[Peace-discuss] “I don’t care what the international lawyers say, we are going to kick some ass.”- GW Bush 9/11/2001

[Paul Patton]

 *Rogue Soldiers or Rogue President? Scapegoating Small-Fry *
  *by Ray McGovern *

The news that yet another Army private, Lynndie England, 22, of Fort Ashby,
West Virginia, has been convicted and sentenced for posing for the infamous
photos of torture at Abu Graib, while her superiors duck responsibility, is
a sad commentary on the extent to which the Bush administration has
corrupted the U.S. Army.

The reminder of the photos of those inexcusable activities was sickening
enough and England deserves to be punished. But I am of the old-Army school
where officers took responsibility for the actions of those under their
command. For anyone who cares to look, there is abundant documentary
evidence that the Army brass and its civilian leadership are responsible for
the torture. They continue to dance away from taking responsibility.

They choose, instead, to stone the woman, like the hypocrites of Bible fame,
contending that the photos inflamed the insurgency in Iraq. It is the
torture, not the photos, that inflames the insurgency. And responsibility
for the torture reaches directly up the chain of command to the
commander-in-chief himself. Perhaps when even more repulsive photos and
videos of torture at Abu Graib are released, as a federal judge has now
ordered, the American people finally will be jarred awake.

So far, the silent acquiescence with which Americans—including our
institutional churches—have greeted President George W. Bush's open
assertion of a right to torture some prisoners evokes memories of the
unconscionable behavior of "obedient Germans" of the 1930s and early 1940s.
Thankfully, despite the hate whipped up by administration propagandists
against people branded "terrorists," polling conducted last year showed that
most Americans reject torturing prisoners. Almost two-thirds held that
torture is never acceptable.

Yet few speak out—perhaps because President Bush says he too, is against
torture, and our domesticated media have successfully hidden from most of us
the fact that the president has added a highly significant qualification. On
February 7, 2002, the president issued an order instructing our armed forces
"to treat detainees humanely and, *to the extent appropriate and consistent
with military necessity*, in a manner consistent with the principles of
Geneva" (emphasis added). In the preceding paragraph the president
determined that Taliban and al-Qaeda detainees "do not qualify as prisoners
of war." Never mind that there is no provision in the Geneva Conventions for
such a unilateral determination.

*Speedy Gonzales *

In taking this position, Bush had to overrule then-Secretary of State Colin
Powell, the only one of his senior advisers with experience in combat. On
January 26, 2002, Powell sent to then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales
formal comments on the latter's MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT: "DECISION RE
APPLICATION OF THE GENEVA CONVENTION ON PRISONERS OF WAR TO THE CONFLICT
WITH AL QAEDA AND THE TALIBAN."

This is the Mafia-like memorandum in which Gonzales not only branded some
Geneva provisions "quaint" and "obsolete," but also reassured the president
that he could probably escape domestic criminal prosecution for violating
the U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. 2441), as well. Here is what
Gonzales told the president on this key point:

"...it is difficult to predict the motives of prosecutors and independent
counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges based on
Section 2441. Your determination would create a reasonable basis in law that
Section 2441 does not apply, which would provide a solid defense to any
future prosecution.

Meanwhile, back at the State Department, Powell apparently thought the
memorandum was still in draft. But Gonzales, who knew what the president
wanted, did not wait for Powell's formal comments. Rather, on January 25
Gonzales sent his final draft to the president, thereby shielding him from
dissonance like Powell's written observation that exempting detainees from
Geneva protections "will reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice
in supporting the Geneva conventions and undermine the protections of the
law of war for our troops."

Gonzales was already aware of Powell's opposition, and in his own memo the
former White House counsel and now attorney general was dismissive of
Powell's request that the president reconsider the argument that al-Qaeda
and Taliban detainees are not prisoners of war under Geneva. In a short
paragraph tacked onto the bottom of a list of "negatives," Gonzales took
brief note of Powell's objections. Gonzales' paragraph speaks volumes in the
light of subsequent abuses in Abu Graib, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo:

"A determination that the GPW [Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War] does
not apply to al-Qaeda and the Taliban could undermine U.S. military culture
which emphasizes maintaining the highest standards of conduct in combat, and
could introduce an element of uncertainty in the status of adversaries."

Last week, over a dozen high ranking military officers sent a letter to
President Bush, pointing out that "It is now apparent that the abuse of
prisoners in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere took place in part because
our men and women in uniform were given ambiguous instructions, which in
some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what was allowed by the
Army Field Manual."

A pity that Colin Powell limited himself to writing memos to the president's
lawyer.

The photos from Abu Graib and the more recent Human Rights Watch report
describing "routine" torture by the once highly professional 82nd Airborne
Division offer graphic evidence that Powell's misgivings were well founded.
The report relies heavily on the testimony of a West Point graduate, an Army
Captain who has had the courage to speak out after 17 months of trying in
vain to go through Army channels.

Human Rights Watch Director Tom Malinowski has noted, "The administration
demanded that soldiers extract information from detainees without telling
them what was allowed and what was forbidden. Yet when the abuses inevitably
followed, the leadership blamed the soldiers in the field instead of taking
responsibility." A Pentagon spokesman has dismissed the report as "another
predictable report by an organization trying to advance an agenda through
the use of distortion and errors of fact." Judge for yourselves; the report
can be found at (http://hrw.org/reports/2005/us0905/). Grim but required
reading.

*Pictures Worth a Thousand Words *

After seeing the photos from Abu Graib last year, Senate Armed Forces
Committee Chairman John Warner of Virginia took a strong rhetorical stand
against torture. But then he quickly succumbed to White House pressure to
postpone Senate hearings on the subject until after the November 2004
election.

In July, Warner joined two other Republican Senators, John McCain and
Lindsey Graham, in attempts to introduce amendments against torture to the
defense authorization bill. The amendments would require that U.S. forces
revert to the standards set forth in Army Field Manual (FM 34-52) for
interrogating detainees held by the Defense Department. The manual prohibits
the use of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Another
amendment that has been discussed would require that all foreign nationals
"be registered with the International Committee of the Red Cross." This
would prohibit sequestering unregistered "ghost detainees" at prisons like
Abu Graib and secret CIA interrogation centers.

Inured as I thought I had become to the gall of top Bush administration
officials, I found the White House reaction shocking. On the evening of July
21, Vice President Dick Cheney went to Capitol Hill to dissuade the three
Senators from proceeding with the amendments. But the Senators were not
cowed—not then, at least. Four days later on the floor of the Senate, John
McCain—who knows something of torture—made a poignant appeal to his
colleagues to hold our country to humane standards in treating captives, "no
matter how evil or terrible" they may be. "This is not about who they are.
This is about who we are," said McCain.

The following day Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist pulled the Pentagon
spending bill off the floor, sparing Bush the political risk of vetoing the
much needed defense authorization bill simply because it included amendments
requiring the protections for detainees—protections already required not
only by international law but also by US criminal statute.

Yesterday, the White House again warned lawmakers not to add any amendments
on the treatment of detainees. It will be interesting to see if, in the end,
the Senators cave in to White House pressure. For if they do, they will be
providing yet another congressional nihil obstat for the general approach so
succinctly voiced by the president to then-terrorism czar Richard Clarke and
Defense Secretary Rumsfeld in the White House on the evening of 9/11.
According to Clarke, the president yelled, "I don't care what the
international lawyers say, we are going to kick some ass."

*Ray McGovern works for Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical
Church of the Saviour in Washington, DC. A former Army officer and CIA
analyst, he is now a member of the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence
Professionals for Sanity. This article appeared first on TomPaine.com *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20051002/fa491e2a/attachment.htm