage, or injury incident to a lawful attack.
(4) Inapplicability of taking hostages to prisoner exchange.— Paragraph (1)(I) does not apply to an offense under subsection (a) by reason of subsection (c)(3) in the case of a prisoner exchange during wartime.
(5) Definition of grave breaches.— The definitions in this subsection are intended only to define the grave breaches of common Article 3 and not the full scope of United States obligations under that Article.

[NYC_SKP]

7. kick

The rec goes without saying...

[slipslidingaway]

9. knr - I hope this is fully investigated - General Abdul Rashid Dostum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Rashid_Dostum#Return_to_Afghanistan

"Return to Afghanistan

Late at night on 16 August, 2009, Dostum made a surprise return from exile to Kabul to support President Hamid Karzai in his bid for re-election. The next day, the last day of campaigning, he flew by helicopter to his northern stronghold of Sheberghan, where he was greeted by 20,000 supporters in the local stadium.<32>"

[HamdenRice]

11. Dostum is the Rosetta Stone of 9/11

If they pressure him too much, then the whole cloth unravels.

[WinkyDink]

12. Even with pictures, many Americans vehemently defended Lt. Calley. Expect the same in this case.

[paparush]

13. Meanwhile, in the MSM -

A seven year long war has garnered as much coverage as a singer who died in June.

<snip>
Mark Jurkowitz, the project's associate director, found that, unsurprisingly, the economy and Iraq were the top news agenda items. The historic elevation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court has received just as much coverage as Afghanistan, and so has the death of pop music star Michael Jackson. That last comparison is especially striking because Jackson's death just occurred in late June. There are now 62,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and more may well be on the way.
</snip>

Hey, Media, Where's the Afghanistan Coverage?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112030088

[ljm2002]

14. I am very glad to hear this...

...I remember reading about that massacre when it happened and being sickened by it. When Dostum's name popped up again recently in the news, as someone we were still making deals with, it was very upsetting. So now we may yet try and impose some legal sanctions. Well, not a minute too soon. That was a dark, dark incident.