Time to call Bush* on his lies - What he knew about Abu Ghraib

[doni_georgia]

This week, Bush showed outrage at the news of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib:

"Bush was unhappy he was not told about incriminating pictures before they were shown on television or about a 2-month-old Pentagon report before it turned up in the news.

Rumsfeld did not know about the images until CBS aired them last Wednesday, a senior White House official said.

Bush also said he learned of the photographs of the alleged abuse when the rest of the world did. 'First time I saw or heard about pictures was on TV,' Bush told the Al-Hurra television network.""

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1151&slug=Bush%20Prisoner%20Abuse

BULLSHIT! BULLSHIT!! BULSHIT!!!

A CNN Pentegon correspondent knew in January when the Pentegon
released a press statement detailing the investigation of alleged abuse at Abu Ghraib:

"The US military command in Iraq said on January 16 that it was conducting a criminal investigation into allegations of abuse of Iraqi detainees. In its initial report on the matter, CNN said: 'Some officials have suggested there are photographs documenting the abuse.'

Barbara Starr, the television network's Pentagon correspondent, followed up with a report on January 21 in which she cited a Pentagon source saying that 'US soldiers reportedly posed for photographs with partially unclothed Iraqi prisoners'."

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1083180370612

You cannot tell me that the Pentegon released a press statement concerning something of this magnitude and the President and Secretary of Defense were out of the loop. Again.

BULLSHIT! BULLSHIT!! BULLSHIT!!!

These lying bastards have got to go!

[doni_georgia]

1. Just found this story -

http://joatmoaf.typepad.com/i_love_jet_noise/2004/05/military_not_cb.html

"For a sense of proportion, let's rehearse the timeline here. While some accusations of abuse go back to 2002 in Afghanistan, the incidents at Abu Ghraib that triggered this week's news occurred last autumn. They came to light through the chain of command in Iraq on January 13. An Army criminal probe began a day later. Two days after that, the U.S. Central Command disclosed in a press release that "an investigation has been initiated into reported incidents of detainee abuse at a Coalition Forces detention facility." By March 20, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt was able to announce in Baghdad that criminal charges had been brought against six soldiers in the probe.
By the end of January, meanwhile, Major General Antonio Taguba was appointed to conduct his separate "administrative" probe of procedures at Abu Ghraib. It is his report, complete with its incriminating photos, that is the basis for the past week's news reports. The press didn't break this story based on months of sleuthing but was served up the results of the Army's own investigation.
By February, the Secretary of the Army had ordered the service's inspector general to assess the doctrine and training for detention operations within all of CentCom. A month after that, another probe began into Army Reserve training, especially military police and intelligence. Those reports will presumably also be leaked and reported on, or at least they will be if they reach negative conclusions.
Tempting as it is to want abuse of this kind exposed immediately, it is also important to ensure that it is investigated - and that the information that is released is accurate - especially as the matter is so inflammatory. Lives are at stake. Investigations often throw up conflicting, contradictory, and even inaccurate information in their early stages. It is not wrong to investigate first, and report only once a more accurate picture of events has been obtained. In fact, in wartime I would argue that this is crucial.

There must be full accounting and disclosure of what has transpired at Abu Ghraib, but what we need to get to are the facts, not speculation. And that is what the military has been trying to determine ever since they uncovered evidence of the abuse. Now we need to decide what to do about it."


The government knew about this for MONTHS folks - MONTHS. Bush has once again lied to the American people and to the world. I know I shouldn't be shocked, but I am outraged, because the Dems need to start pointing out these discrepancies and calling him on his lies!


Send Rush Packing
http://www.geocities.com/sendhimpacking/

Coming Soon: Send them ALL packing!

[napi21]

2. Trying to hide pics! No pics-no World outrage!

I suspect they all knew of the accusations and investigations. They wanted to make sure the pics were never released to the media. It's a shame, but without the pics, it doesn't sound like much of a story! Too bad they are so stupid they actually belived that pics taken by first level people could be kept quiet!

They are now trying to keep the rest of the pics "confidential". They probably can keep what they have secret, but I bet there are copies somewhere! My guess is thise pics are on the net, or somebodys hard drive. They'll get out, and I bet it will be soon.

[parasim]

3. "officials suggested" indeed.

from page 16 of the Taguba Report:

The allegations of abuse were substantiated by detailed witness statements (ANNEX 26) and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence Due to the extremely sensitive nature of these photographs and videos, the ongoing CID investigation, and the potential for the criminal prosecution of several suspects, the photographic evidence is not included in the body of my investigation. The pictures and videos are available from the Criminal Investigative Command and the CTJF-7 prosecution team.

[Tellurian]

5. what does that mean exactly?

the videos and photos would not be (allowed as) part of the evidence used for the prosecution of the suspects?

Why not use the RICO ACT and dump these criminals.

[parasim]

8. No, they're evidence, just not included in the report...

... apparently they made them jump though a few hoops to actually see that evidence.

But what bugs me is, any self-respecting investigative reporter would have certainly jumped through those hoops. And perhaps some reporters did, but their editors stifled them?

But certainly all the Bushoids would have seen the pictures. The descriptions alone would be enough to prompt them to take a look-see, I would imagine. Wouldn't they?

I totally agree with the idea of firing up the ol' RICO ACT...

[Tellurian]

10. Hmmm...not necessarily...

especially if the torture and photos were their idea in the first place.

[doni_georgia]

6. See it's absurd to even think videos and photos of such a sensitive

nature would be kept from the President and Secretary of Defense. It's utter bullshit. Who hasn't Bush* lied to? Is there ANYONE? It's amazing. Remember his mantra in 2000, that he would bring honor, dignity, and integrity (some wording of this) back to the White House. The Repugs were utterly outraged that Clinton lied about a blowjob, but their absolutely okay with Bush lying about everything else. Hypocritical bastards! Sorry, I just can't think of another word for these bastards than *bastards*!!!!

[Tellurian]

4. yeah, Bush said he was watching tv and saw the first plane hit the WTC!

I wonder if the man is starting to believe his own propaganda?

[doni_georgia]

7. Yeah, I read that, then later he said he hadn't learned about it until

after the event at the school. He lies so often the press doesn't even notice. Bastard!

[cliss]

9. This matter will be settled very soon, DG.

The Red Cross has already spoken out about submitting reports, numerous reports about the situation. They were repeatedly ignored. And I guarantee you these reports have a "send to" destination. There will be copies somewhere.

Amnesty International including foreign chapters of this organization have complained repeatedly about the situation. Even our own forces were involved in fact-finding trips to assess. Don't tell me he just saw these photos last Thursday. This is the kind of thing that's easy to disprove. And sure enough, reports will surface that say: To Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense. "Urgent" or, "Special Delivery".

That's the problem with you, Donald. You're a liar. But you're such a bad one.