Senator Teddy Kennedy gave a speach yestorday on the first anniversery of the Media's first salvo of Abu Ghraib pictures. One year ago, Kennedy, giddy at the oportunity to accuse someone other than a Kennedy of rape, torture or potentially drowning innocent people, Kennedy led a full out assault on the military, the intellegence organizations and the President.
Regardless of the fact that the military had already become aware of the activities at the Abu Ghraib facility, and regardless of the fact that they were already investigating the situation and releaving those in charge of the facility, the Left and thier partners in propaganda (the media) went public with the pictures and stories of torture in an attempt to swing voters away from the military and the issue of the War on Terror and undermine the President's campaign for re-election.
What they did though was hand over a TON of propaganda to the terrorists and to the media outlets that help fuel the hatred of America in the middle east. By trying to regain power, the Demo-commies actively gave the enemies of this nation more ammunition to use against us in thier campaign destroy us.
Here is a trimmed down transcript of the speach by Senator Kennedy along with my commentary.
Happy Abu Ghraib Day to everyone!
The sad anniversary of the Abu Ghraib torture scandal is now upon us. It's an appropriate time to reflect on how well we've responded as a nation.
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.
Even Harder to look at are the the images of innocent contractors working at rebuilding a war torn Iraq being Killed, torched, dragged through the streets and hung from a bridge in front of a croud of chanting barbarians.
Even harder still are the images and videos of the barbaric terrorists beheading and killing people who were either helping rebuild the country or reporting on the news in Iraq.
Warning: Graphic footage and images - Armstrong killing, Pakistani captives beheaded, Korean Hostage killing, Nick Berg beheading, Paul Johnson beheading, the Nepalese killings, Guiliana Sgrena, etc.
Oh, wait, we were never shown those images in the media because it might have helped the American people understand just what it is that we are fighting.
These images are seared into our collective memory. The reports of widespread abuse by U.S. personnel were initially met with disbelief, then incomprehension. They stand in sharp contrast to the values America has always stood for-our belief in the dignity and worth of all people-our unequivocal stance against torture and abuse -- our commitment to the rule of law. The images horrified us and severely damaged our reputation in the Middle East and around the world.
On December 4, 2003, President Bush had proclaimed to the world that the capture of Saddam Hussein brought "further assurance that the torture chambers and the secret police are gone forever." The photos of Abu Ghraib made all too clear that torture continued in occupied Iraq.
No Senator Kennedy, the torture chambers, rape rooms, and mass graves of Saddam Hussein are closed forever. How can you compair the images of Abu Ghraib to the systematic torture and rape of innocent Iraqi civilians? What does that horrid image of the Hooded terrorist have in common with the practice of forcing parents to watch thier children brutally raped and then killed before they themselves are killed?
Stories like that were the Standard Operating Proceedure in Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
One story that came out told of a family that was taken in for the crime of speaking out against Hussein's regime. The mother was hung naked from the celing upside down and raped while the father was forced to watch. After this rape, the woman's genetals were electrocuted and burned while the guards brutally raped the young daughter, all in front of the father.
When they were finally done mutilating the mother and taking turns raping the young doughter, they turned to the father and told him that he would have to decide which would die and they would be let go.
The father made a decision that I cannot even fathom making and they killed the daughter. Then they turned to the mother and killer her, and then finally, they killed the father.
How does stacking terrorists into naked pyramids to embarass them compare to that?
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?
Sadly, the answer is no, because at every opportunity, the Administration has tried to minimize the problem and avoid responsibility for it.
Is the Administration responsible for the actions of a few bad people in the military? Is the administration responsible for the actions of a few dosen people who were placed in a horrible situation? Of course not. It's been established that the administration had not issued and order to torture anyone.
The tone was set at the very start. Senior-level military commanders knew about the problems much earlier. They knew about Abu Ghraib photos as early as January 2004. General Taguba submitted his scathing report on February 26th. Yet rather than deal with the problem honestly, Pentagon officials persuaded CBS News to delay its report while they developed a damage-control plan.
The plan included an effort to minimize the abuse as the work of "a few bad apples"-all conveniently lower-rank soldiers-in a desperate effort to emphasize the role of senior military officials in exposing the scandal and insulate the civilian leadership from responsibility.
The thing is that the military was investigating the incident and putting a plan into action to deal with the people who were participating in the activities at the facility as well as looking into and dealing with the rumors of "wide spread" torture.
It was the media that wouldn't wait until the investigation was done or until the benefit of the doubt could be established. They times the assault so that any investigation would be completed AFTER the damage had been done, thus giving us the following tyraid by Senator Kennedy:
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.
The assigned investigators were also denied the cooperation of the C.I.A., which had a central role in the torture scandal. General Fay found that C.I.A. practices led to "a loss of accountability, abuse" and "poisoned the atmosphere at Abu Ghraib." His efforts to fully uncover the agency's role, however, were stymied by their refusal to respond to his requests for information. Indeed, no investigation, Congressional or otherwise, has gotten full cooperation from the C.I.A.
I wonder why. The C.I.A. is tasked with doing the things that they have to to protect this nation and it's interests. If that means they play a few college frat initiation pranks on terrorists to get them to give up the ghost, then that's what they have to do to protect us.
If that means pressuring killers, terrorists, or militants with mild forms of persuasion, then I say "make it so."
In May 2004, General Sanchez categorically denied to the Senate Armed Services Committee that he had approved the use of sleep deprivation, excessive noise, and intimidation by guard dogs as interrogation techniques in Iraq. A memorandum uncovered last month by the ACLU, however, showed that he had in fact approved the use of these techniques.
OH NO! We didn't let terrorists sleep! How evil of us! OH NO! We yelled really loud at them and played loud music to keep them awake! How could we? OH NO! We let guard dogs intimidate terrorists! Who trained these dogs!
This is crazy. We're being told that we can't use ANY measure or intimidation, humiliation or persuasive questioning to get information from terrorists and that they deserve representation in a court of law. No, terrorists deserve a swift kick in the balls and a bullet in the head. They're LUCKY that WE got ahold of them and not some of these other countries did...
The Church Report, released last month, rejected any connection between the official interrogation policies in Iraq and the abuses that occurred. The Fay Report, by contrast, blamed the abuses at Abu Ghraib on a number of "systemic problems" that included "inadequate interrogation doctrine and training" and "the lack of clear interrogation policy for the Iraq Campaign."
Imagine that. A federal beauracracy resulted in conflicting reports.
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.
The Red Cross has documented scores of abuses at U.S. facilities across Iraq and Afghanistan and at the naval base at Guantanamo.
F.B.I. agents have reported "torture techniques" at Guantanamo, including techniques that senior Pentagon officials had specifically denied were being used.
Top officials in the Administration have endorsed interrogation methods that we've condemned in other countries, including binding prisoners in painful "stress" positions, threatening them with dogs, extended sleep deprivation, and simulated drownings.
I always find it humorous when Senator Kennedy gets on a soap-box about water-boarding. The Idea of the technique is that the prisoner is made to believe he is going to drown and is actually never in ANY danger because medical professionals are there to make sure that no-one really gets hurt.
But what's really runny about Kennedy's attacks on the practice of water-boarding is that he himself was involved in the drowning death of Mary Jo Kopechue at Chappaquiddick.
The Administration has also increased the practice of "rendering" detainees to countries like Syria, Egypt, and Jordan -- countries that the State Department condemned in its most recent human rights reports because of their use of torture. The practice of "rendition" -- described by a former C.I.A. official as "finding someone else to do your dirty work" -- is a clear violation of our treaty obligations under the Convention Against Torture.
Yet, political leaders made a deliberate decision to throw out the well-established legal framework that has long made America the gold standard for human rights throughout the world. The Administration left our soldiers, case officers, and intelligence agents in a fog of ambiguity. They were told to "take the gloves off" without knowing what the limits were.
They redefined torture so narrowly as to be meaningless.
They reinterpreted our treaty obligations in order to authorize the C.I.A. to engage in cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, to remove "protected persons" from Iraq for interrogation, and to "render" persons to countries known to practice torture.
As Secretary of State Colin Powell warned the White House, "It will reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice in supporting the Geneva Conventions and undermine the protections of the law of war for our troops." Senior Defense officials were warned that changing the rules could lead to so-called "force drift," in which, without clearer guidance, the level of force applied to an uncooperative detainee might well result in torture.
Our men and women in the military are still not clear whether and to what extent they should consider themselves bound by the Convention Against Torture, the federal law prohibiting torture, or even the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice that prohibit torture and cruel treatment. The basic validity of the military's "golden rule" -- treat captured enemy forces as we would want our own prisoners of war to be treated -- is in doubt.
Now wait a minute here. Earth to Senator Kennedy. Terrorists, foreign militants and mercinaries are not covered at all by the Geneva Conventions. Only the uniformed soldiers of armies that are at war are bound to abide by the Geneva Convention.
Our prisoners are being executed and beheaded. You're crying about a few naked frat-prank photos and stupid stuff like loud music and naked pyramids. Our boys and girls out there are being tortured, raped, and executed. Where is the outrage at the conduct of the enemy.
I'm not saying "They did it to us, so now we're going to do it to them." I'm saying that comparitively, these terrorists and militants are receiving far better treatment than our citizens and soldiers are receiving at the hand of these barbarians with whom we are at war.
But hand-cuffing our military soldiers and intellegence officials does nothing but provide some leverage for our enemies to use against us. They scream about oppression and torture while decapitating people.
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?
The torture scandal is not going away on its own. Our nation will continue to be harmed by the reports of abuse of detainees in U.S. custody, the failure by top officials to take action, and the abandonment of our basic rules and traditions on human rights.
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?
Well, Mr. Kennedy, this isn't like the other wars we've fought. This is a war against international terrorists and the nations that harbor them. In cases were we are fighting the actual army of a country, the U.S. Military treats all captured soldiers in a manner consistant with the Geneva Conventions. However, when we catch terrorists planting car-bombs and plotting ambushes in the city streets, we have to treat them differently. By the very nature of thier participation in the War, they are illegal combatants who are un-protected by the Geneva Conventions.
The nation's standing as a leader on human rights and respect for the rule of law has been severely undermined.
Yeah, by the media and by the Leftists that sought to bring this scandal to the public long before the investigation that had already begun was allowed to be completed. Our media gave Al Jezeera the images that it used to further attack our nation and plant more seeds of hatred in a community that already seeks our destruction.
We must not allow inaction to undermine two bedrock principles of human rights law that we worked hard to establish at Nuremberg: that higher officials cannot escape command responsibility and lower officials cannot excuse their actions by claiming that they were "just following orders."
First, we must acknowledge that the rule of law is not a luxury to be abandoned in time of war, or bent or circumvented at the whim and convenience of the White House. It is a fundamental safeguard in our democracy and a continuing source of our country's strength throughout the world.
Sadly, a recent National Defense Strategy policy contained this remarkable statement: "Our strength as a nation state will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak using international fora, judicial processes, and terrorism." Who could have imagined that our government would ever describe "judicial processes" as a challenge to our national security-much less mention it in the same breath as terrorism? Such statements do not reflect traditional conservative values, and they are clearly inconsistent with the ideals that America has always stood for here and around the world.
You mean sorta like mentioning our officials in the same breath as making a comparison to the Nazi war crimes trials in Nuremberg?
In REALITY, something which Senator Kennedy is unaware appearently, Liberals and enemies of this nation ARE using the courts to find ways to undermine the War on Terror. There are lawyers out there right now trying to free captures illegal combatants that we've captured in Afghanistan or Iraq so they can get back to thier homelands and attack our country or soldiers in the field again.
Lawyers are suing on behalf of terrorists who were caught in the act of attempting to blow up airliners with Bombs built into thier shoes, who've been captured on the battlefield shooting at American soldiers with AK-47s, and who've been caught funnling money into terrorist coffers.
So the statement is correct Mr. Kennedy.
Second, we must acknowledge and apply the broad consensus that exists against torture and inhumane treatment.
Never before has torture been a Republican versus Democrat issue. Instead, it's always been an issue of broad consensus and ideals, reflecting the fundamental values of the nation, and the ideals of the world.
9/11 didn't nullify this consensus. We did not resolve as a nation to set aside our values and the Constitution after those vicious attacks. We did not decide as a nation to stoop to the level of the terrorists, and those who did deserve to be held fully accountable
Americans continue to be united in the belief that an essential part of winning the war on terrorism and protecting the country for the future is safeguarding the ideals and values that America stands for at home and around the world.
Finally, to implement these values, we need a full and independent investigation of our current detention, rendition, and interrogation policies, including an honest assessment of what went wrong in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo.
The investigation will require genuine candor and cooperation by all officials and agencies in the Bush Administration, full accountability, a clear statement of respect for human rights, and a plan for protecting those rights throughout the government. Only a truly independent and thorough investigation can restore America's reputation and put us back on the right path to the future.
The challenges we face in the post-9/11 world are obvious, and the stakes are very high. Working together, we have met such challenges before, and I'm confident we can do so again. I urge all of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to join together to protect the rule of law, protect our soldiers serving abroad, and restore America's standing in the world.
If we really want to restore America's standing the world, we need to get rid of the likes of Ted Kennedy...
Recent Comments