Military court to review Abu Ghraib conviction

By GottaLaff

Well now, if BushCo said it was okay, then it was okay:

The U.S. military's highest court says it will review the conviction of an Army reservist [former Cpl. Charles Graner Jr. ] who prosecutors said was the ringleader of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. [...]

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in Washington said Tuesday it will consider whether the trial judge erred by refusing to let jurors see memos approving "enhanced interrogation tactics" for detainees.

I guess it was just too, too harsh, punishing an abuser for stacking naked prisoners in pyramids and photographing them while they were being forced to masturbate in front of others.

Especially with permission.... given by the same group of thugs that ordered and wrote the memos that made torture hunky dory in the first place.

Here's an idea: Convict the group of thugs.

*****

All my previous posts on this subject matter can be found here; That link includes one specific to only Fayiz al-Kandari's story here. Here are audio and video interviews with Lt. Col. Wingard, one by David Shuster, one by Ana Marie Cox, and more. My guest commentary at BuzzFlash is here.

Lt. Col. Barry Wingard is a military attorney who represents Fayiz Al-Kandari in the Military Commission process and in no way represents the opinions of his home state. When not on active duty, Colonel Wingard is a public defender in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

If you are inclined to help rectify these injustices: Twitterers, use the hashtag #FreeFayiz. We have organized a team to get these stories out. If you are interested in helping Fayiz out, e-mail me at The Political Carnival, address in sidebar to the right; or tweet me at @GottaLaff.

If you'd like to see other ways you can take action, go here and scroll down to the end of the article.

Then read Jane Mayer's book The Dark Side. You'll have a much greater understanding of why I post endlessly about this, and why I'm all over the CIA deception issues, too.

More of Fayiz's story here, at Answers.com.

Aiding and Abetting The Enemy: Special Comment by my 72-year-old friend

By GottaLaff

My very caring, impassioned 72-year-old Twitter pal, who goes by the name 42bkdodgr, would like to share his feelings about BushCo's generous contribution to the national INsecurity of our country since 9/11. I am more than happy to oblige.

But first, a personal note from 42bkdodgr:

Many of you may wonder why I chose to use the “ 72 year old friend” as the introduction to my Special Comments. I selected the moniker so readers could see that from my age and life experiences I give a different perspective to the issues of today.

Now for his Special Comment:

Aiding and Abetting The Enemy

Recently former Vice President Dick Cheney and former special assistant to President George W. Bush Ron Christie stated on television that President Obama is “aiding and abetting the enemy“; while activist Peter Gadiel, on Sean Hannity’s show suggested that Obama should be tried for treason.

All this talk about “aiding and abetting the enemy”-- and treason-- is due to the fact that the U.S. government has decided to put Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, and four of his cohorts, on trial in a civilian court in New York City.

I’m not going to discuss whether the decision to try the defendants in a federal court is the right decision or not, but what I want to discuss is who I believe has aided and abetted the enemy.

After the 9/11 tragedy, the United States had the full support on the world community to find and capture Osama bin Laden and members of the Al-Qaeda organization who claimed responsibility for the horrendous acts. When the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, many nations provided logistical support and/or armed forces to help in our endeavor.

We started to lose world support, especially in the Middle East, when it became apparent that the reasons given by the Bush/Cheney administration for invading Iraq were based on lies and misinformation.

As the world became aware of the following events-- (1) Abu Ghraib Prison Photos, (2) Rendition Prisons operated by the CIA, (3)Guantanamo Bay detention camp, (4) Torture and (5) Unexplained deaths at various prison sites-- it enabled Al-Qaeda to recruit terrorists for Jihads attacks against American forces and the people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan.

But now we are also learning the war policies and practices of Bush/Cheney are having consequences in this country. Recent events show there is a growing trend of U.S. citizens participating in and joining in a global jihad.

One need only to look at such recent events as the arrest of a U.S. citizen accused of helping to plot the Mumbai, India attack; the massacre at Fort Hood, Texas; and the arrest of five young Americans in Pakistan for a possible terrorist connections... to see this global jihad is happening.

So I say to Dick Cheney, Ron Christie and Peter Gadiel: It’s not President Obama who has aided and abetted the enemy; it's the policies of the Bush/Cheney administration who have aided and abetted the enemy and have made this country unsafe and possibly open to another terrorist attack.

Dick Cheney you reap what you sow.

Many thanks again for another important, relevant piece, 42bkdodgr. This one hit home with me, in light of the many posts I've done on Gitmo detainee Fayiz al-Kandari and the subject of torture. You never fail to say what so many of us are thinking and feeling, and your perspective is invaluable.

Alberto Gonzales Regrets Enemy Detainee Memo

By GottaLaff

Think his fingers were crossed when he apologized?

Well, heck, as long as he's sorry, let's just shake hands and put all that torture behind us:

Alberto Gonzales expresses regret over a memo he wrote defending the harsh treatment of enemy detainees. Some argue that the 2002 memo cleared the way for prisoner abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The former U.S. attorney general said he shouldn't have used the words "quaint" and "the Geneva Conventions" in the same sentence.

I shouldn't use the words Gonzo and dick in the same sentence either, but I am, and without a hint of regret.

Hey Alberto, the word "quaint" isn't the only thing you should be apologizing for. Not by a long shot.

What you should apologize for is only touched upon below. It's also what you should be imprisoned for:

All my previous posts on this subject matter can be found here; That link includes one specific to only Fayiz al-Kandari's story here. Here are audio and video interviews with Lt. Col. Wingard, one by David Shuster, one by Ana Marie Cox, and more. My guest commentary at BuzzFlash is here.

If you are inclined to help rectify these injustices: Twitterers, use the hashtag #FreeFayiz. We have organized a team to get these stories out. If you are interested in helping Fayiz out, e-mail me at The Political Carnival, address in sidebar to the right; or tweet me at @GottaLaff.

If you'd like to see other ways you can take action, go here and scroll down to the end of the article.

Then read Jane Mayer's book The Dark Side. You'll have a much greater understanding of why I post endlessly about this, and why I'm all over the CIA deception issues, too.

More of Fayiz's story here, at Answers.com.

War supplemental passes after photo settlement

By GottaLaff

All that back and forth about the torture photos is settled, then. Finally! Oh wait. No it isn't:

The Senate late Thursday passed a $106 billion military supplemental to fund the U.S. military’s efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan after unraveling a controversy over photos of detainee abuse.

Voting 91-5, the Senate sent the measure to President Obama’s desk, after the House voted 226-202 for it on Tuesday. Both chambers had already passed different versions, which were reconciled in conference meetings. [...]

In the end, the controversy was settled with a Senate vote Wednesday night for a stand-alone law to keep the photos from public view. The House still must vote on that bill, however, meaning the controversy may not be over. But White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel on Wednesday told Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) that Obama would sign an executive order to classify them if necessary.

Voting 'no' was a hodgepodge of the Senate's more conservative and liberal members: Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.).

Absent from the vote were Robert Byrd (D-W.V.), John Ensign (R-Nev.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.). Byrd and Kennedy are both ill, while Ensign has not returned to the Senate after admitting an extramarital affair on Tuesday. There is also an ongoing vacancy in the second Minnesota seat.

Here's what I wrote in one of the posts of my interviews with a Gitmo lawyer/abused detainee:

Wait, sidebar: I smell a reason for releasing those pesky torture photos everyone's talking about… evidence. Sidebar over.

Public view is one thing. Declassifying is another, for limited use in, say, a courtroom.

Torture photos: Update and Correction

By GottaLaff

Scott Horton's post (hence, my post) is being updated and corrected:

Update and correction: Since my story on torture photos posted Friday, Salon has accurately pointed out that the sexually explicit photographs focused on in my story were first published by Salon in 2006, and that all the Salon photographs have in fact been released by the government. The 44 photos subject to the ACLU law suit and reviewed by President Obama do not contain sexually explicit images. I regret my errors.

But the story is far from over. Indeed, a senior Pentagon official involved in the ACLU litigation tells me that the 44 photographs in question are not the end of the controversy, stating that an internal process of review was still underway, reconsidering photographs that “may previously have been miscategorized.” The source declined to comment on the additional photographs. In addition, the official confirmed that:

• There are a “substantial number” of unreleased photographs, past the 44 in question, potentially subject to the ACLU’s request. It remains to be seen what they are and what is in them.

• Obama’s May 14 decision not to release these 44 photographs, after personally reviewing them, was a stall tactic: he intends to release them eventually, even if he prevails in court, once the situation on the ground improves.

• The was a split between the top Centcom commanders, with General David Patraeus speaking in favor of release (specifically, “let’s lance this boil”), and General Raymond Ordierno coming out against, arguing that it could make a dangerous situation more dangerous.

There you have it. Updated and corrected. Follow the link for more.

President Obama, the Pentagon, and the leaked sexual abuse photos

By GottaLaff

Earlier I posted about the Abu Ghraib photos and that their existence has been confirmed. I went back and reread the article I linked to. Please go read the whole thing, but this part stood out:

The most prominent victim in the past of [Pentagon spokesperson, Bryan G. Whitman's, who came to prominence during the Bush administration] disinformation may have been none other than Barack Obama. On the campaign trail, in Austin, Texas, candidate Obama said he had gotten a message from an Army captain in Iraq who described how his unit had been shorted in munitions and equipment. I learned from reporters that Whitman started a whispering campaign with the Pentagon press corps telling them (not for attribution) that he didn’t believe Obama’s claims were true. Whitman’s game, however, was stopped by ABC reporter Jake Tapper, who tracked down the captain, interviewed him and fully verified the account.

Bryan Whitman remains on the job in the Pentagon today. But the effort to suppress the shocking photographs is already failing, as they leak to the public and reliable sources verify their authenticity. A senior military officer told me that in the months before the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, Pentagon officials engaged in strange maneuvers to avoiding viewing the pictures. That, he noted, didn’t make the photos any less real. But it apparently made it easier for Pentagon officials to dissemble about them. That process hasn’t stopped.

Confirmation that photos show torture and rape

By GottaLaff

This back and forth about the photos is dizzying. And what about the videos that were referred to? My posts about all of this are here, here, here, here, and here.

Now we can add this to the collection:

[Y]esterday, Scott Horton reported that he has confirmed that the photos do, in fact, “depict sexually explicit acts,” including “a government contractor engaged in an act of sodomy with a male prisoner and scenes of forced masturbation,” as well as “penetration involving phosphorous sticks and brooms.” Horton writes further:

A senior military officer familiar with the photos told me that they would likely provoke a storm of outrage if released. … Some show U.S. personnel engaged in sexual acts with prisoners and each other. In one, a female prisoner appears to have been forced to expose her breasts to be photographed. In another, a prisoner is suspended naked upside down from the top bunk of a bed in a stress position. [...]

Still other withheld photographs have been circulating among U.S. soldiers who served in Iraq. One soldier showed them to me, including a photograph in which a male in a U.S. military uniform receives oral sex from a female prisoner.

Horton also obtained what he characterizes as “rarely seen Abu Ghraib torture photos,” which can be viewed here.

It looks like it's time for someone to sort all of this out. Again, IMHO, the ObamAdministration should control the message. Leaks like this are already getting out of hand (as you can see by the number of posts I've done on this subject), and eventually, the photos/videos themselves will make their way out to the public.

Oh, and accurate reporting wouldn't hurt either.

Army Major General Taguba Saw Video of Male Soldier Sodomizing Female Detainee

By GottaLaff

UPDATE: Taguba denies he's seen abuse photos suppressed by Obama
But what about video?

Original post:

Again, this is becoming a hotter and hotter topic, as I knew it would be when I posted about some unreleased photos the other day. Also, a post about some others/same (?) here. More of my follow-up posts here and here. It's getting confusing, is it not?

Now, some clarification via Jason Leopold:

In 2007, shortly after he was forced into retirement, Army Major General Antonio M. Taguba, made a startling admission. During the course of his investigation into the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib Taguba said he saw “a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.”

Taguba told New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh that he saw other graphic photos and videos as well, including one depicting the “sexual humiliation of a father with his son, who were both detainees.”

That video as well as photographs Taguba saw of U.S. soldiers raping and torturing Iraqi prisoners, remains in the possession of the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division (CID).

Taguba said he did not discuss the details of the more graphic photographs and videos he saw in his voluminous report on the abuses at Abu Ghraib because of the Army’s ongoing criminal probe and the photographs’ “extremely sensitive nature.”

Taguba's report on the widespread of abuse of prisoners did say that he found credible a report that a soldier had sodomized “a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick.” [...]

But the photographs described by the Telegraph are not the ones that were at the center of the five-year-old lawsuit between the Bush administration and the ACLU that Obama had agreed earlier this year to release.

Two weeks ago, after Obama decided against releasing the photographs, the Telegraph published a story along with several pictures depicting Iraqi prisoners being abused claiming those too were the ones Obama was withholding. But that report was also incorrect as the photographs the Telegraph published had first surfaced in 2006. The newspaper has since changed the headline and first paragraph of its report.

The photographs Obama has decided to withhold, as I first reported May 15, are ones that were taken in 2003 and 2004 in which U.S. Army soldiers in Afghanistan took dozens of pictures of their colleagues pointing assault rifles and pistols at the heads and backs of hooded and bound detainees.

Another photograph, found on a government computer, showed two male soldiers and one female soldier pointing a broom to one detainee “as if I was sticking the end of a broom stick into [his] rectum,” according to the female soldier’s account as told to an Army criminal investigator.

I found the documents that describes many of the photographs that were set for release this month on the ACLU’s website. [...] Those files can be downloaded here: [Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5].

Amrit Singh, an ACLU staff attorney, confirmed that the photographs described in documents posted on the group's website were those that President Obama has decided to withhold fearing the disclosure would stoke anti-American sentiment and endanger U.S. troops.

That does not mean the photographs and videos described by Taguba do not exist, as Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs seemed to suggest in response to the Telegraph’s report Thursday, which was also harshly critical of the British press in general. It's just not the photographs in question.

Leopold has more details here.

H/t: The Joshua Blog

The Torture/"Rape" Photos: Crime v. Cover-up

By GottaLaff

I originally posted in detail about this here.

Digby, in part:

So, we don't know if the pictures Taguba refers to are the pictures which were covered under thee ACLU's FOIA request, and whether they still exist. We do know that accusations of rape were investigated under both the Taguba and Fay reports, but can't be sure of the disposition of them. And again, we don't know if these pictures refer to those specific allegations or if they pertain to different incidents. The Pentagon denies that there are any pictures which depict these heinous acts. In other words, confusion still reigns and suspicions run high.

The administration claims that it withheld the FOIA pictures because they were more of the same and would inflame anti-American hatred which, as I said, always seemed contradictory. And now it appears that they may actually show something much worse than we've seen --- and the administration looks as if it's covering that up by saying that there's nothing new. Perhaps they aren't, but their conflicting statements and refusal to release the pictures quite naturally raises these questions.

The administration needs to realize that it can't avoid this issue even if it wants to and it's not useful to try to finesse it or kick the issue down the road. There are simply too many lies under the bridge --- it's impossible to take the government at its word. If sexual assaults beyond those which we already know about and saw evidence of (and which were prosecuted) happened, then it will come out. The only question is whether it will be a drip, drip, drip of toxic revelations and speculations that will continue to poison this country and its relationship to the world or whether it will be an official, transparent accounting of what happened. Either way, there's no running away from it.

Please go read the whole thing. Digby addresses my own struggles with this, and my tendency toward getting this out in the open (not literally, there are ways to tell the story without blasting photos all over the airwaves).

I've maintained that the ObamAdministration needs to take control of the message, and not give the appearance of hiding anything. The skill and wisdom with which they do that will determine the way the world reacts, especially considering the horrific revelations have already leaked out, and inevitably, the photos themselves will, too.

VIDEO: Robert Gibbs responds to Abu Ghraib "rape" photos report

By GottaLaff

My post about the so-called censored Abu Ghraib "rape" photos has caused quite a stir on Twitter and elsewhere. The article I drew from has caused quite a stir, period. Here is Robert Gibb's response:



Did he just call Major General Taguba a liar, er, mistaken? I know he meant all that for the reporter, but...

Abu Ghraib abuse photos that Obama censored 'show rape'

By GottaLaff

WARNING: Graphic descriptions in second half of this post.

This just came across on Twitter:

BULLETIN -- REPORT: PHOTOS PRESIDENT OBAMA REFUSES TO RELEASE SHOW SERIOUS SEXUAL ABUSE.

Learning about the content of the photos is more acceptable than seeing them. I understand that argument, but eventually, inevitably, the photos themselves will leak out...or so I've heard.

Wouldn't the ObamAdministration have more control of the message if they released the photos on their own terms, instead of this kind of thing? In a court room or only to certain public officials, as they've done before? I'm asking for the sake of argument, not because I necessarily want that to happen.

And after reading what you're about to read, I can fully understand President Obama's change of heart.

It took some digging, but I finally found the source of the news. WARNING, some excerpts below are disturbingly graphic:

At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

Another apparently shows a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts.

Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.

[...] He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.

[...] Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency.

“I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan.

“The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it.”

[...] The latest photographs relate to 400 cases of alleged abuse between 2001 and 2005 in Abu Ghraib and six other prisons. Mr Obama said the individuals involved had been “identified, and appropriate actions” taken.

[...] Among the graphic statements, which were later released under US freedom of information laws, is that of Kasim Mehaddi Hilas in which he says: “I saw [name of a translator] ******* a kid, his age would be about 15 to 18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [name] who was wearing the military uniform, putting his **** in the little kid’s ***…. and the female soldier was taking pictures.”[...]

Three detainees, including the alleged victim, refer to the use of a phosphorescent tube in the sexual abuse and another to the use of wire, while the victim also refers to part of a policeman’s “stick” all of which were apparently photographed.

Yeah, that would tend to anger a few people.

The photos they don't want us to see

By GottaLaff

Via BuzzFlash, the photos they don't want us to see. A sample, from a 2006 Australian newspaper article:

There are more disturbing ones than the one above, 15 in all.

Murder One, Not Just War Crimes

By GottaLaff

Your daily dose of BuzzFlash:

The Legal Case Against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Et Al., Is Murder One, Not Just War Crimes

BuzzFlash fully supports trying Bush, Cheney, and their band of fellow sadists for war crimes, but while they are in the courtroom, let's not forget Murder One. Apparently, many in the mainstream press and blogosphere already have.

The focus right now is on legal memos justifying the horrifying and numbing repetition of torture against "high profile" targets. We have a short memory in America -- and most of what was in these memos -- except for the diabolical excess of the waterboarding and the medieval torture by insects -- was, as President Obama has said, pretty much already known.

Also known, but not discussed at this time, is that less upper echelon Al-Qaeda figures were murdered as a result of the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld torture jihad (euphemestically called in the mainstream corporate press "harsh" or "enhanced interrogation").

Uh, remember those photos of bludgeoned prisoners in body bags that came out of Abu Ghraib? (And we still have only seen a small portion of the visual evidence.) Those people were murdered as a result of the green light on torture.

Please go read the rest here.

Iraq to re-open Abu Ghraib prison

By GottaLaff

Mission accomplished:

The AP reports that next month, Iraq will re-open the infamous Abu Ghraib prison, site of the egregious torture and human rights abuses conducted during the Bush administration. The new prison will hold up to 15,000 inmates and will be called “Baghdad’s Central Prison” because the name Abu Ghraib left a “bitter feeling inside Iraqis’ hearts,” deputy Justice Minister Busho Ibrahim said yesterday.

We're makin' progress.

The Torture Report

By GottaLaff

Rep. Jim Moran (D- Virginia) just said on Hardball that the Obama administration won't move on the substance of this New York Times editorial, because they want to "move on". As the editorial says, it's too "politically fraught". Oy.

Duncan Hunter is on Hardball, too, and calls it "left wing rubbish", because, see, only three people were waterboarded and those three were bad, bad, bad guys who gave us "enormously valuable information that saved American lives" after being tortured. Great logic, Duncan. Moral high ground and real American principles be damned. Double oy.

All but President Bush’s most unquestioning supporters recognized the chain of unprincipled decisions that led to the abuse, torture and death in prisons run by the American military and intelligence services.

Now, a bipartisan report by the Senate Armed Services Committee has made what amounts to a strong case for bringing criminal charges against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld; his legal counsel, William J. Haynes; and potentially other top officials, including the former White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff.

The report shows how actions by these men “led directly” to what happened at Abu Ghraib, in Afghanistan, in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and in secret C.I.A. prisons.

It said these top officials, charged with defending the Constitution and America’s standing in the world, methodically introduced interrogation practices based on illegal tortures devised by Chinese agents during the Korean War. [...]

The officials then issued legally and morally bankrupt documents to justify their actions, starting with a presidential order saying that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to prisoners of the “war on terror” — the first time any democratic nation had unilaterally reinterpreted the conventions. [...]

These top officials ignored warnings from lawyers in every branch of the armed forces that they were breaking the law, subjecting uniformed soldiers to possible criminal charges and authorizing abuses that were not only considered by experts to be ineffective, but were actually counterproductive. [...]

These policies have deeply harmed America’s image as a nation of laws and may make it impossible to bring dangerous men to real justice. The report said the interrogation techniques were ineffective, despite the administration’s repeated claims to the contrary. [...]

A prosecutor should be appointed to consider criminal charges against top officials at the Pentagon and others involved in planning the abuse. [...]

At the least, Mr. Obama should, as the organization Human Rights First suggested, order his attorney general to review more than two dozen prisoner-abuse cases that reportedly were referred to the Justice Department by the Pentagon and the C.I.A. — and declined by Mr. Bush’s lawyers.

Mr. Obama should consider proposals from groups like Human Rights Watch and the Brennan Center for Justice to appoint an independent panel to look into these and other egregious violations of the law. [...]

A good place for them to start would be to reverse Mr. Bush’s disastrous order of Feb. 7, 2002, declaring that the United States was no longer legally committed to comply with the Geneva Conventions.

Moran:

If we don't hold them accountable, we are not the nation the rest of the world wants us to be.

Senior officials authorized ‘aggressive’ interrogation

By GottaLaff

From the Department of What Else Is New:

Senior U.S. officials authorized the use of aggressive interrogation techniques resulting in the abuse of military detainees in U.S. custody, according to a report released by the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.

The authorization was not only the cause of aggressive interrogation techniques, but also conveyed the message that it was OK to mistreat and degrade detainees in U.S. custody, according to the report released by panel Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and ranking member John McCain (R-Ariz.). [...]

SERE training is designed to teach soldiers how to resist interrogation by enemies who refuse to follow the Geneva Conventions and international law. During SERE training, U.S. troops are exposed to harsh techniques such as stress positions, forced nudity, use of fear, sleep deprivation and, until recently, the waterboard, according to a release issued by the committee. The SERE techniques were never intended to be used against detainees in U.S. custody.

The committee’s investigation found that senior officials in the U.S. government decided to use some of these harsh techniques against detainees based on flawed interpretations of U.S. and international law, according to the release. [...]

Levin also said that the abuses that took place at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and earlier at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq are not the actions of just a “few bad apples.”

“Attempts by senior officials to pass the buck to low-ranking soldiers while avoiding any responsibility for abuses are unconscionable,” Levin said. “The message from top officials was clear: It was acceptable to use degrading and abusive techniques against detainees.”

McCain said, “The committee’s report details the inexcusable link between abusive interrogation techniques used by our enemies who ignored the Geneva Conventions and interrogation policy for detainees in U.S. custody. These policies are wrong and must never be repeated.”

Oh really, Gramm-pa? Really? February 2008:

Last week, the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill — which contained a provision banning waterboarding — to the floor for a vote. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), an outspoken waterboarding critic, voted against the bill.

So many reasons to impeach, so little time

By GottaLaff

11,131.08 –239.61 –2.11%

Here are two more reasons that this administration is worthy of intensive investigation. Reason #1:

The next president will inherit a record budget deficit of $482 billion, according to a new Bush administration estimate released Monday.

Reason #2:

A Nobel-prize-winning rights group said US officials committed war crimes by ordering what the group says was torture of detainees, and called for them to be probed and prosecuted.

"There must be a complete and independent investigation of what happened in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and other places where terrorist suspects were detained," Allen Keller of Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) told a briefing in the US House of Representatives Thursday. [...]

PHR president Rubenstein echoed the call for a probe.

"Accountability must include prosecuting individuals who have committed war crimes, whatever their place in the chain of command," said Rubenstein.

In the preface to the PHR report entitled "Broken Laws, Broken Lives: Medical evidence of torture by US personnel and its impact," retired US Army general Antonio Teguba said bluntly that there was "no longer any doubt that the current administration has committed war crimes."

"The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account," said Teguba, who led the official investigation into the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq.

Why would they be held to account? That would throw a wrench into the Olympics coverage.

Breaking: Former Abu Ghraib detainees suing U.S.

By GottaLaff

Detainees from Abu Ghraib are suing four U.S. states for abuse/torture. MSNBC is reporting that, although I'm not sure I can completely trust them any more.

The Four Stages of "Good Grief!"

By GottaLaff

Froomkin lays out the contempt Bush has for his questioners or anyone who has the nerve to doubt him. Reading this put me through what I will call the Four Stages of "Good Grief!"...

When British Sky News reporter Adam Boulton today challenged Bush on his dedication to freedom, suggesting that Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib represented "the complete opposite of freedom," Bush accused Boulton of "slander[ing] America."

Stage 1, Defiance: I beg to differ. If anyone is "slandering America", it's Bush. He does that through his actions, his decrees, his lies, his secrets... you know the rest.

Evidently still smarting about the Supreme Court's rejection of his detainee policies last week, Bush noted defensively that the lower courts had agreed with him -- as if that mattered.

Stage 2, Hysteria: That's so laughable that I'm reduced to tears...okay, I'm sobbing. He's disgraceful.

While Americans increasingly blame him for record-high gas prices and the toll on their pocketbooks, Bush dismissively referred to domestic concerns about those high prices as "squawking." (Bush: "Well, in the meantime you've got a bunch of people squawking about the price of gasoline. And because we didn't try to find more oil and gas, we're in a pinch in America.")

Stage 3, Rage: Squawk this, George: !#%&*#!!

And in an interview on Friday with Ned Temko of Britain's Observer, Bush actually joked that he was "still looking" for the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that were the main reason he gave to the public for going to war.

Stage 4, Impeachment.

Fox Reality Show Contestant Wears Anti-Abu Ghraib Shirt

Pretty impressive the kid got away with it. I don't watch these things, but some kid named Gev is competing on "So You Think You Can Dance" and an EW reader caught this-

An astute reader has pointed out that during his pre-taped rehearsal and interview, Gev wore a shirt with the unmistakable image of one of the hooded Abu Ghraib prisoners with electrodes on either hand and draped in an American flag.

In watching more of the vid (gag), when Gev first comes on the screen, he's wearing a "Drop Beats, Not Bombs" shirt and says he's from Kazakhstan. Then in the next bit he's wearing the Gitmo shirt that has a tagline "Invisible *****", can't read the second word.

Props to Gev for taking a stand and hope Fox doesn't find out. (pertinent video starts about :35)