INTERROGATIONS OF IRAQIS REQUIRED LESS SENIOR APPROVAL THAN THOSE AT GUANTANAMO

The New York Times is reporting that an investigation into whether the changes in rules for interrogations contributed to the abuse of prisoners is now at the center of the widening scandal:

Three officials familiar with the methods approved for Guantánamo said they appeared to be more restrictive than those promulgated for Iraq. At Guantánamo, methods like extended isolation and putting detainees into "stress positions" require approval from senior Pentagon officials; in Iraq, they need only that of the task force commander.[emphasis mine]
...
According to information from a classified interview with the senior military intelligence officer at Abu Ghraib prison, General Miller's recommendations prompted a shift in the interrogation and detention procedures there. Military intelligence officers were given greater authority in the prison, and military police guards were asked to help gather information about the detainees.

The Bush administration has been repeating ad nauseum that the Geneva Convention rules were suspended for Guantanamo because it was there that Al Qaeda terrorists were being held, and Qaeda operatives are STATELESS. Yet interrogation methods there required higher-up approvals than in Iraq, where detainees were either suspected insurgents (Iraqi people fighting for their own country), suspected foreign fighters, or totally innocent. I suppose you could call the Iraqis stateless too, now that we're there -- there is no Iraqi government, ergo there is no Iraqi state. Wait for the Bushies to make THAT argument in their defense.

But then, Rumsfeld doesn't think they need defending.