Talk:Janis Karpinski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

I have made two changes:

Karpinski served with Special Forces. No women serve in Special Forces.

A newspaper article described Karpinski as "the only female US commander in Iraq." That is so vague as to be obviously incorrect. FC 02:47, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

---

I don't think the photograph of Karpinski is in the public domain. It looks like it was cropped from a large photo. (zikzak23)

If it's from the government, it can't be copyrighted (the people paid for it, eh?). But it should use the appropriate template to indicate that. ("Zikzak: We make everything you need, and you need everything we make!") DavidConrad 05:45, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 First Jewish Female General in U.S. military history 2 Various deletions 3 Demotion and Abu Ghraib 4 Ordered from on top 5 Cleanup 6 Rape Statements 7 BGEN Karpinski 8 08/MAR/06 Dateline Interview, SBS, Australia

[edit] First Jewish Female General in U.S. military history

How do you know that Karpinski is Jewish? The only other sites that claim this seem to be anti-Semitic sites.

I removed this. The contributor has a history of writing wildly inaccurate articles. It can be re-instated if the contributer gives a reputable source for the statement. DJ Clayworth 18:55, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Various deletions

In 2003, Karpinski served as an unofficial spokesperson for the new Iraqi justice system.

Is there a source for this? As the into sentence for the paragraph I found it in, it looks like a contributor's personal opinion. Better let facts speak for themselves. Or quote someone. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 17:26, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Demotion and Abu Ghraib

Article said demotion was unrelated (?) to prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, but even the liberal CNN seemed to find a direct, cause-and-effect relationship:

President Bush has demoted Army Reserve Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who was in charge of Abu Ghraib during the prison abuse scandal in 2003, after an extensive investigation, the Pentagon said Thursday. Now a colonel, Karpinski was formally relieved of command of the 800th military police brigade last month. [1]

I don't see why else the first two sentences in their article would mention scandal, investigation, demotion and being relieved of command all in one breath, if they were not related. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 17:29, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, maybe I get it:

Brigadier General Karpinski's performance of duty was found to be seriously lacking

This is army code for, "You screwed up royally, but we don't think we could convict you at courtmartial, so all that happens to you is that your career is over; let that be a lesson and warning to others." Once you are relieved of command (and demoted!), that's a clear signal that you are not to be trusted (see "dereliction of duty").

But it's also political code for, "Yeah, we let her off easy." Kind of like a limo driver who's fired by his company after an accident involving a pedestrian - even though police filed no criminal charges. There are two standards:

1. being good enough to hold a command; as opposed to,
2. being so bad as to merit prison time

Karpinski fell into the twilight zone between good enough and too bad. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 17:39, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ordered from on top

Orders from on top are a poor excuse for at least two reasons:

• It is illegal to follow an illegal order. You can't obey it then, and protest it later (when you realize you can't get away with the crime).
• If she or anyone else thought it was a crime at the time, where is the audit trail? The letters home to parents, relatives, congressmen - protesting the illegal orders? (You can also go to chaplain, or even hole up in a chapel and claim sanctuary, I hear - though I'd personally find a secure way to get a message home to civilians who are just as much against crime as I am.)

The only person who seemed to think what was going on was "wrong" was whoever anonymously slipped the disk of digital photos under the investigator's door in January 2004.

And how can you be in command of thousands of soldiers and have no fucking idea what they're up to? Eh?? Gimme a break. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 18:36, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

There are thousands of soldiers and nobody's talking to the commander -- I mean really talking. And when she goes out on walk arounds and inspections there was plenty of "notice" so everything was cleaned up. Haven't you ever been in a large unit where almost everthing is a facade and mission readyness is only in a bunch of reports in file drawers -- not real at all?--TGC55 23:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

What that would be is piss-poor leadership. Either Karpinski DID know what was going on, which was illegal, or she DIDN'T know what was going on under her command, which is dereliction of duty. I can't believe they were as easy on her as they were.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.216.100.250 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 October 2006.

Exactly. A commander is responsible for everything that does or does not happen in their command. If she knew what was going on, she had an obligation to stop it any way she could, to include whistle-blowing. "Working from the inside" to effect change is a BS excuse. If she didn't know what was going on, then it most definately was dereliction of duty. There are ways to see what really goes on in your unit - for example, no-notice inspections, talking to soldiers away from their superiors, etc. Somehow, I suspect Karpinski was the type who relished her role as general and wanted to be treated as such when she visited a unit, so to ensure all the trappings of military protocol, she probably never did drop by unexpectedly, or try to "lower herself" by talking one-on-one with a "lowly" private. The average fire team leader knows those tricks of the trade.--Nobunaga24 01:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

The following statements were deleted due to the questionable veracity of Mr. Hersh's statements. There is no verifiable evidence that his statements are true and should not be included in this article.

In the same period, reporter Seymour Hersh, who helped uncover the scandal, said in a speech before an ACLU convention:

"Some of the worse that happened that you don't know about, ok? Videos, there are women there. Some of you may have read they were passing letters, communications out to their men. The women were passing messages saying 'Please come and kill me, because of what's happened.'

"Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys/children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror it's going to come out."

156.98.187.230 15:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

There seem to be some unwikified cut-and-paste segments in this article, and there's also poor organization around the Abu Ghraib material. It should probably all be under its own section and broken out better. --Dhartung | Talk 19:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

There are two paragraphs that have been quoted from somewhere, but they do not get a proper citation:

<blockquote:The American public needs to understand we're talking about rape and murder here. We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience,’ Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told reporters after Rumsfeld testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee. ’We're talking about rape and murder -- and some very serious charges.

"A report by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba on the abuse at the prison outside Baghdad says videotapes and photographs show naked detainees, and that groups of men were forced to masturbate while being photographed and videotaped. Taguba also found evidence of a ‘male MP guard having sex with a female detainee."

Whoever put this stuff in should be able to insert ahead of the quotation something like: New Amsterdam Times, 31 February 2006: P0M 03:30, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rape Statements

Janis Karpinski has been in the news of late with her testimony that female soldiers in Iraq are dying of dehydration, because they fear getting raped in latrines by male soldiers. It's a shocking charge, and should be addressed here. Is she telling the truth, causing trouble, or just extending her 15 minutes? Who know's yet...

Check this http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/004141.html military blog for references and links. Her testimony is to a group sponsored by Not In Our Name that opposes the war. DesScorp 15:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BGEN Karpinski

I hope you read this General. I've just finished your book "A Women's Army" and I'd like you to know that I'd serve with you as opposed to that idiot Sanchez. There are many of us former veterans who understand the bullshit politicals within the Services. I served with JSOG as a team leader during the Regan Adminstration and Bush (Senior) Adminstration. I'm a former Marine, but my team was combined with Navy Seals, Army Rangers, Air Force Para-rescue. You have the support of more people than you realize. Take Care, SmittyD.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DavidMichaelSmith (talk • contribs) 17:02, 24 February 2006.

[edit] 08/MAR/06 Dateline Interview, SBS, Australia

On the Dateline programme aired on SBS last night (four hours ago), Karpinski stated the following to a question by George Negus:

"GEORGE NEGUS: Janis, you have been attributed with the comment that Donald Rumsfeld ordered the torture that occurred in Abu Ghraib, that is a gigantic call. Are you prepared to stick by that, that it went that high?

JANIS KARPINSKI: Absolutely... When the Secretary of Defence, when General Miller, when General Sanchez when General Taguba, when they testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, they were very careful to say, in response to a question about the photographs, that they knew nothing about the photographs. However, nobody on the Senate Armed Services Committee asked them "Did you know anything about the actions depicted in those photographs?" Because they would have had to give a truthful answer and the answer would have been yes, in fact they authorised the actions depicted in those photographs." The Secretary of Defence authorised it, in conversations with General Miller, his Under-Secretary for Intelligence not only authorised those actions but was staying on top of the progress of those actions and those activities. [2]

If this is of any use, you may want to add it into the article. It was again re-broadcast a couple of hours ago on other Ausralian television networks on their late night news programmes. Al-Andalus 14:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC).