home

Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abuse

The Independent reports that newly released documents show that Lt General Ricardo Sanchez authorized coercive prisoner practices banned by the Geneva Conventions. It appears that Sanchez may have committed perjury in prior testimony by denying that he authorized the techniques:

Documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reveal that Lt General Ricardo Sanchez authorised techniques such as the use of dogs to intimidate prisoners, stress positions and disorientation. In the documents, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Gen Sanchez admits that some of the techniques would not be tolerated by other countries.

When he appeared last year before a Congressional committee, Gen Sanchez denied authorising such techniques. He has now been accused of perjury.

The ACLU says the authorization for the abuse doesn't stop with Sanchez, it goes up to Rumsfeld:

The ACLU says the documents reveal that the abuse of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere was the result of an organised and co-ordinated plan for dealing with prisoners captured during the so-called war on terror that originates at the highest levels of the chain of command. It says that far from being isolated incident, the shocking abuse at Abu Ghraib that was revealed last year was part of a pattern.

"We think that the techniques authorised by Gen Sanchez were certainly responsible for putting into play the sort of abuses that we saw at Abu Ghraib," Amirit Singh, an ACLU lawyer, told The Independent on Sunday. "And it does not just stop with Sanchez. It goes to [Defence Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld, who wrote memos authorising these sorts of techniques at Guantanamo Bay."

[link via Buzzflash.]

< Sharpton Exonerated In Pension Fraud Probe | Gov. Arnold and Releasing Lifers >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Torture of prisoners leads to death: see here.

    I thought it didn't go past the already convicted soldiers! Does this mean Rumsfeld will resign, people will be charged with prejury, and the Bush administration will hang it's head in shame?

    The guy at the top order the so called abuse, remember this happens in our prison system all the time. but yes Ricardo Sanchez was in fact following Orders from Bush, the so called Geneva Convention is never followed by any nation state, the fact is Sanchez is a political General and was picked because bush needs a yes guy, and when Sanchez was not needed any-more he was replaced with a new "Yes guy" can i ask you if you would admit to the crimes and admit to perjury? and remember Sanchez comes from a poor Hispanic family and has hit the big time, why would he want to admit wrong doing?

    ...And I imagine no one of consequence will be held responsible. The ones at the bottom, those taking orders, they must be held responsible, but those in power accept no responsibility. That is characteristic of the Bush administration.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#5)
    by scarshapedstar on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 04:51:42 AM EST
    So now we'll get the spectacle of Alberto Gonzales getting Ricardo Sanchez off the hook. That oughtta rile up the anti-immigration crowd.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#6)
    by roger on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 05:31:50 AM EST
    anyone suprised by this?

    Surprised? Not at all. It's been clear that the orders for the abuse and torture came from the WH, why else have Gonzales work up the legal basis for the treatment? The neocons have mastered the art of bringing in minorities, letting them sit at the table of power and money, and using them as pawns who will take the fall when the s*** hits the fan. That's why Colin Powell is gone. He is too smart for this game. Alberto, Condi, Ricardo are not made of the same stuff. It is a tribute to liberal/progressive success that minorities now get to play the parts that were given to white guys like E Howard Hunt, G Gordon Liddy et all a few decades ago. Short version? War crimes and they go right to the WH. Ricardo should be indicted now for perjury. Someone on the Congressional Committee needs to pick up the torch and insist on indictment.

    Operative phrase.... "We think..."

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#9)
    by Darryl Pearce on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 08:48:57 AM EST
    ...heh. Those that survive the United States' harsh, admittedly outlaw prison facilities will have a hotter hatred of us and will have honed their logic to convince others to hate us. Because we've seen this kind of thing before.

    Have to quote Jon Stewart paraphrasing Deadly Donald:
    "The people below me betrayed the people above me."
    Some diseases can only be cured with a rope.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#11)
    by john horse on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 08:55:52 AM EST
    Yes PPJ, and your point is? Lets look at the facts. Sanchez appeared before Congress and under oath said that he never approved any coercive techniques and news reports that he did were false. Now we have a document showing that he did approve coercive techniques. Looks like perjury to me. At least thats what I think. What do you think?

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#12)
    by Sailor on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 09:15:55 AM EST
    PPJ, don't you think he should be investigated for perjury? Don't you think it is important to find out whether our military leaders are lying to our civilian leaders?

    et al - I think he should be investigated for whatever Congress wants to investigate him for. Flat feet, bad breath, doing what they don't like... you name it. PIL - As history shows, rope cures are contagious. My advice is to avoid them at all costs.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#14)
    by john horse on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 10:21:32 AM EST
    We are not talking about "flat feet" or "bad breath." We are talking about General Sanchez appearing before Congress and committing perjury when he denied that he authorized coercive techniques at Abu Ghraib. If this document in which Sanchez authorized coercive techniques are Abu Ghraib is correct, then it is the smoking gun that shows that what happened at Abu Ghraib (and at other places) was not the actions of a "few bad apples" as Bush has alleged. Lets not forget that Bush had to publically apologize for this once. If it was not bad enough seeing the President of the United States, with his tail between his legs, telling the rest of the world that he is "sorry", now we can add to our humiliation the fact that his explanation turned out to be a lie.

    john h - I stand by my statement. "We think" is weasle words. Perhaps it is true, perhaps it is not true.

    Remember Bush and his boys need you to do more of this. and to Justin Faulkner, yes you got it right, to roger and conscious angel if you understand ask why? you got to love the Propaganda its right out of 1938. this is so third world its funny, but in a third world nut house?. Bush the guy with the bat, and he is coming after you next. where is bin laden?.

    I did not have torturous relations with those people, the Eyerakis.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#18)
    by Johnny on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 11:00:21 AM EST
    Typical.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#19)
    by Dadler on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 12:12:09 PM EST
    Jim, If "we think" pertained to an officer under a democratic president, you'd be all over it. please. you've reported crap on the shaivo story that is so second-hand rumor it's amazing you can offer this "we think" rationale with a straight face.

    Dearest No Name - Whatever I am, being too timid to post my moniker is certainly not one of them. And your reason is? Sailor - I see no relationship between the two events. I did note several times my problems was with the judical system. The actions/comments/etc. of all of the actors in that tradegy were quoted widely. I guess my sin was in saying that I thought there should be a be a new, full, and public hearing based on all the claims. Pardon me if I don't genuflect when someone says "judge." Too many of my ancestors knew some of them simply as the company store owner.

    good grief! - I have confused Sailor with dadler.. My apologies to both.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#23)
    by Sailor on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 02:10:04 PM EST
    I think an investigation for perjury involving torture is more important than perjury involving a bj. But I'm funny that way.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#24)
    by john horse on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 02:31:46 PM EST
    PPJ, ACLU said "We think that the techniques authorised by Gen Sanchez were certainly responsible for putting into play the sort of abuses that we saw at Abu Ghraib..." Why do you say that ACLU used "weasel words" when they said "We think". It would be "weasel words" if there was nothing linking Sanchez to the abuse at Abu Ghraib but doesn't the recently disclosed document establish the link. What this article reveals is that a major American military commander was involved in Abu Ghraib and committed perjury to Congress when he denied his involvement. Instead of being upset about that, you try to find fault with the messenger.

    Sailor - As someone who never thought Clinton's actions were never important enought for impeachment, I agree. john h - Fault? Not at all. I merely point that "We think" are weasle words. Why not just make a charge? ..."The techniques.. To me, this looks like a sideways attack that allows the ACLU to slide away if wrong. If correct, it is beneath them. If incorrect, it is beneath them.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#26)
    by john horse on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 03:59:47 PM EST
    PPJ, How will using the word "We think" allow ACLU to "slide away if wrong"? I look at the word "we think" or "I think" as redundant since anything you say expresses what you think, but it is something that is commonly done, including by myself. For example, if I was to say that I think your characterization of what ACLU said is wrong, the phrase "I think" may be unnecessary but it is certainly not weaselly. I also think your parsing of this phrase is a way to avoid taking a stand on whether Sanchez was linked to the abuse at Abu Ghraib or committed perjury when he said under oath that he never approved of coercive techniques practiced at Abu Ghraib.

    I think Jim blew his credibility on any of this early on when he claimed that Iraqi prisoners never had it so good as when held by our troops. There is a difference between a troll and a buffoon. It's hard for me to spell out exactly, but Jim as example helps. Someone on the Congressional Committee now needs to insist on investigation, indictment, prosecution if the facts are as they appear. I would also be willing to give Ricardo a couple of hours in the care of the AG prisoners with the understanding that there should be no rough stuff, just the typical frat house, blowing off steam kind of thing. But since we are a nation of laws, I will continue to raise my voice for investigation, prosecutorial processes.

    John H - I "think" is clearly less definite than "The techniques..." I think you know this. "synonyms THINK, CONCEIVE, IMAGINE, FANCY, REALIZE, ENVISAGE, ENVISION mean to form an idea of. THINK implies the entrance of an idea into one's mind with or without deliberate consideration or reflection ....

    CA - And you blow your creditability by continuing to post these charges without linking to them and showing context. Come now. Do so or accept my charge of distorting and omitting. You do know how to link, don't you?

    Whenever I read CA's posts, I can't help but think that it's Emperor Palpatine from the "Star Wars" Trilogy talking. Try reading his posts, using the Emperor Palpatine voice. You'll find is surprising amusing as well as alarmingly accurate!

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#31)
    by soccerdad on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 05:31:11 PM EST
    Sanchez is also guilty of perjury. So i expect he will be given a medal and promoted to chief of staff.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#33)
    by soccerdad on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 05:41:24 PM EST
    The unbvelievable attempt to cast aspersion on the ACLU by over parsing some words exemplifies the lack of actual arguments and facts available to the admin apologists here. of course the phrase "We think" conveys that the ACLU is giving their opinion but is not an organization responsible for either interpreting or applying the law. The real goal of the parsers and the apologists is to try and muddy the water even when things are clear. Failing that you attack the messenger.

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#34)
    by soccerdad on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 06:13:31 PM EST
    As others have pointed out torture of prisoners is not confined to Iraq. It happens here in the US Look at this video which was part of a BBC documentry on US prisons. So there is a sadistic part of our culture, which IMO is becoming worse. Most people in the US are not like that but turn a blind eye to such behavior.

    Never really watched much of Star Wars except the first one, so Emp P goes right by me, but thanks for the attention in any case. Jim, keep digging. You are in a hole. Keep digging. Tell us all about context if you wish. Equate perjury to Congressional Committees to flat feet and bad breath if you want. This guy Sanchez should be under investigation. Jail time would send a message to people who come to testify to Congress. He never had it so good. By the way, Jim, just come out and say you were dead wrong about the treatment of the prisoners and detainees and I won't bring it up again. Can you admit you were wrong or do you want to stick with the context argument?

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#37)
    by Che's Lounge on Sun Apr 03, 2005 at 09:31:18 PM EST
    Operative phrase.... "We think..." How Clintonesque.

    "If "we think" pertained to an officer under a democratic president, you'd be all over it. please. you've reported crap on the shaivo story that is so second-hand rumor it's amazing you can offer this "we think" rationale with a straight face" You don't expect PPJ and other a**-k**sers to get your point, do you? Fealty to Bush's as* overriddes all logic and truth. We all KNOW that if any of this had happened under Clinton, there would already have been at least 50 impeachment resolutions already introduced. [repetitive insult deleted]

    Forget perjury, he authorized torture. Can we lock him up for that?

    Re: Report: Sanchez Authorized Iraqi Prisoner Abus (none / 0) (#38)
    by john horse on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 04:09:26 AM EST
    The conservative kneejerk reaction is to ignore or minimize this. There is a visceral understanding that if Sanchez was involved, then this was a systematic problem rather than a case of a "few bad apples". If the problem is systematic than those in power have some responsibility for what happened and that means there will be political consequences for the Republicans. Maybe that is why there has been so much silence on this issue by our rightwing friends. Of course a true patriot would not remain silent when it comes to this violation of what our country stands for. He would not chose party or politics over country. A true patriot would not remain silent while evil is being committed.

    To soccerdad... I couldn't agree with you more. Yes it happens in the prisons here at home too. Is it right? Hell no, but who is gonna stop it???

    ...and so it starts (I hope)...

    deleted, link not in html format and comment off topic. Please don't solicit in the comments space.

    CA - When you link to the complete comment, I'll debate. Until then you continue to remind me of a 10 year old saying... "You said we could." I don't think you will do it because you don't know where it is, and because you are fearful of what it really says. So, let's play the game fair and square. Put the comment in view, or quit using it. It is starting to make you look Ishmaelish. BTW - I don't use phony monikers. Luke Skywalker is not me. SD - Well, it depends on the meaning of, is. And we are allowed to question the ACLU, aren't we? Che - Exactly. DA - Thanks for making my point. As lawyers they should speak more plainly and with greater exactness than others. When they do not, I come to attention, always asking. Why. Try it sometimes. It will make you a little uncomfortable, but a lot more educated. V2marty - Uh, usually there are some acts between accusation and jail. You know, investigations, trials, etc. Now were you speaking as a card carrying Leftie, or just someone with a little lust for blood in his eyes?