Zarqawi's Grisly Path To Power

[wade]

Which shows it is not policy. Do you really think if it were policy, that the military could not contain it as a secret. I am sure there would be many solidiers who would be more than willing to go along with such policy and keep their mouth shut. Just the mere fact that whistleblowers were there proves the point !

THEY TRIED TO MAINTAIN IT AS A SECRET AND THEY FAILED!

And it was not the soldiers who "blew the whistle" on this whole thing, it was the friends and families to whome they sent the photos. They didn't think these photos would leak out, but they did, because one Dad in particular, a decorated WWII Vet btw, could not accept that this was what the USA was doing and effectively turned in his own son! Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today.

Rumsfield thought he could get away with this, but just in case he has positioned scape-goats to take the fall for him. That too is sickening, but that's another topic.

However you are missing the point. These abuses did occur, and they are public knowlege, and the Arab world has seen the photos and read over the numerous accounts. That is what matters in this fiasco.

Wade.

 

[Zhukov]

Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today.

Wrong. The story had been presented to the press back in January, after investigations of the offenders had already begun. However absent the photos they (the media) didn't feel the need to report it. No one leaked this story. The DoD delivered it to the media who ignored it until they got some sexy pictures to sex up the report because sex sells.

The U.S. military itself -- not Mr. Hersh or any other reporter – first publicized the facts of the abuses at Abu Ghraib in January 2004, four months before Mr. Hersh “broke” the story.

http://www.dod.gov/releases/2004/nr20040910-1240.html

But flattening a Mosque which is considered one of the 5 most holey sights in Islam is a choice with significant consequences.

Would it have been alright to drop a neutron bomb on said mosque? Any sort of 'significant consequences' associated with that?

 

[wade]

Wrong. The story had been presented to the press back in January, after investigations of the offenders had already begun. However absent the photos they (the media) didn't feel the need to report it. No one leaked this story. The DoD delivered it to the media who ignored it until they got some sexy pictures to sex up the report because sex sells.
http://www.dod.gov/releases/2004/nr20040910-1240.html

Well, so they claim. But I sure cannot find it in the records! Please point out where the DoD delivered this info to the media in January 2004:

Jan 2004 News Transcripts
Jan 2004 News Releases
Jan 2004 News Articles
Jan 2004 Press Advisories

I sure cannot find even one mention of prisoner abuse in these documents. Perhaps it was brought up to Congress in a secret session, but so far I can find nothing that was made available to the public or the "media" in January 2004. I've also spent a fair bit of time using their search engine, but unfortunately it does not allow advanced searches.

I'm sure they have some statement made to the press such as "we have found some isolated cases of detainee abuse and have initiated steps to rectify it" - ie: an ass covering statement planted for future reference, but which gives the impression there is no problem at the time it is given. As far as I can see, this statement about the DoD having "delivered" the story to the press in Jan. 2004 is pure spin control and has no substance whatsoever.

I'm sure you will disagree - so find this supposed statement to the media if you can and lets see it!

Would it have been alright to drop a neutron bomb on said mosque? Any sort of 'significant consequences' associated with that?

It would depend on our goals and objectives. If our intent is to install a democracy in Iraq - no. If our intent is to make the Arabs re-think their Jihad, yes. Even the thought that Mecca might be turned into a field of radiocative glass would make them seriously reconsider their course. But you certainly cannot undertake both strategies in this "war on terror" together - that of course would be pure folly.

Wade.

 

[eric]

And it was not the soldiers who "blew the whistle" on this whole thing, it was the friends and families to whome they sent the photos. They didn't think these photos would leak out, but they did, because one Dad in particular, a decorated WWII Vet btw, could not accept that this was what the USA was doing and effectively turned in his own son! Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today.

Wade, do you realize just how stupid this sounds ??????

Really, just think about how long secrets were kept concerning new weapons systems, and the amount of people who worked on them. They had friends and family too. Come on, if it was such a big secret, wouldn't the mail and phone calls have been censored ???

You really need to give the military a little more credit my friend !!

 

[Zhukov]

Well, so they claim. But I sure cannot find it in the records! Please point out where the DoD delivered this info to the media in January 2004:

So they claim? Yes, so they claim, and if you can find a reputable refutation of the DoD's claims by all means post it. I've provided a source that contradicts you, refute it.

As far as I can see, this statement about the DoD having "delivered" the story to the press in Jan. 2004 is pure spin control and has no substance whatsoever.

Well it would certainly be easy to refute, and I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would love to do so. Let's see if you can find something along those lines. Again, I've provided a source that contradicts you. Refute it. You're conspiracy theory speculation hardly qualifies as a refutation.

On 16 January, that's when General Kimmitt went to the public -- I don't know how many people saw that report, but he pretty much said what it was: we've got reports of abuse, there supposedly are pictures, and gave a general description of that abuse, a very general description.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A9251-2004May7&notFound=true

Disprove Gen. Myers.

After you're done with that, you also said "Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today."

Still going on today? Here's indication the investigation was already under way. Refute this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/


Don't blame the military if the press didn't feel the need to follow up on the story at the time. The military reported the incident shortly after they learned about it and had begun their investigation, when they didn't have too many details, and the press passed. As far as the military was concerned, they would handle it, and the would answer truthfully any question that were asked. They reported it, they were investigating it, the people responsible would be punished. They didn't want it plastered all over every newspaper in the world, and rightly so. It was despicable behavior and it embarrased the whole country. But also it was an internal matter that they were already in the process of handling.

Several months later pictures show up of nude men in demeaning poses and the press, dishonestly in my opinion and with ample across the aisle support, portrayed the whole incident as an ongoing atrocity and the modus operandi of the administration.

You've bought into that.

 

[wade]

Wade, do you realize just how stupid this sounds ??????

Really, just think about how long secrets were kept concerning new weapons systems, and the amount of people who worked on them. They had friends and family too. Come on, if it was such a big secret, wouldn't the mail and phone calls have been censored ???

You really need to give the military a little more credit my friend !!

The nature of the info is different. Only a few weapons systems have the kind of "secret" nature you describe - the F117 for instance, and even it was rumored to exist well before it was made public.

Having worked on secret level projects in the past, I can tell you for sure that security is much tighter than possible in a prison with hundreds of personel at all levels. When working on secret level communications systems, only a few of us knew what was going on in any particular part of the project. A lot of internal mis-info was also involved. Had a leak of any significant detail occured, they'd have known within a few people who must have leaked it, and our contracts involved very stiff $ penalties for any leak (not to mention possible criminal penalties). Also there was no moral issue going on - no one was being physically hurt.

They just didn't think they had a security concern - they didn't think any of those who had access to the prisoners were going to blow the whistle. The nature of communciations today is such that they'd have had to institute some serious restrictions on the troops and contractors to control communications - and this would have raised a red flag in and of itself.

Look at the facts - the info did leak out. The images were sent by Sgt. Fredricks to his dad who then leaked them to CBS. Prior to this, no public info about anything other than minor abuse that had occured, been identified, and rectified, had been released.

Wade.

 

[wade]

So they claim? Yes, so they claim, and if you can find a reputable refutation of the DoD's claims by all means post it. I've provided a source that contradicts you, refute it.

I have. I showed that none of the DOD announcements, articles, press-releases, or News for the January period mentioned focus on the topic, or as best I could tell even mention it.

Well it would certainly be easy to refute, and I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would love to do so. Let's see if you can find something along those lines. Again, I've provided a source that contradicts you. Refute it. You're conspiracy theory speculation hardly qualifies as a refutation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A9251-2004May7&notFound=true

Disprove Gen. Myers.

You are playing the old game of "prove something does not exist". You are smart enough to know that proving a negative is impossible.

Quoting a source that came out after CBS broke the story on the prisoner abuse and trying to claim that is proof that in fact the DOD had broke the story earlier is no proof at all.

After you're done with that, you also said "Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today."

Still going on today? Here's indication the investigation was already under way. Refute this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/

Don't blame the military if the press didn't feel the need to follow up on the story at the time. The military reported the incident shortly after they learned about it and had begun their investigation, when they didn't have too many details, and the press passed. As far as the military was concerned, they would handle it, and the would answer truthfully any question that were asked. They reported it, they were investigating it, the people responsible would be punished. They didn't want it plastered all over every newspaper in the world, and rightly so. It was despicable behavior and it embarrased the whole country. But also it was an internal matter that they were already in the process of handling.

But this report was not made until sometime after Febuary 2004, so it does not support the contention that the issue was made public to the media in January 2004. This is an internal report which they later chose to make public because it was prudent to do so to allow them to say "see, we know about the abuses and are dealing with them".

Several months later pictures show up of nude men in demeaning poses and the press, dishonestly in my opinion and with ample across the aisle support, portrayed the whole incident as an ongoing atrocity and the modus operandi of the administration.

You've bought into that.

So far you have not proven that anything was actually made public by the DOD until after the CBS story broke. I am not disputing that the miltiary discovered these abuses and took action to rectify the situation, what I am disputing is that they ever had any intention of making it public, and that any statements about abuse prior to the story having gone public through other sources were vague statements carefully placed where they'd not likely be noticed and were not sufficiently detailed to make meaningful "news".

There is the further question as to what action was taken based upon this report, and when it was taken.

But all this is really secondary to the primary issue, which is that these abuses DID take place. Clearly prisoners were sodimized, murdered, and in at least one case raped. My point is that with these actions having been taken, the Arab World, and indeed much of the rest of the world as well, is not going to have much sympathy for us when captives are beheaded or otherwise brutilized.

Please understand, I'm not in anyway condoning the behavior of the kidnappers. I think if we can capture them they should be tried and executed. However, if we are going to regain our credibilty we are going to have to severely punish the abusers of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are going to have to find out who beat those two detainees to death and execute them. I don't believe there is a chance in hell this will happen.

Wade.

 

[CSM]

THEY TRIED TO MAINTAIN IT AS A SECRET AND THEY FAILED!

And it was not the soldiers who "blew the whistle" on this whole thing, it was the friends and families to whome they sent the photos. They didn't think these photos would leak out, but they did, because one Dad in particular, a decorated WWII Vet btw, could not accept that this was what the USA was doing and effectively turned in his own son! Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today.

Rumsfield thought he could get away with this, but just in case he has positioned scape-goats to take the fall for him. That too is sickening, but that's another topic.

However you are missing the point. These abuses did occur, and they are public knowlege, and the Arab world has seen the photos and read over the numerous accounts. That is what matters in this fiasco.

Wade.

Not entirely correct.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/20/sprj.nirq.abuse/index.html

Details of Army's abuse investigation surface
Pentagon source: Photos may show soldiers, Iraqi detainees
From Barbara Starr
CNN Washington Bureau
Wednesday, January 21, 2004 Posted: 7:37 AM EST (1237 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sources have revealed new details from the Army's criminal investigation into reports of abuse of Iraqi detainees, including the location of the suspected crimes and evidence that is being sought.

Also, it was Spc Darby who initially reported the abuse to his chain of command by slipping a note under his commander's door. The Army began investigating as early as July (see Lessons Learned, AKO). None of it was covered up. The Army thought it was an internal matter and were working on Article 32 hearings very early on (Article 32 is similar to a Grand Jury).

The CD with the photos cam only after it was made known publicaly that the Army was looking for the photographic evidence.

 

[Zhukov]

I have. I showed that none of the DOD announcements, articles, press-releases, or News for the January period mentioned focus on the topic, or as best I could tell even mention it.

You are playing the old game of "prove something does not exist".

No, because I believe it does exist.

And you haven't refuted it because absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You've shown links that don't have that particular transcript. From the dates, it looks like they don't have quite a few transcripts.

But this report was not made until sometime after Febuary 2004, so it does not support the contention that the issue was made public to the media in January 2004.

Nor was it intended to. You claimed if we hadn't heard about the abuse it would still be going on today. That document proves the abuse had stopped and an investigation had begun months before the story came up. But they just made that up too, right? What a utilitarian argument.

I am not disputing that the miltiary discovered these abuses and took action to rectify the situation,

Sure you are, or at least you did. If not then what does this mean?

Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today.

my emphasis

 

[CSM]

First off, with respect to your "circumstances of detention" argument, according to our own people, something around 60% of those held at Abu Gharib were being held without cause and should have been released. It was recommended that they be released but they were not.

Look, I'm not trying to say it's right or it's justified. If you think that you are missing the point. I'm trying to point out that once we opened pandora's box by treating Arab detainee's and prisoners with brutality, a complete lack of respect, and outright torture and in at least 17 cases murder, we lost any right to whine and cry about how they treat their captives.


And just because they show film of the beheadings but we only see the mangled corpse in a still photo after a man has been beaten to death does not make any difference in the heinousness of the act itself. Are you seriously saying that because it's been filmed that makes it more wrong than if it'd only been photographed?

And those civilians are often not really civilians. Usually they are contractors who are quite well armed and not subject to military law. To our enemies, who consider this a war, they are non military combatants, and under the GC this makes them spies, and spies have no protections. The journalists are another matter, but they have usually been released.

It's a sad, disgusting, disgraceful situation.

Wade.

I think what is more important than who committed what abuse is HOW the perpatrators are being handled. Those who tortured prisoners at Abu Grhaib are being prosecuted to the full extent that both military and civilian law allows. Those who are kidnapping and beheading and otherwise torturing prisoners from the Arab world are being viewed and treated as anything from insurgents/freedom fighters to heroes of the Islamic religion.

While there is great outcry from the Western World against those US soldiers, civilians, and even the entire military chain of command, there is little or no outcry from any part of the world against the subhumans committing those atrocities.

There is no justification on EITHER side for treating prisoners inhumanely. However, excusing the actions of the terrorists because of the abuses at Abu Grhaib is wrong. They need to be brought to justice just as the sickos from our side need to be.

 

[wade]

Zhukov,

What I meant was that without the public seeing those photos, abuse would continue. The most aggrevious abuses would probably have been stopped, but the treatment of the prisioners would still include torture. It probablly still does, but on a much smaller scale.

As for the punishements - clearly a lot of people were involved in this mess, yet as far as I can see, only about 6 are potentially going to recieve any real punishment, and there will clearly be no executions or even life sentances.

We do not cheer about this behavior on our militaries part, but it is already largely forgotten.

Wade.

 

[CSM]

Zhukov,

What I meant was that without the public seeing those photos, abuse would continue. The most aggrevious abuses would probably have been stopped, but the treatment of the prisioners would still include torture. It probablly still does, but on a much smaller scale.

As for the punishements - clearly a lot of people were involved in this mess, yet as far as I can see, only about 6 are potentially going to recieve any real punishment, and there will clearly be no executions or even life sentances.

We do not cheer about this behavior on our militaries part, but it is already largely forgotten.

Wade.

Would executions and life sentences make it all better? Heck we can't even get a death sentence for someone like Charles Manson and you want to execute some PFC for putting panties on a guys head. I know you mean those responsible for the deaths of Iraqi prisoners and I am exaggerating.

As for being forgotten, that may be true among our civilian population, but it sure isn't forgotten among the military circles.

 

[Zhukov]

What I meant was that without the public seeing those photos, abuse would continue. The most aggrevious (egregious+greivous?) abuses would probably have been stopped, but the treatment of the prisioners would still include torture. It probablly still does, but on a much smaller scale.

So you're saying without the photos the abuse would have continued but abuse continues? Got it. So bascially, after the photos were released nothing really changed that the military hadn't already changed or wasn't planning on changing. So what was your point again about the importance concerning who broke the story when?

but it is already largely forgotten.

By whom? Here we are talking about. Not two weeks ago I thought I heard something about it on the TV in passing. While court martials continue, the military certainly hasn't forgotten about it. And all those dead Sudanese whose plight was ignored by the media because there was a naked-man-pyramid in Iraq haven't forgo....

 

[wade]

Would executions and life sentences make it all better? Heck we can't even get a death sentence for someone like Charles Manson and you want to execute some PFC for putting panties on a guys head. I know you mean those responsible for the deaths of Iraqi prisoners and I am exaggerating.

As for being forgotten, that may be true among our civilian population, but it sure isn't forgotten among the military circles.

No I don't want to execute some PFC for "putting panties on some guys head". You must have missed the fact that at least two detainee's were beaten to death at Abu Gharib. The description is that two were beaten to death and the room in which it was done was "covered in blood".

As for it being remembered in military circles - evidently not since you think this is about panties on heads, not cold blooded murder.

Wade.

 

[Zhukov]

and the room in which it was done was "covered in blood".

That would probably describe every room in that prison.

 

[wade]

So you're saying without the photos the abuse would have continued but abuse continues? Got it. So bascially, after the photos were released nothing really changed that the military hadn't already changed or wasn't planning on changing. So what was your point again about the importance concerning who broke the story when?

My point is that the DOD didn't really "break the story" in January as claimed in the article you posted - at least not in anything I could find on the DOD site, and you have not come up with anything either.

Again, abuse probably does still continue, but on a much smaller scale and it is probably less severe. That is hardly "nothing really changed".

In my opinion, the only time physical or psychological abuse even approaching that reported is justified is when there is specific time-critical information that it is honestly believed the subject has. The general "maybe we can get some intel out of these dogs" abuse at Abu Gharib and other detention facilities is unacceptable.

And, the abuse of captive suspects, who have not put up any fight, on their way to detention facilities has to stop immeadiately.

Wade.

 

[wade]

That would probably describe every room in that prison.

No, the discription given indicated that this room was very abnormal. You provided the report that had that info in it - didn't you read it?

 

[Zhukov]

and you have not come up with anything either.

Nothing....except the as yet unrefuted statements of multiple senior administration and military officials of course.

No, the discription given indicated that this room was very abnormal. You provided the report that had that info in it - didn't you read it?

I don't see anything referencing 'blood covered walls' in the Taguba report. What are you referring to?

My point is that the DOD didn't really "break the story" in ...

No, your other point, which was:

Without those photo's having been leaked to CBS the whole thing would have been kept under wraps and we'd probably never have heard about it and it would still be going on today.

But we did hear about it, and in your opinion abuse is still going on.

Abuse which according to you:

The most aggrevious abuses would probably have been stopped, but the treatment of the prisioners would still include torture. It probablly still does, but on a much smaller scale.

would still include torture (you're 'on a much smaller scale' comment notwithstanding) even hadn't the photos been released.

So the relase of photos might have, in your opinion, reduced the amount of torture that is going on in Iraq. That leaves us with little else but your own opinion, which itself isn't even well defined.

 

[dmp]

That leaves us with little else but your own opinion, which itself isn't even well defined.

it's as if John Kerry himself joined the board.

 

[wade]

Sorry Zhukov, my error. It was a quote in the New Yorker article I posted.

What we heard about were ill defined abuses, and that there were some abuses. What we did not hear about was outright torture, murder, and rape, and I don't believe we ever would have if the story had not been leaked to the press.

Wade.