It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


WAR: Rumsfeld Ordered Iraqi Prisoner Improperly Held in Secret

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 08:30 PM
In a stunning admission from the Pentagon, top officials acknowledged that an Iraqi prisoner was ordered improperly detained "off the books" by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
The unidentified man was captured after an attack on Coalition forces in July 2003. He is believed to be a high-ranking member of the terrorist group Ansar al Islam. CIA officials removed him to a location outside Iraq for interrogation, where he remained for four months before officials determined it may not be legal to hold him outside the country.

In the militarys own investigation into prisoner abuse, Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba said efforts to hide prisoners from the Red Cross were deceptive and a violation of international law.

Pentagon officials claim its entirely lawful to hold prisoners in secret if they pose an immediate threat. But today, nearly one year after his capture, hes still being held incommunicado.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Once returned to Iraq, reportedly to the Abu Ghraib prison, Rumsfeld instruced the commander of US troops in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, to hold the man without a detainee number and thus away from the oversight of the International Red Cross.

The prisoner was then "lost in the system" almost immediately and has not been questioned or interrogated since. His current status and whereabouts are unknown.

Critics are calling this a blatant disregard for the Geneva Convention and international law, while US officials maintain the dentention of the man was entirely legal.

Geneva Convention laws require prisoners of war be assigned a detainee number and notification made to the ICRC. The Pentagon counters that the man is an "enemy combatant" and thus is not afforded the protections of the Geneva Convention.

Related News Stories:

[edit on 16-6-2004 by Banshee]

[edit on 6-16-2004 by Valhall]

[edit on 6-19-2004 by Valhall]

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 08:44 PM
Wow... Yet again the name of the U.S. is tarnished by someone who, fortunately, does not represent the methods of the majority of it's citizens.

Further and further we tumble down the rabbit hole...

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 09:14 PM
I can't wait to hear the spin, I'll enjoy this one.

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 09:19 PM
God forbid any real intel comming from some damm dirty tell the bad guys you have so in so so they inturn can redo their plans aginst us...




posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 09:21 PM
This is getting crazy. Every single country in this world that was/is involved in a War has been doing this and worse. The media coverage watching every little thing the US does is getting out of hand. IMO this is going to cause MAJOR problems, maybe even more terrorists attacks due to people hindering the intelligence gathering. Everyone is screaming for rights for these people whom are BLOWING THEMSELVES UP KILLING US TROOPS AND MORE or at least trying to and the worlds media is crying about what we do to these sub human savages?

People need a freakin reality check here, or the reality of a suitcase nuke in their cozy little suburb or city is going to be an even more serious reality.

This is a war, all fair in love and war.

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 12:13 AM
This guy must be singing like a bird, or else the coalition would have done the smart thing and terminated him much earlier. As it stands now, if located, he'll probably be set free to build and set off another dozen IED's, which is his right under which? article of the Geneva Convention?

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 01:02 AM
Posted in wrong thread- sorry

[edit on 17-6-2004 by Narnia]

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 01:12 AM
Hey Rumsfeld... ever been to Switzerland? LOL. The man is a criminal and hopefully will see his day in court. But given the fact he has denied so many others this right perhaps he should just be locked in a room and have the room disposed of.

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 09:21 AM
Why single this one story out and jump all over it? Actually that's normal. When faced with massive corruption that has gone on for quite some time, it is natural to jump on the first provable item and scream and yell until it is firmly established as fact.

Unfortunately, in the past this tendency has been manipulated. It is possible to focus everyone's attention on a relatively minor item, and thus let a really major transgression slip by. The biggest example would be the intense focus on Monica Lewinski, which totally derailed the Clinton impeachment by submergin other issues that were much more important.

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 09:24 AM
Is Rumsfeld gunna get kicked out already? When is someone high up going to pay for all the mistakes and abuse that has occured in Iraq?

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 11:48 AM
Stunning? It sounds like business as usual for the current administration. The only arguably stunning thing is that they have yet again failed to keep their misdeeds concealed.

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 12:01 PM
Thats the thing, they have. Now do you see how bad it really must be?

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 12:20 PM
It's not whether every nation at war has done it,we have supposedly invaded Iraq, because of the evil Saddam, who was a master of dissappearing people, we are trying to bring democracy to the middle east, we need to practice what we preach, or we will not be believed. YOu would think by now we would know we can't get anything a secret very long.

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Indy
But given the fact he has denied so many others this right perhaps he should just be locked in a room and have the room disposed of.

Nice image!

Did you mean to say that?

Pu the entire Bush administration in a room and dispose of the room, and the world will know it is a better place, and the work that should have been done can be done. All figurative, of course.

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 02:45 PM
Yeah I meant to say that :-)

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 10:42 PM
It is WAR...things happen!! I have lost NO sleep over the Abu Ghraib deal. These people want us dead folks!! This is alos no ordinary war. We are fighting against "people" who have no consciences. What do you think is happening to our soldier over there that no one has spoken about in months? He isn't being treated like he was at the Hilton. So I personally feel the only thing the soldiers did wrong was to take pictures!!!

posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 11:16 PM
Yes, people start spouting Geneva convention but that doesn't pertain to "unlawful combatants"
Ta Da You people screaming willy nilly need to understand we already have the supreme court backing this up for those fellows in Cuba...Supreme Court


posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 12:02 AM
What is an unlawful combatant? Anyone that fights us? Anyone we deem to be unlawful? EVERYONE falls under one law or another. There isn't a person alive that falls through all the cracks. They are a US criminal and entitled to protection under US law. Or they are an international criminal and entitled to protection under international law. Or they are a war criminal and entitled to protection under the Geneva Convention. Or they are criminals of their respected countries and entitled to protection under those laws. Regardless of what you think the US does NOT reserve the right to strip freedoms from ANYONE. No exceptions. Remember the US obtained its independence from England by being nothing more than "terrorists" and "unlawful combatants" as you describe.

posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 12:43 AM

Originally posted by Indy
Remember the US obtained its independence from England by being nothing more than "terrorists" and "unlawful combatants" as you describe.

Good point

posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 12:18 PM
So if "all's fair in ... war", I guess tha means it was OK for Hitler's boys to gas all those Jews as "enemy combatants", and it's no sweat about the Hutus massacring the Tutsi women and children, and "the only good Indian is a dead Indian", and why did everyone get so worked up over My Lai, etc., etc., etc. Come on, people, we are supposed to be CIVILIZED, a distinction that comes with some responsibility towards our fellow living beings, human or otherwise. If we degenerate to the level of behavior of the terrorists and of terrorist-sponsoring regimes, we become just another bunch of terrorists, and we forfeit the right to call ourselves civilized.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in