Officials say methods at prison broke rules

[weedman]

Washington -- Two of the Pentagon's highest-ranking officials were forced to admit Thursday that a tough method approved for handling prisoners in Iraq appeared to violate the Geneva Conventions, although both said they were unfamiliar with how the decision to allow such techniques had been approved.

The statements by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, put them at odds with their boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and with the U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who approved a "stress matrix'' for interrogating detainees there.

"I would describe it as a violation, sir,'' Pace told Sen. Jack Reed, D-R. I., after Reed pressed him on whether placing prisoners "naked, with a bag over their head, squatting with their arms uplifted for 45 minutes,'' would violate the Geneva Convention of 1949 requiring the humane treatment of prisoners of war.

Such a practice was among the 20 techniques approved for use in Iraq, the Senate Armed Services Committee was told Friday at a hearing into the abuse of prisoners at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison that was photographed by U.S. soldiers, some of whom face court-martial.

Lawmakers say they have seen evidence that the Abu Ghraib abuse involved forced ****** acts and the menacing of prisoners with unmuzzled guard dogs.

On Wednesday, Rumsfeld told another Senate panel that the 20 measures were legal and had been approved by Pentagon lawyers. "Any instructions authorized in Iraq were checked by lawyers and deemed to be consistent with the Geneva Convention,'' he said.

Wolfowitz and Pace said they were familiar with discussions about what tough interrogation treatment would be allowed at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where hundreds of suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban members are being held.

"I am aware of discussions about Guantanamo, and I can tell you that what I'm aware of, those certainly would not have been remotely permitted in Guantanamo,'' said Wolfowitz.

In a ruling on the Guantanamo prisoners, President Bush has said that although in his view they aren't covered by the Geneva Conventions, they would still receive the treaty's protections. In Iraq, however, the administration has always said that the conventions apply to everyone taken into U.S. custody.

Pace and Wolfowitz also said that until Thursday, they weren't aware that such tough techniques were allowed under Sanchez's order. But Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said that Sanchez wasn't giving interrogators free rein to use such methods. Instead, Sanchez required them to get specific approval every time they wanted to use them, Sessions said.

"Things went awry, and we're not happy with them,'' Sessions said of the Abu Ghraib scandal. "But I don't think that memorandum (from Sanchez) should be seen as a permissive suggestion that they should go beyond the Geneva Conventions.''

Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone testified at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday that Rumsfeld had been informed every time the "stress matrix" was applied to prisoners in Iraq. But Cambone agreed that the acts of abuse depicted in photographs from Abu Ghraib went far beyond anything allowed.

There is wide disagreement, even among experts, over how to interpret the Geneva Convention rules regarding prisoner interrogation.

Speaking before a Senate appropriations subcommittee Wednesday, Rumsfeld said the rules did not apply to suspected members of al Qaeda and the Taliban held at Guantanamo Bay.

"The Geneva Conventions apply to conflicts between states, parties to the conventions," Rumsfeld said. "In the case of Afghanistan, it is a state, and therefore the Geneva Convention applied to Afghanistan as a state. It did not apply to the al Qaeda that was using that state.''

The hearing's most heated exchanges came between Reed and Wolfowitz.

"What I've heard from you is dissembling and avoidance of answers, lack of knowledge," Reed said.

"I'm not dissembling, Sen. Reed," Wolfowitz shot back. "I have Gen. Pace's same reaction. What you described to me sounds to me like a violation of the Geneva Convention. It's the first time I've heard that it was in Gen. Sanchez's direction."

"I would suggest, Mr. Secretary," Reed replied, "that you're not doing your job, then."



Source (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/05/14/MNGE46LJQ51.DTL)

[Argyll]

Why are you constantly spamming the forum with stuff about abuse allegations ?

Stop trolling!

[weedman]

Why are you constantly spamming the forum with stuff about abuse allegations ?
I don't get it.

When there 're news, why am I spamming by posting them?

[Argyll]

Because you're the only one doing it,and it's always about the negative stuff,have you ever posted a feelgood story from Iraq?

[mocking_loudly_died]

Word up - getting my name down before the lock-fest!

:D

[Argyll]

How about you tell us about the torture carried out in Eigelstien Police station in Cologne on 2002?Where Police officers had been abusing prosoners for years without it being reported,and it was the subsequent death of an inmate that opened up a nasty can of worms?


http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jul2002/germ-j31.shtml

People in Glass houses should not throw stones ;)

[weedman]

Because you're the only one doing it,and it's always about the negative stuff,have you ever posted a feelgood story from Iraq?All the positive stuff I want to post everytime is already posted by somebody else.

But if you want to, I'll stop posting critical articles, because I don't want to disturb you, but then please ban me completely.

[Shiruzu]

How about you tell us about the torture carried out in Eigelstien Police station in Cologne on 2002?Where Police officers had been abusing prosoners for years without it being reported,and it was the subsequent death of an inmate that opened up a nasty can of worms?

Maybe because this is a forum owned by americans, mostly frequentent by americans? I wouldn't care if something like that would happen in Chile or India - but thats just my 0.02$


PS: By the way - "Wandering Nomad" did the same as Weedman, and he got banned for posting no 'feelgood storys' about iraq. Is this what you call 'freedom of speech' ?

[weedman]

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jul2002/germ-j31.shtml
That's awful, but I didn't want to bother you with such things, that have no real link to this forum.

[Argyll]

Shiruzu

No wandering nomad got banned for inciting flames and posting inflammatory posts.

Freedom of speach my ass,you follow the forum rules buddy simple as that


Have you read them lately if ever?

How many of these alleged abuse topics have you posted in the past 2-3 weeks weedman?...............compared to other topics?

Shiruzu,how many topics you posted here?

[weedman]

How many of these alleged abuse topics have you posted in the past 2-3 weeks weedman?...............compared to other topics?
Well, at least I am not opening a new thread for every Iraqi resistance fighter killed by the Coaltion Troops. :roll:

[Argyll]

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jul2002/germ-j31.shtml
That's awful, but I didn't want to bother you with such things, that have no real link to this forum.

Ah but is it not about abuse?

Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?

See I don't mind these articles at all,but they're all coming from YOU,and the forum know's where your political agenda's fall on

[Shiruzu]

Shiruzu,how many topics you posted here?

Zero, i guess. Why are you asking?

[Argyll]

How many of these alleged abuse topics have you posted in the past 2-3 weeks weedman?...............compared to other topics?
Well, at least I am not opening a new thread for every Iraqi resistance fighter killed by the Coaltion Troops. :roll:

Who is....................provide a link please?

The links are about significant casualties not individuals

[Argyll]

Shiruzu,how many topics you posted here?

Zero, i guess. Why are you asking?

Seems youre more content wih jumping on the bandwagon ,and adding to the flames.............I've read all your comments,and from a moderators viewpoint it looks very much like you are simply here to flame?

I'd be very happy to be proven wrong ;)

[weedman]

Ah but is it not about abuse?

It's about abuse, but it has nothing to do with military operations. :roll:



Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?

As all the other guys here do? :roll: That's ridiculous. So many people here are "spamming" (as you called it), but the only one, who get sued are the people posting critical stuff.



See I don't mind these articles at all,but they're all coming from YOU,and the forum know's where your political agenda's fall onAs I said, feel free to ban me, if you can't stand critics and other point of views.

[weedman]

How many of these alleged abuse topics have you posted in the past 2-3 weeks weedman?...............compared to other topics?
Well, at least I am not opening a new thread for every Iraqi resistance fighter killed by the Coaltion Troops. :roll:

Who is....................provide a link please?

The links are about significant casualties not individualsJust a random example:

Look at the threads seruriermarshal created within the last 7 days and then check the redundancies.

[Argyll]

Ah but is it not about abuse?

It's about abuse, but it has nothing to do with military operations. :roll:

And neither has a lot od stuff posted here,and well you know it!
What has the Nick berg conspiracy theories to do with Military?



Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?

As all the other guys here do? :roll: That's ridiculous. So many people here are "spamming" (as you called it), but the only one, who get sued are the people posting critical stuff.

Nope they get PM's as well,but they take heed of warnings ;)



See I don't mind these articles at all,but they're all coming from YOU,and the forum know's where your political agenda's fall onAs I said, feel free to ban me, if you can't stand critics and other point of views.

Well if you want banned who am I to stand in the way of your request?
See you have also been abusive to Moderators as well ,when you've been pointed out about your inflammatory remarks,most people take a telling,and start to behave,but there are those who think they're above such tellings,generally they end up getting banned.
It's not the criticism that bothers me,I'm no lover of bush's or Blairs Policies either,and I've made that clear plenty of times,but when the topics are Politically motivated to incite flaming ,then that's when I get pissed off.

[Shiruzu]

Shiruzu,how many topics you posted here?

Zero, i guess. Why are you asking?

Seems youre more content wih jumping on the bandwagon ,and adding to the flames.............I've read all your comments,and from a moderators viewpoint it looks very much like you are simply here to flame?

I'd be very happy to be proven wrong ;)

I don't understand, what you call flaming? Look at all the insults in this board, which are tolerated, because they are made by "pro-US"-Guys!
But if someone makes a critical(not idiotic!) comment, its considered 'flaming'! Thats awefull!

Yes, i'm posting my opinions, and they might be critical, but i'm not criticising anything!
As i've allready said: My points of view don't need to be wrong, just because my opinion doesn't fit into your world.

[Argyll]

How many of these alleged abuse topics have you posted in the past 2-3 weeks weedman?...............compared to other topics?
Well, at least I am not opening a new thread for every Iraqi resistance fighter killed by the Coaltion Troops. :roll:

Who is....................provide a link please?

The links are about significant casualties not individualsJust a random example:

Look at the threads seruriermarshal created within the last 7 days and then check the redundancies.

I have,he's posted quite a lot of other topics of interests ,from the past 5 days there was one topic about a singular casualty and that was a US KIA in A-Stan......................so therefore your rebuttle about his topics is fruitless in it's content.

[weedman]

Well if you want banned who am I to stand in the way of your request?OK, then I delete my account and feel free to be happier. :lol:

[weedman]

I have,he's posted quite a lot of other topics of interests ,from the past 5 days there was one topic about a singular casualty and that was a US KIA in A-Stan......................so therefore your rebuttle about his topics is fruitless in it's content.

28 Iraqis Killed in Recent Clashes

al-Sadr's al-Mahdi al-Mahdi lieutenant killed

18 Insurgents Killed by Coalition Forces


All on the frontpage... :roll:

[Argyll]

Shiruzu,how many topics you posted here?

Zero, i guess. Why are you asking?

Seems youre more content wih jumping on the bandwagon ,and adding to the flames.............I've read all your comments,and from a moderators viewpoint it looks very much like you are simply here to flame?

I'd be very happy to be proven wrong ;)

I don't understand, what you call flaming? Look at all the insults in this board, which are tolerated, because they are made by "pro-US"-Guys!
But if someone makes a critical(not idiotic!) comment, its considered 'flaming'! Thats awefull!

Yes, i'm posting my opinions, and they might be critical, but i'm not criticising anything!
As i've allready said: My points of view don't need to be wrong, just because my opinion doesn't fit into your world.

Flaming is posting something that deliberately incites tensions,with the sole purpose of causing aggravation within the topic,it's not neccesaryabout the posters views it's about the way he posts them,when and where I can interject about those topics I usually do,but when people start being abusive to moderators,then that line is crossed.
Bottom line is Moderators hold the aces ..........no matter what,they are the ones who call the shots,it's the same in every other forum I've ever been in,they're the referee,not all decisions are the right ones,but their decisions are final.
Hood will over rule a Moderators decision,should it be the wrong one.
If I've made a wrong decision and it gets over ruled,then I'll apologise for it.............I don't have a problem with that.
I've yet to see people apologise for their behavior and attitudes towards Moderators lately.

[Shiruzu]

Do i have to apolgise for something?

[Argyll]

I have,he's posted quite a lot of other topics of interests ,from the past 5 days there was one topic about a singular casualty and that was a US KIA in A-Stan......................so therefore your rebuttle about his topics is fruitless in it's content.

28 Iraqis Killed in Recent Clashes

al-Sadr's al-Mahdi al-Mahdi lieutenant killed

18 Insurgents Killed by Coalition Forces


All on the frontpage... :roll:



Well, at least I am not opening a new thread for every Iraqi resistance fighter killed by the Coaltion Troops

Neither is he,he's reporting significant numbers,just like I said,all from different incidents too,sorry but you loose on this one ;)

[Argyll]

Do i have to apolgise for something?

No why you done something wrong today?

[Shiruzu]

Do i have to apolgise for something?

No why you done something wrong today?

No, i was just asking, if i pissed someone off, which wasn't my intention.

[weedman]

Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?
You're lost in contrariness.

[Argyll]

Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?
You're lost in contrariness.

And you're just lost full stop!!

All of your topics=Al Graib
SecurierMarshalls=Iraq
Yours=abuse topics
His=all topics

[weedman]

Come on, stop bitching, I'm sick of your behavior, ban me and feel good :lol:

[Argyll]

Come on, stop bitching, I'm sick of your behavior, ban me and feel good :lol:

I don't have to ban you to make me feel good,my wife can do that for me,but if you want banned then I can forward your request to the Administartor,I'm sure he'll be delighted to assist you ;)

[M_S]

,and it's always about the negative stuff


so islam bashing, anti-islam is not bad?

[Argyll]

,and it's always about the negative stuff


so islam bashing, anti-islam is not bad?

Yes it is and moderators have acted before to stop this,we cannot be here 24/7,I stopped countless Anti Islamic topics when sixgun was here,several warnings and eventual banning tooks place.
And the site began to look the better for it,then I left for Iraq,and these threads began again,and I was unable to Moderate as much as i would have liked,but now I'm back I can assure you I do as much as I can to prevent spamming and flame wars.
Perhaps providing some links would also help,instead of an off the cuff remark?

[ibstolidude]

,and it's always about the negative stuff


so islam bashing, anti-islam is not bad?
considering people have been banned for it - I would say, yes; and actions have reflected it.

[Ichhabe]

Ah but is it not about abuse?

It's about abuse, but it has nothing to do with military operations. :roll:



Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?

As all the other guys here do? :roll: That's ridiculous. So many people here are "spamming" (as you called it), but the only one, who get sued are the people posting critical stuff.



See I don't mind these articles at all,but they're all coming from YOU,and the forum know's where your political agenda's fall onAs I said, feel free to ban me, if you can't stand critics and other point of views.


weedman, there is a balance you know. What you are doing can be compared to shouting down in a bucket. Not much get out of it other than some pain to the ears.
Those who use this forum on a regulare basis know what has been going on in those prisons. We do read the news, and the following-up articles. Why you feel the need to post this threads over and over againI cannot understand.
And dont you dare calling me an arse licker towards the Americans. Cause I'm not. My CO actually denied me the privilige to attend a meeting that Rumsfeld held for coalition soldiers. Why? Because we were told that we were allowed to ask questions out in the open, and by no chance would he dare to allow me to get over there.

I sometimes post "anti-American" articles. But I do not see the need to flood the forum with them. The only thing you gain by that is producing flame-wars.

I am not an fan of quoting from movies, but as Tom Cruise said it in "Born 4th. of July": Love it, or leave it.
I don't look upon this forum as a platform for solving the problems of the world. I see this as a forum where I get the chance to talk and debate, exchange information and stories with soldiers, veterans and military interested civilians from all over the world.

I have flipped out 2 times here, and had my warnings. I even threathened to start spamming some peoples threads that I did not like. But after a day or two in the thinking-box I just found it a stupid thing to do. I like it here, I just stay out of some peoples threads. And do have a good time.

Cheers, Ichhabe.

[Argyll]

Ah but is it not about abuse?

It's about abuse, but it has nothing to do with military operations. :roll:



Why keep posting little snippets,instead of adding them to additional threads?.................as they're all about the same incident?

As all the other guys here do? :roll: That's ridiculous. So many people here are "spamming" (as you called it), but the only one, who get sued are the people posting critical stuff.



See I don't mind these articles at all,but they're all coming from YOU,and the forum know's where your political agenda's fall onAs I said, feel free to ban me, if you can't stand critics and other point of views.


weedman, there is a balance you know. What you are doing can be compared to shouting down in a bucket. Not much get out of it other than some pain to the ears.
Those who use this forum on a regulare basis know what has been going on in those prisons. We do read the news, and the following-up articles. Why you feel the need to post this threads over and over againI cannot understand.
And dont you dare calling me an arse licker towards the Americans. Cause I'm not. My CO actually denied me the privilige to attend a meeting that Rumsfeld held for coalition soldiers. Why? Because we were told that we were allowed to ask questions out in the open, and by no chance would he dare to allow me to get over there.

I sometimes post "anti-American" articles. But I do not see the need to flood the forum with them. The only thing you gain by that is producing flame-wars.

I am not an fan of quoting from movies, but as Tom Cruise said it in "Born 4th. of July": Love it, or leave it.
I don't look upon this forum as a platform for solving the problems of the world. I see this as a forum where I get the chance to talk and debate, echange information and stories with soldiers, veterans and military interested civilians from all over the world.

I have flipped out 2 times here, and had my warnings. I even threathened to start spamming some peoples threads that I did not like. But after a day or two in the thinking-box I just found it a stupid thing to do. I like it here, I just stay out of some peoples threads. And do have a good time.

Cheers, Ichhabe.

And still have the respect for this too mate ;)

[Tane Angle]

:cantbeli: Argyll, doesn't it ever end? We had about a week's rest on here after SS left, but now people from both extremes have picked up the slack. We seem to oscillate between flame-posters from each side. :|


so islam bashing, anti-islam is not bad?
M_S, many here have tried very hard to put a stop to the Islam bashing. Just a day or two ago, Argyll, Trident-za, and myself were the subjects of a 25-page flame thread because we advocated respecting Shiite culture. We do try very much to advocate respect for other cultures, religions, ethnic backgrounds, etc. It dismays me when our requests for that tolerance are ignored, but we do try. I think most people on here are respectful and tolerant, though.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[budanski]

I've submitted your name to be banned, Tane. You're way too tolerant. ;)

[Tane Angle]

Serves me right, I got flamed for 25 pages, had my honor and name attacked, and I wasn't even here to see it! My one chance to get really pissed and yell at someone back, and I missed it! p-)

[Sway]

Because you're the only one doing it,and it's always about the negative stuff,have you ever posted a feelgood story from Iraq?

i dont get why people are bashing weedman.....and i dont wanna start no bashing contest either...but if theres stuff to report...negative or positive...let the man put his articles and sources.....this isnt disneyland ..not every article has to be "feelgood"

[Argyll]

Because you're the only one doing it,and it's always about the negative stuff,have you ever posted a feelgood story from Iraq?

i dont get why people are bashing weedman.....and i dont wanna start no bashing contest either...but if theres stuff to report...negative or positive...let the man put his articles and sources.....this isnt disneyland ..not every article has to be "feelgood"

Welcome to Militaryphotos.net. ;)

Read the forum rules,and I've explained to weedman my reasons,it's not the topics,it's the repetativeness,nobody is disputing the fact what went on,it's the same topic over and over again. does the term "innocent until proven guilty" ring a bell?
Nobody else seems to post these stories,why not?Because after having it rammed down their throats nobody really gives a fuc* anymore,they're happy to let justice be done.
How many topics are there about Al Graib in this section,search and you'll see.

[weedman]

Former Abu Ghraib Intel Staffer Says Army Concealed Involvement in Abuse Scandal
(http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/abu_ghraib_cover_up_040518-1.html) :roll: