New Torture Pictures show ...

[hooligan]

I'm not sure what they're trying to hide, but there seems to be accusations of sodomy and rapes.

Bush Administration Files 11th Hour Papers Blocking the Release of Darby CD Photos and Video Of Abu Ghraib Torture

Synopsis

On July 22, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) denounced the latest efforts of the Bush Administration to block the release of the Darby photos and videos depicting torture at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison facility. On June 2, 2004, CCR, along with the ACLU, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense, and Veterans for Peace filed papers with the U.S. District Court, charging the Department of Defense and other government agencies with illegally withholding records concerning the abuse of detainees in American military custody. Since then, the organizations have been repeatedly rebuffed in their efforts to investigate what happened at the prison.


http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/images/hdr_status.gif

In June, the government requested and received an extension from the judge stating that they needed time in order to redact the faces of the men, women and children believed to be shown in the photographs and videos. They were given until today to produce the images, but at the eleventh hour filed a motion to oppose the release of the photos and videos, based on an entirely new argument: they are now requesting a 7(F) exemption from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act to withhold law enforcement-related information in order to protect the physical safety of individuals. Today’s move is the latest in a series of attempts by the government to keep the images from being made public and to cover up the torture of detainees in U.S. custody around the world.

Joseph Darby was the U.S reservist who turned over the photos and videos to U.S. Army officials and touched off the Abu Ghraib scandal in April 2004.

“This is absolutely unacceptable,” stated Michael Ratner, President of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We can not move forward from this scandal until we have a full public accounting and independent investigation into what happened at Abu Ghraib. The government cannot continue to hide evidence of torture. The time to release these photos and videos was a long time ago.”

Expectations are that the FOIA request will release more than 100 photos and 4 videos, all believed to document deplorable human rights violations by U.S. military personnel against Iraqi civilians.

Barbara Olshansky, Deputy Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, stated, “The public must be informed of what is being done in our name. It is this Administration that has put our troops at risk and caused world-wide anger by fostering policies that promote torture and refusing to hold those responsible publicly accountable.”

The Center for Constitutional Rights once more calls for a complete, transparent independent investigation into the torture and abuse of detainees that goes all the way up the chain of command and demands that the Administration apply the Geneva Conventions to every detainee being held in U.S. custody around the world.

This is part of the request under the Freedom of Information Act filed by the the Center for Constitutional Rights, the ACLU, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans for Peace. The FOIA lawsuit is being handled by Lawrence Lustberg and Megan Lewis of the New Jersey-based law firm Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, P.C.

[hooligan]

Published on Thursday, July 28, 2005 by the New York Times
Military's Opposition to Harsh Interrogation Is Outlined
by Neil A. Lewis


WASHINGTON - Senior military lawyers lodged vigorous and detailed dissents in early 2003 as an administration legal task force concluded that President Bush had authority as commander in chief to order harsh interrogations of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, newly disclosed documents show.


The more extreme interrogation techniques recommended by the Justice Department on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law as well as military law.

Air Force, Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives
Despite the military lawyers' warnings, the task force concluded that military interrogators and their commanders would be immune from prosecution for torture under federal and international law because of the special character of the fight against terrorism

In memorandums written by several senior uniformed lawyers in each of the military services as the legal review was under way, they had urged a sharply different view and also warned that the position eventually adopted by the task force could endanger American service members.

The memorandums were declassified and released last week in response to a request from Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. Mr. Graham made the request after hearings in which officers representing the military's judge advocates general acknowledged having expressed concerns over interrogation policies.

The documents include one written by the deputy judge advocate general of the Air Force, Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives, advising the task force that several of the "more extreme interrogation techniques, on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law" as well as military law.

General Rives added that many other countries were likely to disagree with the reasoning used by Justice Department lawyers about immunity from prosecution. Instead, he said, the use of many of the interrogation techniques "puts the interrogators and the chain of command at risk of criminal accusations abroad."

Any such crimes, he said, could be prosecuted in other nations' courts, international courts or the International Criminal Court, a body the United States does not formally participate in or recognize.

Other senior military lawyers warned in tones of sharp concern that aggressive interrogation techniques would endanger American soldiers taken prisoner and also diminish the country's standing as a leader in "the moral high road" approach to the laws of war.

The memorandums provide the most complete record to date of how uniformed military lawyers were frequently the chief dissenters as government officials formulated interrogation policies.

"These military lawyers were clearly disturbed by the proposed techniques that were deviations from past practices that were being advocated by the Justice Department," said Senator Graham, himself a former military lawyer.

He said that the genesis of the dispute was a memorandum issued in August 2002 by the Justice Department and signed by Jay S. Bybee, the head of the office of legal counsel.

The Bybee memorandum defined torture extremely narrowly and said Mr. Bush could ignore domestic and international prohibitions against it in the name of national security. That position was rescinded by the Justice Department last Dec. 30.

Rear Adm. Michael F. Lohr, the Navy's chief lawyer, wrote on Feb. 6, 2003, that while detainees at Guantánamo Bay might not qualify for international protections, "Will the American people find we have missed the forest for the trees by condoning practices that, while technically legal, are inconsistent with our most fundamental values?"

Brig. Gen. Kevin M. Sandkuhler, a senior Marine lawyer, said in a Feb. 27, 2003, memorandum that all the military lawyers believed the harsh interrogation regime could have adverse consequences for American service members. General Sandkuhler said that the Justice Department "does not represent the services; thus, understandably, concern for service members is not reflected in their opinion."

Maj. Gen. Thomas J. Romig, the Army's top-ranking uniformed lawyer, said in a March 3, 2003, memorandum that the approach recommended by the Justice Department "will open us up to criticism that the U.S. is a law unto itself."

The confidential government deliberations over permissible interrogation techniques that ranged from August 2002 to April 2003 were prompted by a request from officers at Guantánamo. They said traditional practices were proving ineffective against one detainee, Mohamed al-Kahtani, believed to have been the planned 20th hijacker on Sept. 11, 2001. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved a series of techniques in December 2002, only to rescind them temporarily after military lawyers complained.

Mr. Rumsfeld ordered a study by the legal task force, led by Mary Walker, the Air Force general counsel. When the Walker task force issued its report on March 6, 2003, it largely adopted the Justice Department's view.

Senator Graham said, however, that Mr. Rumsfeld subsequently learned of the military lawyers' objections and that became a factor in his decision on April 16, 2003, to limit the permitted interrogation techniques.

Ex-Warden Tells of Use of Dogs

FORT MEADE, Maryland., July 27 (AP) - The former warden of the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq testified Wednesday that he attended a meeting in which the commander of the Guantánamo prison recommended using military dogs for interrogation.

The former warden, Maj. David Dinenna, testified at the end of a preliminary hearing for two Army dog handlers accused of abusing Iraqi detainees. Major Dinenna said that at a meeting in September 2003, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, then the Guantánamo commander, talked about the effectiveness of using the dogs

© 2005 New York Times

##

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0728-03.htm

[hooligan]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0813-02.htm

Published on Saturday, August 13, 2005 by Agence France Press
Fearing Backlash, Pentagon Moves to Block New Abu Ghraib Photos

The Pentagon has moved forcefully to block the release of new video evidence of prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, arguing it would help recruit new Islamist insurgents and endanger American lives.

The request is contained in a motion filed in federal court by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers in response to a plea by several human rights groups to make public 87 photographs and four videotapes made at Abu Ghraib by Specialist Joseph Darby that thus far have been kept under wraps.

Darby triggered the Abu Ghraib scandal last year when he turned over to military investigators extensive photographic and video evidence implicating his fellow military policemen in brutal abuse of prisoners.

The pictures showed inmates piled up naked on the floor, cowering in front of snarling military dogs, chained to beds in stress positions, with women's underwear put over their heads, and forced to stand naked in front of female guards.

At least eight low-ranking US soldiers have been convicted or voluntarily pleaded guilty in the wake of the scandal that has sparked condemnation of the United States all around the world.

A Pentagon probe has cleared all top US commanders of any criminal responsibility in the matter.

But so far, only a fraction of pictures made by Specialist Darby have been released to the public.

A lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and several other human rights groups with the US District Court in New York seeks to fill this gap by making the remaining pictures available.

But in an affidavit filed with the court on July 21 and unsealed this past week, Myers insists the release "would aid the recruitment effort and other activities of insurgent elements."

He further states that should the pictures become public, they will "endanger the lives and physical safety of the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines in the United States Armed Forces presently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan."

The suit comes at a particularly sensitive time for the administration of President George W. Bush, which is trying to stem the erosion of public support for its policies in Iraq following a new spike in US casualties in that country.

As many as 61 percent of Americans expressed their disapproval of how the president is handling Iraq in the most recent Newsweek magazine survey.

Myers says he personally condemns "in the strongest terms" the misconduct and abuse depicted in the images.

But he argues the situation in Iraq is "dynamic and dangerous," with US forces and their allies having to face on average 70 attacks a day mounted by an insurgent army that now numbers about 16,000.

The top US military commander also suggests the release of new photos could have an effect similar to that caused by a since retracted Newsweek story about the desecration of the Koran at the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The story about the Islamic holy book allegedly being flushed down the toilet, which was published in April, sparked riots in Afghanistan that, according to Myers, claimed at least 17 lives.

But the general's arguments was sharply rebuffed by retired colonel Michael Pheneger, a former classmate of Myers' at the US Army War College and intelligence officer with experience in the Middle East.

Pheneger writes in court papers that Myers "mistakes propaganda for motivation."

"Insurgents average 70 attacks a day regardless of provocation as part of their effort to achieve specific objectives," the intelligence expert argues.

Meanwhile, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero insists the real reason the Pentagon is fighting the release of the new evidence is because it demonstrates "the failure of American leaders who placed our young men and women in compromising situations and are now seeking to blame them for it."

© 2005 Agence France Press

###

[yoMAMA]

there's torture?

[hooligan]

there's torture?

what torture?

[Faithless]

Waiting for bush's tenure to end. Now, there's real torture.

LOL -- we're a christian nation. Thus, this question:

Who would be tortured by Jesus? (http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/religion/columns/051105.shtml)

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2005 * James L. Evans

...
Torture also does not become a nation that aspires to be called "a Christian nation." After all, whom would Jesus torture?

But even with Christian particulars left aside, we have in our history an idealistic vision of the value of human life and a commitment to fairness and justice. A great nation that aspires to these ideals does not resort to torture to protect itself.

Or, as Jesus might say, what does it profit us if we gain the whole world but lose our national soul?

[hooligan]

Waiting for bush's tenure to end. Now, there's real torture.

LOL -- we're a christian nation. Thus, this question:

Who would be tortured by Jesus? (http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/religion/columns/051105.shtml)

WWJT?

[Faithless]

The answer: Hopefully, george bush's conscience.

But if not the big-guy himself, how about bush's church, the United Methodists?

Last week, the United Methodist Church Board of Church and Society--the social action committee of the church that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney belong to--resoundingly passed a resolution calling for withdrawal with only two 'no' votes and one abstention.

Bush's Church Calls for Withdrawal from Iraq (http://www.tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/news_item.2005-11-05.9987150783)

If Bush heard a call from God to take him into war, will he listen when God gives a different message to his Church?

Sweet Victory: United Methodist Church Calls For Withdrawal

It's one thing when former high-ranking members of your own Administration come out against your war. It's another thing when two-thirds of the country calls the invasion and occupation a mistake. It's really something when your own church issues a statement urging you to pull out the troops now.

Last week, the United Methodist Church Board of Church and Society--the social action committee of the church that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney belong to--resoundingly passed a resolution calling for withdrawal with only two 'no' votes and one abstention.

"As people of faith, we raise our voice in protest against the tragedy of the unjust war in Iraq," the statement read. "Thousands of lives have been lost and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a war the United States initiated and should never have fought.... We grieve for all those whose lives have been lost or destroyed in this needless and avoidable tragedy. Military families have suffered undue hardship from prolonged troop rotations in Iraq and loss of loved ones. It is time to bring them home."

The board also issued a strong statement against torture, urging Congress to create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate detention and interrogation practices at Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan.

"It is my hope and prayer that our statement against the war in Iraq will be heard loud and clear by our fellow United Methodists, President Bush and Vice President Cheney," said Jim Winkler, General Secretary of the UMC's Board of Church and Society. "Conservative and liberal board members worked together to craft a strong statement calling for the troops to come home and for those responsible for leading us into this disastrous war to be held accountable."

With its bold stands against the Administration, the UMC is fulfilling the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who called for the church to be "not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion" but "a thermostat that transformed the mores of society."

Bush has asserted that he entered Iraq on a direct order from God. Now, he has a direct order from his own church to leave. Is he listening?

We also want to hear from you. Please let us know if you have a sweet victory you think we should cover by e-mailing
nationvictories@gmail.com.

Co-written by Andy Johnson and Sam Graham-Felsen, a freelance journalist, documentary