Log in 
New user? Re: Two face
Message Details
Posted
5/10/2004; 1:47 PM by Brian CarnellLast Modified
5/10/2004; 1:47 PM by Brian CarnellIn Response To
Re: Two face (#6892)Label
PoliticsRead Count
254
Message Body
Jim Roepcke wrote:
>Still hadn't seen them? What kind of incompetent people does he have
>working for him that he could go that long without getting access to
>that information?
>
>
It wasn't incompetence, it was an intentional policy to protect the
rights of the accused and preserve convictions from claims that
superiors had interfered with the cases to prejudge the outcomes:
"RUMSFELD: And second, the -- I don't know quite how to respond to your
question. The Department of Defense announced that their abuse was being
charged, there were criminal investigations under way. No one had seen
the photographs.
They were part of a criminal investigation. And they were in that
Central Command -- I say no one in the Pentagon had seen them. And they
were part of that investigative process.
It is the photographs that gives one the vivid realization of what
actually took place. Words don't do it. The words that there were
abuses, that it was cruel, that it was inhumane -- all of which is true
-- that it was blatant, you read that and it's one thing. You see the
photographs and you get a sense of it and you cannot help but be outraged.
Now, there are -- at any given time in the Department of Defense as I
said, there are these 3,000 courts-martial under way, general
courts-martial some 1,200, criminal investigations 18,000 a year last
year. And the importance of protecting the people charged, protecting
their rights, and the importance of seeing that if in fact they're
guilty that they don't get off because of command influence. So there's
a pattern of not reaching down into those things, bringing them up and
looking at all the evidence before it ever arrives. And in this case, it
was released to the press.
Now, we announced the problem to the press. We did not release the
Taguba report to the press. That was done by someone to release against
the law a secret document.
That's how it surprised everyone. It shocked the Congress. It shocked
me. It shocked the president. It shocked the country.
But to suggest that they had not taken tough, swift, corrective actions
in the Central Command, it seems to me is inconsistent with what took place.
. .
RUMSFELD: Well, Senator Collins, I wish I had done that. I said that in
my remarks.
I wish I knew -- and we've got to find a better way to do it. But I wish
I knew how you reach down into a criminal investigation when it is not
just a criminal investigation, but it turns out to be something that is
radioactive, something that has strategic impact in the world. And we
don't have those procedures. They've never been designed."
>Still hadn't seen them? What kind of incompetent people does he have
>working for him that he could go that long without getting access to
>that information?
>
>
It wasn't incompetence, it was an intentional policy to protect the
rights of the accused and preserve convictions from claims that
superiors had interfered with the cases to prejudge the outcomes:
"RUMSFELD: And second, the -- I don't know quite how to respond to your
question. The Department of Defense announced that their abuse was being
charged, there were criminal investigations under way. No one had seen
the photographs.
They were part of a criminal investigation. And they were in that
Central Command -- I say no one in the Pentagon had seen them. And they
were part of that investigative process.
It is the photographs that gives one the vivid realization of what
actually took place. Words don't do it. The words that there were
abuses, that it was cruel, that it was inhumane -- all of which is true
-- that it was blatant, you read that and it's one thing. You see the
photographs and you get a sense of it and you cannot help but be outraged.
Now, there are -- at any given time in the Department of Defense as I
said, there are these 3,000 courts-martial under way, general
courts-martial some 1,200, criminal investigations 18,000 a year last
year. And the importance of protecting the people charged, protecting
their rights, and the importance of seeing that if in fact they're
guilty that they don't get off because of command influence. So there's
a pattern of not reaching down into those things, bringing them up and
looking at all the evidence before it ever arrives. And in this case, it
was released to the press.
Now, we announced the problem to the press. We did not release the
Taguba report to the press. That was done by someone to release against
the law a secret document.
That's how it surprised everyone. It shocked the Congress. It shocked
me. It shocked the president. It shocked the country.
But to suggest that they had not taken tough, swift, corrective actions
in the Central Command, it seems to me is inconsistent with what took place.
. .
RUMSFELD: Well, Senator Collins, I wish I had done that. I said that in
my remarks.
I wish I knew -- and we've got to find a better way to do it. But I wish
I knew how you reach down into a criminal investigation when it is not
just a criminal investigation, but it turns out to be something that is
radioactive, something that has strategic impact in the world. And we
don't have those procedures. They've never been designed."
Replies
| Re: Two face ( 5/10/2004 by Jim Roepcke ) | |
| On May 10, 2004, at 11:47 AM, Brian Carnell wrote: > It wasn't incompetence, |
| Re: Two face ( 5/10/2004 by Philippe Martin ) | |
| But to suggest that they had not taken tough, swift, corrective actions in |
