Bush Privately Chides Rumsfeld

[adios]

How long will it be before Bush cuts this albatross from around his neck and shows Rumsfeld the door. I would think very soon to lessen the political damage. Not saying that lessening political damage is an appropriate reason, just pointing out the seeming reality of the situation. If this weren't an election year Rumsfeld would be gone I would think. IMO Rumsfeld doesn't deserve Bush's loyalty over this but could be convinced otherwise and I believe it's probably more damaging politically to stay with this guy.

Bush Privately Chides Rumsfeld

Bush Privately Chides Rumsfeld

1 hour, 31 minutes ago Add Top Stories - washingtonpost.com to My Yahoo!


By Robin Wright and Bradley Graham, Washington Post Staff Writers

President Bush (news - web sites) privately admonished Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld yesterday, a senior White House official said, as other U.S. officials blamed the Pentagon (news - web sites) for failing to act on repeated recommendations to improve conditions for thousands of Iraqi detainees and release those not charged with crimes.


Bush is "not satisfied" and "not happy" with the way Rumsfeld informed him about the investigation into abuses by U.S. soldiers at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison or the quantity of information Rumsfeld provided, the senior White House official said.


The president was particularly disturbed at having had to learn from news reports this week about the scope of misconduct documented in an Army investigative report completed in March, according to the official, who refused to be named so he could speak more candidly.


Other U.S. officials said Rumsfeld and the Pentagon resisted appeals in recent months from the State Department and the Coalition Provisional Authority to deal with problems relating to detainees. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell urged action in several White House meetings that included Rumsfeld, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.


"It's something Powell has raised repeatedly -- to release as many detainees as possible -- and, second, to ensure that those in custody are properly cared for and treated," said a senior State Department official familiar with the discussions.


But the Pentagon repeatedly failed to act on both requests, said U.S. officials, who are privately furious over a human rights disaster that they believe might have been averted if military officials had acted on their requests.


Defense officials sharply disputed suggestions that Rumsfeld or other senior Pentagon authorities turned a deaf ear to the appeals and ignored festering problems at U.S.-run detention centers. They said there were no major differences between the departments of State and Defense over the handling of detainees in Iraq (news - web sites), saying top administration officials had generally agreed on the need to reduce the number of prisoners in U.S. military custody and ensure proper management of detention facilities.


"It would be unfair to Secretary Powell to portray the discussions among [national security] principals about this issue in the way some people seem to be trying to portray them," said Lawrence T. DiRita, the Pentagon's chief spokesman. "There was a lot of important activity and interest taken by the principals, including Rumsfeld, to make sure we were doing all that we could."


Rumsfeld also came in for fresh criticism yesterday on Capitol Hill, where Republicans joined Democrats in expressing anger about not having been informed about the details of the prison investigation. Rumsfeld is to appear at a Senate Armed Services Committee (news - web sites) hearing tomorrow, and some White House officials fear that a Republican lawmaker will ask him whether he is considering resigning. Some Republican aides on Capitol Hill said he might not survive until Election Day. Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said Rumsfeld should resign if investigators conclude the chain of responsibility reaches his office.


The defense secretary has deplored the reported abuses at Abu Ghraib prison but defended the Pentagon's response, saying military commanders acted promptly to investigate conditions there after being alerted in January about the misconduct. He also has noted that the Pentagon announced the start of the investigation in January and, in March, reported the filing of charges against six enlisted military police soldiers who served as guards.


But the nature of their offenses were not revealed until CBS's "60 Minutes II" aired photographs last week showing naked inmates piled up beside smiling soldiers and the New Yorker magazine days later detailed the findings of the Army's internal report. In the wake of widespread outrage over the misconduct, the Pentagon has moved to tighten oversight of prison operations in Iraq, accelerate release of prisoners and probe conditions at internment centers elsewhere.


State Department officials, however, have been particularly concerned about what they said was the Pentagon's reluctance to heed urgings earlier from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to improve conditions at Iraqi prisons.


"We've been pressing for more flexibility and openness to the ICRC's needs and suggestions about the detainees," said a U.S. official familiar with the legal issues involved in detentions.


U.S. officials here and former Coalition Provisional Authority officials attributed some of the problems to disarray and poor communication among different branches of the occupation structure in Iraq. But they said the Pentagon's resistance has also been a factor.


"The level of disarticulation between the military and civilian components of our occupation is extraordinary," said Larry Diamond, fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institute who served for several months as an adviser to L. Paul Bremer, the chief U.S. administrator in Iraq, and is now a critic of the U.S. occupation. "We're either serious about human rights and the Geneva Convention or we're not."


Although Bush is giving no consideration to asking to Rumsfeld to resign, the senior White House official said, the president informed Rumsfeld of his dissatisfaction during a meeting in the Oval Office yesterday morning after the two left a National Security Council meeting. Bush was particularly bothered at not having been told that the photos of the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison were in circulation, even though Pentagon officials knew that CBS had obtained them, the senior White House official said.


Asked yesterday by al-Hurra, a television station seen widely in the Arab world that is financed by the U.S. government, Bush replied: "Oh, of course I've got confidence in the secretary of defense, and I've got confidence in the commanders on the ground in Iraq."





Bush aides conceded that Rumsfeld had earlier given Bush a general sense of the investigation of Abu Ghraib during a meeting that included Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. But White House press secretary Scott McClellan said officials have not been able to pin down the exact date, except that it was after Jan. 16, when the Pentagon issued a release announcing the probe.

Much of the debate within the administration over what to do about Iraqi prisoners has roots in a long-running struggle among the departments of State, Defense and Justice to sort through prisoners at the detention facility at the U.S. Navy (news - web sites) base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, officials said. The scandal involving Abu Ghraib prison has cast a fresh spotlight on the administration's general approach to the handling of war prisoners and terrorist suspects since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Concerns about prison conditions in Iraq were brought up in internal administration deliberations at the beginning of the year by Powell and Bremer, who warned of the potential political fallout, U.S. officials said.

U.S. officials now say the only solution to the crisis over the treatment of Iraqi detainees is a drastic policy shift, such as surrendering all control of prisoners or sharing supervision with Iraqis or an international institution such as the ICRC.

Since it is not likely that Iraqis or the wider Islamic world will believe U.S. pledges to deal with the situation, the Bush administration needs some kind of witness or partner in administering the detention centers, U.S. officials said.

In the past, however, the ICRC had not been willing to share control of detainees with another party. So the only option may be some form of joint control with Iraqis or other unspecified forces, the officials said.

[adios]

Who would have thought that? Good front page article in the Wall Street Journal about Bush and Iraq. Very fair I thought. To me cutting Rumsfeld loose is a good move for Bush. First of all if it turns out that the abuse of Iraqi prisoners was an isolated incident then Bush can state that he has zero tolerance for that crap (bring it on). If the problem turns out that it is much more wide spread than how it's being spun currently Bush to me obviously has gained politically. The message being sent to Iraqis in keeping Rumsfeld on can't be a good one methinks but again I could be convinced otherwise. This isn't the way to win the hearts and mind of Iraqis. Bush supported Rumsfeld yesterday but that move will blow up in his face if and when this problem is investigated and it turns out to be much worse than what is being reported. Again I don't think Rumsfeld deserves Bush's loyalty. Perhaps Bush is being blackmailed in a sense in that he's worried Rumsfeld will write a tell all book if he's let go [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

[andyfox]

Can't let him go. It would look too bad at this stage. I think it would increase, not lessen, the political damage, now that he's said he's an important person in the administration and has done a great job.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Can't let him go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure he can.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it would increase, not lessen, the political damage

[/ QUOTE ]

He's taking a political hit no matter what. Better to cut him loose than support him.


[ QUOTE ]
now that he's said he's an important person in the administration and has done a great job.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO that was a bad move.

[andyfox]

How'd Rummy do in front of Congress today? I imagine there were fireworks galore.

[adios]

Not too good IMO. Check this story out. Looks to me like it's more than 7 US soldiers involved LOL.

More Photos, Videos in Iraq Abuse Scandal-Rumsfeld

More Photos, Videos in Iraq Abuse Scandal-Rumsfeld

51 minutes ago Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo!



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib prison includes more photographs and videos that are potentially worse than the photos shown around the world of smiling American soldiers next to naked Iraqi prisoners in humiliating positions, U.S. officials said on Friday.


Reuters Photo



Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, at a Senate Armed Services Committee (news - web sites) hearing, said there were many more photos and videotapes that had not been published showing cruel and sadistic acts by U.S. personnel.


"I've said today that there are a lot more photographs and videos that exist. If these are released to the public, obviously it's going to make matters worse. That's just a fact," Rumsfeld said.


"I mean I looked at them last night and they're hard to believe," he said. "And if they're sent to some news organization and taken out of the criminal prosecution


channels that they're in, that's where we'll be. And it's not a pretty picture."


The photographs published so far have shown naked Iraqi prisoners piled on top of each other. One prisoner is shown with a leash around his neck held by a female American soldier, and one has women's underwear over his head.


Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, asked Rumsfeld during the hearing whether he had seen the video. Rumsfeld said he had not seen it.


"Apparently the worst is yet to come potentially in terms of disturbing events," Graham said.


From the NY Times:

Rumsfeld Offers Apology for Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners
By DAVID STOUT

Published: May 7, 2004


ASHINGTON, May 7 — A chastened Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld offered his personal apology today for the abuses inflicted upon Iraqi prisoners by their American military jailers, saying that the wrongdoings were "fundamentally un-American" and signaling that even uglier disclosures are to come.

"I take full responsibility," Mr. Rumsfeld told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, some of whom pressed him with hostile questions. "I offer my deepest apology."

In an appearance widely seen as crucial to his prospects of remaining as Pentagon chief, Mr. Rumsfeld acknowledged that he was responsible for what happened in the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad because the events occurred "on my watch."

"I feel terrible about what happened to these Iraqi detainees," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "They're human beings."

The secretary said he would name a commission to look deeply into the incidents of abuse, notwithstanding the inquiries already under way, and that he would try to find a way to compensate the individual detainees who were abused.

"It's the right thing to do," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

Mr. Rumsfeld said in response to questions that the abuses were instances of misconduct, not part of tactics meant to "soften up" detainees for questioning. But he indicated that even more instances have yet to be made public.

"Beyond abuse of prisoners, there are other photos that depict incidents of physical violence towards prisoners, acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "There are many more photographs and indeed some videos. Congress and the American people and the rest of the world need to know this."

At one point, the secretary said, "There are a lot more pictures."

Mr. Rumsfeld praised the courage of the soldiers who came forward and told of the abuses. He said the resulting investigations, and the collective examination of conscience that underlie them, offer an opportunity for the United States to make amends.

"Watch how a democracy deals with wrongdoing," Mr. Rumsfeld said in what amounted to a plea to the world. "We will strive to do our best, as imperfect as it may be," he said after declaring that he felt "the heartbreak of acknowledging the evil in our midst."

As for his own future, Mr. Rumsfeld said, "I'd resign in a minute" if he concluded that he could no longer lead the Defense Department effectively.

The secretary said the acts of a few American soldiers do not represent the values and conduct of most American military men and women in Iraq. "They're truly wonderful human beings," he said.

Several panel members said they agreed. But they also took Mr. Rumsfeld to task. Senator John S. McCain, Republican of Arizona, wanted to know what private contractors were in charge of questioning the prisoners and had authority over the guards.

When the secretary did not answer immediately, Mr. McCain grew exasperated.

"No, Secretary Rumsfeld, in all due respect, you've got to answer this question, and it could be satisfied with a phone call," Mr. McCain said. "This is a pretty simple, straightforward question. Who was in charge of the interrogations?"

Mr. Rumsfeld did not answer directly at first. Finally, he said, "That is what the investigation that I have indicated has been undertaken is determining."

Mr. McCain was clearly not satisfied with the answers. "I think these are fundamental qusetions to this issue," he said.

At one point, Mr. Rumsfeld was interrupted for a loud, long moment by several hecklers. "Fire Rumsfeld!" they shouted before being ejected. "Fire Rumsfeld!"

Under other circumstances, Mr. Rumsfeld might have smiled and cracked a joke. Today, he sat silent and stoic as the protesters were ejected.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts and one of the most outspoken opponents of the Bush administration's Iraq campaign, said, "In the Middle East and too often today, the symbol of America is not the Statue of Liberty; it's the prisoner standing on a box wearing a dark cape and a dark hood on his head, wires attached to his body, afraid that he's going to be electrocuted.."

"These incidences of torture and abuse resulted in a catastrophic crisis of credibility for our nation," Mr. Kennedy said.

The secretary also expressed his regrets to members of the committee for not informing them sooner of the full extent and seriousness of the Abu Ghraib abuses.

"Let me be clear," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "I failed to recognize how important it was to elevate a matter of such gravity to the highest levels, including the president and the members of Congress."

Members of the committee, Republicans as well as Democrats, have expressed extreme annoyance recently over not being informed about the explosive photographs depicting abuse that included sexual humilation — a particular outrage in Arab culture.

President Bush has also expressed his deep regrets. His aides also let it be known that he had personally admonished Mr. Rumsfeld for not informing him sooner about the Abu Ghraib episode.

Mr. Bush, campaign today in Dubuque, Iowa, said, "The abhorrent pictures on our TV screens have stained our honor. They do not reflect the nature of the men and women we have sent overseas. We've sent decent, compassionate, honorable, sacrificing citizens."

Today's Senate session was being broadcast by at least two Arab television networks.

Mr. Rumsfeld was to appear this afternoon before the House Armed Services Committee, where he was expected to deliver similar remarks and face similar sharp questioning.

Senator John Warner, the Virginia Republican who heads the Senate committee, opened the session with a pledge to probe the facts of the prison affair exhaustively "no matter where they lead, no matter how long it may be."

The committee's ranking Democrat, Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, said the "depraved and despicable" acts committed by some American soldiers had made the United States less secure by compromising its most precious asset: its moral values.

The soldiers responsible for the abuses must be found out and punished, Mr. Levin said. "So must anyone up the chain of command."

[Chris Alger]

This isn't news, it's theatre. What better way to shift the focus from the killing of civilians in Faluja, Kufa and Basra and the meltdown of good relations with Iraqis than to emphasize our self-flaggelation over the humiliation of prisoners? The news about the mistreatment of female detainees and the interrogation deaths hasn't sunk in yet, and maybe never will, so there's a element of preemption here.

But the constant media messages on the scandal are mostly pro-war: it's just a screw-up; everyone is appalled at humiliation (but not the civilian death toll, still a secret); the military system discovered the problem, is punishing the perps; the perps are a few bad apples in an ocean of well-intentioned heroes; Bush learned about it from TV (another teflon Pres); we'll pay compensation to the victims; we'll beef up training; we'll say we're really, really sorry over and over until the "patriots" begin to complain.

What no one's saying: the U.S. enlisted ranks are rife with sadists and sociopaths who believe Arabs are culturally retarded terrorists who deserve whatever they get.

And the meta-message: we're doing everything we possibly can do, from the highest levels on down. If the Iraqis and Arabs don't support our occupation (now scheduled to last through 2005), it will be (1) only because of this "humiliation" snafu; and (2) because they're too stupid and unforgiving to acknowledge our that U.S. interests are really everyone's interests.

Meanwhile, in Kufa: 23 Iraqis dead, bringing the civilian total to easily more than 10,0000. This time we wiped out a family, including a "2-year-old-girl and her cousins, boys ages 4 and 5 ... killed in a bomb explosion as they slept." (The Guardian)

[ACPlayer]

So, yesterday the story of the day was the pitures of torture being conducted by the US Military in Gharib despite information from Red Cross etc. Till a couple of days ago the Boss (Rumsfeld) had not even seen the pictures or the report. Management was aware that something was wrong but worrying about some Iraqi's was simply not worth Rummy's complete attention.

Now, the story is, what a great country the US is. See, we are talking about it, we are apologizing, democracy is working, Rummy's been chided, Bush has apologized to the King of Jordan, and oh yes we will pay some money to the victims.

Myers complains that all this was happening when the Fallujah thing was blowing up as was Najaf and other actions in the war theatre. Can our enemies now say, well we put American soldiers in front of cameras and slapped them a bit, but we had the whole American forces to worry about attacking us as we were doing so. Oh and by the way we are sorry about it.

One wonders whether the people who authorized the use of military contractors for military jobs (a situation I argued against before for just this accountability reason), whether there are any legal remedies against the contractors (the betting line is they get no punishment), whether our total disdain at the highest levels of govt for prisoners (Gitmo or Iraq or Afghanistan) will go unpunished.

Should the story be: Hey we apologized now get over it already.

[adios]

Obviously the administration is "circling the wagons" but that is wrong headed IMO. This a major fiasco for Bush but I'm not sure he get's it yet. The Iraqis aren't going to trust the US military to investigate itself and I dare say the rest of the Arab world isn't either. Certainly not with Rumsfeld leading the investigation, why should they? I'm not presuming to know how widespread this abuse was/is but Bush needs to do something to repair the damage that has been done. Sacking Rumsfeld IMO sends a message to Iraqis and the Arab world that Bush wants to get to the bottom of this and that he is serious about it. Also keeping Rumsfeld around and "spinning" events gives those such as ACPlayer, Cyrus , and Chris a stronger position.

[iblucky4u2]

Maybe Bush and his cronies should just apologize to the people of America for having killed hundreds of our finest, spent $200 billion (and counting), failing to get OSB, destroying all the good will America had after 9/11 and helping increase terrorism in the world and just pull out of Iraq and say <font color="red"> WE WON! </font>

They have lied about everything else, at least this strategy won't get any more Americans killed.