So far from the Bush Administration, we've seen a great deal of packaged-for-the-American-electorate expressions of disbelief and disgust at the treatment of Iraqi prisoners. Bush claims to be appalled, horrified, etc. etc. Donald Rumsfeld at first seemed to think that the treatment was not a violation of the Geneva Convention but has retreated a bit from that statement.
But does anyone remember this little story?
Almost one year ago when the story broke that Saddam had captured some American soldiers, the video footage of these soldiers was shown on Al-Jazeera. Rumsfeld was quick to demonstrate his pinpoint understanding of Geneva Conventions then. "The Geneva Convention indicates that it's not permitted to photograph and embarrass or humiliate prisoners of warm," Rumsfeld said. "It's something that the United States does not do. Needless to say, television networks that carry such pictures, I would say are doing something that's unfortunate." The military spokesman went on to specifically castigate Al-Jazeera for this.
The usual suspects (NRO online, for example) were quick to pile on. Walid Phares wrote: "To rebut these allegations, let's note that in Afghanistan, U.S. forces captured terrorist elements and followed the terms of the Geneva Convention. .... It's one thing to show prisoners before and as they are arrested, quite another to film an interrogation session in which subjects are humiliated. The American forces' handling of irregular militias in Afghanistan exceeded the requirements of the Geneva Convention; the Iraqis' treatment of our troops has flouted it."
(Um, you might want to update those facts, Walid.)
Apparently in Donald Rumsfeld's world, it is a far greater offense to show pictures of captured soldiers than it is to subject detainees to the kind of abuses at Abu Ghraib. And even after what Abu Ghraib has come to mean in the minds of the world now, both under Saddam and under the U.S., he still doesn't think it should be dismantled by us.
Way to help win those hearts and mind, Rummy.
