Posted on 05/10/2004 5:51:58 AM PDT by Bubbette
Just heard on KVIl in Dallas, Col. Hackworth being interviewed. Stated he will be releasing the names of the notorious 17 today on the internet. FYI
"We gave [the military] the opportunity to have none of this come out," Lawson said. "They could have avoided all of this."
Yes, the uncle is a blackmailer.
That uncle wanted the U.S. Army to drop the charges against his nephew because his nephew was < German accent> "just following orders" < /German accent>.
That excuse did not fly at Nuremberg after World War II and it does not fly in the U.S. Armed Forces today. Every soldier who makes it out of Boot Camp has been trained that it is his duty to disobey illegal orders and it is his duty to report such illegal orders.
Spc. Joseph Darby remembered his training and did his duty. This blackmailer's nephew ignored his training and violated the UCMJ.
Yes, the U.S. Army had the opportunity to "avoid" the release of the photos by caving in to the uncle's demands that his nephew be put above the law.
The U.S. Army told the uncle to go to hell.
Good for the U.S. Army! The Army followed the Rule of Law which is exactly what the Army of a Constitutional Republic is supposed to do.
Yes, and Spc. Joseph Darby is a hero.
Lawson, Hackworth, and the Frederick family are blackmailing traitors.
BUMP!
"War Crime"? Are you joking? In 1945 a "war crime" was gassing Jews and others by the millions. Now a "war crime" is parading around Arab POWs in ladies underwear. Hackworth is a despicable p.o.s.
DAYTON: Mr. Secretary were you aware, did you authorize General Myers to call CBS to suppress their news report?
RUMSFELD: I don't have any idea if he discussed it with me. I don't think he did.
DAYTON: Over the last two weeks, calling CBS to suppress the news report?
RUMSFELD: "Suppress" is not the right word at all.
DAYTON: I'm sorry, sir, but I...
RUMSFELD: It's an inaccurate word.
DAYTON: General Myers, did you discuss it with the secretary?
MYERS: This had been worked at lower levels with the secretary's staff and my staff for some time.
DAYTON: That you would call CBS to suppress their news report?
MYERS: I called CBS to ask them to delay the pictures showing on CBS's "60 Minutes" because I thought it would result in direct harm...
DAYTON: Mr. Secretary, is that standard procedure for the military command of this country to try to suppress a news report at the highest level?
MYERS: It didn't -- let me just -- Senator Dayton, this is a serious allegation...
DAYTON: Sure is.
MYERS: ... and it's absolutely -- the context of your question, I believe, is wrong.
DAYTON: I understand the context, General, you...
MYERS: Let me just...
DAYTON: ... told us the context earlier. I have very limited time, sir.
(CROSSTALK)
MYERS: I want to take as much time as we need to straighten this out.
This report -- the report was already out there, the news was out there about the abuse...
DAYTON: General, if the news had been out there and we had all known about it...
(CROSSTALK)
WARNER: Senator, I ask that the witness be allowed to respond to your question. They're very important questions.
General, would you proceed?
MYERS: Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Senator Dayton.
This was not to suppress anything. What I asked CBS News to do was to delay the release of the pictures, given the current situation in Iraq, which was as bad as it had been since major combat ended, because I thought it bring direct harm to our troops; it would kill our troops.
We talked about it, and I said, "I know this report will eventually come out. But this -- if you can delay it for some period of time -- it would be helpful."
DAYTON: What period of time is that?
MYERS: I did it based on talking to General Abizaid and his worry was like mine, and he convinced me that this was the right thing to do. There was no -- this report has been around since January. What was new were the pictures. I asked for the pictures to be delayed.
DAYTON: Did you discuss delaying -- calling CBS to ask them to delay their report, with the secretary of defense, or the vice president or the president?
MYERS: Of course not.
DAYTON: None of those.
MYERS: Of course not.
DAYTON: I would just say, General -- and I agree with your assessment of the consequences of this on our troops, and that's the great tragedy of this, but attempts to suppress news reports, to withhold the truth from Congress and from the American people is antithetical to democracy.
MYERS: You bet it is. And that's not what we were doing.
DAYTON: And whatever the intentions may be, sir, the result is always the same. And it's, I think, terribly tragic that the president, who wants to expand democracy around the world, by actions of his own administration is undermining that democracy in the United States.
DAYTON: That's always the result when people try to control information, delay it, manage it and suppress it, it has that result. It's antithetical to a democracy.
RUMSFELD: May I speak a minute, Mr. Senator?
Throughout the history of this country, there have been instances where military situations have existed that have led government to talk to members of the media and make an editorial request of them that they delay for some period disclosing some piece of information. It is not against our history. It is not against our principles. It is not suppression of the news. And it's a misunderstanding of the situation to say it is.
DAYTON: It is against our principles. It's against our principles when you come before 40 to 45 members of the Senate three hours before that news report is going to occur and don't mention one word about it, sir.
That is antithetical to democracy and the Constitution, which has the Senate and the House as co-equal responsibility for this country.
I want to just ask about the escalation of American forces, sir. You're bringing in, in response to all of this -- and this is also important. This is the future of this nation and the people who are over there.
You're increasing the number of forces, the number of tanks over there. How can this have anything to do but to escalate the level of violence, the opposition of Iraqis, intensify the hatred across the Arab world to the United States, and more atrocities? How can this have any result other than to put us deeper into this situation and make the conditions there worse for our forces and for our nation and for the world?
WARNER: Senator, I'm going to ask that the witnesses respond to your important question for the record. And I thank your cooperation.
Here were his "questions";
--------------------------------------------------
"Senator Byrd?
BYRD: Thank you for calling this timely, very important hearing.
I apologize for my voice. I've been struggling with a bout of laryngitis.
I share your outrage over the atrocities that have emerged from the Abu Ghraib prison. I believe Congress has a responsibility to demand a public accounting and a public explanation from the leadership of the Defense Department.
I fear this is only the beginning of a long and painful process. And I am glad that you have taken the first steps to begin the necessary public examination of the massive policy failure that led to this catastrophe.
Among the many aspects of this situation that are so troubling to me is why the president and his advisers are only now publicly condemning the prisoner abuses in Iraq when apparently the Defense Department had known about them for months. I do not recall hearing a peep out of either of you, Secretary Rumsfeld or General Myers, about this before CBS broke the silence. Why did it take the televised broadcast of graphic photos of prisoner abuse, a broadcast General Myers has acknowledged he tried to suppress, to galvanize the leadership of the Defense Department to express its outrage over the situation?
Why was a report that described sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses by American soldiers left to languish on a shelf in the Pentagon unread by the top leadership until the media revealed it to the world?
Why wasn't Congress apprised of the findings of this report from the Defense Department instead of from CBS News?
Mr. Secretary, it was President Truman who was said to have displayed the famous sign on his desk: The buck stops here. I served with President Truman. He was an honorable man. He did not shirk his responsibility.
I see a very different pattern in this administration. I see arrogance and a disdain for Congress. I see misplaced bravado and an unwillingness to admit mistakes. I see finger-pointing and excuses.
Given the catastrophic impact that this scandal has had on the world community, how can the United States ever repair its credibility? How are we supposed to convince not only the Iraqi people, but also the rest of the world that America is indeed a liberator, and not a conqueror, not an arrogant power? Is the presidential apology to the king of Jordan sufficient?
I ask you that question.
RUMSFELD: Senator, the facts are somewhat different than that. The story was broken by the Central Command, by the United States Department of Defense, in Baghdad. General Kimmitt stood up in January and announced that there were allegations of abuses and that they were being investigated. He then briefed reporters. And I think it was March 20 -- there's a timeline up here. By March 20, he went back out again and said that these had been filed.
The idea that this is a story that was broken by the media is simply not the fact. This was presented by the Central Command to the world so that they would be aware of the fact that these have been filed.
What was not known is that a classified report with photographs would be given to the press before it arrived in the Pentagon.
BYRD: Mr. Secretary, we'll put my timeline in the record and compare it with yours. My question is: Is the presidential apology to the king of Jordan sufficient?
RUMSFELD: Senator, I guess that's for the president and the Congress and others to decide.
There have been many apologies. There have been apologies by every person at this table today. Any suggestion that there is not a full, deep awareness of what has happened, and the damage it has done, I think, would be a misunderstanding.
BYRD: Have you read the...
RUMSFELD: The report that we're talking about is sitting over -- right there on the floor. And it is, I don't know -- what? -- two feet high. There is a...
BYRD: Did you read it?
RUMSFELD: I read the executive summary, which is 50 to 75 pages, and I looked at some of the annexes and appendices and references. I had been briefed on it in full and as have the people at this table. And you can be certain of that.
BYRD: The Red Cross claims that it made reports of prison abuse in Iraq throughout 2003. I understand that those reports are confidential by mutual agreement. Secretary Rumsfeld, how do we know that there isn't a broader problem here?
We've heard reports of prisoner abuse from more than just the Abu Ghraib prison. Will you ask the Red Cross to waive its confidentiality agreement on those reports and make public all the pertinent reports on U.S. military-run prison facilities including those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and elsewhere?
RUMSFELD: We would certainly be happy to provide the committee with all the reports that we have.
I think the issue of the International Committee of the Red Cross allowing one of their reports to be made public is an issue for them, because they worry that they will not be told the truth when they go into countries where there are dictatorships and where people are systematically punished and tortured. And people do not want to talk to them if the ICRC gets a reputation for making their reports public.
So we will be happy to give you our reports on a confidential basis that is respectful of the International Committee of the Red Cross's stipulation.
BYRD: I must conclude..."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.