ABUSE CRISIS: Bush & Blair Knew Of Iraq & Afghanistan Detainee Abuse 'For Two Years'

Following the news that Red Cross reports on prisoner abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan have been received by the Pentagon and the M.O.D for over a year, Amnesty International has claimed it has been filing reports with U.S and U.K authorities since the war in Afghanistan. Both the Red Cross and Amnesty International describe the abuse of prisoners as systematic and widespread throughout US-run camps in Iraq.

Sunday Herald
Despite Bush attempting to portray himself as ill-informed of the true extent of the abuse and torture, the White House has been fully aware for the past year of the violations of the Geneva Convention committed by its personnel in Iraq.

Since April 2003, US authorities in Baghdad have got monthly reports from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

A senior source at the ICRC said: �It doesn�t matter which report it was, we had been telling the US and UK authorities in Baghdad for over a year about the scale of this [abuse and torture] problem. They had been given 10 or more reports. All detailed the same findings. They knew this had been going on for a year.�

Teresa Richardson, of Amnesty, said: �We have been delivering reports on these violations to the US authorities since the period between 9/11 and the beginning of the Iraq war. The abuse and torture, in Afghanistan, goes back two years.�

Related: BBC: Red Cross saw 'widespread abuse'



Related ATSNN.com Stories
Senator Calls For Rumsfeld Resignation
Arab TV Airs Video Of US Hostage
New Photos Show More Iraqi Prisoner Abuse in Abu Ghraib Prison
Abusive U.S. Soldier Stories Spring Up In Arab News. Bush Counters With Arab Interviews
Abuse may have been ordered

Active AboveTopSecret.com Discussions
Prison Scandal (graphic)
Today America stands United in Shame
The World After Bush's "Apology"
Lynndie England (aka the sadistic woman in Iraqi abuse photos)
Rumsfeld Testifies Regarding Abuses @ Abu Ghraib Prison



[Edited on 9-5-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

[Edited on 10-5-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

Sunday Herald: How Much Did They Know?

Rumsfeld knew about the torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib. So did the US governor in Iraq, Paul Bremer. Even the British Ministry of Defence knew. Can we really believe that Bush and Blair didn�t?

www.DailyTimes.com.pk Dr Ahmed told the Newhouse News Service that in the United States, the full power of the images was only beginning to be realised, pointing out that so far the picture that seems to resonate most in the West is one showing a hooded and wired prisoner with his arms outstretched, like Christ suffering on the cross. But the image Muslims will have seared on their psyche is the photo of the female American soldier, because it depicts an interaction brazenly crossing spiritual, societal and cultural boundaries. �Here, you�re getting one person representing one civilisation pointing to the most vulnerable part of another person representing another civilisation,� he said, adding, �It�s gloating. It�s triumphant, with an element of sadism and stupidity.� I can imagine that the term "jihad" will soon no longer be enough to describe the situation.

The Bush administration knew, was told, was warned repeatedly...yet faked recent outrage at "just learning of these activities" for the purposes of public relations.

Hmmm, now where have I heard of something similar lately. Oh yes, the completely trivial matter of Mike Moore knowing of Disney's intentions for a full year then pretending to just learn of it for public sympathy as has been "revealed" on ATS as a scam, a stunt and jeopardizing the credibility of anything Moore says.

Mike Moore Admits Stunt; ATS Members Go Ape

So knowing the full extent of member's particularly rabid feelings on Mike Moore as a result of his comparitively superficial stunt, it should go without saying that the same members should transfer AT LEAST the same outrage over this much more serious revelation of Bush's scam.

I'll happily replace Mike Moore's name with "Bush" from a few quotes...since I'm sure everyone agrees the same outrage and conclusions are deserved. Right?

Let's make it game!!! See if you can pick out your quote and if you stand by your logic!

[Bush]'s credibility has always been in doubt. Only the ignorant are blind to that fact. He talks a good game and makes up fantastical stories, but in the end, he's nothing but a fake and a loud mouth.

[Bush] is is very tiresome. I wish the creep would just go away. He should not have been encouraged after his [father's Presidential] attempt.

[Bush] is worthless.

What fun!!!

Would it be churlish to point out that one of these men is a film-maker whose *job* is selecting and presenting reality is a narrative style, while the other man is a lying swindling imbecile who rode into office on his daddy's coat-tails? Would it be considered unfair to point out that one of these men has played a PR game with a monolithic company, while the other is directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of hundreds and the suffering of potentially thousands?

C'mon, Rant. I agree, the overlap on the hyperbole is somewhat amusing, but where's the perspective?

Originally posted by StrangeLands
C'mon, Rant. I agree, the overlap on the hyperbole is somewhat amusing, but where's the perspective?

You're right, there's hardly any comparison. That's the entire LACK of perspective engaged by those that choose to ignore mountains while championing mole hills.

Just an observation to put an increasingly contagious lack of perspective IN perspective.

I'm not saying people shouldn't rail on Mike Moore if they want AT ALL...he's anecdotal to the point I was attempting. But why do so, then apologize for Bush/Rumsfeld...or simply ignore their sins altogether?

It's interesting, how some people suddenly are silent, when the relevance of the few "faked" (porn) images falls away, against the true magnitude of the tip of the iceberg we are seeing.
I agree with the postings above.

Hoaks

[Edited on 9-5-2004 by Hoaks]

news articles like this make things worse and cause more trouble, sure the truth is good to know but at what cost? things like this should wait till we leave or atleast 20 years so our people dont all get killed, reporters and aid groups need to think of what the big picture is and what they might cause before spouting everything, yes these things are wrong but think of how islamic terrorist groups might act, these idiots will be responsible for how our people will be treated from now on and for a wave of suicide bombings that i know are going to come soon.

sometimes i understand why governments control their press when i see idiot reporters putting others at risk so they can look good, reveal truth, etc, they never think about how others react to what they report, some groups and reporters have good intentions but they forget how people react violently to most anything they hear about.

Originally posted by namehere
news articles like this make things worse and cause more trouble, sure the truth is good to know but at what cost? things like this should wait till we leave or atleast 20 years so our people dont all get killed, reporters and aid groups need to think of what the big picture is and what they might cause before spouting everything, yes these things are wrong but think of how islamic terrorist groups might act, these idiots will be responsible for how our people will be treated from now on and for a wave of suicide bombings that i know are going to come soon.

sometimes i understand why governments control their press when i see idiot reporters putting others at risk so they can look good, reveal truth, etc, they never think about how others react to what they report, some groups and reporters have good intentions but they forget how people react violently to most anything they hear about.

I agree. This is another case of stupid, headline-seeking, politically motivated activity meant to )1 make a name for someone and 2) make things worse for the coalition. It will have the negative effect of stifling future co-operation into prison inspections around the world.

What happened to the ICRC's strict policy of never publicly releasing its reports into prison conditions?

Idiots.

The ICRC has not released any reports, though there is pressure on Blair in the U.K to do so. He says he won't because of the confidentiality.
Link

It's hard to believe some people would rather this wasn't talked about; especially on a site like this. The papers are only reporting what the ICRC and Amnesty International are saying, You'd rather they ignored them? The ICRC and Amnesty are coming out with these statements because Bush and Blair are lying about their knowledge of the abuse. You'd rather their lies were protected? You'd rather they covered up the cover up? You'd rather stay in the dark and be ignorant of the true story?

Get Real.

Where would that policy end? Everything and anything that could embarrass or hurt the government abroad should be covered up?

A little counterproductive to the aim of this site don�t you think?

So it turns out that they knew about it long before it came to light ?

What else did we expect from that pair of scumbags ?

Well... where are all the people who are always praising HOW GOOOOOOOOOD is the current administration now?

I find them very silent suddenly.

Originally posted by kegs
The ICRC has not released any reports, though there is pressure on Blair in the U.K to do so.
It's hard to believe some people would rather this wasn't talked about; especially on a site like this. You'd rather they ignored The papers are only reporting what the ICRC and Amnesty International are saying,them? The ICRC and Amnesty are coming out with these statements because Bush and Blair are lying about their knowledge of the abuse.

A little counterproductive to the aim of this site don�t you think?

So which is it? The ICRC is talking or aren't they? At least you admit that they are doing it for political reasons.

I never said to ignore it. I said that there are different ways to achieve the same end result.

Does your "right to know" outweigh the lives of those who will be placed in greater danger simply because you want to see headlines splashed acroos the media? Do you not care about those lives?

Originally posted by namehere

news articles like this make things worse and cause more trouble, sure the truth is good to know but at what cost?

So are you saying that it would have been better to hide this truth from the world forever?

I think that is exactly what they were trying to do here.

This was leaked out, and there was some high level arm twisting with CBS about it.

We would not have known about this and it could have continued or gotten far worse.

I don't know about you, but I thank God that I live in a world where a truth like this can be told and not hidden.

Hitler thought he could keep his actions hidden from the world too. and he did.. long enough to do far worse unspeakable things.

You would actually have had this hidden for 20 years?

Please

Gazz

[Edited on 9-5-2004 by UM_Gazz]

By jsobecky
So which is it? The ICRC is talking or aren't they? At least you admit that they are doing it for political reasons.

I never said to ignore it. I said that there are different ways to achieve the same end result.

Does your "right to know" outweigh the lives of those who will be placed in greater danger simply because you want to see headlines splashed acroos the media? Do you not care about those lives?

The ICRC is simply saying that the abuse that has already came to light has been going on and has been known about for longer than the governments care to admit. They are not releasing the detailed reports, do you see them mentioning any names?

I want the truth. If you want cover ups that�s up to you. If this information had not come to light it is likely that very little if not anything would have been done about the situation, whereas now the abuse will cracked down upon and stopped. I care about the victims of torture as well as the troops. The commanders of the troops are responsible for the actions of the soldiers. The higher reaches of the command structure have known about this abuse for two years and yet have done nothing until now, solely because it has been reported in the media. The troops with no part in the affair have only their commanders to blame for their increased danger, not the media.
And the victims of torture have the media to thank for putting an end to it.

I don't want coverups. either. I do care about the troops more than I do the prisoners, however.

Something about the time-lines bothers me also. We've been on the ground there for one year. Are we to believe that we stepped off a tank and into torture mode, or is it possible that we inherited some of this abuse that the ICRC is talking about?

Abuses of a similar order were taking place under view of the Bush administration in Afghanistan, for some time.

Originally posted by jsobecky
I don't want coverups. either. I do care about the troops more than I do the prisoners, however.

It's simple really. No matter who you may blame for recent events or the almost assured backlash against our mission and troops, the ONLY way to support the troops now is concede Rumsfeld's position (and probably put a new face on American leadership come November).

You can blame the press all you want, but that's no solution. Nor is there a remedy at Bush's disposal other than the good will resignation of Rumsfeld and the burning down of that infamous prison.

This is key to Bush's very survival come November given the fact he's chosen to almost exclusively run on his Commander and Chief record. God, the more I think about it...Bush is just screwed.

The call for Rumsfeld though goes beyond partisan politics or election tactics, it's for the good of America, it's reputation and the lives of our troops.

That may just be my opinion, but I've seen no arguement anywhere for how the continuation of Rumsfeld will help the battle for hearts and minds. Does anyone have one?

Agreed, Rant. That Rumsfeld has not already been sacrificed on the media altar is evidence of his questionable links with the Bush regime. They will pay the price for this come November - the only question is how high the price will be.

With luck, Rumsfeld's claws are so deep into Bush that Junior won't force his resignation, and the pair of them will be utterly screwed over in the Election.

I don't think it's overstating the case to say that this could be Bush's Watergate or Monica.

But the scandal, unpleasant as it is,
is not as big as the Bush administration's negligent and/or complicit role in 9/11, the "Pearl Harbour" that the neo-cons needed to activate the whole mess in Iraq in the first place.

Lest we forget.