Yes you are. This thread is about the Government supposedly conducting torture.
YOu then went off on a tangent and brought up individuals who acted on their own and were charged and punished for such. That is not not the Government acting. That is an unsupportable allegation.
You even went as far to make false claims like "ramming". :doh
Government action is not documented in what you presented. Individual bad actor are.
Nothing you provided to me says that.
What you provided was a screwed-up, plagiarized?, rewritten?, miss-attributed quote or something.
The information mostly verbatim came from wiki, but you then linked to a story from the NY Times as if it had come from there.
The way it was presented was really screwed up. :shock:
The only actual link provided came from the NY Times, besides confirming that the bad actors were indeed brought to justice, only contained an unsupportable allegation of
"may". And that wouldn't even support a claim that the Government was involved. Just individual bad actors.
In an interview on Sunday, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who oversaw Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq but has since been admonished and suspended from command, described Captain Wood as an impressive and well-spoken expert on interrogations who oversaw the center. Colonel Buckner said that Captain Wood's commanding officer in Iraq, Lt. Col. Robert Whalen, was not available for comment. To date, seven enlisted personnel from a military police unit have been the only soldiers charged with crimes in connection with the abuses at Abu Ghraib. But an Army report completed in March identified Colonel Jordan as among four people who may have been among those "directly or indirectly" responsible for the misconduct.
Do you understand what "may" means?
It certainly doesn't mean the Government acted in any such way, does it?
It pretty much means there is not enough evidence to support his being one of the bad actors.
That is all that means. Not that the Government was actually involved and aware.
And don't even begin to assume the General's removal was because of involvement.
•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•◦∙◦•∙•
Yes, it is quite clear that you are pushing unsupportable allegations.
