Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Talon

Rumsfeld sued over prison abuse

14 posts in this topic

Rumsfeld sued over prison abuse

US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is being sued by two civil liberties group for allegedly authorising torture and then failing to stop it.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First have filed a lawsuit on behalf of eight men who claim abuse by US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The men allege they suffered beatings, mock executions and sexual humiliation.

The Pentagon says no policies or procedures Mr Rumsfeld approved were intended as abuse or condoning abuse.

"There have been multiple investigations into the various aspects of detainee abuse," it said in a statement. "None have concluded there was a policy of abuse."

Apologies

The groups are seeking undetermined compensation for four Iraqis and four Afghans detained at various locations, including Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and the Bagram air base in Afghanistan.

None of the men were ever charged and all have since been released, they said.

The case - being heard in Mr Rumsfeld's home state of Illinois - focuses on an order he signed in December 2002 authorising new methods for interrogating prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Both groups say the defence secretary later ignored overwhelming evidence that the policies resulted in prisoner abuse.

"Secretary Rumsfeld bears direct and ultimate responsibility for this descent into horror by personally authorising unlawful interrogation techniques and by abdicating his legal duty to stop torture," said lead counsel Lucas Guttentag.

The defence secretary has apologised for the abuse scandals and has twice offered to resign.

Three other cases are being heard against Lt Gen Ricardo Sanchez, former commander of US military forces in Iraq, Col Thomas Pappas an Brig Gen Janis Karpinski, both commanders at Abu Ghraib.

Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...cas/4310847.stm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am of the opinion that Rumsfeld should be held accountable. These kinds of military campaigns are abusive to human rights . When Clinton went into Yugoslavia you never heard of anything like this. Clinton was masterful as a President and carried himself well as a leader and he never let the military act like this. I am appalled at the christian right's inability to voice concern over this when they never skipped a beat when it came to Monika Lewinsky. The stuff that went on in Abu Gahraib makes me ill with my country and I do not support our current leaders (to put it nicely). Sounds to me like the Mossaud and our right -wing CIA had more to do with it than Rumsfeld but nevertheless...he was the figure in charge. Also, for those of you that read this...if you think the Iraqi's are getting what they deserve then let me say that no Iraqi was ever responsible for anything concerning 911. Saddam was bad? Well Saddam is gone, so are his backers. What you are seeing is regular people opposing the US as an occupying force. Let me ask you...what would you think of the US if your home was just bombed indiscriminantly killing your relatives? It is sad that our sons and daughters are dying for George Bush's ill- conceived war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hopefully this leads into something greater...such as Bush and his lackeys standing trial for the crimes they've committed.

Edit...just being sarcastic tongue.gif But it would still be cool.

Edited by Mad Manfred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hopefully this leads into something greater...such as Bush and his lackeys standing trial for the crimes they've committed.

Edit...just being sarcastic  tongue.gif But it would still be cool.

508941[/snapback]

Hey manfred...I have a question for you since you are from Australia...Do you know much about this rupert murdoch fellow? You seem like the right chap to ask. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am appalled at the christian right's inability to voice concern over this when they never skipped a beat when it came to Monika Lewinsky.

The Christian Right has voiced concern about it. And just to be accurate: the passion of the right over Monica had little to do with what Clinton did with Monica. The whole focus was that he LIED about it to the American people and to a Federal Grand Jury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hopefully this leads into something greater...such as Bush and his lackeys standing trial for the crimes they've committed.

Edit...just being sarcastic  tongue.gif But it would still be cool.

508941[/snapback]

Hey manfred...I have a question for you since you are from Australia...Do you know much about this rupert murdoch fellow? You seem like the right chap to ask. Thanks.

509188[/snapback]

I know of him, but not much else...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you are seeing is regular people opposing the US as an occupying force.

if by normal people you mean Baath loyalists and islamists...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

With all do respect, the ACLU has no business suing Rumsfeld over these abuses while they defend NAMBLA (The North American Man/Boy Love Association), which is a group that endorses child molesting. Everything the ACLU does is political, and of course their leftist supporters don't care.

And the Clinton years go both ways... The far left had no problem with Clinton lobbing over a couple of missiles into Iraq.

What you are seeing is regular people opposing the US as an occupying force.

if by normal people you mean Baath loyalists and islamists...

509275[/snapback]

That's exactly what they mean. These people don't touch stories like when the real Iraqi civilians were shooting at the insurgents, or when the real Iraqi civilians marched through Najaf. The insurgents are targeting IRAQI'S! These are the people with the hypocritical view that Iraq is better off without Saddam or that they do admit Saddam was a horrible human being, yet sit on the sidelines cheering for the freaking insurgents who are fighting the U.S. mainly in support of Saddam.

Edited by Loaded_Revolver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it was only a matter of time before someone was sued over this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole focus was that he LIED about it to the American people and to a Federal Grand Jury.

Oh yeah joc....

An iraq had a hand in 9/11 , lol whats the bigger lie lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saddam's openly defiant actions gave them the confidence as well as other non-tangables and tangables... 9/11 commission has indirect links, but nuance isn't some people's stong points. We're going to go from generalities to specifics we start narrowing it down just to go "aha" so I'm not going there, faulty intel isn't the same as knowing exactly what you did, taking an oath, and then lying under oath about something we knew he knew he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An iraq had a hand in 9/11 , lol whats the bigger lie lol.

you keep repeating this, sorry but saying a lie enough times isn't going to make it truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An iraq had a hand in 9/11 , lol whats the bigger lie lol.

No one said Sadaam was involved in 9/11...so what is the 'lie' to which you refer?

Offer me proof to the contrary...PROVE that Sadaam had nothing to do with 9/11. Nobody said he did. But prove to me none the less that he didn't. He hated America. He attempted to assassinate a sitting US President. Prove he had no ties to 9/11. blink.gif I don't have to prove he did, because no one has said he did. All we have are your words that Bush said so...Prove that one as well...show me the proof of Bush saying Sadaam had ties to 9/11 and then show me proof that Sadaam didn't have ties to 9/11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you are seeing is regular people opposing the US as an occupying force.

if by normal people you mean Baath loyalists and islamists...

509275[/snapback]

So you are naive enough to believe that all those fighting are Baathists? Or if you want to make it a religious issue by critisizing "islamists" as to blame then I would say These two groups have the same fight but different objectives. My point earlier is that this is largely a war on anyone who does not agree with what Bush is doing. That means ordinary people like you and me whos families are bombed out of existence are fighting to. The problem I have with your argument is that it is US military propaganda. It tries to have us believe that those who fight are just crazy loyalists and the "regular" Iraqis want us there. Not true. There is a bunch of people who had this whole thing planned way before 9-11, especially Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Now isn't that just too damned coincidental that they are in the positions they were in on 9-11 to finally get thier wish?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.