Joe Darby, the reluctant Abu Ghraib whistleblower was interviewed on 60 minutes last night. He placed his life in pearl for reporting the Abu Ghraib crimes. His unit hates him, most of the military hates him. Darby was assured that his name would be kept anonymous. Then Rumsfeld at the congressional hearing said "There are many who did their duty professionally and we should mention that as well. First, Specialist Joseph Darby, who alerted appropriate authorities that abuses were occurring". Darby was still serving in Iraq with his unit when Rumsfeld outed him. He was fearful for his life from his fellow G.I.s. Was this just another blunder on Rumsfeld part or was it the Whitehouse's way of payback for whistleblowing?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/07/60minutes/main2238188.shtml
2006-12-11 07:06:04 · 9 answers · asked by Do You See What Happens Larry? 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
1a1mikegolf:
1. Darby didn't witness the crimes so he isn't an accusor. He just reported the pictures that were taken.
2. So since this was featured on 60 minutes, you don't believe Abu Ghraib happened? You don't believe Rumfeld mentioned his name to Congress. Do you refuse to believe that the military hate Joe Darby and that he has been threaten because it was reported on 60 minutes? How's that sand that you have your head in?
2006-12-11 07:26:31 · update #1
Of course Rummy did it intentionally. After all, he was part of the Bush Administration, who also outed a clantestine CIA operative to the enemy during a time of war, thus aiding and abetting the enemy cause. Its how Republicans play politics with people's lives, just like the politics being played with countless GIs dying over in Iraq today...
2006-12-11 07:11:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Joe Darby
2016-09-29 22:12:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all there was no way that his name could have been kept secret. Remember that the US Constitution requires that an accused be allowed to confront his accuser.
Second of all - claims that 'most of the military hates him' are hysterical. He is being used as an example of the 'soldier who did the right thing' when basic trainees are taught the US Army core values.
I would take anything you see on 60 Minutes with a grain of salt - they are after ratings, not truth.
2006-12-11 07:16:44 · answer #3 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Of course! Don't believe for a second that someone as powerful as Rumsfeld makes any public "blunders". It was calculated to have a specific effect, and it worked.
2006-12-11 07:14:42 · answer #4 · answered by 12879 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Part of their payback. They do crap like this to anyone who dares paint them in a bad light or disagree with them. That people cant see this is just odd.
2006-12-11 07:12:09 · answer #5 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No, it was just a slip up. Human beings sometimes do that.
2006-12-11 07:09:07 · answer #6 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
SNITCHES GET STITCHES. THAT'S AN OLD ARMY SAYING.
2006-12-11 07:16:52 · answer #7 · answered by strike_eagle29 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
they got away with it with Valerie Plame, they probably think they can get away with it again. And they might. And i don't believe either time was on accident.
2006-12-11 07:08:50 · answer #8 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋
reported you ractistst!
2006-12-11 07:07:41 · answer #9 · answered by BlacK KnucKles 1 · 2⤊ 5⤋