TPM Muckraker

« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Rumsfeld On Abandoning Geneva: 'All Of A Sudden, It Was Just All Happening'

Donald Rumsfeld has finally said he's sorry. Sort of.

In an interview with biographer Bradley Graham, the former secretary of defense says he has regrets about the administration's controversial detainee policy.

The twist is that Rumsfeld doesn't regret the policy itself -- specifically the abandoning of the Geneva Conventions for detainees picked up in Afghanistan. Rather, he regrets how the policy was formulated.

"All of a sudden, it was just all happening, and the general counsel's office in the Pentagon had the lead," Rumsfeld told former Washington Post journalist Bradley Graham, as quoted in By His Own Rules: The Ambitions, Successes, and Ultimate Failures of Donald Rumsfeld. "It never registered in my mind in this particular instance--it did in almost every other case--that these issues ought to be in a policy development or management posture. Looking back at it now, I have a feeling that was a mistake. In retrospect, it would have been better to take all of those issues and put them in the hands of policy or management."

Primarily at issue is the Bush Administration's decision -- in which Rumsfeld played a key role -- to not grant prisoner-of-war designation to detainees from Afghanistan. In the Department of Defense, which had authority for Gitmo, the policy initially took the form of a since-declassified January 2002 memo, written by Rumsfeld, that said Al Qaida and Taliban detainees "are not entitled to prisoner of war status" under the Geneva Convention.

This memo, as Graham puts it, "effectively nullified half a century of U.S. military adherence to the [Geneva] conventions."

But Rumsfeld, whose own memoir will hit the shelves in 2010, still sees the problem as one primarily having to do with process.

Here's the relevant section from Graham's book:

With the passage of time, Rumsfeld has come to recognize that he made a mistake, although he sees the error as one of process, not basic judgment. He faults himself for taking too legalistic an approach initially, saying it would have been better if senior Pentagon officials responsible for policy and management matters had been brought in earlier to play more of a role and provide a broader perspective. As he explained in an interview in late 2008, policies were developing so fast in the weeks after the September 11 attacks that he did not follow his own normal procedures. "All of a sudden, it was just all happening, and the general counsel's office in the Pentagon had the lead," he said. "It never registered in my mind in this particular instance--it did in almost every other case--that these issues ought to be in a policy development or management posture. Looking back at it now, I have a feeling that was a mistake. In retrospect, it would have been better to take all of those issues and put them in the hands of policy or management."

Further, Rumsfeld conceded, more should have been done to engage Congress in drafting the new policies on detainees--something he said that White House officials had opposed. Although Congress did eventually get involved, he noted that this occurred "in duress" after the Supreme Court ruled in 2006 against the administration's original approach.


60 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

If this clown had been drafted during the Vietnam War... he would most likely been court marshalled or drummed out of the service... both of which might have saved us from the more recent wars and atrocities...

As it now stands, Rumsfield is still unscathed while his nation is littered with bodies of innocents and patriots...

As he is being protected by his Democrat and Republican cronies in Washington....

user-pic

Just to clarify Rumsfeld was a Marine pilot in the mid 1950s and trained other pilots. Unlike most other Bush appointees and Republican members of congress he actually served in the military.

I don't think he needs to go to the Hague. We have a perfectly good justice system and laws that outlaw torture in the USA. It's our responsibility.

Having said that it would be wonderful if we had the luxury to spend the next two years putting everything else on hold and trying and convicting these clowns but we don't. The Village can't chew gum and fix the economy at the same time, let alone pass healthcare and energy reform. If you like the way DC was distracted by a stain on a blue dress you'd love the way it'd come to a screeching halt over war crimes trials. Maybe some day it'll happen but I wouldn't hold my breath.

user-pic

True he was a pilot in the late 50's (peacetime), and clearly a very good one. He became an instructor pilot and taught flying to highly trained individuals. But that is the job of a highly trained technician, not a leader. He worked with people who had gone through a rigorous selection process, and he was a very, very good technician passing on his skills. If he had ever flown a combat mission I am sure it would have appeared on his resume.

But what he was teaching was technical details, something laid out for him by the aircraft and the physical environment of flying, not something he had to conceive, communicate, supervise and take responsibility getting a large group of people to do. Right and Wrong boils down to "Does it fly successfully or does it crash? Can the pilot fly it better than the guy trying to kill him? Can he hit the target?" That either works or it doesn't. Other than that, there is no right or wrong.

Rumsfeld has added the additional criterion of "Does it advance my career or retard it?" to "Works or Not." But that's all. Forget "Right or Wrong." That will never cross his mind.

user-pic

Makes sense that his military career was as a peacetime flyboy.

Will Tom Cruise be playing him in the movie? TC's craziness (on the one hand) and wooden lack of talent (on the other) might make him the perfect fit.

user-pic

I have no idea if Rummy was much of a leader in the Marine Air Wing. I have no idea if he had a big career ahead of him in the uniformed military or why he got out. I don't think we can "blame" him for serving during peacetime. I'd like to see a lot more peacetime. Be my guess he got out because he figured he was too brilliant to spend his life in the military.

My only point here is Rumsfeld isn't your typical neocon chickenhawk, Republican yellow elephant who has no clue about war but thinks it's a good idea to make more of it. He did actually serve in the military. In a better world that would have ended his involvement in US government.

user-pic

Rumsfeld served active duty 1954-1957, which "mid 1950s" describes better than "late '50s".

"Peacetime"? Uneasily. The Korean War reached armistice in 1953, but no-one could be sure it wouldn't be broken with another surprise attack, which is why forces were (and are still) readied south of the DMZ.

user-pic

I agree we have laws to take care of this and the world is not going just let this be ignored. Whether we can chew gum at the same time or not, we better start the process of doing just the same.

user-pic

Remember when Clinton was accused of "parsing"? Rumsfeld is parsing -- in order to sidestep the "means" part of his ends: the law and ehtics on the matter.

Typical of a thug in suit and tie. See "Lust, Caution" for the equivalent of his treasonous ilk.

user-pic

I think that's key to the entire Bush Administration: The individuals most responsible for utterly abandoning every publicly held American value were utterly ignorant and contemptous of their actions' implications and results. None of the warhawks - this jackass, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Bush himself - were combat veterans. None knew, or bothered to imagine, the fruitless horror of war. We handed the reins of destiny to a gang of infantile jocks and silver-spoon babies. Are we that shocked by the result?

user-pic

I think that Rumsfeld is on the edge of explosion right now. His admission that he messed with the Geneva Convention will not allow him to later on try to sidestep the issue if he appears before the court at the Hague.

user-pic

Rumsfeld must be very confident that no present or future US President will ever allow him to be tried for war crimes at the Hague.

user-pic

Rummy served in the Navy as an aviator between 1954-1957. Then he served a s weekend warrior under 1975.
One of the few Bush policy guys to actually serve.
Not that it did him any good.

user-pic

Can't WAIT to see him in his star turn at the Hague.

user-pic

GOD I HATE THIS GUY. HA!!!!!!!

Who in the f.... is he kidding?

Well at least he is pretending to be contrite. More than that other war criminal Cheney.

Well we know who we tortured and we do not know we might have tortured, but those that were tortured that we really did not know we had tortured well...I mean we know what we know, and if the pictures are not there from the cell phones, well,.... we might not have exactly tortured except for those who might have undergone enhanced interrogation techniques, but were they really tortured, I mean we know what we know but we do not know what........

user-pic

Rumsfeld has always been more circumspect than Cheney. Cheney is more the Bull-in-the-China-shop type, Rumsfeld is the guy who is quiet until suddenly he stabs-you-in-the-back-by-surprise guy. That's probably why Rumsfeld never ran for political office. He is a total back-office man.

But that's just a variation of style of office politics. They are peas in a pod otherwise.

user-pic

Rumsfeld was actually elected to Congress for 4 successive terms (1963-1971). So he did a significant stint as a politician. (That fact doesn't necessarily negate your thesis, though.)

user-pic

Calling Cheney the "Bull in the china Closet" is very flattering. Cheney is a war criminal, unindicted and unconvicted though he be. Rumsfeld is not all that far behind Cheney but there seems to be a glimmer of decency in rumsfield. We will have to wait and see if in fact, his glimmer propels him to turn on his criminal buddies and tell all the facts about the miscreants in the Bush Administration. There is a chance for Rumsfeld to but he better get to it quickly.

user-pic

"But Rumsfeld, whose own memoir will hit the shelves in 2010, still sees the problem as one primarily having to do with process."

In essence, torture and other heinous crimes are perfectly acceptable... you just have to make sure the process fully protects those who are doing the torturing...

You need not worry, Rumsfield, even without the correct process, this nation has decided torture no longer needs defending and those who desire to utilize it will be protected WITHOUT excessive process and consideration.

See... you must be proud to know that your endeavors have some good, long lasting outcomes. We can now commit crimes against humanity and torture to our hearts content without fear of reprisal...

and it is ALL due to your efforts.... and those who have decided to protect you....

user-pic

See, the problem was that there wasn't enough politics involved in the decision-making process.

user-pic

Tomorrow is the Fourth of July. Tomorrow is the 1st time since coming back from Vietnam that I will not be participating.

Seeing the flag pass in front of me long longer gives me the pride and memories which it once did... today, I see a flag which is symbolizing a new nation... one which no longer holds dear the ideals of countless patriots lying in memorial cemetaries, but would rather protect the elite more than the common people... torture those who MIGHT be guilty... fight religious wars under false pretensions and made up scenarios... and snub their noses at disabled veterans while publicly giving them continuous lip service and praise...

At least it certainly no longer represents MY beliefs...

user-pic

Seeing the flag pass in front of me long longer gives me the pride and memories which it once did

So this is the first time the flag made you feel this way?
Try reading "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee".

user-pic

Johnnydoughey,
I understand your disgust and outrage, but I hope you know that there are millions of us who not only share those sentiments but are actively working to bring our country back to its moorings in law and principles. The 4th of July is a celebration of the Declaration of Independence--not (as some believe) of the formation of the United States--and the articulation of its principles are worth re-reading. We should all re-subscribe to those principles. Timely that Britain has found another copy of our Declaration in its national archives. Happy 4th of July, Johnnydoughey and everyone else who shares the principles of Jefferson's Declaration.

So re-read this paragraph:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

I'm not advocating the overthrow of our government: I'm saying that the principles on which our country were founded commit us to demanding accountability and legality from our leaders--even when they are no longer in office.

Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, Rove, John Yoo, Alberto Gonzalez--investigations culminating in trials are necessary to our democracy.

user-pic

Sorry, I have to stand with johnnydoughey. I'm a Vietnam vet also who has come to now distrust any of our officials to bring to justice the criminals from the last 8 years. I expected Obama to do as he promised - he's let us down also. Obama was the first candidate since Robert Kennedy I truly trusted to do what they say. You need to tell the other vets to not get discouraged, it won't work for us.

user-pic

I share your disappointment in Obama, but I don't think there is any other politician on the national level who might get a chance who could do better than he has. I still think that he is sweeping the decks of everything else in preparation for the fight over universal health care.

Universal health care is the greatest long-term benefit any President could bestow on this nation since Social Security and Medicare, and Obama's enemies (and ours) know it. They'll use every fight before the Congressional floor fight over health care to develop their political strength and funds to defeat Obama, just as they did to Clinton. So Obama's not picking any additional fights right now.

So I am discounting the current disappointments and waiting for the main event which will be soon. After health care, win or lose, I think we will see a different White House. But I still want to see Progressive activists out in force to pressure Obama heavily.

We'd damned well better see a different White House after health care. There will be no excuses then.

user-pic

The approach of holding back for the "main event" (health care reform) also allows the opposition to hold back their assets instead of using them up fighting a lot of little wars. This is a losing strategy for Obama. Remember, the Republicans only need one (1) "Democrat" to break ranks and the filibuster is on. Can you say Joe Lieberman?

user-pic

Sounds like a Reaganesque dodge. I just don't remember... Things were happening soooo fast.... Sorry ocifer, I didn't mean it...

Yeah right. This is the same psycho who proudly showed us his strength of character and work ethic by referring to his habit of reading while standing. He knows what was going on, and if he doesn't he is liable because it was his job to know.

user-pic

I am sooooo discouraged.
I supported Obama. I voted for Obama. I gave money to Obama's campaign.
And on the most important issues - HE WIMPED OUT!!!
Certainly restoring the economy is very important, getting out of Iraq is very important, single payer health care is very important. On all of these issues Obama talked a good game, but now he has compromised to the point that it appears that we will see very little change.
BUT ... by far the single most important issue facing Obama when he was sworn in was, and remains, restoring our democracy and returning us to the nation of laws we once were. The only way that our country can restore its democracy is to demonstrate that NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW ... INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION'S PARTNERS IN CRIME.
Bush, Cheney, Runsfeld, Gonzales, Rice, Powell, Wolfewitz, and dozens of other operatives from "the Project for a New American Century" all must be indicted, tried, convicted and imprisoned. If Obama continues to refuse to indict he should be impeached for his complicity in the crimes against humanity perpetrated by these bastards and the whole lot of them should then be turned over to the Hague for trial.

user-pic

Why oh why oh why can't these admitted war criminals be brought to trial? Rumsfeld, Cheney, Yoo, Addington . . . these people need, in the words of Brian Dennehy in "Silverado," "a fair trial, followed by a first-class hangin'." Or as Hanover Fist puts it with regard to Captain Sternn in "Heavy Metal": "Hanging's too good for him! Burning's too good for him! He ought to be torn into little, bitty pieces and buried alive!"

These are admitted war criminals. Good Lord, what's the hold up?

user-pic

Too many Americans are complicit is supporting those war criminals and their actions. Bringing them to trial will destabilize this nation for a generation.

The first function of EVERY government is to enforce stability. Always. If the government does not do enforce stability, it is invariably overthrown. That is a clear truth known by every lasting ruler since the twin inventions of cities and of writing. No existing sensible government willingly instigates a civil war. Look what happened to China when Mao Tse Tung instituted the Cultural Revolution. Bringing those criminals to trial right now almost certainly would be a major push in that direction, as the right-wing violence we have recently seen little samples of demonstrates.

And yes, social stability is far more important than justice. Sorry, but there it is. When you are responsible for a family, social stability is first long before social justice.

Just ask your parents.

user-pic

"The first function of EVERY government is to enforce stability. "

Please.... our leaders have caused instability for a couple centuries... ALL OVER THIS WORLD!!

Did you ever atop to think perhaps THAT is why we are in this mess today?

In this counrty of ours, I was taught as a child that WE are the government... that those in Washington are there to represent US, no themselves and their cronies... that they have a duty to our Constitution, not their own egomaniacal desires.

What you are telling us is that by not prosecuting the important folks who have gotten us and the world bankrupt... who have allowed innocent and guilty alike to be treated inhumane and/or tortured... who have most likely gotten us into another war WITHOUT cause and consequently caused the death and destruction of countless thousands... that THIS causes stability?

I suppose Hitler was also just fulfilling his mission, since he was apparently only attempting to help his country out of a depression and fulfilling manifest destiny and attempting to solve the racial and ethnic dilemma in his own country... and used an entire army to prevent disruption...

user-pic

wrong.

the idea that stability is the most important function of governmnet has a name: conservatism.

and justice is not the enemy of stability. justice becoming the enemy of stability is the brickwork of authoritarianism being laid.

the foundation of demcoracy is the rule of law over the rule of men. abandoning that is not the course of prudence, but a rather dangerous path away from what democracy truly means.

user-pic

Rumsy, sorry sweetie, but your error was glaring and gigantic. I mean you spoiled the US reputation throughout the world with your heinous, illegal behavior that threw out the American commitment to adhering to the Geneva Convention. Plus, you put at risk the lives and well being of future US military personnel captured by our enemies. You sort of handed them a license to abuse our people just like you allowed others to be abused. You should hang your head in shame and really begin to worry about meeting God when this life is over.

user-pic

You are completely right. Just remember, though, that Rumsfeld was appointed by George W. Bush and could have been removed any time he was not meeting Bush's approval.

Everything Rumsfeld did reflects right back to the man responsible - George W. Bush.

If Bush appointed him and Cheney, then did not supervise closely enough to correct their errors, those are the errors of George W. Bush. It is for errors of the top bosses like that that the RICO statutes were passed. And since Cheney stepped in and gave directions, and Bush did not stop him, both Cheney and Bush become responsible for what Rumsfeld did.

That in no way diminishes Rumsfeld's direct responsibility for the policies he instituted or permitted.

user-pic

Rumsfeld is a war criminal!

Rumsfeld is a war criminal!

Rumsfeld is a war criminal!

Rumsfeld is a war criminal!

THE LAW REQUIRES ALL WAR CRIMINALS BE CHARGED AND TRIED FOR THEIR CRIMES.

WHY IS OUR PRESIDENT SO INDIFFERENT TO WAR CRIMES?

user-pic

The answer, oleeb, is because pursuing war crimes is so distracting to the REAL work of the Republic. Get it?

Cowardly bastards, including Obama, all of them unworthy to be seen in public on the 4th of July.

user-pic

I just love the way you put things sometimes sleepin! And yes, they should hang there heads in shame on this day of all days.

user-pic
"All of a sudden, it was just all happening, and the general counsel's office in the Pentagon had the lead," [...] "It never registered in my mind in this particular instance--it did in almost every other case--that these issues ought to be in a policy development or management posture. Looking back at it now, I have a feeling that was a mistake. In retrospect, it would have been better to take all of those issues and put them in the hands of policy or management."

This is a highly political bureaucrat who NEVER takes personal responsibility for a failed policy. If it succeeds, no matter who uttered or pushed it, afterward it was his; but if it fails, it's all "Hey, they did it and I had no control and no real awareness."

His only criterion is "Will it succeed? Can I get credit?" Right and wrong are just words that he uses. He has no concept of what they really mean.

user-pic

This was sent to me:

What happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Five signers were captured by the British and tortured before they died. twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the war. They signed and pledged their lives their fortunes and sacred honor!

This continued but it makes the point.
Compare that with what we have today in Washington with so few honorable exceptions.
What piss poor comparisons. Sunshine soldiers for the most part. And war profiteers some. Many of the 'signers' died destitute and forgotten.

user-pic

If that's the same email I saw about the signers of the Declaration of Independence, it's a hoax. Actually, some wildly scattered truth, but mostly hoax.

Why make shit up? I don't know. I'm not a Rethuglican.

user-pic

Gee, Rummy is going all soft and squishy on us. Next thing ya know he'll be another Bob Macnamara with crocodile tears.

This must be one of those Unknown Unknowns he was lecturing us about.

user-pic

I, too, thought of McNamara's "confession." I want to see Rumsfeld in front of Errol Morris's camera to make true comparison.

user-pic

The only thing Rummy regrets is that his reputation is in tatters. A classic narcissist, to the end.

user-pic
He faults himself for taking too legalistic an approach initially, saying it would have been better if senior Pentagon officials responsible for policy and management matters had been brought in earlier to play more of a role and provide a broader perspective. [emphasis mine.]

WTF???? The Undersecretary for Policy was Doug Feith, and he had plenty to do with discarding the Geneva Conventions. In fact, it was Feith that came up with the rationale that terrorists don't deserve the GCs protections back in the 1980's. Furthermore, it was Feith's office that was in charge of Iraq's prisons. WTF???

user-pic

I have to take issue with people who think Rumsfeld somehow got off scot-free in all of this.

Rumsfeld is completely discredited. He is a pariah on the left and a source of embarrassment on the right. He was, essentially, the only neocon who was fired as a result of the Iraq War debacle. He owns it, in the conventional wisdom and political circles.

It's much more crucial to keep the Obama administration honest about the Geneva Conventions going forward than to prosecute Rumseld. Why? Because Obama's in the position to make more huge mistakes. Rumsfeld most certainly is not.

user-pic

Embarrassment and ridicule are robes of honor for Republicans. Rummy will wrap himself in victimhood like the rest of the gangsters, screaming poor little me all the way to the bank.

Money, nothing else, is all that matters. And he got his end, bub, count on it.

user-pic

you are a talking about a gang of thugs who rode the discredit and embarassment of nixon like a grudge, something to be avenged. they came to power with bush to set right the wrongs of history. you give far too much credit to the efficacy of shame.

user-pic

by trying to get to the bottom of the big enchilada of government malfeasance, it's stunning how infrequently Rumsfeld is called to the mat.

the more i try to understand the evolving government conspiracy, the more the information fingers Rumsfeld.

on a related note: when i checked to see what Cynthia McKinney was doing lately, here's what i found (remember Cynthis was the congresswoman who stated that Bush had foreknowledge of 9/11):

McKinney, still in jail, expected to see judge Sunday

By RHONDA COOK

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Saturday, July 04, 2009

With Cynthia McKinney due to appear in an Israeli court Sunday, the mother of the former congresswoman decided to skip a weekend family reunion in Alabama just in case State Department officials need any documents to get her released from jail.

McKinney has been in custody since Tuesday when she and 20 others were swept up by the Israeli Navy while allegedly trying to sail through a navy blockade. The group says it was attempting to deliver humanitarian supplies to Gaza.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/dekalb/stories/2009/07/04/mckinney_israel.html

user-pic

What was abandoned are the very things we hold to be most important. By reacting with something besides our heads, our fate was sealed. Naturally, this is very human.

It is our sincerest hope that in choosing those who lead us we will have selected persons who will act rationally and in support of what we believe when it is of the utmost importance we do so.

The inevitability of getting this wrong on occasion is a familiar shortcoming of ours that we've yet to find an answer for.

user-pic

When we choose opportunists whose desire is to make sure common folk have to abide by their wishes... and are then elected... we can expect some flaws once in awhile.

However, when we also decide these folks are no longer susceptible to our laws and checks and balances, the fear of reprisal will no longer hold those same people back, and history shows the destruction they can cause can wreck havoc on millions.

In the case of superpowers, the numbers can rise to billions.

We have a system in place to prevent this result, but we have apparently decided to abandon this also...

user-pic

This reminds me of Exodus 32:24 when, confronted by Moses about the golden calf, Aaron says "So I said to them, 'Whoever has gold, take it off!' They gave it to me and I hurled it into the fire and out came this calf!"

In fact, as laid out in verses 32:1 through 32:6, Aaron -- like Rumsfeld -- was instrumental in creating the atrocity and his lame excuse was a lie. (In my house, "I threw the gold in the fire and out came the calf" is what we say whenever someone makes a lame and dishonest excuse for bad behavior.)

user-pic

no matter what is said, no matter how hard these guys try and re-write history and justify their paranoia and incompetence; history will not be kind.

as disappointed i am with president obama not investigating further the era when torture came to the united states and hold those accountable, i know history will.

user-pic

"You know, in retrospect, I was before it before I was against it, and I think that's the problem, the known unknowns and all that. I'm not worried so much about my image among our contemporaries though, since we pretty much locked in a global bloodbath or two. I'll worry about the opinions of those who emerge from the bunkers with me. Yours probably won't matter. See, this is history, and I intend to be one of the writers. Just like I was a writer of the illegal and stupendous failures of the Bush adminstration."

user-pic

Wasn't it one of Bush's Press Secretaries that said something to the effect that the Bush Administration was making history. And while we were reading about that history, they were continuing to make new history and we would never catch up with them?

user-pic

"Don: Heads up. Better lose that "souvenir". Looks like that NYCCAN thing is going to happen after all. Dick"

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/06/01/make-it-happen/

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2008/08/16/black-box/

user-pic

Why the long face, Don?

A good Christian fellow like yourself should have no regrets.

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/05/24/torture-and-911/

user-pic

"All of a sudden, it was just all happening"

Yes, we understand, Don. You just lost track of time.

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/clock-stoppers/

user-pic

"Don: The "contractors" want more money. That $100 million may not be enough to keep them quiet. Call me. Dick"

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/the-ghost-in-the-machines-the-mystery-of-the-wtc-hard-drive-recoveries/

user-pic

Hey Justin -

you might want to go back and take a look at the Mayer New Yorker piece on Mora and then maybe try for a follow up question to Mora or Matthew Waxman maybe, as to whether or not they were aware that Rumsfeld steamrolled by Haynes as Pentagon GC, and the "hands of policy or management" never got a crack at this stuff. You know, if only a "policy or management" guy like Cambone had been involved ...

user-pic

thanks for the tip

user-pic

Just the facts please! To say something like "it just happened" is so absurd that it boggles the mind. He was the head of DOD and didn't know that J Yoo wrote the "legal justification" memo on how the US President would use to nullify parts of the Geneva Conventions, then where the hell was he when the memo from Nov 15, 2001 was written. The memo: RE: Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Provisions of the ABM Treaty...was that first giant step into the abyss.
That begs the question: Where was he?
Rumsfeld then goes on to authorize the torture techniques described in the 2002 memo's by Bybee and others. So he was either woefully ignorant about the goings on in his own department, failed to understand the documents he was signing.
Then, when the WH decided it was in deep sh*t, Rumsfeld withdrew his blanket approval for torture techniques and directed the DoD General Counsel to set up a Working Group to assess the Legal, Policy and Operational issues related to the interrogation of detainees.
The most interesting part, was when the Working Group was told that the "controlling authority for all questions of domestic and international law" was the OLC documents...which essentially told this group that "they were NOT there to do any legal analysis", they were being instructed to "sign onto" the OLC memos authorizing torture.
As it was Rumsfeld who called for the group...and then told them to cover his ass...the audactiy of him to LIE is astounding.

Maybe he thinks that we can't or won't read all the documents released by the DOJ on this topic. WRONG!

He was one of those who authorized the torture treatment and he somehow wants us to believe that he didn't know about the memo and then just said Oh Well, we don't have to follow GC because I have a legal opinion from the OLC that says so????? This is a dumb and dumber argument.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe
Tip Line

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Zachary
Roth

Bio

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address