PDA

View Full Version : Abu Graib Prison Scandel Update



Redleg
05-11-2005, 13:34
From the Military.com site I subscribe to.


Army Demotes General In Prison Scandal
Associated Press
May 6, 2005

WASHINGTON - The Army said Thursday that only one general will be disciplined for failed leadership in connection with the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal and that more than a dozen lower-ranking officers have received a variety of punishments.

The Army said it demoted Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, whose Army Reserve unit was in charge of the prison compound when Iraqi detainees were physically abused and sexually humiliated by military police and intelligence soldiers in the fall of 2003. When photos of some of the abuse became public a year ago a firestorm of criticism erupted worldwide.

The Army also announced that it cleared three other, more senior generals of wrongdoing in the prisoner abuse cases, actions that had been previously reported but not publicly confirmed by the Army.

That leaves Karpinski as the only general officer to be disciplined thus far. The demotion means her career in the military, where officers must rise in rank or leave, is effectively over.

Messages left at her home in Hilton Head, S.C., and with her attorney were not returned. Neal A. Puckett, Karpinski's attorney, told The Washington Post that the Army is seeking to punish a general officer to show that action has been taken but has distanced her from the actual abuse to absolve other senior leaders.




"They're saying she's the only senior leader that had any part in this, but they're saying she didn't have a direct part in it," Puckett said. "I think they're trying to have it both ways. They are severing the chain of command right at her eyeball level, and not letting it go higher."

The Senate Armed Services Committee has said it intends to hold hearings soon to assess whether senior Defense Department civilian and military leaders were adequately held accountable for Abu Ghraib.

The Army described its investigations as exhaustive, requiring six months of work including sworn-statement interviews with 82 people, including L. Paul Bremer, who was the top civilian authority in Iraq at the time, and Gen. John Abizaid, the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East.

Among those cleared by the Army was Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who was the top Army general in Iraq at the time of the prisoner abuses. He has been faulted by some for leadership failures but has never been accused of ordering or sanctioning any abuse of prisoners.

The Army said it could not substantiate two allegations against Sanchez: dereliction in the performance of duties pertaining to detention and interrogation operations and improperly communicating interrogation policies.

Sanchez is currently the commander of 5th Corps, headquartered at Heidelberg, Germany.

Karpinski was demoted to colonel, a move that required approval by President Bush. She also received a written reprimand by Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Richard Cody and was formally relieved of command of the 800th Military Police Brigade on April 8, the Army said in a statement.

The Army's inspector general investigated four allegations against Karpinski: dereliction of duty, making a "material misrepresentation" to investigators, failure to obey a lawful order and shoplifting. Only the shoplifting and dereliction of duty allegations were substantiated.

The Army did not explain the specifics of the allegations, but a number of previous investigations of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuses have accused Karpinski of failing to maintain order and prevent the abuses. She has said publicly that she was not given full authority over Abu Ghraib and that when photographs of the abuse became public she was made a scapegoat.

A U.S. government official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Karpinski was accused of shoplifting a cosmetic item from a shop at a domestic Air Force base while she held the rank of colonel. Karpinski did not report her arrest for this misdemeanor on a later background check, the official said. In an interview with CBS News last year, Karpinski denied shoplifting.

The generals who were cleared, besides Sanchez, were Maj. Gen. Walter Wojdakowski, who was Sanchez's deputy in Iraq at the time, and Sanchez's intelligence chief, Maj. Gen. Barbara Fast. Both were accused of dereliction of duty, but the allegations were not substantiated.

Fast is now commander of the Army Intelligence Center and Wojdakowksi is a special assistant to the commander of U.S. Army Europe.

Col. Marc Warren, who was Sanchez's top uniformed lawyer in Iraq, also was cleared of allegations of dereliction and "professional impropriety under lawyers' ethics rules," the Army said.

Without providing their names, the Army also said Thursday that one colonel and two lieutenant colonels linked to detainee abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan were given unspecified administrative punishment. Also, two other lieutenant colonels were given letters of reprimand.

More than a dozen other lower-ranking officers, whose names were not released, also received various punishments.

- Three majors were given letters of reprimand and one of the three also was given an unspecified administrative punishment.

- Three captains have been court-martialed, one captain was given an other-than-honorable discharge from the Army, five captains received letters of reprimand and one was given an unspecified administrative punishment.

- Two first lieutenants have been court-martialed, another got a letter of reprimand and one was given administrative punishment.

- One second lieutenant was given an other-than-honorable discharge and another was given a letter of reprimand.

- Two chief warrant officers have been court-martialed.

The Army said other cases involving officers linked to detainee abuse are still open, but it did not say how many. Among the open cases are those of Col. Thomas Pappas, commander of the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade at Abu Ghraib, and Lt. Col. Stephen Jordan, who directed the prison's interrogation center. Both face possible criminal charges, Army officials have said.



For your information and discussion. The lower enlisted involved are being reported in the Media - but this is the first article I have seen on the officers that had to have been involved.

Don Corleone
05-11-2005, 14:04
Redleg,
You already know what the response from the angry left is going to be...that the punishments don't go high enough up the chain of command. Anything less than Rumsfeld's head on a pike is going to be a 'coverup', because we all know he directs each and every operation in Iraq, from which jeep is going to get refueled in Basra next to coodrinating radio communications throughout the country, and he still manages to find time to burn down orphanages on the side. :rolleyes:

Redleg
05-11-2005, 14:43
Redleg,
You already know what the response from the angry left is going to be...that the punishments don't go high enough up the chain of command. Anything less than Rumsfeld's head on a pike is going to be a 'coverup', because we all know he directs each and every operation in Iraq, from which jeep is going to get refueled in Basra next to coodrinating radio communications throughout the country, and he still manages to find time to burn down orphanages on the side. :rolleyes:

Maybe so - but at least the angry left can not say nothing is being done.

Ironside
05-11-2005, 14:44
From the Military.com site I subscribe to.
For your information and discussion. The lower enlisted involved are being reported in the Media - but this is the first article I have seen on the officers that had to have been involved.

Only seen about the general demoted to coloniel in Swedish media. And a mentioning about that a few others were punished. It was a few day ago.

Hurin_Rules
05-11-2005, 18:19
I'd like to see what an independent investigation would conclude. This is an internal investigation and of course the investigators are not going to condemn their own bosses.

Gawain of Orkeny
05-11-2005, 18:23
I'd like to see what an independent investigation would conclude. This is an internal investigation and of course the investigators are not going to condemn their own bosses.

Oh you mean like the UN and the oil for food scandal.

Hurin_Rules
05-11-2005, 18:42
Oh you mean like the UN and the oil for food scandal.

Yes, exactly. Independent investigations are needed in both cases.

Redleg
05-11-2005, 19:03
I'd like to see what an independent investigation would conclude. This is an internal investigation and of course the investigators are not going to condemn their own bosses.

Then you don't know General Tajibu (SP) very well - he answered to the Chief of Staff of the Army - who controled two levels above all the other generals in the scandel.

However I would not mind an independent investigation to insure that everyone responsible for the wrong doing is held responsible.

And it should be done by the United States Congress - which has the obligation and the responsibility to monitor the conduct of the military.

Hurin_Rules
05-11-2005, 19:29
Then you don't know General Tajibu (SP) very well - he answered to the Chief of Staff of the Army - who controled two levels above all the other generals in the scandel.

Yes, but of course Bush, Rumsfeld and Gonzalez are all above or outside of this chain too, no?



However I would not mind an independent investigation to insure that everyone responsible for the wrong doing is held responsible.

And it should be done by the United States Congress - which has the obligation and the responsibility to monitor the conduct of the military.

Here we are in agreement. Justice must not only be done, but must also be SEEN to be done.

See Redleg, we could get things done in a bipartisan fashion if we were in congress. Why don't we both run for office? ~:)

Redleg
05-11-2005, 19:35
Yes, but of course Bush, Rumsfeld and Gonzalez are all above or outside of this chain too, no?


He did not have the authority or the responsiblity to investigate that aspect - his investigation focused on the actual places of the event.

Bush, Rumsfeld and Gonzales must be investigated by Congress because they are civilian leaders of the military - miltary officers do not have the authority to investigate civilians - there is federal law on this.





Here we are in agreement. Justice must not only be done, but must also be SEEN to be done.


And that is why I posted the article - Justice is being done - but seems to be ignored by some media sources - is it complete - no I dont believe so. But visiablity of this should be just as important of a news item as the actual scandel was. However I don't see this making the front page of any paper here in the United States.



See Redleg, we could get things done in a bipartisan fashion if we were in congress. Why don't we both run for office? ~:)

I am not corrupt enought to be a professional politian - and often speak very bluntly when in conversations - to bluntly sometimes.

Productivity
05-12-2005, 02:37
And that is why I posted the article - Justice is being done - but seems to be ignored by some media sources - is it complete - no I dont believe so. But visiablity of this should be just as important of a news item as the actual scandel was. However I don't see this making the front page of any paper here in the United States.

I remember around last friday, it was on the fron page of the Reuters site. Let me just go and dig up the link (*says thankyou to Karpinski for having an easily searchable name*).

Link (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8411281)

I'm not sure how much coverage it received otherwise though.

bmolsson
05-12-2005, 05:24
Actually I don't think anything matters in this. The gloves are already off. Terrorists will know what is expected and don't really care. Military on the ground will shoot before they ask. The loser will be any poor bastard being at the wrong place at the wrong time........

Steppe Merc
05-12-2005, 13:27
Well, this is positive. I wish I knew what the hell admistrative punishment was. To me, some of the punishments weren't really strong enough, but I know nothing of the military, and if having a letter of repremand really means something, then that's good. If they didn't speak so vaguley about what will happen, I'd think people would appreciate it more.

But I do think that Congress should investagate, and it would be best to also have an outside investigation as well, just to insure everyone is punished that deserves to. And while it's good that they got a General, I don't get the feeling that being a General of Army Reserve is that impressive...

Paul Peru
05-12-2005, 13:38
Redleg,
You already know what the response from the angry left is going to be...that the punishments don't go high enough up the chain of command. Anything less than Rumsfeld's head on a pike is going to be a 'coverup', because we all know he directs each and every operation in Iraq, from which jeep is going to get refueled in Basra next to coodrinating radio communications throughout the country, and he still manages to find time to burn down orphanages on the side. :rolleyes:
more or less ~:)

KukriKhan
05-12-2005, 19:11
Well, this is positive. I wish I knew what the hell admistrative punishment was...

It's also known as Non-Judicial Punishment; the guy's commander offers it as a way to resolve a disciplinary matter without going thru a lengthy, involved court-martial.

The guy can accept that "offer" (basically admitting guilt) and receive punishments less than confinement and discharge

or

demand a full court-martial (where he risks greater penalties for the same alleged offense).

A "Letter of Reprimand" in a senior officer's (or senior Sgt's) file will effectively rule out any further promotions, and - if the military is in a cost-cutting mood - mark him or her for denial of retirement.

KafirChobee
05-13-2005, 06:41
Could you, show me another source for this? Is curious that none of the news agencies are (or have been) carrying any of these "investigations" of officers. Aside from Kapinski.

Kapinski, was on "NightLine" this evening with Ted - and neither mentioned anyone other than the enlisted personel and a couple sergeants being charged. As a matter of fact, the report I saw concluded only Kapinski was "derelict of duty" (though it did not specify exactly how), and that the enlisted people acted on their own initiatives without proding (though all have said they thought they were following the orders of Military Intelligence superiors).

Somehow, I would have prefered that some type of house cleaning was done with Generals Miller and Sanchez - and Rummy. Atleast, I wonder why there was a cut off point on the person overseeing 18 prisons in Iraq, where only two cell blocks seemed to have bad eggs running them and imposing torture.

Then again, there is the good old WPPA - WestPoint Protection Association - bet no one charged was a grad from there. (or the Naval Academy)

:balloon2:

KukriKhan
05-13-2005, 12:24
The original report was an Associated Press article, picked up by Military.com.
(AP recycles frequently; here's a google 'cached' link:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:VMb6PNHzfrgJ:customwire.ap.org/dynamic/fronts/HOME%3FSITE%3DMIDTF%26SECTION%3DHOME+associate+press+pappas&hl=en%20target=nw
Pappas story 4th down)

COL Pappas's source of commission was ROTC, Rutgers University, 1981.

Adrian II
05-13-2005, 13:26
Anything less than Rumsfeld's head on a pike is going to be a 'coverup', because we all know he directs each and every operation in Iraq, from which jeep is going to get refueled in Basra next to coodrinating radio communications throughout the country, and he still manages to find time to burn down orphanages on the side. :rolleyes:Yup, it's a phenomenon known as ' political responsibility'. Rumsfeld is financially accountable for every soldier, every tank, every darn jet and jeep in his budget, so why shouldn't he be accountable for what his army does and for what happens in his prison camps?
:dizzy2:

KafirChobee
05-14-2005, 03:37
4th down? Kukri? Must be archived. Looked elsewhere, maybe you'll have better luck finding these investigations of the pentagon into themselves.

Still, since we live in the time of the buck stopping on the first head that can be blamed - and blame never rising to the source of origin (where a directive or an authorization to commit a crime - we make those people Attorney Generals, and such). What the hey. That those in responsible position are never responsible for the actions of their subordinates that do their bidding seems in fassion.

Still, who could expect less from our Military - whose motto seems to be "Anyone know what the Privates are doing today?" Makes one wonder, who really is in charge - maybe it really is the sergeants.

:balloon2: