Abu Ghraib, again...

As the anniversary of the misdeeds at Abu Ghraib has passed, there are a few things interesting to note:

Chrenkoff points out http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2005/04/reason-why-democrats-lost-election.html that Ted Kennedy had no comment on the the second anniversary of the start of the liberation of Iraq (March 19th). Kennedy had no comment on April 9th, the second anniversary of the fall of Baghdad and Saddam's evil regime.

But boy oh boy, did he have a lot to say on April 26th http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/03/2005426703.html in a "STATEMENT BY SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY ON ANNIVERSARY OF ABU GHRAIB SCANDAL " which reads like a S&M fantasy:

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.
These images are seared into our collective memory...

Kennedy is a sick man - how we've responded as a nation??? Sorry, Ted, those were not choirboys in that prison; they were insurgents, involved in the killing American soldiers - that's what seared into my memory, that and watching the Towers fall from my office on 9/11. That doesn't matter to Ted; he cannot bring himself to mention the dead American soldiers who are fighting for freedom in the Middle East; and according to LGF, http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=15630_Kennedy-_Torture_Torture_Torture&only=yes Teddy K. figures out a way to use the " T " word 38 times. Sorry, fat man, your liberal guilt is powerless against us! I cannot/will not shed crocodile tears for the incacerated terrorists; they weren't in Abu Ghraib (or Gitmo) for jaywalking...
Follow the links above; read 'em all...

And related, I loved this Reuters article
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=3&u=/nm/20050427/ts_nm/rights_iraq_dc, quoting the unbaised Human Rights Watch claiming Abu Ghraib was only the "tip of the iceberg". Check it out:

The group said it was concerned the United States had not stopped the use of what it called illegal coercive interrogation.

Illegal? Since when did Human Rights Watch start writing laws? Did the Democrats somehow sneak back into power?

Update 1028PM: Oh, lookie here, PBS has joined the fun: PBS' 'Now' Visits Guantanamo Prison
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/04/27/entertainment/e140235D87.DTL .

"I remember the box, the pipes, even the two wires," Haj Ali says...

Another liberal S&M love story ? Yes, between a terrorist and PBS:

Then mayor of a Baghdad suburb and a member of the ruling Baath Party, he was snatched off the street in late 2003 and transported to the prison, despite denying involvement in the insurgency. During his almost three months at Abu Ghraib, Ali's family had no idea where he was.

OK, so according to PBS, if a Baathist Bagdad Mayor denies involvement in his own insurgency, we should TAKE HIM AT HIS WORD!

1- that's why PBS and its ilk don't run the country; 2- I hope he had a pleasent stay...