The Defense Department refused to process the October FOIA request because...
...the material was not 'breaking news' and that the failure to expedite the request would not 'endanger the life or safety of any individual.' Full compliance with the request, the ACLU said, would have required the Defense Department to release records related to the emerging scandal at Abu Ghraib. It would also have required the release of records describing any measures taken by the Defense Department to prevent torture and abuse.
...The FOIA request was filed in October 2003 by the ACLU and four other organizations: the Center for Constitutional Rights, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense, and Veterans for Peace. The requesters are currently considering litigation to force compliance with the seven-month-old request. source
...The FOIA request was filed in October 2003 by the ACLU and four other organizations: the Center for Constitutional Rights, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense, and Veterans for Peace. The requesters are currently considering litigation to force compliance with the seven-month-old request. source
Plus...
Hundreds of Iraqi prisoners were held in Abu Ghraib prison for prolonged periods despite a lack of evidence that they posed a security threat to American forces, according to an Army report completed last fall.
The unpublished report, by Maj. Gen. Donald J. Ryder, reflects what other senior Army officers have described as a deep concern among some American officers and officials in Iraq over the refusal of top American commanders in Baghdad to authorize the release of so-called security prisoners.
NY Times article
The unpublished report, by Maj. Gen. Donald J. Ryder, reflects what other senior Army officers have described as a deep concern among some American officers and officials in Iraq over the refusal of top American commanders in Baghdad to authorize the release of so-called security prisoners.
And, as for ever getting to the bottom of it - or, rather, the top....
"I can't tell if all the inquiries represent attempts to patch new holes opening in the boat every day, or if they're part of some carefully designed strategy to have lots of activity going on around the center of this thing without probing the center itself," said John Hamre, who served as deputy secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and now heads the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
With one inquiry completed and five more underway -- not to mention dozens of criminal investigations into alleged abusive treatment of detainees inside and outside military-run facilities -- Pentagon officials continue to promise that all trails will be pursued wherever they lead and that the guilty will be held accountable.
But some military lawyers, lawmakers and defense experts point to what they see as fundamental shortcomings: Most of the probes involve the Army investigating itself, they say, and each investigation is focused on only one aspect or another of the burgeoning scandal -- the role of military intelligence personnel who served as interrogators, for instance, or the adequacy of training of reservists or the need for revisions in Army training and doctrine.
No investigating authority has been given the specific task of assessing the roles of top authorities either in the U.S. Central Command or at the Pentagon.
WaPo article
With one inquiry completed and five more underway -- not to mention dozens of criminal investigations into alleged abusive treatment of detainees inside and outside military-run facilities -- Pentagon officials continue to promise that all trails will be pursued wherever they lead and that the guilty will be held accountable.
But some military lawyers, lawmakers and defense experts point to what they see as fundamental shortcomings: Most of the probes involve the Army investigating itself, they say, and each investigation is focused on only one aspect or another of the burgeoning scandal -- the role of military intelligence personnel who served as interrogators, for instance, or the adequacy of training of reservists or the need for revisions in Army training and doctrine.
No investigating authority has been given the specific task of assessing the roles of top authorities either in the U.S. Central Command or at the Pentagon.
