[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 71 (Wednesday, May 19, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5741-S5743]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               PENTAGON RESPONSE TO IRAQI PRISONER ABUSE

  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, last week, along with a number of my 
colleagues, I went up into the room on the fourth floor in the Capitol 
where the Defense Department, the State Department, and the CIA come to 
brief us on classified information. I sat in a darkened room where we 
saw a slide show of the photographs that had been taken of Americans 
inflicting abuse on Iraqi prisoners. The pictures were revolting, they 
were disgusting, and they left us all with a sense of outrage that this 
had gone on, outrage that Americans had been involved in anything such 
as this.
  I did not look forward to the experience. Indeed, I made the initial 
decision not to go. Then I decided: No, if I am going to be involved in 
examining what is here, I have to see the evidence, as revolting as it 
may be.
  The sense of outrage that I and my colleagues felt about this was 
shared by all Americans, but in one sector of American society it seems 
to be even greater than anyplace else. There are some in this society 
who might not be able to guess what that sector is. But I would say the 
outrage that has been the strongest has come from those who serve in 
the American military.
  Duty, honor, country--these are the watch words of the American 
military, and they were violated by those who took those actions in the 
prison in Baghdad. They did not do their duty. They dishonored the 
uniforms they wore as they abused those prisoners, and they brought 
disgrace on the country whose Constitution they had taken an oath to 
uphold and defend.
  The sense of outrage is nationwide, but it is particularly focused 
among those who have sworn to uphold duty, honor, and country and saw 
their fellows in uniform violate those principles.
  I rise to discuss this today because today is the first court-martial 
coming as a result of the investigations that have been conducted into 
this activity. This morning in Baghdad, Army SPC Jeremy Sivits pled 
guilty, was convicted, and sentenced to a 1-year imprisonment, 
reduction in rank, and a bad conduct discharge.
  Now, there are those in our society who have less faith in the 
military, who say: These courts-martial are a part of a coverup; this 
is an attempt to gloss over what has happened; one cannot trust the 
military to investigate themselves; and we need a whole series of 
investigations by outside groups.
  I believe the facts are that we will find out more what happened from 
the courts-martial than we would find out from any degree of 
investigation conducted elsewhere. I offer as a demonstration of the 
fact that the military can be trusted to act in matters of this kind 
the following chronology of what has happened with respect to this 
incident.
  We now know that the abuse of the prisoners took place in the last 
quarter of 2003. We do not know the exact dates, but sometime toward 
the end of that year the alleged detainee abuse occurred. On January 
13, 2004, SPC Joseph Darby opened an e-mail thinking he was going to 
see pictures that he described as a travelogue; a history of the 
performance of a particular unit. Instead, what had been downloaded on 
his computer were the photographs that my colleagues and I saw in room 
407 of this building.
  Specialist Darby was absolutely stunned. What did he do? Here were 
his fellow soldiers engaged in activity that was clearly in violation 
of everything he had been taught, people he wanted to feel close with 
and identified with, people who, perhaps, were his friends. What would 
he do? He did his duty, and he provided a CD of the abuse photos to the 
Army Criminal Investigation Command, or the CID, on January 13, 2004. 
On January 14, the CID began its investigation--no attempt to cover up. 
No attempt to hide or turn away from the fact that there was a 
potential difficulty. They began the next day, and they notified people 
up the chain of command of what they were doing.
  On January 16, just 2 days later, Brigadier General Kimmitt announced 
that there would be an investigation by

[[Page S5742]]

Central Command. It had gone up all that way, that quickly. In just 3 
days they were at the top levels of Central Command.
  Two days after that, BG Janis Karpinski, who was the commander at Abu 
Ghraib prison, was admonished and suspended from her command. She was 
relieved just 2 days after this reached the attention of Central 
Command.
  Additionally, the Abu Ghraib chain of command was suspended, from the 
battalion commander, a lieutenant colonel, all the way down. Just 2 
days after this was brought to the attention of Central Command, the 
entire group was relieved.
  Now, on January 19, a combined joint task force requested that 
Central Command appoint an investigating officer, and on January 31, 
Major General Taguba was appointed to conduct the investigation.
  On February 10, the Secretary of the Army tasks the inspector general 
to conduct an analysis of the internment detention policies, practices, 
and procedures. It goes beyond just the prison: Look at the whole Army 
and our procedures to see what can be done to prevent this from 
happening again.
  On March 12, General Taguba completed his investigation and briefed 
the commander of joint task force 7, Lieutenant General Sanchez. Also 
on March 12, Lieutenant General Helmly, who was the commander of the 
U.S. Army Reserve Command, directed that Command's inspector general to 
conduct an assessment of training for Reserve personnel on the issues 
of detainee treatment, ethics, and leadership to see if the training 
had broken down in a way that would cause this to happen. All of this 
was going on--the military acting on its own.
  On March 20, the first charges were preferred against six accused and 
announced by Brigadier General Kimmitt at a press conference. This is 
not something that got discovered by some investigative reporter 
digging in behind the scenes. This was something that was announced by 
the military after they had done a careful examination and moved in a 
way to protect the rights of every individual.

  At that announcement, no names or units were identified so that they 
would not compromise the due process of those who were being accused.
  On April 15, Major General Fay, the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for 
Intelligence, appointed an investigative officer to examine the 
circumstances with respect to the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade. 
That is the group where the commander was relieved within 2 days of 
discovering that there was an allegation of a problem.
  On May 1, Lieutenant General Sanchez issued a memorandum of reprimand 
to six general officers and one letter of admonition to a member of the 
800th Military Police Brigade as recommended by Major General Taguba. 
This is not something that they passed off to the GIs, the sergeants, 
the corporals, and the privates. This is something they took care of at 
the general officer level. Six general officers received a memorandum 
of reprimand. That is a career-ending experience for a general officer.
  Then on May 7, Secretary Rumsfeld announced the independent review 
panel headed by former Defense Secretary Jim Schlessinger, including 
retired Air Force General Chuck Horner, former Representative Tillie 
Fowler, and former Defense Secretary Harold Brown. And then, today, on 
May 19, the first court-martial has taken place and Specialist Sivits 
was found guilty and sentenced.
  The lesson that comes from this list of actions is a lesson that the 
world should heed. The lesson for Iraqis and other nations is that this 
is how democracies handle their problems. This is how Americans face 
the difficulties that arise when there is a breakdown that occurs 
within our military. We do not hide it. We do not pretend it did not 
happen. We do not strive to find excuses. We act in the way consistent 
with the rule of law.
  I hope everyone in the world would recognize the difference between 
the way we have responded to this and the way al-Qaida has responded to 
this. We have responded to it by exercising the rule of law and seeking 
those responsible. They have responded by taking an innocent American 
civilian, who had nothing whatever to do with any of this, and cutting 
off his head, live and in color on international television. That is 
the difference between Americans and al-Qaida when faced with a 
problem.
  So that is the first lesson I hope the world will take from the way 
we are handling this. The lesson that the military should take from 
this is that the rules are there to be obeyed. The lesson that should 
go forward from Specialist Sivits' court-martial, from the six general 
officers who got the memorandum of reprimand and from the 
investigations that are still going forward is that if the rules are 
broken, you end up in Fort Leavenworth. That is the lesson that should 
come out of this for the American military, and I believe it is being 
received there.

  The lesson for the commanders, those who are now responsible and who 
have taken over to replace those who were relieved, is this. It comes 
from a statement by General Eisenhower, who knew something about 
military discipline. He said: ``Areas that are not inspected 
deteriorate.''
  Let's go back to Specialist Sivits for a moment and find out from his 
statements relating to his court-martial what really happened. I am 
quoting now from the Washington Post:

       Sivits told investigators that the abuse would not have 
     happened had higher-ranking members been present. ``Our 
     command would have slammed us,'' he said. ``They believe in 
     doing the right thing. If they saw what was going on, there 
     would be hell to pay.''
       That statement echoes testimony given by one of the initial 
     investigators on the case. During a session similar to a 
     grand jury proceeding, Tyler Pieron, an Army criminal 
     investigator, said the abuses occurred, ``after the chain of 
     command had changed shifts and gone home.''

                           *   *   *   *   *

       Sivits said he did not report the abuse to his commanders 
     because [he was told not to by a friend] ``and I try to be 
     friends with everyone. I see now where trying to be friends 
     with everyone can cost you.''

  I spoke with Secretary Rumsfeld this morning about this lesson, the 
lesson of command. It is fine to change the command, but we must 
examine what caused the problem and change the procedures. Even though 
the rules were there, the procedures broke down. There was not a duty 
officer on duty. We have been told that this abuse took place between 2 
and 4 in the morning when no one was around. I raised with Secretary 
Rumsfeld the importance of seeing to it from now on that the new 
commanders of the prison make sure there is a duty officer there all 
night long.
  Back to Eisenhower's dictum, there should be snap, surprise 
inspections. People in the prisons should never know when someone might 
drop in, unexpected and unannounced, to see what is going on. Secretary 
Rumsfeld concurred. I believe that is the lesson that command should 
receive from this experience, and I believe it is the lesson they will 
learn and they will follow.
  As sorry as this chapter is in our proud military history and as deep 
as this stain has become upon America's honor, it is not the first time 
we have seen such chapters. It is not the first time we have endured 
such stains. I wish I could say it is the last time this will happen, 
but even in this morning's news we are hearing that there are more 
pictures, that it may have been more widespread than we thought. With 
human beings as imperfect as they are, it is inevitable that at some 
point in the future someone else will break the rules, violate his 
oath, and take actions that will cause all Americans to mourn, as we do 
over these actions.
  Given that history, that it has happened before and perhaps will 
happen again, we should remember what we did as a nation when it 
happened before and what we are doing now. We dealt with it. We went 
after those who were responsible, discovered who they were, gave them 
their full due process, but when they were convicted, they were 
punished. They were dealt with. Then we made the changes that were 
necessary to see to it that it wouldn't happen again. Then we got past 
it.
  We have not allowed those past chapters in our history to deter us 
from our destiny as a nation. We should do the same thing now. We are 
in the process of discovering who the guilty are. We are in the process 
of conducting courts- martial. Specialist Sivits is just the first. 
Charges have been proffered against others and additional courts-

[[Page S5743]]

martial will be forthcoming. We are in the process of making the 
changes--not just the change of command but the change in procedures to 
see to it that this will not happen again.

  As we have done in the past, we must get through this and not let it 
deter us from our overall goal of why we are in Iraq. We must not 
fixate on this stain on our honor to the point that we become so 
muscle-bound that we cannot proceed forward in our mission.
  What is our mission? Speakers who have addressed this before me have 
made that clear. Our mission is to provide freedom and security for the 
people of Iraq. I believe that means freedom and security for the 
Middle East generally. I believe that means transforming the world in 
which Americans live and an increase of freedom and security for our 
Nation as well. These are worthy, indeed noble goals, and we must not 
be deterred from seeking them by preoccupation with this particular 
outrage.
  I close with a conversation I had over the weekend. Like many of us 
over the weekend, I went home to Utah and I participated in Armed 
Forces Day. It was a poignant Armed Forces Day for a variety of 
reasons, because many of the people who were there were families of 
those in the military who were there without their family member--that 
is, children, husbands, wives, mothers and fathers of Utahns who are 
serving in this war and who are not home with their families to enjoy 
the delightful spring day at Murray City Park where everyone was having 
a picnic and a good time. Set up in that area was a series of flags, 
one flag for each individual who had fallen in either Iraq or 
Afghanistan. Of course, the majority of flags were American flags, but 
I was struck by the number of British flags, Italian flags, Polish 
flags, Spanish flags--one I did not recognize, an Ukrainian flag, an 
Estonian flag. We are providing the leadership, but many countries in 
the world are responding to us as we launch on this mission.
  On Armed Forces Day I sat next to a colonel. He was not a Utahn; he 
had come to participate in the activities. We visited over lunch. With 
the Army, he has been in Kosovo, he has been in Bosnia, he has been in 
Afghanistan, he has been in Iraq, and he was on his way back to Iraq.
  I said to him: Colonel, tell me what it is like. You have been there, 
you have been on the ground. Tell me what it is like. He gave me an 
answer we hear a lot. Indeed, it was the first sentence out of his 
mouth that comes out the same as many others. He said: Well, things are 
not nearly as bad as the U.S. press would have you believe. Things are 
really going fairly well in many parts of the country. But we have 
problems.
  We talked about some of the problems. He made this observation that I 
think should keep us thoughtful as we address our mission in Iraq. He 
said: You know, whether it is Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, or Iraq, the 
same thing is true: Those people are just like us in that all they want 
is to have their children be able to walk out of the door and be safe 
on the street, to be able to go to school without intimidation and 
learn what they need to learn to get a decent job and live a decent 
life. That is all they want in Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, or Iraq--
just like us. That is what we want in America. To bring that to Iraq 
and give the people of Iraq that opportunity, with their wives and 
their children and their grandchildren, unfortunately requires force of 
arms. Americans, British, Italians, Poles, Spaniards, Ukrainians, 
Estonians, are willing to risk their lives to bring about that goal. We 
must never lose sight of the importance of that mission or of the 
sacrifice that has gone into achieving it. We must never turn back 
simply because there are those who have put a stain on American honor 
by the way they have behaved.

  I pay tribute to the Armed Forces. I pay tribute to the chain of 
command that is dealing with these challenges. I pay tribute to those 
who are willing to face the problems and not back away from them or 
cover them up. We must support them in their efforts. We must not smear 
the entire establishment because of the actions of a few.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bennett). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________