A Cockeyed Kennedy Perspective

With the one-year anniversary of the Abu Ghraib scandal that gave liberals a hammer to hit President Bush with before and after the election, ethics-challenged Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy added his voice via a lengthy statement. Now while I go through some of this drivel, especially his reference to water torture, don’t forget his willingness to let a woman drown in his car so he could escape and get his story straight a few hours later.

The images of cruelty, and perversion are still difficult to look at a year later. An Iraqi prisoner in a dark hood and cape, standing on a cardboard box with electrodes attached to his body. Naked men forced to simulate sex acts on each other. The corpse of a man who had been beaten to death, lying in ice, next to soldiers smiling and giving a “thumbs up” sign. A pool of blood from the wounds of a naked, defenseless prisoner attacked by a military dog.

Now while no sane person condones prisoner abuse, I still await Senator Kennedy’s statement to al Qaeda as they kidnap civilians, detain them for weeks while forcing to make statements against their own nations, just to cut their heads off with large kitchen knives while awake. He may have said a couple of sentences here and there over the years, but I don’t recall him devoting 3,600-plus words to the issue.

Where are we a year later? Has this problem been resolved? Has the moral authority of the U.S. been restored? Have we recovered from what is perhaps the steepest and deepest fall from grace in our history?

It was clear from the start that further investigation of the abuses was needed. The American people deserved a thorough review of all detention and interrogation policies used by military and intelligence personnel abroad, and a full accounting of all officials responsible for the policies that allowed the abuses to take place.

What we got instead were nine incomplete and self-serving internal investigations by the Pentagon. None of the assigned investigators were given the authority to challenge the conduct of the civilian command. For example, the Schlesinger Panel’s report found that abuses were “widespread” and that there was “both institutional and personal responsibility at higher levels,” but Secretary Rumsfeld did not authorize the panel to address matters of personal accountability.

Something the senator doesn’t seem to understand in his sheltered world of privilege and influence, is that our troops spend almost every waking action in Iraq searching for some unexploded ordinance waiting to kill their fellow soldiers and innocent civilians. The very people who Kennedy is protecting may be someone who planted a bomb, shot a soldier, tortured or raped a civilian, yet extracting information in war demands our side only observe “rules”.

Should you get the opportunity to hear the gurgling and sound of a knife cutting through the neck bones of a hostage, remember that we should treat anyone with information as to the whereabouts of another hostage with civility. Should a prisoner know of an impending terrorist bomb going off in a major metropolitan city anywhere around the world, we should observe the prisoner’s human rights and strive to protect his dignity.

If there was evidence that he was being targeted by al Qaeda, does anyone think that Senator Kennedy would object to a suspect with information to be interrogated with the greatest violence necessary? He would be the first person looking to bestow the nation’s highest honor on any person who used torture to save him and his family.

A year after Abu Ghraib, new revelations about abuse committed by U.S. personnel are still being reported frequently. The military has confirmed 28 acts of homicide committed against detainees in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002. Only one of these deaths took place at Abu Ghraib.

Again not condoning the actions of personnel who are clearly in violation of the law, has there been any stories dug up by Mary Mapes-types about prisoner abuse during the Haiti invasion under President Clinton? Any outrage of this magnitude when Bill’s cruise missile strikes killed countless civilians in Iraq, Mogadishu, and Bosnia? I only say “countless” because it seems the mainstream media, Amnesty International, Bono, and war protesters lose their math skills when a Democrat pulls the trigger.

Clearly, the civilian lawyers in the Defense Department, the Justice Department, and the White House Counsel’s office have been on an ideological mission. Their goal was not to reassess the current rules on detention and interrogation in light of the 9/11 attacks; their goal was to destroy them, and to a large extent, they succeeded.

Liberals were more than willing to forgive and forget what they would consider war crimes when John Kerry was the alleged perpetrator. Kerry’s own words of his actions were considered youthful indiscretions. Now these same people have the audacity to criticize the motives of people whose job it is to make sure all the Kennedys are safe and secure.

It was one thing when observing Geneva Convention rules to extract information pertinent to a war zone. But as 9/11 illustrated, terrorists will kill civilians by the thousands if left to their own devices. Being nice and respectful of the human rights of animals who would see the United States and our allies reduced to a smoldering wasteland is naïve and dangerous.

I’m still waiting for the lengthy statement from Kennedy denouncing the terrorists and their penchant for torture and mass murder.

The President has directed the military to treat detainees “humanely,” but this directive has not provided adequate guidance to our troops. General Counsel Haynes himself advised Secretary Rumsfeld that simulated drowning, forced nudity, the use of dogs to create stress, threats to kill a detainee’s family, and other extreme tactics all qualified as “humane.” When the Pentagon’s top civilian lawyer shows so little respect for human dignity, how can we expect more from our soldiers serving in the field?

This from a Kennedy who let a woman drown in his car while he fled, and has a relative who may well have beaten a young woman to death and for most of his life gotten away with it, just because he essentially is a Kennedy.

If another 9/11 happens and it turns out we had a suspect with knowledge of the plot on American soil and we didn’t do all we could have to save lives, Kennedy would be complaining about Bush Administration incompetence. He’d be blaming the president for not doing enough to save civilian lives. But as the Abu Ghraib prisoners mostly targeted American military personnel and Iraqis, Kennedy probably believes that extracting such important information could have been done simply by asking nicely.

The scandal directly endangers U.S. soldiers and U.S. civilians abroad. We no longer demand that those we capture in the war on terrorism be treated as we treat prisoners of other wars. What will we say to a country that justifies its torture of a U.S. soldier by citing our support for such treatment? How we can we hold other nations accountable for their own human rights violations, when we continue to hold prisoners for years, without charging them or convicting them of anything?

Using Kennedy’s “logic”, the car bombings and beheadings would not be taking place if not for the prisoner abuse scandal. If we just treated the terrorist prisoners with a little more respect, they would be happy to let Iraq become the democracy it deserves to be.

With all due respect to Senator Kennedy, it’s people on your side in the media who continue to this day to refer to our liberation of Iraq as an “occupation”. It is the very people at CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Democracy Now!, whose words and stories mirror those previously presented by al Jazeera.

As I’ve said in previous columns, I’d be willing to bet that the rank-in-file American soldier in Iraq would much rather be home barbecuing and watching the NBA Playoffs rather than being in a country where one never knows what’s behind those open arms. If this whole thing was about oil as liberals always contend, why didn’t we just annex Kuwait after we liberated her from Iraq in the early 90’s?

Because we are not as evil as Senator Kennedy assumes we are under Republican administrations. He has no problem with people being blown to smithereens by Democrats, and has yet to call for an investigation for the hundreds of wartime civilian deaths under Presidents Johnson, Carter, and Clinton.

About the Writer: Bob Parks is a versatile writer, activist, and political campaigner, who currently resides in Boston.

Nancy Pelosi doesn't have the power she'd like to have, and I hope never will. She would be last person that any of us would want see running the House of Representatives. Ms. Pelosi, along with about 57 other House members are devout card carrying socialists! What's troubling, is the rest of the House DumboRats voted her in as their leader! Anyway, good conversation Gidget7. I knew I'd raise a voice or two with my comments!

Americans living in blue states are suffering. If not they will be! Comparatively, and legislatively, California and Taxachussets politically mirror each other. Arnold has an awesome job to do. I don't believe he's going to make it. The task is just to overwhelming, plus the state legislature are so far left, their falling off the planet. Plus, the state reserves were looted of about 35 billion by the last Dem administration.

the nitwits from that state that keep voting him in

They must all be wealthy liberals up there and they like all that he 'gets' for the state.

His Boston Project went on for umteen years and cost many millions more than he originally said it would.

Good evening Potlatch...

Teddy's Boston dig ran several billions over budget. One of the main on-going problems with it is, the tunnel is continuously leaking large amounts of water. Also, it's been noted as being an engineering nightmare that may never end. But, the Chappaquiddick Kid got the money to waste on it.

Water leak inside Tunnel: Gridlock ensued when water began leaking into the northbound lanes of the tunnel, at one of its deepest points, just north of South Station at about 1:45 p.m. Wednesday. The tunnel carries Interstate 93 through the city. The water resulted in two lanes of the tunnel being closed to traffic underneath downtown Boston, shortly before the evening rush hour was to begin. Sibley explained that an eight-inch pocket of clay mixture in the tunnel walls was likely to blame for the leak. Water found its way into the pocket, and the high pressure at the tunnel's extreme depth -- 110 feet below the earth -- likely resulted in the leak, he said. Sibley said the leak, which occured in a portion of the wall which has been in place for 10 years, posed absolutely no structural threat to the tunnel itself.

"With all due respect to senator kennedy.."
That's a good one! Imagine that fat, alcoholic killer being due any respect!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.