Excellent And Depressing New Seymour Hersh Article: "The General's Report"

[kpete]

Excellent and depressing new Seymour Hersh article

We all serve at the pleasure of the President." A retired four-star Army general later told Taguba that he had been sent to the job in the Pentagon so that he could "be watched." Taguba realized that his career was at a dead end.

It's a 9 page article that is well worth reading in its entirety, and I can barely scratch the surface here. But after introducing General Taguba and describing his background as the son of a Filipino veteran of the Army, Hersh begins by describing Taguba's first meeting with Rumsfeld and his military aide after the existence of his report was revealed:

Taguba was met at the door of the conference room by an old friend, Lieutenant General Bantz J. Craddock, who was Rumsfeld’s senior military assistant. Craddock’s daughter had been a babysitter for Taguba’s two children when the officers served together years earlier at Fort Stewart, Georgia. But that afternoon, Taguba recalled, "Craddock just said, very coldly, ‘Wait here.’ " In a series of interviews early this year, the first he has given, Taguba told me that he understood when he began the inquiry that it could damage his career; early on, a senior general in Iraq had pointed out to him that the abused detainees were "only Iraqis." Even so, he was not prepared for the greeting he received when he was finally ushered in.

"Here . . . comes . . . that famous General Taguba—of the Taguba report!" Rumsfeld declared, in a mocking voice. The meeting was attended by Paul Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld’s deputy; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence; General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (J.C.S.); and General Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, along with Craddock and other officials. Taguba, describing the moment nearly three years later, said, sadly, "I thought they wanted to know. I assumed they wanted to know. I was ignorant of the setting."

..............

In January of 2006, Taguba received a telephone call from General Richard Cody, the Army’s Vice-Chief of Staff. "This is your Vice," he told Taguba. "I need you to retire by January of 2007." No pleasantries were exchanged, although the two generals had known each other for years, and, Taguba said, "He offered no reason."

...................

"From the moment a soldier enlists, we inculcate loyalty, duty, honor, integrity, and selfless service," Taguba said. "And yet when we get to the senior-officer level we forget those values. I know that my peers in the Army will be mad at me for speaking out, but the fact is that we violated the laws of land warfare in Abu Ghraib. We violated the tenets of the Geneva Convention. We violated our own principles and we violated the core of our military values. The stress of combat is not an excuse, and I believe, even today, that those civilian and military leaders responsible should be held accountable."

Taguba report
http://www.agonist.org/annex/taguba.htm
Hersh Article
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/06/25/070625fa_fact_hersh
via:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/16/1409/88157

[WillyT]

1. K & R !!!

:kick:

[WillyT]

9. This Says It All...

<snip>

Richard Armitage, a former Navy counter-insurgency officer who served as Deputy Secretary of State in the first Bush term, recalled meeting Taguba, then a lieutenant colonel, in South Korea in the early nineteen-nineties. “I was told to keep an eye on this young guy—‘He’s going to be a general,’ ” Armitage said. “Taguba was discreet and low key—not a sprinter but a marathoner.”

At the time, Taguba was working for Major General Mike Myatt, a marine who was the officer in charge of strategic talks with the South Koreans, on behalf of the American military. “I needed an executive assistant with brains and integrity,” Myatt, who is now retired and living in San Francisco, told me. After interviewing a number of young officers, he chose Taguba. “He was ethical and he knew his stuff,” Myatt said. “We really became close, and I’d trust him with my life. We talked about military strategy and policy, and the moral aspect of war—the importance of not losing the moral high ground.” Myatt followed Taguba’s involvement in the Abu Ghraib inquiry, and said, “I was so proud of him. I told him, ‘Tony, you’ve maintained yourself, and your integrity.’ ”

Taguba got a different message, however, from other officers, among them General John Abizaid, then the head of Central Command. A few weeks after his report became public, Taguba, who was still in Kuwait, was in the back seat of a Mercedes sedan with Abizaid. Abizaid’s driver and his interpreter, who also served as a bodyguard, were in front. Abizaid turned to Taguba and issued a quiet warning: “You and your report will be investigated.”

“I wasn’t angry about what he said but disappointed that he would say that to me,” Taguba said. “I’d been in the Army thirty-two years by then, and it was the first time that I thought I was in the Mafia.”

<snip>

Same article.

fuck...

[CGowen]

66. “I’d been in the Army 32 years by then, and it was the first time that I thought I was in the Mafia.

yup

[Solly Mack]

2. It was a given that Taguba would be forced out

I hope he continues to speak out.

[babylonsister]

3. Rec'd! nt

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. It is a pity that good military men are forced out by the thugs in control

the thugs have no idea how to run the military. Looking at the mess that Rumsfeld and his other cronies made and are still making?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. fuck them. fuck them with a forked stick the wrong way in.

kpete, I bow in your direction. thanks for bringing this up.

damn them.

[annabanana]

6. SOME Military people remember their oaths...

Others have no respect for the Country, it's ideals or it's very foundation.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

7. Not too hard to envision Rummy mocking his generals,

what a POS. :grr:

Thanks for the great link kpete!

[unhappycamper]

8. Sorry I missed him, but:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/unhappycamper/6

Walter Reed has happened. 3521. PTSD is surfacing. How much more is enough?

uhc note: Get. The. Fuck. Out. now.

[cal04]

10. Seymour Hersh will be on tomorrow

CNN’s “Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer”
Seymour Hersh, the investigative reporter, will be on to talk about Abu Ghraib.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/16/sunday-breakfast-menu-june-17/

[kpete]

11. more

“Could you tell us what happened?” Wolfowitz asked. Someone else asked, “Is it abuse or torture?” At that point, Taguba recalled, “I described a naked detainee lying on the wet floor, handcuffed, with an interrogator shoving things up his rectum, and said, ‘That’s not abuse. That’s torture.’ There was quiet.”

[ThomWV]

12. Anyone who reads that article and isn't scared is just plain nuts

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

49. The fact this sadistic shit took place is disturbing! The fact no consequence will be borne by those

,...responsible for it is an absolute outrage!!!

If men in positions of power can get away with a CLEAR AND CONVINCING INTENTIONAL BREACH OF OATHE to uphold the Constitution and laws of this land; if men in positions of power can get away with violations of U.S. law; if men in positions of power can get away with torture,...how the hell can this country be called a democratic republic let alone a 'just' nation?

These barbaric predators should BE IN PRISON!!!!

But, they are free,...free to pull strings from behind the national scenes. Free to continue their abuses and crimes. Free from responsibility. Free from the rule of law.

How can I hold any confidence, whatsoever, in the government of this country? I can't.

[lovuian]

13. Bush destroyed one of the finest ,military machined in the

world ...and he did it on purpose...

[bahrbearian]

41. For the same reasons he destroyed , FEMA , EPA, and the DOJ

To get the public to distrust the Government, and its working.

[atreides1]

44. I Disagree

The military was already standing at the precipice, the generals that supported these actions were already in place, and when Rumsfeld and his crew arrived things were probably put into motion, all they needed was a reason and 9/11 gave it to them.

So it isn't all Bush's fault, the men and women who believed in using the same tactics as the Nazis and the Russians were already in uniform and prepared to implement this program of torture.

[JDPriestly]

54. Are you familiar with the Milgram Experiment?

Ordinary people will do horrible things if they believe that authorities in charge of them want the things done. The generals that supported these actions were just ordinary people. It takes a person of extraordinary integrity and courage to refuse to do wrong when ordered or urged to do them.

[JHB]

71. Don't ignore a long-standing cover-your-brass at the top...

There'a a bit of a history of cover-ups about things that might make the upper eschelons look bad:

When the Navy tried to pin the turret explosion on the USS Missouri on an enlisted man, Rummy wan't in charge (hmmm, turns out Cheney was. But still...)

(I'd give more, but I don't have the materials I need where I am, and Google is turning up mostly Bush-era stuff)

[femrap]

14. The US has become unrecognizable to me. nt.

No wonder we're hated around the world....the only way to make this right, well, at least a very good start, is to IMPEACH THEM....start with Gonzo and work up the ladder.

We will never reclaim our reputation if we let this scum off the hook.

[Richard Steele]

15. K&R

[TacticalPeek]

16. K&R

:kick:

[trumad]

17. Sick

Taguba said that he saw “a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.” The video was not made public in any of the subsequent court proceedings, nor has there been any public government mention of it. Such images would have added an even more inflammatory element to the outcry over Abu Ghraib. “It’s bad enough that there were photographs of Arab men wearing women’s panties,” Taguba said.

[Raksha]

26. Omigod!!!

Taguba said that he saw “a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.” The video was not made public in any of the subsequent court proceedings, nor has there been any public government mention of it.

What's become of my country?

[whistle]

18. This is very condeming of Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and the military high command

...thanks for posting

[KoKo]

19. Thanks...I'll read it tomorrow..... can't be depressed tonight.

:kick:

[Peace Patriot]

20. Well, one thing the Bush Junta has done is create some real American heroes

--like Gen. Taguba, who refused to lie about torture, and Lt. Ehren Watada, who refused to serve in an illegal war--in reaction to the outrages and crimes of this regime. Worms with ungodly power (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld) create circumstances in which peoples' characters are sorely tested. Will they lie? Will they toady? Will they cover up? Will they rely on "just following orders"? Will they ignore their own consciences and just go along?

I am hugely admiring of people who do what is right in these circumstances--especially with their careers and even lives at risk. And I feel horribly sorry for people who have failed the test, or have become confused--people who may have started out with upright characters and high ideals, and found themselves sullied by the overwhelming stench of the Bushite cloud.

The horror to the victims, and the slaughter of Iraqis aside, I find this one of the most unforgivable crimes of the Bush Junta--its assault of the consciences and souls of our own people, in the military, but not just there, also in the U.S. Attorneys' offices, in the intelligence community, the FBI, the CIA, in the EPA, in NASA, in FEMA, everywhere you look.

Kudos and laurel wreaths to the heroes who held up under this vile assault on honesty and integrity in our government, and I dearly hope that the perps will pay for the terrible moral crime committed against those of weaker character, and those who may now be anguished by the compromises they were bullied into.

The Bush Junta created a pervasive atmosphere of sadism, callousness, dishonesty, secrecy, toadyism, craven ambition, greed and contempt for the law. They ARE "the enemy from within." The damage they have done to our country, by this and other means, is the equivalent of many 9/11's, and makes the question of whether or not they had a hand in 9/11 almost irrelevant. We might as well be falling amidsts fire and ashes into our own footprint, as a society, with these gangsters and moral bankrupts in charge.

And the only plus: The honor that people like Gen. Taguba and Lt. Watada bring us, and a whole lot Americans reassessing who are, what we believe in, and how we got here--to ramming objects into the rectum of a helpless prisoner.

[Sacajawea]

24. Well said, Peace. Very well said.

[Raksha]

27. In traditional Christianity, this is precisely the work of the devil...

to assault a person's conscience and soul. While I don't believe in a literal devil, sometimes it's a useful construct.

Re I find this one of the most unforgivable crimes of the Bush Junta--its assault of the consciences and souls of our own people...

I may be in the minority on this, but I never thought Hugo Chavez was being facetious in his speech at the U.N. when he compared Bush to the devil. If he was being serious, he was even more right than he knew!

[seafan]

21. The enormity of damage Bush has created is beyond comprehension.

The General’s Report

by Seymour M. Hersh

June 25, 2007 Issue
The New Yorker

.....

Abu Ghraib had opened the door on the issue of the treatment of detainees, and from the beginning the Administration feared that the publicity would expose more secret operations and practices. Shortly after September 11th, Rumsfeld, with the support of President Bush, had set up military task forces whose main target was the senior leadership of Al Qaeda. Their essential tactic was seizing and interrogating terrorists and suspected terrorists; they also had authority from the President to kill certain high-value targets on sight. The most secret task-force operations were categorized as Special Access Programs, or S.A.P.s. ..... The military task forces were under the control of the Joint Special Operations Command, the branch of the Special Operations Command that is responsible for counterterrorism.

.....

In special cases, the task forces could bypass the chain of command and deal directly with Rumsfeld’s office. A former senior intelligence official told me that the White House was also briefed on task-force operations.

The former senior intelligence official said that when the images of Abu Ghraib were published, there were some in the Pentagon and the White House who “didn’t think the photographs were that bad”—in that they put the focus on enlisted soldiers, rather than on secret task-force operations. Referring to the task-force members, he said, “Guys on the inside ask me, ‘What’s the difference between shooting a guy on the street, or in his bed, or in a prison?’ ” A Pentagon consultant on the war on terror also said that the “basic strategy was ‘prosecute the kids in the photographs but protect the big picture.’ ”

A recently retired C.I.A. officer, who served more than fifteen years in the clandestine service, told me that the task-force teams “had full authority to whack—to go in and conduct ‘executive action,’ ” the phrase for political assassination. “It was surrealistic what these guys were doing,” the retired operative added. “They were running around the world without clearing their operations with the ambassador or the chief of station.”

J.S.O.C.’s special status undermined military discipline. Richard Armitage, the former Deputy Secretary of State, told me that, on his visits to Iraq, he increasingly found that “the commanders would say one thing and the guys in the field would say, ‘I don’t care what he says. I’m going to do what I want.’ We’ve sacrificed the chain of command to the notion of Special Operations and GWOT”—the global war on terrorism. “You’re painting on a canvas so big that it’s hard to comprehend,” Armitage said.

.....

Representative Obey told me that he had been troubled, before the Iraq war, by the Administration’s decision to run clandestine operations from the Pentagon, saying that he “found some of the things they were doing to be disquieting.” At the time, his Republican colleagues blocked his attempts to have the House Appropriations Committee investigate these activities. “One of the things that bugs me is that Congress has failed in its oversight abilities,” Obey said. Early last year, at his urging, his subcommittee began demanding a classified quarterly report on the operations, but Obey said that he has no reason to believe that the reports are complete.

A former high-level Defense Department official said that, when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, Senator John Warner, then the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, was warned “to back off” on the investigation, because “it would spill over to more important things.” A spokesman for Warner acknowledged that there had been pressure on the Senator, but said that Warner had stood up to it—insisting on putting Rumsfeld under oath for his May 7th testimony, for example, to the Secretary’s great displeasure.

.....

An aggressive congressional inquiry into Abu Ghraib could have provoked unwanted questions about what the Pentagon was doing, in Iraq and elsewhere, and under what authority. By law, the President must make a formal finding authorizing a C.I.A. covert operation, and inform the senior leadership of the House and the Senate Intelligence Committees. However, the Bush Administration unilaterally determined after 9/11 that intelligence operations conducted by the military—including the Pentagon’s covert task forces—for the purposes of “preparing the battlefield” could be authorized by the President, as Commander-in-Chief, without telling Congress.

There was coördination between the C.I.A. and the task forces, but also tension. The C.I.A. officers, who were under pressure to produce better intelligence in the field, wanted explicit legal authority before aggressively interrogating high-value targets. A finding would give operatives some legal protection for questionable actions, but the White House was reluctant to put what it wanted in writing.

.....

The Pentagon consultant said in an interview late last year that “the C.I.A. never got the exact language it wanted.” The findings, when promulgated by the White House, were “very calibrated” to minimize political risk, and limited to a few countries; later, they were expanded, turning several nations in North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia into free-fire zones with regard to high-value targets. I was told by the former senior intelligence official and a government consultant that after the existence of secret C.I.A. prisons in Europe was revealed, in the Washington Post, in late 2005, the Administration responded with a new detainee center in Mauritania. After a new government friendly to the U.S. took power, in a bloodless coup d’état in August, 2005, they said, it was much easier for the intelligence community to mask secret flights there.

“The dirt and secrets are in the back channel,” the former senior intelligence officer noted. “All this open business—sitting in staff meetings, etc., etc.—is the Potemkin Village stuff. And the good guys—like Taguba—are gone.”

.....

[Peace Patriot]

34. "...feared publicity would expose more secret operations and practices."

One argument I have with Hersh's article is that he doesn't question the motive for these abominable acts. He lets those who were involved establish the motive, by implication--that the purpose of the torture was (is?**) to "keep us safe." Has anything Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld done had the motive of "keeping us safe"? I don't know about others, but I don't think a single action of theirs has had that motive.

The same callousness and sadism that characterizes their torture policy characterized their treatment of the victims of Katrina, and characterizes their disregard for wounded soldiers, their disregard for the elderly poor, and all poor, their disregard for the victims of credit card usury, their disregard for and utter neglect of our emergency services--the use of National Guards and emergency equipment for their Iraq horror--their disregard for poisons in the environment and for the fate of the earth, their disregard for the economic health of the nation, in running up a $10 trillion deficit to give multiple tax cuts to the rich and to pay for unnecessary, heinous war--and on and on. The proofs of their disregard for our safety and welfare are innumerable. So, if the torture is not for the purpose of "keeping us safe," what IS it for?

Another impression (and I stress the word impression) that the Hersh article conveys is that the torture was occurring at several levels below Rumsfeld and the White House, perhaps as the result of vague directives from above to gain intelligence information, but still, mainly at the initiative of military prison officials, special ops groups, and murky agents who had leave to get around rules; that it was pervasive, out of control and horrible, but that the main question is the old Watergate question: What did Rumsfeld know and when did he know it? What did top brass know and when did they know it? What did Bush know and when did he know it? That is, at what point did they become aware of these terrible and illegal actions, and why was their response so lame--prosecution of a few underlings, protection of the brass? Hersh, on a conscious level, conveys some facts that POINT TO intense, detailed Rumsfeld involvement in some of the torture, and to cover up, and punishment of truth-tellers. Don't get me wrong. The article is hard-hitting. But still it conveys a sense of chaos at the lower rungs of the chain of command--of a policy that got out of control--that I think may be misleading.

One clue to Rumsfeld strategy is the widespread looting he permitted in Baghdad after the invasion--looting that he seemed to approve of. 'This is freedom,' he said--or some such. Freedom = the freedom to loot. (Bushism in a nutshell.) I remember being appalled when I heard this. Is that the right message to be putting out? Freedom is the freedom to plunder, to sack the place, to steal, to destroy?

But I think he meant it, and intended chaos. Chaos is fertile ground for controlling people--if you have the most guns. It creates ideal conditions for truly massive theft, and for any purpose you have in mind--eliminating leaders who might be good advocates for their people, destroying secret Saddam files that implicate Rumsfeld, Reagan and others in dirty bioweapons dealings with Saddam, trying to sneak WMDs into the country for a phony "discovery" (a plot that was foiled, I think)--that sort of thing. Chaos is hell for most people, but prime conditions for thugs, for criminals covering their own tracks, and for black ops.

I would invert the pyramid that Hersh's article inadvertently conveys--of many acts of torture by many people at Abu Ghraib, at Guantanamo Bay, at the Baghdad airport prison, in homes and back alleys, and in secret prisons around the world, with responsibility moving up the narrowing pyramid, through the military brass, and getting vaguer all the time, to Rumsfeld, Bush and one or two others (Cambone, Cheney) at the top. I think they issued specific directives, for torture and death for certain people (and, as they found things out, for certain more people), to be COVERED UP by the widespread, random use of torture as terror and humiliation, and of roundups of random people, to disguise their true targets (to non-Bushite military, FBI and CIA, to Iraqi society, and to outside snoopers).

The widespread use of torture (base of the pyramid, turned upside done) was ordered and encouraged as a general policy, to disguise the true targets (the tip of the pyramid, the specific goals, the pointed arrow) which may have been items like covering up Bush Cartel money trails to Al Qaeda (Afghan torture, Guantanamo Bay and secret prison torture), or to eliminate witnesses or potential whistleblowers, and destroy any records, of dirty dealings in Iraq, past, present or planned (Abu Ghraib). The bullying and terrorizing of Iraqis would also be useful in setting up a government that would do the bidding of U.S. oil giants, and permit the establishment of a permanent U.S. foothold in the Middle East--a base of operations for the next target, Iran. But there are other, better ways to colonize a country and put it under your thumb.

Let me reverse this: IF the Bush regime had the intention of creating an orderly society in Iraq, the last thing in the world they would permit--it's just common sense--would be widespread, random torture. They would have clamped down on mistreatment of Iraqis immediately. They did the opposite. Why? It cannot have been to catch Al Qaeda, which was non-existent in Iraq at the beginning (and may be now). And the best strategy for quelling any violent opposition is treat most the people well, to attract their loyalty with fairness and justice, and, of course, to immediately begin to address their needs. You could say it's just perversity that the Bushites did the opposite, at every turn--that they have no concept of a just society, their instincts are to reign by terror, and that's what they did. There is plenty of evidence for that argument. But it may, instead (or in addition), have been a strategy to cover up certain things. So, too, the other prisons and torture chambers in Afghanistan and around the world. Widespread looting and chaos--as if by accident--and widespread torture, as if it were an out-of-control policy at the junior level--is great cover for specific, targeted, nefarious deeds, that only a few leaders and a few torture squads know the true purpose of.

It's easy for normal humans to get overwhelmed by this torture. It is so awful. The thought of relatively innocent bread thiefs, caught up in the chaos and dislocation of the invasion, or completely innocent people, guilty of not the slightest infraction--innocent bystanders--being hooded and jailed, and beaten and raped, and stripped naked, and threatened with dogs, and some suffocating and dying in piles of naked bodies, and that these acts were committed in our name, is unbearable. It's difficult to think of anything else but the horror of it. But we shouldn't let this blind us to the fact that Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney and Cambone may well have been thinking of something else; their interest may have been very focused on certain tortures and deaths, buried in the apparent chaos, with motives possibly even unknown to the torturers, as they sought information that had nothing whatever to do with "keeping us safe," and ordered selective murders for their own ill purposes.

[MrPrax]

47. This is insane...

It's easy for normal humans to get overwhelmed by this torture. It is so awful. The thought of relatively innocent bread thiefs, caught up in the chaos and dislocation of the invasion, or completely innocent people, guilty of not the slightest infraction

Bread Thieves????

no shit...the biggest problem with heroes like Tanguba and Watada is that they are wasting their time trying to communicate to American citizens who have proven to be nothing but cowards and reduced to little more than hyper-rationalizations of imperialist 'motive' while desperately trying to blame partisans for their own debase racist adventurism.

Cut the shit...it's not a question at this point of whether you are 'stained' with sins of your leaders, which seemingly have destroyed your country with the full approval of both the public and the opposition party, but what are you actually going to do about it.

So Rummy tortured on your behalf...well either arrest him or shut the fuck up Good American

[truth2power]

61. There's something else, Patriot..

This torture, and the barely disguised pleasure they seem to take in it.

Many here are familiar with "Pan's Labyrinth", a truly extraordinary film in so many ways, but containing some truly horrific scenes of violence and torture. There is a scene where, in order to extract information from one of the partisans regarding the identity of his comrades, the military commander crushes the man's fingers with a pair of pliers. It's worse in the viewing than I can describe here, but can't, in any case, be assigned any sort of "sexual" subtext.

In contrast, where Rummy and Co. are concerned, there's always a homoerotic or other sexual (male soldier sodomizing, presumably, a female detainee) component to probably 99% of the torture. Why is that? There are many non-sexually related ways to torture people if you're really after information. And the "Muslim men are afraid of menstrual blood" explanation just doesn't account for it.

The people perpetrating this horror are deviants - morally, legally and sexually.

And I think Rumsfeld likes to watch.

[AntiFascist]

63. One explanation I've read...

was that intelligence people were mixed in with the prison personnel who took control of this situation. They were taking pictures of the tortured and humiliated victims to be used as a means of intimidating other (would be?) insurgents. Instead, it seemed to reinforce deep-seated anger and views of the U.S. as being evil.

[seafan]

22. "...Bush made no known effort to forcefully address the treatment of prisoners..."

More from http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/06/25/070625fa_fact_hersh?printable=true">Hersh:

.....

Whether the President was told about Abu Ghraib in January (when e-mails informed the Pentagon of the seriousness of the abuses and of the existence of photographs) or in March (when Taguba filed his report), Bush made no known effort to forcefully address the treatment of prisoners before the scandal became public, or to reëvaluate the training of military police and interrogators, or the practices of the task forces that he had authorized. Instead, Bush acquiesced in the prosecution of a few lower-level soldiers. The President’s failure to act decisively resonated through the military chain of command: aggressive prosecution of crimes against detainees was not conducive to a successful career.

In January of 2006, Taguba received a telephone call from General Richard Cody, the Army’s Vice-Chief of Staff. “This is your Vice,” he told Taguba. “I need you to retire by January of 2007.” No pleasantries were exchanged, although the two generals had known each other for years, and, Taguba said, “He offered no reason.” (A spokesperson for Cody said, “Conversations regarding general officer management are considered private personnel discussions. General Cody has great respect for Major General Taguba as an officer, leader, and American patriot.”)

“They always shoot the messenger,” Taguba told me. “To be accused of being overzealous and disloyal—that cuts deep into me. I was being ostracized for doing what I was asked to do.”

Taguba went on, “There was no doubt in my mind that this stuff”—the explicit images—“was gravitating upward. It was standard operating procedure to assume that this had to go higher. The President had to be aware of this.” He said that Rumsfeld, his senior aides, and the high-ranking generals and admirals who stood with him as he misrepresented what he knew about Abu Ghraib had failed the nation.

“From the moment a soldier enlists, we inculcate loyalty, duty, honor, integrity, and selfless service,” Taguba said. “And yet when we get to the senior-officer level we forget those values. I know that my peers in the Army will be mad at me for speaking out, but the fact is that we violated the laws of land warfare in Abu Ghraib. We violated the tenets of the Geneva Convention. We violated our own principles and we violated the core of our military values. The stress of combat is not an excuse, and I believe, even today, that those civilian and military leaders responsible should be held accountable.”

[LizW]

23. An absolute MUST READ!

Sy Hersh is an amazing reporter. The article is long, contains immense amounts of detail, but is organized and flows so that it is not a difficult read. It is horrifying, infuriating and depressing, and yet there is hope. There is great evil in this country and we have much work to do to eradicate it, but there are also heroes.

[gordianot]

25. At least they are not given cyanide tablets for the propaganda value of a State funeral.

Give it some time.

[Doc Martin]

28. Put Bush in Jail

Is it possible for citizens to appeal to the UN when their government leaders are committing war crimes?

[calimary]

29. kpete - you sure are sweet! Another excellent post for us!

You are not a poster. You are a public service!!!

Kicked, Rec'd and Bookmarked.

:yourock:

[EFerrari]

30. Not depressing! Both Hersh and Taguba are putting out truth.

:toast: to both of them.

[Peace Patriot]

38. I agree that the truth is redeeming and refreshing, however bad it may be.

If we don't know the worst, we cannot hope to restore our democracy (or is it create our democracy anew?), and instigate preventive measures, so that such things never happen again. I believe in this absolutely. But I can also understand depression and dismay at the depths to which our country has sunk, at the corruption of people at all levels, and at the horror of it all. I would just say, to those who are upset or depressed, that we are not the first country to struggle with the sadism and dreadful crimes of its leadership and horrible harm to human beings--South Africa comes to mind--and that our government has been far from innocent of such things in the past, although they tended to use proxies for torture, assassinations and death squad activities. There are many examples in Latin America of U.S. proxy crimes of a similar nature.

One big difference between now, and past events of U.S. government crime of this kind, is that it WAS by proxy, and sometimes with selective, secret U.S. "advisers." The population of the U.S. was largely kept ignorant of it--by design--and often only found out much later what our government was complicit in. So, on the surface, the U.S. remained a refuge for the victims of such crimes--and, indeed, a beacon of hope, a place where the law forbids such crimes, and where the law is enforced, where publicity about atrocities could be used to seek justice or to shame and pressure governments that were oppressing people in this way. And this notion of the U.S. as a refuge had depth in the sense that most Americans would never approve of torture, assassinations and death squads, and would bring pressure on U.S. politicians to investigate and prosecute such crimes, and to stop such crimes--as has sometimes happened. That is WHY such things are held as tight secrets in our supposedly open, accountable society--for fear of public reaction. And it is why the U.S. has always tried to keep its hands clean--to use proxies and secret agents. Because of us--the people--and what we might do to politicians, the military, intelligence agencies or corporations who are complicit in evil deeds.

We have an example even today. The disclosures about mass slaughter of union organizers, peasants and leftists in Colombia, and related drug trafficking, closely tied to the Colombian government, are holding up "war on drugs" and other funding for Colombia in Congress, right now. Why? Because MOST Americans are appalled at such things, and when they become public, pressure is put on government to stop them. (Of course, the Bushite Republicans wouldn't care. Thieves and sadists, every one of them. But some Democrats DO care--not enough, but some.)

Further, torture has been a particular issue in the military and in the intelligence community. Everyone knew they were forbidden to do it. That is the law. It has occurred in the past, but I would say that, ever since the Iran-Contra scandal, it has been rare. The My Lai massacre in Vietnam may have been a turning point toward better adherence to UCMJ and Geneva Convention standards.

The dreadful thing about the Bush policy is that it is so widespread and so brazen--a clear and massive breach of all such standards--and, most of all, that it has been OFFICIAL POLICY, directed by the President, with no regard for the law, and with a bullying attitude toward the people in the military and intelligence community who DO have standards and a code of ethics. Anyone might forgive the use the torture in an emergency situation (the "24" TV show scenarios). It may be illegal and unethical, but people who are afraid and stressed, or imagining great harm to others, or suffering PTSS, might merit some sympathy if they "lose it" and fall prey to "the end justifies the means." But a SYSTEMATIC degradation of all ethical standards, coming straight from the Pentagon and the White House, and corrupting people all down the chain of commend, to commit GRATUITOUS atrocities, is unprecedented in modern U.S. history. It was state policy in the south toward slaves, and federal policy toward Native Americans a century ago, but has become intolerable in modern times.

Bush & cabal have deliberately and systematically breached the intolerable. They have disgraced our country. They have disgraced the military. They have very nearly extinguished that beacon of hope that American once was.

It is best that we know this, and that we consider it not just from an emotional place, but also with strategy in mind. You can be sure that Seymour Hersh is thinking this way. Otherwise he would not have gone to the trouble to document it and publish his findings. Publicity is part of strategy. A further element of strategy involves our power, as a people, to direct our government's policy and to hold government accountable. Regarding that, the integrity of our elections must be a priority. We must get rid of secretly coded electronic voting machines, and eliminate the other methods of rightwing theft of our elections (voter "caging lists," etc.) Without transparent vote counting, other reforms are impossible.

Thirdly, we must beware of the syndrome by which the Bush Junta takes us off the cliff of fascism, and is so appalling, that we REDUCE our standards for judging what a progressive is, in our Democratic Party leaders. Bush has pioneered a fascist government, with implementation of all sorts of unconstitutional powers, plainly illegal powers, and abuses of power, that NONE of the current Democratic candidates for president (except Dennis Kucinich) has fully disavowed. This worries me a great deal. Are we going to go only part of the way back to lawful government, under, say, Hillary Clinton?

We might not be able to do much about it, under current conditions of non-transparent vote counting, but we should be aware of it. Democratic politicians SHOULD BE screaming bloody murder about torture (among other things), and should have been doing so all along. It is intolerable in our society. And their quietude about this (and some other things--domestic spying, the "unitary executive, preemptive war, et al) is NOT OKAY.

We can look to South America for examples of past U.S. perfidy, but we can also, now, look to South America for models of how to recover from rightwing juntas, and from hair-raising atrocities--torture, murder, brutal oppression. After decades and centuries of often U.S.-backed oppression, South America is emerging as the beacon of hope. Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, Nicaragua, all now with leftist (majorityist) governments, transparent elections, and lively political cultures, on paths toward social justice, peacefulness, inclusiveness and self-determination. If the South Americans can do it, after all they've suffered, so can we.

[Blackhatjack]

31. Taguba is a hero and Rumsfeld and his cronies are war criminals....n/t

[illinoisprogressive]

32. Before I dig into the the article I wanted to thank you for it.

[Senator]

33. Impeachment -- One Count -- Geneva Violations

We can -- and must try to -- convict on torture/war crimes

The Senate has already voted 90-9 in support of the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment (sadly negated, via "rule by signing statement").

But gaining conviction is virtually irrelevant. If charges are warranted (and they are) they must be lodged. Failure to do so is complicity -- approval -- exoneration for the unlawful acts. In this case, that means torture and war crimes. Without impeachment we formally become (remain) a War Criminal Nation.

It really is just that simple. We (the U.S.) don't get to rewrite those rules. And failure by gov't officials (the Dem majority in Congress) to report and ACT to stop ongoing war crimes is a war crime in itself.

Beyond that, simple morality/decency demand that you do the right thing without regard to personal/political gain or cost.

And even by a craven political/electoral yardstick, the DC Dems ongoing failure to even stand and object formally (actually DO something), solidifies the perception of Dems as the party of weakness, fecklessness, and dithering. They will remain a non-alternative to meet the fears that will continue to be mongerred full tilt by the neofascists.

Only Impeachment ... is a substantive act.

The rest is just (masturbatory) rationalization for inaction.

Yes, even "Cut the Funding II -- The Sequel." (We've watched this movie before.)

It IS our positive agenda. Literally a panacea for the Dem Party.

It is also our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

Let's just end this thing.

--

[BeHereNow]

35. Good lord, I think I'm going to be sick- HOW can these people not be in prison?

I think what really sickens me with fear is the fact that,
given the track record so far on neocon scandals, NOTHING will come of this
brutal report.
Can I get a witness?
God bless Hersh.
God damn the neocons.

BHN

[G_j]

36. K & R

wow

[Theduckno2]

37. They want complete authority , yet deny all responsibility when the awful truth comes out.

I heard Bush's speech today and even though there had been a rubber-stamping Republican Congress for four years alongside a Republican President, he maintained that Democrats were fiscally irresponsible!

Thanks for posting Kpete. Rec'd

[La_Fourmi_Rouge]

39. Kicked, Rec'd, and Bookmarked.

Sad story... I thought we had better military leadership but I am beginning to think they're just as f**ked up as the civilians. OK, so I'm a fool - I thought better of them as a class of people.

BTW - both my parents served in WWII, and I always had enormous respect for officers.

[Solly Mack]

40. I'm on my 4th reading of the article since it was posted

and I want to scream - not that it would do any good.

We have war criminals in the executive office.
Our government tortures people.
Most of the guilty are still in office and they are still walking around free.

There is NO acceptable excuse for that.

America has no excuse for this...none.

[TankLV]

56. Exactly. I've been saying this for YEARS now - to deaf ears...

Nobody seems to care - NOBODY.

We have become the "good german"...

utterly and completely disgusting...

but we here have known this almost AS IT WAS OCCURING.

Only now, and I fear much later still, will the rest of the country "know" it, also...

But remember this: THE REPUKES NOT ONLY KNOW OF THIS, BUT THEY WOULD DO EVEN WORSE IN THE FUTURE if the repuke candidates' "debates" are any indication, plus the overall 60% approval raing among repukes FOR these policies...

[Solly Mack]

68. That's the part that keeps me awake at night - nobody seems to care

and I'm serious...I really do stay awake at night thinking about all this

[demnan]

42. From Page Eight:

A former high-level Defense Department official said that, when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, Senator John Warner, then the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, was warned “to back off” on the investigation, because “it would spill over to more important things.” A spokesman for Warner acknowledged that there had been pressure on the Senator, but said that Warner had stood up to it—insisting on putting Rumsfeld under oath for his May 7th testimony, for example, to the Secretary’s great displeasure.

Good to know Senator Warner had principles regarding this matter.

[The Count]

43. At least for a short while - as the scandal has ultimately been snuffed

The GOP dissidents always get brought back on the plantation and quieted. Remember Warner briefly opposed the surge as well? Overly celebrated for his "unprecedented" courage - it's always more respectable when one of THEM dies it. It lasted about 5 seconds - and then nobody called him a coward - that's only reserved for Democrats.

[Philosoraptor]

45. .............

[derby378]

46. This statement from Taguba says it all...

Upon Gen. Abizaid informing Taguba that he and his report would be investigated: "I’d been in the Army thirty-two years by then, and it was the first time that I thought I was in the Mafia."

[ThomWV]

48. Looks like a Pulitzer to me

I presume Columbia will spot this one ....

[seafan]

50. Fake names used by task force... Computers scrubbed of 70% of files....

Fake names used by task force.

Computer *malfunction*scrubbed 70% of the files before they could be investigated.


All of this was intentionally committed to halt all investigation into who authorized and committed these heinous acts of prisoner torture.



More from Hersh:

.....

In some cases, the secret operations remained unaccountable. In an April, 2005, memorandum, a C.I.D. officer—his name was redacted—complained to C.I.D. headquarters, at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, about the impossibility of investigating military members of a Special Access Program suspected of prisoner abuse:


(C.I.D.) has been unable to thoroughly investigate . . . due to the suspects and witnesses involvement in Special Access Programs (SAP) and/or the security classification of the unit they were assigned to during the offense under investigation. Attempts by Special Agents . . . to be “read on” to these programs has (sic) been unsuccessful.

The C.I.D. officer wrote that “fake names were used” by members of the task force; he also told investigators that the unit had a “major computer malfunction which resulted in them losing 70 per cent of their files; therefore, they can’t find the cases we need to review.”

The officer concluded that the investigation “does not need to be reopened. Hell, even if we reopened it we wouldn’t get any more information than we already have.”

[Spazito]

51. Mr. Hersh is a national treasure, imo

His integrity and passion for truth above all else continues, thank goodness. General Taguba also deserves many accolades for his honesty and integrity, speaking out despite knowing there will be adverse consequences for doing so.

Recommended.

DU's archives show DUers were covering a lot of this back when it first became public:

The other prisoners (The Women of Abu Ghraib)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=570508

WP: Iraqis Provide More Details of Abuse

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=570725

Abuse Scandal Focuses on White House Memo
Legal Counsel Wrote Geneva Conventions 'Obsolete'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=560305

and, finally, this excellent In Depth article about Abu Ghraib from the CBC:

INDEPTH: IRAQ
Abu Ghraib

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/iraq/abughraib.html

[RadiDem]

52. Another K&R - A must-read

[The M Double]

53. I love Hersh!

KICK...

[tanyev]

55. May Don Rumsfeld have his own personal Abu Ghraib waiting for him in hell.

[MsLeopard]

57. From page nine

Taguba, on being told to resign by January 2007:

“They always shoot the messenger,” Taguba told me. “To be accused of being overzealous and disloyal—that cuts deep into me. I was being ostracized for doing what I was asked to do.”

It's the story of this entire maladministration - they do the opposite of what one expects, every time - "ostracized for doing what I was asked to do.” There's a right way to do something, a normal way, and then there's the Bush way. I agree with a previous poster, I do not recognize my country.

[Gregorian]

58. Guess which one of the generals is guilty of perjury.

Karpinsky, Taguba, Miller. One of them lied to Congress. Hint: the answer is Miller.


Wow. You deserve an award for best lurkery.

[MsLeopard]

60. You got me....

I've been around a while, just not much to say..... :blush:

[Gregorian]

62. I don't either. But it doesn't seem to stop me.

haha.

[tblue37]

59. Even a dead mob boss's wife complains about the

"mob" in Washington. John Gotti's wife said reporters should be covering the mob in Washington instead of hounding her at her husband's grave.

This is a chilling statement by Taguba: ". . . it was the first time that I thought I was in the Mafia.” He gets it.

[Broadslidin]

64. The Sooner the Communist Chinese Pull the Financial Plug on the Fetid us empire...

The Better for World.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

65. k-i-c-k

[EV_Ares]

67. Rumsfeld should be tried by the World Court - Didn't want to abide by

the Geneva Convention Rule. There are others that should go down with him as well but he of all should be tried.

How many in this administration thumb their nose at this congress and lie to them?

When is this congress going to get pissed enough; what will it take for the American people to see what they are doing ot ths country?

[Historic NY]

69. They can't handle the truth and go General shopping.....

nothing is scared, duty, honor, country is thrown out. No wonder our army is FUBAR.

[bobthedrummer]

70. kick