Army Major General (retired) Antonio Taguba is a patriot. He spoke truth to power in the fallout over the scandal at the Abu Ghraib military prison in Baghdad. Ultimately, General Toguba, the messenger/author of the internal report into the horrific torture at the prison, was forced to resign from the Army because Toguba's findings did not whitewash the torture at Abu Ghraib. Shame on the United States Army. And now, the Central Intelligence Agency is attempting to whitewash its own torture activities after 9/11. General Toguba has resigned and the CIA must answer to his words. If this is a (fair & balanced) anti-torture statement, so be it.
PS: May every last one of the torturers and torture-enablers burn in Hell (if such a place exists) through eternity. This wish goes for the POTUS43 and all of his blighted associates at every level. There are plenty of empty trees in this land; hang every last one of them.
[x NY Fishwrap]
Stop The C.I.A. Spin On The Senate Torture Report
By Antonio M. Taguba
Tag Cloud of the following piece of writing
The Senate Intelligence Committee will soon release key sections of its report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s detention and interrogation of terrorism suspects after 9/11. In remarks on Friday anticipating the report’s release, which he has publicly supported, President Obama acknowledged that “we tortured some folks.”
In fact, from leaks to the press and the statements of those familiar with the report, we know the committee has determined that C.I.A. torture was more widespread and brutal than Americans were led to believe. The committee reportedly has also found that the C.I.A. misled Bush administration officials and Congress about the extent and nature of the torture, and that torture was ineffective for intelligence gathering.
Even though a bipartisan majority of the committee voted to declassify the report, there is a concerted effort to discredit it by depicting it as partisan and unfair. The report’s detractors include the C.I.A. itself: The agency’s rebuttal will be released alongside the report’s key sections. While the C.I.A. is under no obligation to stay silent in the face of criticism, it seems that between its apparently excessive redactions and its spying on the committee’s computers, the agency is determined to resist oversight.
Yet I know from experience that oversight will help the C.I.A. — as it helped the United States military. Ten years ago, I was directed by Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior officer in Iraq, to investigate allegations of detainee abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. My report’s findings, which prompted a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, documented a systemic problem: military personnel had perpetrated “numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses.”
The findings, along with what became infamous images of abuse, caused a stir and led to prosecutions. The inquiry shed light on our country’s trip to the dark side, in which the United States government engaged in an assault on American ideals, broke the law and in so doing strengthened our enemies.
What I found in my investigation offended my sense of decency as a human being, and my sense of honor as a soldier. I’d learned early about the necessity of treating prisoners humanely. My father, Tomas B. Taguba, a member of the joint American-Filipino force during World War II, was captured by the Japanese and endured the Bataan Death March.
It was clear to me in 2004 that the United States military could not be the institution it needed to be as long as it engaged in and tolerated abuse.
But the military’s path to accountability was a long one, and its leaders hardly welcomed oversight. A few months after I completed the investigation, I was reassigned to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where I could be closely monitored. Then, in early 2006, I received a telephone call from General Richard A. Cody, then the Army’s vice chief of staff, who said, “I need you to retire by January of 2007.” No explanation was given. But none was needed.
I remain certain that by investigating inhumane treatment of detainees, I did my duty as a soldier, and that my inquiry — along with one in 2008 by the Senate Armed Services Committee [PDF] — made the military a stronger, more trustworthy institution. As a result, interrogation and detention regulations were reformed and training programs were revised to comply with the Geneva Conventions.
Equally important, the military changed its command structures for detainee operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. And while accountability for the architects of the torture has proved elusive, more than 200 members of the armed forces have been punished for their involvement in abuse.
Ultimately, as we learned with Abu Ghraib, the best way of guarding against torture is an American public well informed about the moral and strategic costs of such abuse. In the absence of an open accounting, polls show that support for torture among Americans has increased over recent years as proponents sow doubt about whether abusive interrogation is, in fact, illegitimate. So I am very concerned by the pre-emptive efforts of the C.I.A. to derail what we know to be strong criticism of the agency’s conduct during the “war on terror.”
Agency officials, past and current, surely believe that by seeking to undermine the credibility of the report, they are acting in the best interests of the agency. But when the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein [D=CA], has accused you of spying, you may want to reconsider your P.R. strategy. Yet we learn that the former C.I.A. director George J. Tenet, who presided over the “enhanced interrogation” program and later claimed that “We don’t torture people,” is working with the current director, John O. Brennan, to shape the agency’s response to the report.
One of President Obama’s greatest actions as president and commander in chief came on his second full day in office, when he signed an executive order banning torture. But he has allowed the C.I.A. to oversee the redaction process of this report, and is now apparently allowing Mr. Tenet to run a publicity campaign against it. The president should make sure that Mr. Brennan — who is, after all, his employee — spurns Mr. Tenet and accepts oversight.
A failure of leadership took the country to the dark side. A strong presidential lead can ensure that we don’t go back. Ω
[Antonio M. Taguba is a retired major general in the United States Army. He received BA (history) from Idaho State University as well as a Master of Arts (national security and strategic studies) from the Naval War College. Taguba rose through the ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major General. In 2004, he was named to head an investigation of treatment of prisoners in the Abu Ghraib military prison in Baghdad. The internal report was leaked to the press and Taguba was forced to retire, effective January 1, 2007, and thus ended a 34-year career of military service. In June, 2008, Taguba was again in the headlines when he wrote the preface to a report by Physicians for Human Rights on prisoner abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib prison, in Guantanamo Bay, and in Afghanistan. In the preface to the report, he accused the Bush administration of committing war crimes and called for the prosecution of those responsible. He wrote, "There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes. The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account.]
Copyright © 2014 The New York Times Company
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2014 Sapper's (Fair & Balanced) Rants & Raves
No comments:
Post a Comment
☛ STOP!!! Read the following BEFORE posting a Comment!
Include your e-mail address with your comment or your comment will be deleted by default. Your e-mail address will be DELETED before the comment is posted to this blog. Comments to entries in this blog are moderated by the blogger. Violators of this rule can KMA (Kiss My A-Double-Crooked-Letter) as this blogger's late maternal grandmother would say. No e-mail address (to be verified AND then deleted by the blogger) within the comment, no posting. That is the (fair & balanced) rule for comments to this blog.