Battle of the Photographs: Although the main purpose of the abuse was to soften up the prisoners for interrogation, the precise forms of humiliation appear to have been shaped by the insecurities and prejudices of the reservists, who had been given no training in the Geneva Conventions.
The reaction to the photographs in the Arab world was, predictably, fury and humiliation.
[Geneva Convention:
Article 12 - Les prisonniers de guerre sont au pouvoir de la Puissance ennemie, mais non des individus ou des corps de troupe qui les ont fait prisonniers. Indépendamment des responsabilités individuelles qui peuvent exister, la Puissance détentrice est responsable du traitement qui leur est appliqué. (...)
Article 13 - (...) Les prisonniers de guerre doivent de même être protégés en tout temps, notamment contre tout acte de violence ou d'intimidation, contre les insultes et la curiosité publique. (...)
Article 14 - Les prisonniers de guerre ont doit en toutes circonstances au respect de leur personne et de leur honneur.]
Army Discloses Criminal Inquiry on Prison Abuse: In the last 16 months, the Army has conducted more than 30 criminal investigations into misconduct by American captors in Iraq and Afghanistan, including 10 cases of suspicious death, 10 cases of abuse, and two deaths already determined to have been criminal homicides, the Army's vice chief of staff said Tuesday.
To date, the most severe penalties in any of the cases were less-than-honorable discharges for five Army soldiers, military officials said. No one has been sentenced to prison, they said.
The coalition’s reputation takes another hit: The scandal over abuses of Iraqi prisoners by coalition forces continues to grow. Despite promises of punishment for those found guilty of such abuse—and doubts over the veracity of photographs showing abuse by British soldiers—the damage to the coalition’s reputation may prove irreparable
Alguém sabe quem foi a fonte original que divulgou as imagens à CBS?
INVESTIGATION OF THE 800th MILITARY POLICE BRIGADE (SECRET/NO FOREIGN DISSEMINATION): CONCLUSION
1. (U) Several US Army Soldiers have committed egregious acts and grave breaches of international law at Abu Ghraib/BCCF and Camp Bucca, Iraq. Furthermore, key senior leaders in both the 800th MP Brigade and the 205th MI Brigade failed to comply with established regulations, policies, and command directives in preventing detainee abuses at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) and at Camp Bucca during the period August 2003 to February 2004.
2. (U) Approval and implementation of the recommendations of this AR 15-6 Investigation and those highlighted in previous assessments are essential to establish the conditions with the resources and personnel required to prevent future occurrences of detainee abuse.
Classification of Taguba Torture Report: Remarks of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld
Defense Department Operational Update Briefing (Also participating; Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Peter Pace) [excerpt on classification of Taguba torture report] [...]
Q: General, a quick follow-up on that, please. Could you explain to us why the Taguba report was classified secret, no foreign distribution? Those of us who have read the report, there's clearly nothing in there that's inherently secret, such as intelligence sources and methods or troop movements. Was this kept secret because it would be embarrassing to the world, particularly the Arab world?
GEN. PACE: First of all, I do not know specifically why it was labeled secret. Potentially there are parts of the hundreds and hundreds of pages of documentation that are classified. I do not know that to be a fact, but normally we will classify a document at the highest level of anything that's in that document.
But as the secretary pointed out, immediately we told the world that we thought we had a problem. So there has been no attempt to hide this. What we've been trying to do is find out the truth of the matter so we can get on about correcting; finding out who did what, and then taking a proper action.
Q: Mr. Secretary, can you say why it was classified secret? Do you know?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No, you'd have to ask the classifier.
