Impeachment: FBI memos show DoD Commanders fully aware of torture

Evidence that both Congress and the President were fully aware of Geneva Convention violations in 2002, but failed to ensure troops were trained per 5100.77.

170th Military police company falls under the 6th MP Group. [Page 15 shows us what was known in 2002; 170th Military Company, because it falls under 6th Group has a direct line to JCS and NSC.]

This company is responsible for keeping commanders informed of sensitive issues. This is part of the Army CID.

Small problem. CID is like any investigative agency and has counterparts that report directly to the Joint Staff and Congress.

By 2002, 6th Group was already briefing the Joint Staff on both troop morale, readiness, and their counterparts on the Congressional Committees.

It remains to be understood why the Congressional Committees when, upon hearing of the information from the Legislative Liasions in DoD, did not press for more oversight of the issue.

Here is a copy of a CID-like report [from 2004] that Congress and the Joint Staff could have reviewed in the wake of the 2002 revelations.

Where's this complete CID report from 6th Group?

Who read it?

Where is it currently reatined?

Why is it not released with the FOIA?

Who in Congress reviewed it?

Who on the Joint Staff read it?

What method was used to summarize this report for the Commander in Chief prior to the decision to go to war, as referenced in the MI6 memo?

Confirmation

Let's take a look at another document Here. Notice para 3) -- It mentions the Joint Chiefs of Staff Review Board. This confirms that sometime between the initial 170th MP Company CID report earlier in 2002, that the Joint Chiefs had a subsequent meeting.

Also, para 1) confirms that DoJ, FBI, and DHS were also aware in 2002. Meaning: Why did it take so long after 2002 initial findings of problems for SecDef in 2003 to issue guidance on 5100.77?

Iraq Invasion plans

Keep in mind by the summer of 2002, the MI6 memo had already confirmed that the decision to go to war had already been made.

At the same time, Congress was getting briefed by the Commander in Chief that the troops "had what they needed".

Small problem. Despite CID's cross talks with both the Joint Staff and Congress, there was no effort made to ensure the lessons learned were crossflowed.

Army and DoD are suggesting that there was no reporting requirement. Yet, recall the Ft Leavenworth review of the Afghanistan operations. This was a sensitive report.

Going forward, it is absurd for CID to be at interviews of problems with detainees, yet the Commander in Chief was already spinning up the country for a in * invasion.

Despite learning from CID at Guantanamo in 2002 that there were problems with detainees, later reports from Iraq clearly show that the policies had not changed:

Troops were instructed to treat the Iraqi prisoners as terrorists;

Yet, despite the requirements under 5100.77 to comply with Geneva, the lessons from 6th Group didn't translate into any lessons.

We now know, despite the problems with abuse in Guantanamo, there was no effort by the Joint Staff or the Commander in Chief to ensure personnel assigned to Abu Ghraib conducted their affairs in a manner consistent with the rules of law.

Recall, the President's memo dated 2003 sets the timeline of what was supposed to happen.

Yet, by 2004, the abuse continued.

The President was in a position to know; he was told about the problems going on at Guantanamo; and at the same time Congress through CID was also aware of the problem.

What pressure was put on Congress not to look into the matter?

Why was Congress told that the Geneva Conventions didn't apply in 2004, despite the president stating in 2003 that they did?

Why, despite the CID's review in 2002 at Guantanamo that there were problems, were these lessons not then incorporated by the Commander in Chief into the reports to Congress on military readiness, compliance with Congressional rules, and on the readiness of US forces to fight in Iraq?

We see no evidence before us to suggest the Pentagon correctly reported to Congress the lessons learned; nor did the Commander in Chief timely report the violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Again, the Commander in Chief of the Armed forces stated in 2003 that Geneva applied; SEC DEF in 2004 also stated that 5100.77 applied; yet CID and NCIS both report that the commanders had a policy contrary to those memos.

This is not just a discipline problem within the military. It is a deliberate obfuscation of the requirement to comply with the Geneva Convention.

Despite a clear duty to ensure the laws of the land were followed, the President violated Article VI of the Constitution in not ensuring that the Geneva Conventions were enforced.

Where was Congress?

Why didn't Congress timely act on the information from 6th Group?

Why didn't the Commander in Chief swiftly move to ensure that troops were trained per 5100.77 to Comply with Geneva?

Why did the Commander in Chief certify to Congress that the troops were ready to wage war?

Why weren't the lessons learned from the 2002 CID visits to Guantanamo crossflowed through Joint Staff into the Army's national training center?

The laws were clear. They were republished in 1998. Both the President and the Secretary of Defense have a major problem. Their own CID in 2002 told them directly that there was a problem. Even the information from Ft Leavenworth shows that the reports received alot of attention.

How convenient that the president, when faced with allegations of war crimes suddenly can't remember key meetings and memos. Strange that the CID reports issued to Congress are suddenly vague.

Yet, here we have the Ft Leavenworth reports showing us clearly what was going on in Afghanistan.

Let's hope that the Commander in Chief and SECDEF haven't deliberately classified information in order to obstruct justice.

These are no longer political decisions. These are matters of criminal law.

Stickers here: