Donald Rumsfeld

A glimmer of hope for this country, or another painful set-back? Time will tell.
In the meantime, it’s cause for cautious hope that Federal Judge Wayne R. Anderson, for the first time in US history, allows a torture suit to proceed against a current or former cabinet official.

Overruling Donald Rumsfeld’s motion to dismiss, the judge has allowed the case against him to go forward:

"The allegations, if true, would substantiate plaintiffs’ claim that Rumsfeld was aware of the direct impact his newly-approved treatment methods were having on detainees in Iraq….a court might plausibly determine that the conditions of confinement were torturous."

In 2005, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, both American citizens, worked in Iraq for Shield Group Security (SGS), an Iraqi security firm. They believed they saw illegal acquisitions and sales of weapons by SGS, as well as payments made by SGS agents to several Iraqi sheikhs.
Vance, a Navy veteran, contacted the FBI during a visit to his hometown, Chicago, and reported his suspicions. The FBI requested that he work with them during an investigation, forwarding information to them from Iraq. Vance and co-worker Nathan Ertel, also reported their concerns to two other US government officials working in Iraq.
On April 14, 2006, armed SGS guards took their identity cards which allowed them to enter the Green Zone. On instructions from their government contacts, Vance and Ertel barricaded themselves in a room until US forces could safely free them.
They were eventually rescued from the SGS compound and taken to the US Embassy. But once there, their laptops and other personal belongings were confiscated, and Vance and Ertel ended up at Camp Cropper. There they were put in solitary confinement and, their attorneys say, tortured for a period of several months, as officials tried to determine what they had told the FBI.
Their attorneys claim Vance and Ertel were made to endure extreme sleep deprivation, blasting music, threats, held in extremely cold cells without adequate clothing or blankets, and denied food and water, as well as being subjected to other serious abuses, for long periods of time. Vance and Ertel hold Rumsfeld responsible for their torture by the US military.

"Plaintiffs…allege that in August 2003 Rumsfeld sent Major Geoffrey Miller to Iraq to review the United States prison system," read Andersen’s decision. "Plaintiffs claim that Rumsfeld informed Major Miller that his mission was to ‘gitmo-ize’ Camp Cropper…. These allegations, if true, would substantiate plaintiffs’ claim that Rumsfeld was aware of the direct impact that his newly approved treatment methods were having on detainees in Iraq. Based on these allegations, we conclude that plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to survive Rumsfeld’s motion to dismiss on account of a lack of personal involvement…. Accepting at this stage that these treatment methods were in fact used, we conclude that a court might plausibly determine that the conditions of confinement were torturous.

Anderson said his decision "represents a recognition that federal officials may not strip citizens of well settled constitutional protections against mistreatment simply because they are located in a tumultuous foreign setting."

The Justice Department is working on behalf of Rumsfeld in the ongoing case, and, according to their spokesman Charles Miller, they are reviewing the court’s decision.
After allegedly being tortured for three months by US interrogators, Vance’s attorney says he was simply dumped near Baghdad Airport, with no explanation or apology.
We have heard so many horrific stories of torture and abuse ordered by the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld cabal, only to see the perpetrators manage to avoid being held accountable for their crimes. As a result, President Obama now feels it’s perfectly acceptable to target US citizens for assassination, and there are credible allegations that torture is still being used by US forces and their allies in Afghanistan.
Since there has been no accountability, we know that habeas corpus can be waived at the flick of a finger, as was the case with Vance and Ertel.
As of now, all that seems to be standing between US citizens and tyranny are the courts. Congress and the Obama administration want to "move forward," and have concluded that goverment officials should not be made to suffer for mere "policy differences," as though the Constitution was designed as a mere suggestion to succeeding generations, not a set of rules to be followed.
Whatever happens with this case, Federal Judge Wayne R. Anderson deserves our thanks for standing up for our civil liberties and for attempting to follow US law regarding the use of torture.