<< and they were the ones the interragators were SURE had important information>>
I'm afraid you misunderstood what "came up" under that testimony. Maybe this will clarify for you:
Excerpt (whole article at URL below):
The Iraqi prisoners were divided into two main categories: common criminals and "MI Hold," military shorthand for those designated as potential sources of intelligence information.
The MI Hold section, where it is believed many of the naked and abused Iraqis were photographed, was subdivided into two camps, Camp Vigilant and Isolation.
Procedure dictated that prisoners in MI Hold had to be interrogated at least three times before being released, though the soldiers interviewed for this article said they quickly determined that *at least 25 percent* of those locked in this section had done nothing wrong and *even fewer* were of any intelligence value.
rense.com
I've seen no claims that al Qaeda operatives (fyi, al Qaeda was the group responsible for the murder of 3,000 innocents, mostly Americans, on 9/11), were among those tortured by us. Have you, JDN?
Al Qaeda is now predictably exploiting what happened at Abu Ghraib. I suppose they're not only using Iraq as a organizational base now, but as a fertile arena for new recruitment.
Poor Nick Berg. His poor family.
boston.com
nzherald.co.nz
JDN, do you feel that our operation in Iraq has weakened al Qaeda and lessened the Islamofascist threat to America? |
