VoteVets endorses General Sanchez for U.S. Senate, the same Sanchez who approved torture at Abu Ghraib

what is it with memory in my country...? either people don't remember, don't WANT to remember or never have bothered to find out in the first damn place...

here's my response to votevets and their execrable endorsement of ricardo sanchez for the u.s. senate seat in texas...

Dear Friends.

Ricardo Sanchez is the one who authorized the torture/enhanced interrogation techniques used at Abu Ghraib and then lied about it in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee on 19 May 2004. He would like you to believe he's rehabilitated but, unless and until he is held accountable for his past actions, he has no business presenting himself as a serious candidate for the United States Senate. Furthermore, as a Vietnam Veteran and someone who is currently working in Afghanistan, i think it is an absolute disgrace that an organization like VoteVets would endorse such a candidate.

Before putting more of your organizational credibility on the line, I suggest you follow up on the following links.

Blog posts on General Sanchez

Copies of the documents authorizing torture techniques under General Sanchez' signature

Washington Post story on Sanchez' testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee

I know General Sanchez thinks all of this is behind him and, for most people who don't pay close attention, it probably is, but General Sanchez is just as guilty of war crimes as George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and, more recently, Barack Obama.

Shame on you VoteVets for not properly vetting your endorsements.

Sincerely,

XXX XXXXX
U.S. Army 1968-1971
Vietnam Veteran

and here's the votevets endorsement...

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Ashwin Madia <info@votevets.org> wrote:

Dear XXXX,

Today I’m writing with some exciting news. We have a chance to send a veteran to the Senate, from Texas. Not only that, but this veteran also happens to be a retired Lieutenant General who commanded forces in Iraq. Today, we’re endorsing Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez (USA, Ret.) for Senate. He needs your help.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO SANCHEZ FOR SENATE

General Sanchez has a compelling story and honorably served our country in uniform. He’ll make an outstanding Senator for the people of Texas. We're always happy to see veterans entering politics as a way to continue their public service, but it's especially encouraging to see one of our military's finest minds, General Sanchez, look to continue that service as a public servant. General Sanchez knows what this generation of warriors has gone through, and how Washington can best serve them. For the people of the state of Texas, they will have a Senator who is committed to America’s security, and just as committed to the state he loves

General Sanchez graduated from Texas A&I University in Kingsville, Texas, and was commissioned as a second lieutenant in 1973. After decades of service, following nomination to Lieutenant General, he assumed command in Baghdad, Iraq, of the Army’s Fifth Corps and became the commander of one of the largest combat forces deployed in US military history. Upon the reorganization of command-and-control structures in Iraq, he commanded Headquarters, Multi-National Forces (Iraq) from 14 May 2004 to 1 July 2004. After 33 years of service, he retired in 2006.

CLICK HERE TO SEND RICARDO SANCHEZ TO THE SENATE

Texas is a huge state, and running for office there isn’t cheap. But any donation you can afford will go a long way towards sending Ric Sanchez to the Senate. This is an open seat, because Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson is stepping down, so it is an excellent opportunity for a candidate with strong credentials – like General Sanchez – to win. Please click the link above, and help get him to the finish line!

Sincerely,

Ashwin Madia

Iraq War Veteran
Interim Chairman, VoteVets.org

Paid for by VoteVets Political Action Committee
Not Authorized by Any Candidate or Candidate’s Committee

sad... accountability seems to have disappeared from the face of the earth...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Accountability for torture - will we EVER see it...?

i'm not wild about this decision, to say the least, but i might find it a little easier to swallow IF it was combined with an announcement that those responsible for authorizing the torture-based interrogation techniques were going to be held accountable... unfortunately, whatever hope i might have held for the restoration of accountability and the rule of law under obama is fast fading...

Administration: No Charges Over CIA's Enhanced Interrogations
Justice Department releases Bush-era legal memos about harsh techniques used by CIA interrogators on terrorism suspects. Obama says that no charges will be filed against CIA agents who were operating "in good faith."

in case we've lost sight of just exactly WHO is accountable, here's the february 7, 2002, memorandum from george bush officially opening the door to the whole goddam mess...

Page 1


Page 2


and here's the december 2, 2002, memo from donald rumsfeld adding his authorization to those techniques... this is the memo that contains the infamous hand-written comment from the donald asking why, when HE stands for 8-10 hours a day, a detainee is limited to only 4 hours...



here's the january 25, 2002, alberto gonzales memo specifically waiving the geneva conventions...



below are links to the complete list of the specific techniques that were authorized for use in iraq on september 14, 2003, by general ricardo sanchez, who has since tried to cover his ass, a la richard armitage (see previous post), by repudiating the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques," AFTER perjuring himself before the senate armed services committee on may 19, 2004 (see my archive of previous posts here)...


General Ricardo Sanchez, Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy, Transmittal Memorandum

General Ricardo Sanchez, Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy, Cover Memorandum

General Ricardo Sanchez, Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy, Interrogation Techniques, A-L

General Ricardo Sanchez, Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy, Interrogation Techniques, M-X

General Ricardo Sanchez, Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy, Interrogation Techniques, Y-CC

General Ricardo Sanchez, Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy, Interrogation Techniques, General Safeguards

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The progressive blogosphere doesn't walk its talk, Think Progress edition

"d" list bloggers deserve respect too...

Dear Think Progress Colleagues:

I sent in a blog post to Think Progress yesterday regarding the omission of the allegation of perjury on the part of General Ricardo Sanchez in media and blog coverage of his recent speech. I waited the requisite four hours and, since I did not receive a response, put up the post on my own weblog. Imagine my surprise this morning when reading The Progress Report to see that you had decided to call attention to that allegation. Imagine my further surprise when I saw my own words printed verbatim.

The Progress Report

"A memorandum written and signed by Sanchez on Sept. 14, 2003, contained as an enclosure the specific interrogation techniques authorized to be used in Iraq, and also noted that these methods were potentially in contravention of the Geneva Conventions."

And, yes, I DO take it personally

"The memorandum written and signed by General Sanchez on September 14, 2003, contained as an enclosure the specific interrogation techniques authorized to be used in Iraq, and also noted those that were potentially in contravention of Geneva."

I find the lack of the simple courtesy of even sending a private email with a thank-you for the tip to be both disappointing and sadly unprofessional. You can be certain I won't make the same mistake twice.

i take great pains to credit all sources whether they be news media outlets or bloggers... the last thing i want to do is try to pretend that all the stuff i put out here is the product of my own fertile mind and diligent research... i don't think it's too much to ask to expect the same treatment in return...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

When the progressive blogosphere doesn't walk its talk

A recurrent theme in the progressive blogosphere is the lack of context offered by traditional news outlets in their news reporting. It is remarkable, therefore, that, given General Ricardo Sanchez' testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 19, 2004, in which he perjured himself by denying that he authorized enhanced interrogation techniques for use in Iraq, that fact was completely ignored by both progressive bloggers and the traditional news media in the coverage of Sanchez' recent speech decrying the Bush administration debacle that is Iraq.

The memorandum written and signed by General Sanchez on September 14, 2003, contained as an enclosure the specific interrogation techniques authorized to be used in Iraq, and also noted those that were potentially in contravention of Geneva.

General Sanchez was asked if he ordered or approved those techniques by U.S. Senator Jack Reed in testimony given before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 19, 2004.

On May 19, 2004, General Ricardo Sanchez testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on Iraq Prison Abuse.

U.S. SENATOR JACK REED (D-RI): General Sanchez, today's USA Today, sir, reported that you ordered or approved the use of sleep deprivation, intimidation by guard dogs, excessive noise and inducing fear as an interrogation method for a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison.

REED: Is that correct?

LIEUTENANT GENERAL RICARDO SANCHEZ, COMMANDER, MULTINATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ : Sir, that may be correct that it's in a news article, but I never approved any of those measures to be used within CJTF-7 at any time in the last year.

General Sanchez' perjury was not mentioned in any of the following weblogs or news outlets.

Think Progress

AMERICAblog (here and here)

Talking Points Memo

Atrios

Daily Kos

Juan Cole

Raw Story

Washington Post

Associated Press

The missing context is crucial information regarding General Sanchez' credibility. Its inclusion would allow readers to potentially draw different conclusions about General Sanchez' purpose in speaking out against the Iraq debacle and the Bush administration. The progressive blogosphere has prided itself on holding public figures and the traditional media to account, and has never hesitated to excoriate the vast noise machine of the right for overlooking inconvenient facts. We should not allow ourselves to fall into the same trap.

Even more interesting is that I have posted comments about General Sanchez' perjury on all of the above weblogs, including the relevant links, and still no mention has been made. Trust me, I'm not looking for recognition here, I just believe that a very important fact regarding this story has been omitted, and WHERE that omission has taken place bothers me greatly.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The general who authorized enhanced interrogation techniques for Iraq and perjured himself in 2004, now calls Iraq a "nightmare"

robert parry reports on general ricardo sanchez' october 12 speech...

Retired Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who commanded U.S. forces in Iraq for the first year of the occupation, blamed “incompetence” by President George W. Bush’s national security team for creating a “nightmare” that could last far into the future.

Sanchez, who led coalition forces from June 2003 to June 2004, used an Oct. 12 speech to a conference of Military Reporters and Editors in Arlington, Virginia, to castigate nearly everyone connected to the Iraq War, including the U.S. news media, Congress, the State Department, the White House and the Pentagon.

“There has been a glaring, unfortunate display of incompetence in strategic leadership among our national leaders,” Sanchez said. “They have unquestionably been derelict in the performance of their duty. In my profession, these types of leaders would be immediately relieved or court-martialed.”

general, i do believe the penalty for perjuring yourself in front of the senate armed services committee is a somewhat stiffer penalty than a mere court martial...


first of all, general, here's the memorandum authorizing "enhanced" interrogation techniques that you wrote in iraq in 2003...



and here are the torture techniques that you authorized...

The use of techniques A-CC are subject to the general safeguards as provided below as well as specific implementation guidelines to be provided by the 205th MI BDE Commander. Specific implementation guidance with respect to techniques A-CC is provided in U.S. Army Field Manual 34-52. Further implementation guidance will be developed by the 205th MI BDE Commander.

Of the techniques set forth below, the policy aspects of certain techniques should be considered to the extent they reflect the views of other Coalition contributing nations. The description of the technique is annotated to include some policy issues that should be considered before application of the technique.

A. Direct: Asking straightforward questions.
*B. Incentive/Removal of Incentive: Providing a reward or removing a privilege above and beyond those that are required by the Geneva Convention from detainees. [Caution: Other nations that believe detainees are entitled to EPW protections may consider that provision and retention of religious items (e.g. the Koran) are protected under international law (see Geneva III, Article 34).]
C. Emotional Love: Playing on the love a detainee has for an individual or group.
D. Emotional Hate: Playing on the hatred a detainee has for an individual or group.
E. Fear Up Harsh: Significantly increasing the fear level in a detainee.
F. Fear Up Mild: Moderately increasing the fear level in a detainee.
G. Reduced Fear: Reducing the fear level in a detainee.
H. Pride and Ego Up: Boosting the ego of a detainee.
*I. Pride and Ego Down: Attacking or insulting the ego of a detainee not beyond the limits that would apply to an EPW. [Caution: Article 17 of Geneva III provides "Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind." Other nations that believe detainees are entitled to EPW protections may consider this technique inconsistent with the provisions of Geneva.]
J. Futility: Invoking the feeling of futility of a detainee.
K. We Know All: Convincing the detainee that the interrogator already knows the answers to questions he asks the detainee.
L. Establish Your Identity: Convincing the detainee that the interrogator has mistaken the detainee for someone else.
M. Repetition: Continuously repeating the same question to the detainee within interrogaton periods of normal duration.
N. File and Dossier: Convincing detainee that the interrogator has a damning and inaccurate file which must be fixed.
*O. Mutt and Jeff: A team consisting of a friendly and harsh interrogator. The harsh interrogator might employ the Pride and Ego Down technique. [Caution: Other nations that believe that EPW protections apply to detainees may view this technique as inconsistent with Geneva III, Article 13 which provides that EPW's must be protected against acts of intimidation. Consideration should be given to these views prior to application of the technique.]
P. Rapid Fire: Questioning in rapid succession without allowing detainees to answer.
Q. Silence: Staring at the detainee to encourage discomfort.
R. Change of Scenery Up: Removing the detainee from the standard interrogaton setting (generally to a location more pleasant but no worse).
S. Change of Scenery Down: Removing the detainee from the standard interrogation setting and placing him in a setting that may be less comfortable; would not constitute a substantial change in environmental quality.
T. Dietary Manipulation: Changing the diet of a detainee; no intended deprivation of food or water; no adverse medical or cultural effect and without intent to deprive subject of food or water, e.g., hot rations to MREs.
*U. Environmental Manipulation: Allowing the environment to create moderate discomfort (e.g. adjusting temperatures or introducing an unpleasant smell). Conditions may not be such that they injure the detainee. Detainee is accompanied by interrogator at all times. [Caution: Based on court cases in other countries, some nations may view application of this technique in certain circumstances to be inhumane. Consideration of these views should be given prior to use of this technique.]
V. Sleep Adjustment: Adjustment of the sleeping times of the detainee (e.g. reversing sleep cycles from night to day). This technique is NOT sleep deprivation.
W. False Flag: Convincing the detainee that individuals from a country other than the United States are interrogating him.
*X. Isolation: Isolating the detainee from other detainees while still complying with basic standards of treatment. [Caution: the use of isolation as an interrogation technique requires detailed implementation instructions including specific guidelines regarding the length of isolation, medical and psychological review, and approval for extensions of the length of isolation by the 205th MI BDE Commander. Use of this technique for more than 30 days, whether continuous or not, must be briefed to 205th MI BDE Commander prior to implementation.]
Y. Presence of Military Working Dog: Exploits Arab fear of dogs while maintaining security during interrogations. Dogs will be muzzled and under control of MWD handler at all times to prevent contact with detainee.
Z. Sleep Management: Detainee provided minimum 4 hours of sleep per 24 hour period not to exceed 72 continuous hours.
AA. Yelling, Loud Music, and Light Control: Used to create fear, disorient detainee and prolong capture shock. Volume controlled to prevent injury.
BB. Deception: Use of falsified representations including documents and reports.
*CC. Stress Positions: Use of physical postures (sitting, standing, kneeling, prone, etc.) for no more than 1 hour per use. Use of technique(s) will not exceed 4 hours and adequate rest between use of each position will be provided.

[Note: Red asterisks - * - indicate techniques which, as noted, may either be excessive or violate the Geneva Convention.

The above interrogation techniques were transcribed from the original documents obtained by the ACLU and maintained in their archives which can be accessed here.]

so, general, i will point out YET AGAIN (here, here and here) that you perjured yourself before the senate armed services committee in testimony you provided on 19 may 2004...

On May 19, 2004, General Ricardo Sanchez testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on Iraq Prison Abuse.

U.S. SENATOR JACK REED (D-RI): General Sanchez, today's USA Today, sir, reported that you ordered or approved the use of sleep deprivation, intimidation by guard dogs, excessive noise and inducing fear as an interrogation method for a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison.

REED: Is that correct?

LIEUTENANT GENERAL RICARDO SANCHEZ, COMMANDER, MULTINATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ : Sir, that may be correct that it's in a news article, but I never approved any of those measures to be used within CJTF-7 at any time in the last year.

general, you may be able to create an effective smokescreen for some people, but it ain't workin' with me...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The NYT jumps on the context-free journalism bandwagon, this time on torture

(see update below...)

i absolutely hate it when stuff comes out and the media makes it sound like it's SUCH a surprise... context-free journalism should be illegal...

When the Justice Department publicly declared torture “abhorrent” in a legal opinion in December 2004, the Bush administration appeared to have abandoned its assertion of nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.

But soon after Alberto R. Gonzales’s arrival as attorney general in February 2005, the Justice Department issued another opinion, this one in secret. It was a very different document, according to officials briefed on it, an expansive endorsement of the harshest interrogation techniques ever used by the Central Intelligence Agency.

The new opinion, the officials said, for the first time provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.

so, the nyt says that "explicit authorization" was obtained "for the first time", eh...? what a load of bollocks... donald rumsfeld authored a memorandum on 27 november 2002 "explicitly authorizing" the use of torture techniques, a memo that led directly to general ricardo sanchez "explicitly authorizing" torture techniques to be used in iraq, specifically abu ghraib, contained in a memo written on 14 september 2003... folks, i've tracked this like a bloodhound for over two and one half years and posted about it repeatedly... (go look the posts up for yourselves, i don't have the patience to dig out the links...)

one more time... here's the rumsfeld memo...



here's the authorization memo from general sanchez...



and here are the torture techniques that were authorized...

The use of techniques A-CC are subject to the general safeguards as provided below as well as specific implementation guidelines to be provided by the 205th MI BDE Commander. Specific implementation guidance with respect to techniques A-CC is provided in U.S. Army Field Manual 34-52. Further implementation guidance will be developed by the 205th MI BDE Commander.

Of the techniques set forth below, the policy aspects of certain techniques should be considered to the extent they reflect the views of other Coalition contributing nations. The description of the technique is annotated to include some policy issues that should be considered before application of the technique.

A. Direct: Asking straightforward questions.
*B. Incentive/Removal of Incentive: Providing a reward or removing a privilege above and beyond those that are required by the Geneva Convention from detainees. [Caution: Other nations that believe detainees are entitled to EPW protections may consider that provision and retention of religious items (e.g. the Koran) are protected under international law (see Geneva III, Article 34).]
C. Emotional Love: Playing on the love a detainee has for an individual or group.
D. Emotional Hate: Playing on the hatred a detainee has for an individual or group.
E. Fear Up Harsh: Significantly increasing the fear level in a detainee.
F. Fear Up Mild: Moderately increasing the fear level in a detainee.
G. Reduced Fear: Reducing the fear level in a detainee.
H. Pride and Ego Up: Boosting the ego of a detainee.
*I. Pride and Ego Down: Attacking or insulting the ego of a detainee not beyond the limits that would apply to an EPW. [Caution: Article 17 of Geneva III provides "Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind." Other nations that believe detainees are entitled to EPW protections may consider this technique inconsistent with the provisions of Geneva.]
J. Futility: Invoking the feeling of futility of a detainee.
K. We Know All: Convincing the detainee that the interrogator already knows the answers to questions he asks the detainee.
L. Establish Your Identity: Convincing the detainee that the interrogator has mistaken the detainee for someone else.
M. Repetition: Continuously repeating the same question to the detainee within interrogaton periods of normal duration.
N. File and Dossier: Convincing detainee that the interrogator has a damning and inaccurate file which must be fixed.
*O. Mutt and Jeff: A team consisting of a friendly and harsh interrogator. The harsh interrogator might employ the Pride and Ego Down technique. [Caution: Other nations that believe that EPW protections apply to detainees may view this technique as inconsistent with Geneva III, Article 13 which provides that EPW's must be protected against acts of intimidation. Consideration should be given to these views prior to application of the technique.]
P. Rapid Fire: Questioning in rapid succession without allowing detainees to answer.
Q. Silence: Staring at the detainee to encourage discomfort.
R. Change of Scenery Up: Removing the detainee from the standard interrogaton setting (generally to a location more pleasant but no worse).
S. Change of Scenery Down: Removing the detainee from the standard interrogation setting and placing him in a setting that may be less comfortable; would not constitute a substantial change in environmental quality.
T. Dietary Manipulation: Changing the diet of a detainee; no intended deprivation of food or water; no adverse medical or cultural effect and without intent to deprive subject of food or water, e.g., hot rations to MREs.
*U. Environmental Manipulation: Allowing the environment to create moderate discomfort (e.g. adjusting temperatures or introducing an unpleasant smell). Conditions may not be such that they injure the detainee. Detainee is accompanied by interrogator at all times. [Caution: Based on court cases in other countries, some nations may view application of this technique in certain circumstances to be inhumane. Consideration of these views should be given prior to use of this technique.]
V. Sleep Adjustment: Adjustment of the sleeping times of the detainee (e.g. reversing sleep cycles from night to day). This technique is NOT sleep deprivation.
W. False Flag: Convincing the detainee that individuals from a country other than the United States are interrogating him.
*X. Isolation: Isolating the detainee from other detainees while still complying with basic standards of treatment. [Caution: the use of isolation as an interrogation technique requires detailed implementation instructions including specific guidelines regarding the length of isolation, medical and psychological review, and approval for extensions of the length of isolation by the 205th MI BDE Commander. Use of this technique for more than 30 days, whether continuous or not, must be briefed to 205th MI BDE Commander prior to implementation.]
Y. Presence of Military Working Dog: Exploits Arab fear of dogs while maintaining security during interrogations. Dogs will be muzzled and under control of MWD handler at all times to prevent contact with detainee.
Z. Sleep Management: Detainee provided minimum 4 hours of sleep per 24 hour period not to exceed 72 continuous hours.
AA. Yelling, Loud Music, and Light Control: Used to create fear, disorient detainee and prolong capture shock. Volume controlled to prevent injury.
BB. Deception: Use of falsified representations including documents and reports.
*CC. Stress Positions: Use of physical postures (sitting, standing, kneeling, prone, etc.) for no more than 1 hour per use. Use of technique(s) will not exceed 4 hours and adequate rest between use of each position will be provided.

[Note: Red asterisks - * - indicate techniques which, as noted, may either be excessive or violate the geneva conventions.

The above interrogation techniques were transcribed from the original documents obtained by the ACLU and maintained in their archives which can be accessed here.]

it's worth noting YET AGAIN that general sanchez perjured himself before the senate armed services committee in testimony he provided on 19 may 2004...

On May 19, 2004, General Ricardo Sanchez testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on Iraq Prison Abuse.

U.S. SENATOR JACK REED (D-RI): General Sanchez, today's USA Today, sir, reported that you ordered or approved the use of sleep deprivation, intimidation by guard dogs, excessive noise and inducing fear as an interrogation method for a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison.

REED: Is that correct?

LIEUTENANT GENERAL RICARDO SANCHEZ, COMMANDER, MULTINATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ : Sir, that may be correct that it's in a news article, but I never approved any of those measures to be used within CJTF-7 at any time in the last year.

torture has been used since the get-go, and has been "explicitly authorized" at the highest levels of our government... nothing has changed... it has never stopped and, you can bet, is still going on today...

[UPDATE]

The Bush administration on Thursday denied reports that a secret Justice Department opinion in 2005 cleared the way for the return of painful interrogation tactics or superseded U.S. anti-torture law.

"This country does not torture," White House press secretary Dana Perino told reporters. "It is a policy of the United States that we do not torture and we do not."

what the hell do you expect them to say...? "well, doggone it, you finally caught us... yep, we torture, and, by golly, we LIKE it..." when can we toss this bunch out on the street...? i'm free this afternoon...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

War Crimes

the existentialist cowboy has a nice summary of the case for war crimes charges against bush and his criminal compadres... this video captures some of the discussion that was going on last november...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The tip of the torture iceberg: Ricardo Sanchez revisited

This is my country! Land of my birth!
This is my country! Grandest on earth!
I pledge thee my allegiance,
America, the bold,
For this is my country to have and to hold.

tara mckelvey, writing in harpers via raw story...

...a key architect of the secretive interrogation programs that were used against innocent civilians in Iraq has reportedly expressed guilt for his role in the scandal of the former Iraqi prison...

well, i should hope to shout... then she adds this...

Abu Ghraib is only the tip of the iceberg for detainee abuse in Iraq.

"Thousands of detainees have gone through U.S.-run facilities in Iraq, but thousands more—anyone held for less than fourteen days—were never registered or tracked. Human-rights reports and interviews I conducted show that some of the worst abuses took place at short-term facilities—a police station in Samarra, a school gymnasium, a trailer, and places like that, where individuals were held for up to two weeks."

maybe, some day, hopefully in the not too distant future, general ricardo sanchez, who perjured himself before the senate armed services committee on 19 may 2004, will both own up to his lie and face the consequences for the interrogation techniques he approved on 14 september 2003...

On May 19, 2004, General Ricardo Sanchez testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on Iraq Prison Abuse.

U.S. SENATOR JACK REED (D-RI): General Sanchez, today's USA Today, sir, reported that you ordered or approved the use of sleep deprivation, intimidation by guard dogs, excessive noise and inducing fear as an interrogation method for a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison.

REED: Is that correct?

LIEUTENANT GENERAL RICARDO SANCHEZ, COMMANDER, MULTINATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ : Sir, that may be correct that it's in a news article, but I never approved any of those measures to be used within CJTF-7 at any time in the last year.

this is a copy of the cover memo from general sanchez detailing and approving the interrogation techniques to be used within CJTF-7...



here is the complete list of interrogation techniques that general sanchez approved for use in abu ghraib... (note: i transcribed the following from the original documents in the aclu archives which can be accessed here... i have copies of the documents which are contained in my post from april 2005... red asterisks - * - indicate techniques which, as noted, may either be excessive or violate the geneva conventions...)

The use of techniques A-CC are subject to the general safeguards as provided below as well as specific implementation guidelines to be provided by the 205th MI BDE Commander. Specific implementation guidance with respect to techniques A-CC is provided in U.S. Army Field Manual 34-52. Further implementation guidance will be developed by the 205th MI BDE Commander.

Of the techniques set forth below, the policy aspects of certain techniques should be considered to the extent they reflect the views of other Coalition contributing nations. The description of the technique is annotated to include some policy issues that should be considered before application of the technique.

A. Direct: Asking straightforward questions.
*B. Incentive/Removal of Incentive: Providing a reward or removing a privilege above and beyond those that are required by the Geneva Convention from detainees. [Caution: Other nations that believe detainees are entitled to EPW protections may consider that provision and retention of religious items (e.g. the Koran) are protected under international law (see Geneva III, Article 34).]
C. Emotional Love: Playing on the love a detainee has for an individual or group.
D. Emotional Hate: Playing on the hatred a detainee has for an individual or group.
E. Fear Up Harsh: Significantly increasing the fear level in a detainee.
F. Fear Up Mild: Moderately increasing the fear level in a detainee.
G. Reduced Fear: Reducing the fear level in a detainee.
H. Pride and Ego Up: Boosting the ego of a detainee.
*I. Pride and Ego Down: Attacking or insulting the ego of a detainee not beyond the limits that would apply to an EPW. [Caution: Article 17 of Geneva III provides "Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind." Other nations that believe detainees are entitled to EPW protections may consider this technique inconsistent with the provisions of Geneva.]
J. Futility: Invoking the feeling of futility of a detainee.
K. We Know All: Convincing the detainee that the interrogator already knows the answers to questions he asks the detainee.
L. Establish Your Identity: Convincing the detainee that the interrogator has mistaken the detainee for someone else.
M. Repetition: Continuously repeating the same question to the detainee within interrogaton periods of normal duration.
N. File and Dossier: Convincing detainee that the interrogator has a damning and inaccurate file which must be fixed.
*O. Mutt and Jeff: A team consisting of a friendly and harsh interrogator. The harsh interrogator might employ the Pride and Ego Down technique. [Caution: Other nations that believe that EPW protections apply to detainees may view this technique as inconsistent with Geneva III, Article 13 which provides that EPW's must be protected against acts of intimidation. Consideration should be given to these views prior to application of the technique.]
P. Rapid Fire: Questioning in rapid succession without allowing detainees to answer.
Q. Silence: Staring at the detainee to encourage discomfort.
R. Change of Scenery Up: Removing the detainee from the standard interrogaton setting (generally to a location more pleasant but no worse).
S. Change of Scenery Down: Removing the detainee from the standard interrogation setting and placing him in a setting that may be less comfortable; would not constitute a substantial change in environmental quality.
T. Dietary Manipulation: Changing the diet of a detainee; no intended deprivation of food or water; no adverse medical or cultural effect and without intent to deprive subject of food or water, e.g., hot rations to MREs.
*U. Environmental Manipulation: Allowing the environment to create moderate discomfort (e.g. adjusting temperatures or introducing an unpleasant smell). Conditions may not be such that they injure the detainee. Detainee is accompanied by interrogator at all times. [Caution: Based on court cases in other countries, some nations may view application of this technique in certain circumstances to be inhumane. Consideration of these views should be given prior to use of this technique.]
V. Sleep Adjustment: Adjustment of the sleeping times of the detainee (e.g. reversing sleep cycles from night to day). This technique is NOT sleep deprivation.
W. False Flag: Convincing the detainee that individuals from a country other than the United States are interrogating him.
*X. Isolation: Isolating the detainee from other detainees while still complying with basic standards of treatment. [Caution: the use of isolation as an interrogation technique requires detailed implementation instructions including specific guidelines regarding the length of isolation, medical and psychological review, and approval for extensions of the length of isolation by the 205th MI BDE Commander. Use of this technique for more than 30 days, whether continuous or not, must be briefed to 205th MI BDE Commander prior to implementation.]
Y. Presence of Military Working Dog: Exploits Arab fear of dogs while maintaining security during interrogations. Dogs will be muzzled and under control of MWD handler at all times to prevent contact with detainee.
Z. Sleep Management: Detainee provided minimum 4 hours of sleep per 24 hour period not to exceed 72 continuous hours.
AA. Yelling, Loud Music, and Light Control: Used to create fear, disorient detainee and prolong capture shock. Volume controlled to prevent injury.
BB. Deception: Use of falsified representations including documents and reports.
*CC. Stress Positions: Use of physical postures (sitting, standing, kneeling, prone, etc.) for no more than 1 hour per use. Use of technique(s) will not exceed 4 hours and adequate rest between use of each position will be provided.

also, hopefully, the criminals up the chain of command - George Bush, Alberto Gonzales, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney - who authorized these to be used in the first place will get what's coming to them...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"Sen. Graham… I consider you as cowardly as Rumsfeld"

give that good ol' boy a swift kick to the family jewels, would you, janis, please...?

“Sen. Graham… I consider you as cowardly as Rumsfeld, as Sanchez, and Miller and all of them,” she said, referring to her superiors in the military and Defense Department. Karpinski claims she took the blame for a situation they created at Abu Ghraib.

golly, THAT had to feel GOOD... you go, girl...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments