Today's Article
Soldiers who have
paid for these acts
now have a valid
reason to declare they
were scapegoats for
what was a high-level
Bush program.
paid for these acts
now have a valid
reason to declare they
were scapegoats for
what was a high-level
Bush program.
The American Spark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Were Abu Ghraib Guards Bush Administration Scapegoats?
By Cliff Montgomery - May 11th, 2009
When photos of torture at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison surfaced in 2004, Bush Administration officials quickly
painted Army Private Charles Graner Jr. as the de-facto head of some low-ranking "bad apples" who
performed a host of blatantly illegal acts on detainees.
Thus the Army private and others were forced to pay the entire price for such actions. But recently released
Justice Department memos--which verify the authorization of torture at the highest government levels--may
soon change that.
Graner and others who have paid for these acts now have a valid reason to declare they were scapegoats for
what was, in fact, a high-level program. They now also rightly point out that the administration's denial of such a
policy clearly undermined their own legal defenses.
The hapless Army private still is a prisoner at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; he has served about half of his
10-year prison sentence for assault, detainee abuse and dereliction of duty.
Graner seems to have taken the greatest amount of blame for the program; he's the only soldier tried for the
Abu Ghraib tortures who remains incarcerated.
Then-President George W. Bush claimed to be "so disappointed in what happened, yet the whole time he
knew what was going on," Graner told The Washington Post. The private answered questions via his wife,
Megan; she also worked at the Abu Ghraib prison.
Virginia lawyer Charles Gittins, who represents Graner, informed reporters two weeks ago that he is working on
appeals arguments which largely focus on the memos' revelations, as well as a recently released congressional
study into the acts of torture.
Gittins said he plans to convince the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces that leading officials kept
evidence from Graner's defense and thus inappropriately influenced the court.
At their 2004 and 2005 trials, military judges blocked the accused soldiers from calling top Bush officials to the
witness stand.
For its part, the Bush Administration refused to admit the existence of any program that may have approved of
at least some of the actions revealed in those now-infamous photographs.
"Once the pictures came out, the senior officials involved in the decision-making, they knew. They knew they
had to have a cover story," Gittins told the Post.
Thus officials quickly claimed " 'It was [only] the bad apples led by Charles Graner,' " he added.
Some of the illegal actions of these Abu Ghraib guards, such as slamming hooded detainees into various walls
at the prison, clearly echo a Justice Department-authorized tactic revealed in the memos, called "walling"--an
approved action in which interrogators could slam detainees held in CIA custody against a flexible wall built to
make a loud, deafening noise.
But the photos of Abu Ghraib "interrogations" also showed some actions, like stomping or punching, that are
not among the techniques approved in the memos. Still other actions appear simply to have been improvised
by guards, such as forcing naked detainees to form human pyramids, or forcing them to masturbate.
"According to the memos and congressional documents, U.S. officials reverse-engineered techniques from
U.S. survival training courses," states the Post. These techniques were "designed to teach troops how to
endure capture and interrogation"--in other words, they were never intended as interrogation tactics.
Regardless, Bush Administration "Justice and Defense department officials approved the use of dogs, nudity,
stress positions, sleep deprivation and other techniques" during interrogations.
A Pentagon agency which advised the Bush Administration against the use of such harsh interrogation
techniques flatly called the actions "torture" and also told Bush officials that torture will certainly produce
"unreliable information," according to eye-opening military documents prepared in July 2002. For more on this
matter, check out The American Spark's Apr. 27th article.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
By Cliff Montgomery - May 11th, 2009
When photos of torture at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison surfaced in 2004, Bush Administration officials quickly
painted Army Private Charles Graner Jr. as the de-facto head of some low-ranking "bad apples" who
performed a host of blatantly illegal acts on detainees.
Thus the Army private and others were forced to pay the entire price for such actions. But recently released
Justice Department memos--which verify the authorization of torture at the highest government levels--may
soon change that.
Graner and others who have paid for these acts now have a valid reason to declare they were scapegoats for
what was, in fact, a high-level program. They now also rightly point out that the administration's denial of such a
policy clearly undermined their own legal defenses.
The hapless Army private still is a prisoner at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; he has served about half of his
10-year prison sentence for assault, detainee abuse and dereliction of duty.
Graner seems to have taken the greatest amount of blame for the program; he's the only soldier tried for the
Abu Ghraib tortures who remains incarcerated.
Then-President George W. Bush claimed to be "so disappointed in what happened, yet the whole time he
knew what was going on," Graner told The Washington Post. The private answered questions via his wife,
Megan; she also worked at the Abu Ghraib prison.
Virginia lawyer Charles Gittins, who represents Graner, informed reporters two weeks ago that he is working on
appeals arguments which largely focus on the memos' revelations, as well as a recently released congressional
study into the acts of torture.
Gittins said he plans to convince the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces that leading officials kept
evidence from Graner's defense and thus inappropriately influenced the court.
At their 2004 and 2005 trials, military judges blocked the accused soldiers from calling top Bush officials to the
witness stand.
For its part, the Bush Administration refused to admit the existence of any program that may have approved of
at least some of the actions revealed in those now-infamous photographs.
"Once the pictures came out, the senior officials involved in the decision-making, they knew. They knew they
had to have a cover story," Gittins told the Post.
Thus officials quickly claimed " 'It was [only] the bad apples led by Charles Graner,' " he added.
Some of the illegal actions of these Abu Ghraib guards, such as slamming hooded detainees into various walls
at the prison, clearly echo a Justice Department-authorized tactic revealed in the memos, called "walling"--an
approved action in which interrogators could slam detainees held in CIA custody against a flexible wall built to
make a loud, deafening noise.
But the photos of Abu Ghraib "interrogations" also showed some actions, like stomping or punching, that are
not among the techniques approved in the memos. Still other actions appear simply to have been improvised
by guards, such as forcing naked detainees to form human pyramids, or forcing them to masturbate.
"According to the memos and congressional documents, U.S. officials reverse-engineered techniques from
U.S. survival training courses," states the Post. These techniques were "designed to teach troops how to
endure capture and interrogation"--in other words, they were never intended as interrogation tactics.
Regardless, Bush Administration "Justice and Defense department officials approved the use of dogs, nudity,
stress positions, sleep deprivation and other techniques" during interrogations.
A Pentagon agency which advised the Bush Administration against the use of such harsh interrogation
techniques flatly called the actions "torture" and also told Bush officials that torture will certainly produce
"unreliable information," according to eye-opening military documents prepared in July 2002. For more on this
matter, check out The American Spark's Apr. 27th article.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
Wait, why does an
independent news source
run advertisements? The
Spark answers in its
advertising policy.
independent news source
run advertisements? The
Spark answers in its
advertising policy.
* Please check out our ads--they
help keep this news site running.
Thanks!
help keep this news site running.
Thanks!