What did they know? When did they care?
Back to the Iraqi Torture Page
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
By Wesley Pruden
Published May 11, 2004What did our important (just ask them) members of Congress know about the abuses at Abu Ghraib Prison, and when did they know it?
Several congresspersons conceded yesterday that they knew about the abuses months ago, sort of, when the Pentagon first put out the news that the abuses were under investigation. But they didn't get excited until they saw the network television technicians arrive on the Hill and start unpacking their cameras.
"A press release from Central Command isn't good enough," sniffs Lara Battles, a spokeswoman for Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri. "The Pentagon communicates with the Hill ... and that did not occur in this instance."
Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, another Democrat, grumps that he doesn't "want to be on notice every time there's a news release." Anyone else could figure out that if he's getting wet it's probably raining, but not our senators. Learning something important from a news conference, Mr. Nelson says, "is not a substitute for congressional notification."
Teddy Kennedy thinks the Pentagon news about abuses at Abu Ghraib Prison was pretty much a hoot, anyway. The "alleged announcements" in January and March, he says, "were laughable in terms of communicating what was happening to Congress." Don Nickles of Oklahoma, a Republican, recalls that a general mentioned something in a briefing, but the abuses didn't make an impression until he saw the photographs in the newspapers and on television.
This is pretty much what the likes of Lindsey Graham and John Warner and Carl Levin said last week when they opened the Senate ring of the congressional circus. So to get it all straight: Congressmen can't bother with the words in newspapers and magazines, but they understand the pictures in a newspaper or magazine. The abuses aren't important; what's important is how Congress gets the word. Congress is the third branch of government, after all, which makes every one of the 535 members of Congress 1/535th of that important one-third, which works out to, hmmmm, well, someone else can do the math. You wouldn't think such little wheels could make so much noise.
A new Annenberg public-opinion poll, completed Sunday and out yesterday, suggests that a majority of Americans think the Pentagon "covered up" the abuses, but nearly seven out of 10 Americans think Donald Rumsfeld should keep his job. This figure is almost identical to the result of an ABC-Washington Post poll completed earlier (which The Post, leading the media frenzy, relegated to Page 12).
There's certainly no cover-up; the Pentagon first revealed the abuses on Jan. 12, in a press release that Congress couldn't bother to read, and followed it up with a March 20 announcement that criminal charges would be brought against six soldiers for "dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, assault and indecent acts with another." But the public is so contemptuous of Washington that it assumes that everything wrong will be covered up.
But if there's no cover-up, there's certainly a congressional sleepover. "For many politicians," Kate O'Beirne observes in National Review Online, "the danger posed to our troops by the photos that fuel a murderous hatred pales in comparison to the offense to their self-importance ... . In the future, military press releases and announcements should probably be accompanied by personal phone calls to John Warner and Joe Biden and to Martin Frost and Christopher Shays. Other congressmen likewise concerned about missing a media opportunity could sign up for a special call list. They need not be bothered unless pictures are involved."
President Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld, having run out of people to apologize to, looked over additional photographs yesterday, and the White House said the president reacted with "deep disgust and disbelief" that anyone who wears the uniform would indulge such behavior. Don Rumsfeld should send videos on to the Hill. The congressmen will think they haven't had such fun since the Elks lodge cut out the blue movies on Saturday night.
Wesley Pruden is editor in chief of The Times.Copyright © 2004 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.
Reply 1 - Posted by: lazytart, 5/11/2004 12:59:01 AM
WOO HOO!
Reply 2 - Posted by: Desert Fox, 5/11/2004 1:02:59 AM
OLD NEWS!
Reply 3 - Posted by: proudvet, 5/11/2004 1:19:50 AM
Might be old news to us tro some, but I'd wager that 8 in 10 people never heard of this. In addition, we need to find out for sure who the malignant 17 are.
Reply 4 - Posted by: Momma Walton, 5/11/2004 1:20:01 AM
Now, back to Gorelick. Don't forget what she and Clintons did!!!!
The press mindlessly distorts everything. They exemplify lies and deny truth. Is that their total expression of news? I sometimes wonder. They are totally worthless in providing something worthwhile to read in this country. If they are so against our president, why don't they move to France, where surely they will be loved!!!! We need true Americans to stand up for the country that gives us the freedom to speak, to write, and now, for us read or listen. Again, they are worthless!!! They are not seeking truth, only an agenda, if executed, would destroy this country as we know it.
We have thrived on peace and prosperity and the media/press is now prophesying distinction by their constant horrors of how terrible we are and in their own stupid way, have uplifted the enemy, the terrorists who came to our country and conducted mass killings. Is that the America we want? Not me!!!!! We must boycott the anti-Americans disguied as newspapermen/TV reporters/anchors. They do not represent US (us). AMEN
Reply 5 - Posted by: wrywrt, 5/11/2004 1:29:06 AM
God Bless these sane writers and their families. Another in your face idiots by Thomas. I would be honored to make his aquainance. (sp)
Reply 6 - Posted by: Sunflower, 5/11/2004 1:37:48 AM
Congress was informed in January of these supposed atrocities. Why didn't they question Sec'y. Rumsfeld then???? Was it to be hillarys' October surprise?????? It is being brought out now, to hide madam jamie Horelicks' sitting on the 9/11 Commission, instead of testifying before it, so as to save herself, and the clintoons, from sedition, treachery, treason. madam Horelicks' Memo Wall kept the CIA from checking the illegal funding from foreigners going to the clintoons, including marc rich. Also, kept information from the CIA going to the FBI that maybe would have alerted our Nation to capture the arabs of 9/11/2001 from bombing the WTC. Stay on these items with your Congressmen daily.
Reply 7 - Posted by: danu, 5/11/2004 1:43:14 AM
our august MC's laughed at the press releases months ago-b/c there were no pictures.
So, we should not believe these goats when they say they read playboy ''for the articles''
STFU and do some real work for a change
Reply 8 - Posted by: Maybeth, 5/11/2004 6:07:49 AM
I wonder lots of things. From another source this morning, we are told that many of these photos depick American soldiers having sex with one another. No details, though. Men with men? Women with women?
....Could all this be the result of the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy?
....Are the prisoner~abuse pics just a cover~up for a pronography ring?
....Are the finger~pointers in Congress screaming loudly to cover their own behinds?
....Where was the outrage when the facts were given to Congress in January? Oh, I get it. There were no cameras then, right?!
....WAS this supposed to be the October surprise and therefore, the leftists and RINOs INTENTIONALLY stayed silent about known facts? THIS ONE should be investigated very, very thoroughly!!!
Reply 9 - Posted by: Oberk, 5/11/2004 6:11:31 AM
Children and folk who cannot read, enjoy/need picture books, esp. the photos in sequence kind...rapid page turning, you know? Jerks are jerks and embarrassing!
Reply 10 - Posted by: nycweboy, 5/11/2004 6:17:34 AM
Issuing a highky generalized one paragraph statement is the mildest of "notifications," especially given what has come out since. I wouldn't call it "covering up" but it does seem as though the Defense Dept. wanted this to go away, quietly, without a lot of fuss, and it's really only the pictures that changed the calculus of that. All of which suggests that this was simply handled badly by people at lower levels who should have realized the enormity of the problem and alerted superiors sooner.
Reply 11 - Posted by: Maybeth, 5/11/2004 6:24:22 AM
I mean 'depict.' I hate it when I have to correct my own text.
Reply 12 - Posted by: gremlin, 5/11/2004 6:59:26 AM
Wes Pruden, as usual, hits the nail squarely on the head with a ten pound sledge hammer.
Last Friday's Senate Committee meeting was packed to the brim with the biggest bunch of blow-hard, know-nothing, fat-brained, big-reared, self-important idiots I've ever witnessed.
Reply 13 - Posted by: scipiotexicanus, 5/11/2004 7:15:44 AM
Congress didn't care until there were photos and more importatly, to show the hypocrisy , we Americans don't give a rat's behind about Americans in American prisons who are abused everyday (by other prisoners mostly). Study after study shows it, the facts on the ground show it, never have and still don't. You know who does care and signed the bill to prove it? President George Bush who signed the first bill of its kind aimed at stopping prison rape. Not Jimmah and not Billy Jack ( who you would have thought would have some concerns for his own rear end with the amount of malfeasance he gets involved in). The manufacture of this whole prison abuse scandal is effort to take the Gorelick and UN scandal off the radar screen. And you know what? It worked.
Reply 14 - Posted by: Tanstaafl, 5/11/2004 7:24:30 AM
''Last Friday's Senate Committee meeting was packed to the brim with the biggest bunch of blow-hard, know-nothing, fat-brained, big-reared, self-important idiots I've ever witnessed.''
And that was just the Senators!
Reply 15 - Posted by: 901AtTheRiver, 5/11/2004 7:32:12 AM
Those Members of Congress got the word long before us poor insignificant taxpayers. Shouldn't that be enough?
Reply 16 - Posted by: Lawsy0, 5/11/2004 7:36:55 AM
The abuses aren't important; what's important is how Congress gets the word. Just proving once again that congresspeople cannot read. And after all that money they allocate to ''edumacation!''
Reply 17 - Posted by: Halfgenius, 5/11/2004 7:46:00 AM
Hmmm...now where's that darn dictionary, I need to look up "Dereliction of duty" once again...maybe I can borrow my congressman's copy...he obviously never uses it!
Reply 18 - Posted by: Sooner, 5/11/2004 7:56:56 AM
Without CBS attempting to up its ratings by publishing the pictures, this would have been a series of unnoticed court marshals which would have expediently met the actions of a few sick individuals. The press has pounced on this as though it were more important than the capture of Sadaam Houssein. And, Seymour Hersh is attemtping to rejuvenate his career by using a stolen document to promulgate the story. Now, the sleeping Congress jumps in with all their alas and alack histrionics as they once more attempt to justify their salaries and huge teams of aides who actually do the real work. I'm remembering the publicity when Bush said he didn't read a bunch of newspapers, and in return for a question about this from a reporter replied, "You think you represent the public, young man. I don't accept that." I suspect on the part of Congress, that they are just too lazy to read the news.
Reply 19 - Posted by: CheckSum, 5/11/2004 7:58:02 AM
We can't expect our Congress persons to follow the news in January. Most of them were too busy running for president.
Reply 20 - Posted by: chatham, 5/11/2004 8:04:41 AM
While watching Ted (Bloviator) Kennedy and John (Keating 5) McCain working over Rumsfeld I couldn't help but think ,If only we had pictures of Mary Jo Kopeckne in the car where Kennedy left her all night.
Was this the same man making such a fuss with the moral Backbone of a Snail berating Rumsfeld who is more important to this country than 5 congresses and at least 5000 ted (Swimmer) Kennedy, who appears to be the bottom of the Gene Pool.
Reply 21 - Posted by: Rumblehog, 5/11/2004 8:29:05 AM
How will Ted Kennedy continue with his rant of a "systemic cover-up" when that camera also held private photos of private's showing their privates?
Don't Ask, Don't Tell?
Reply 22 - Posted by: mrduc, 5/11/2004 8:29:44 AM
Who were the ''17''? Names, please. I am curious as to why it is taking so long for these 17 names to surface. And I'm dying to know how many have a (D) after them.
Reply 23 - Posted by: mulhaven, 5/11/2004 8:34:29 AM
All this fuss from a bunch of goofs who were adoring of the bozo when he had his Surgeon General promote such behavior.
This happens in every prison.
It's only about sex.
It's a private matter.
Can't we all just get along?
Don't ask and don't tell.
Move along.
Reply 24 - Posted by: artlover , 5/11/2004 8:37:22 AM
All of this is SO political. The democrats are just salivating over this whole thing. If they knew about the abuse in Jan., they decided that it would be better to wait to closer to the election to release it.
I still say that SOME democrat (maybe one of those Senators or Congressmen) who made a trip to Iraq, set this whole thing up. They suggested that they could really mess up Bush, if they just staged something like this. I think a democrat would hiest his own mother for a vote. I wouldn't trust them with anything.
Reply 25 - Posted by: richdet, 5/11/2004 8:40:38 AM
Pruden isn't going far enough with his analysis. It's not just a matter of Congress ignoring press releases or print reports (i.e., reports with no pictures). Over the weekend we had a story posted here in which we learned relatives of one of the accused reservists weeks ago contacted 17 members of Congress about the prison abuse charges. And when those 17 members did not get back to them, the reservist's family contacted David Hackworth, who led them to CBS.
A key omission in that story, which was either a NY Times or Washington Post story, was that it didn't report who those 17 congressmen were, which would seem to be a significant detail given the hue and cry during Friday's Senate and House hearings. I can only conclude that most of the 17 were Democrats, or, maybe more likely, that those few Democrats contacted were prominent ones.
Reply 26 - Posted by: SteelBreeze, 5/11/2004 8:40:58 AM
Yes, who are the 17?
What gets me is... There were several in the congress that said to Rummy, if you only would have come to us earlier, we could have helped you.
Oh really - how would they have helped?
Reply 27 - Posted by: Shannon, 5/11/2004 8:41:40 AM
#17 - good post! I wonder if you saw Dana Rorbacher (R, California on Hannity and Colmes last night? He brought up the fact that Ted the Swimmer had no right to castigate Rumsfeld after what he did at Chappaquiddick. I thought Alan was going to have a fit - told Dana that was not right, blah, blah, blah. Dana came right back at him - it was a wonderful moment!! I think more people should shut the fat swimmer up with stating the facts about what he did - a young woman was left to die!! Who isn't outraged by his actions?
Reply 28 - Posted by: OhMy, 5/11/2004 8:44:05 AM
Rush has been pushing the "Don't ask Don't tell" angle on this scandal as well saying - mark my works. He gets lots of emails from the forces over there and so he has the inside story. The church was corrupted because it was opened to sexual perversion - don't let it happen to the armed forces as well or this will be just the start of the problems. People who can't control their sexual appetite will never be loyal to anything.
Reply 29 - Posted by: DepuTJones, 5/11/2004 8:55:58 AM
This article is a very good read, indeed. Sheesh, you's guys and gals crack me up! Mr. Pruden eloquently states what the majority of people feel but didn't quite know how to articulate it. These pompous windbags in Congress and the Senate (along with their astute media hounds) have once again made an entire mountain range out of a couple of anthills.
Reply 30 - Posted by: Hermoine, 5/11/2004 9:01:18 AM
Apparently, it is not just our school children who can't read, it is our congressrats too. We may as well go back to heiroglyphics/picture books as the main form of communication for society.
Reply 31 - Posted by: Sunflower, 5/11/2004 9:01:45 AM
Congress knew in January and didn't say a word, why? They were too busy getting a deeeemonkRAT ready to be elected. First things first. This erased madame Horelick from the headlines, just as con-didit was erased from the headlines before being tried, and allegedly guilty. These pics are a setup, if not, why weren't they sent to Sec'y. Rumsfeld at once, instead of to the Press. If I worked for a Company, that my Supervisor ignored me, I would see the President of that Co. knew, not another company who wouldn't know me from whoever?????? This is a deeeemonkRAT setup, to get President Bush through Sec'y. Rumsfeld.
Reply 32 - Posted by: Shannon, 5/11/2004 9:03:19 AM
Sorry I meant #20
Reply 33 - Posted by: mc squared, 5/11/2004 9:08:12 AM
How about a Zogby poll on the members of Congress.
Reply 34 - Posted by: suse, 5/11/2004 9:08:40 AM
reguarding who the 17 were..... i remember reading on lucinanne this weekend, someone posted the names and all but two were dems.
Reply 35 - Posted by: shurnuff, 5/11/2004 9:28:16 AM
Congressmen can't bother with the words in newspapers and magazines, but they understand the pictures in a newspaper or magazine.
Just as I thought.... the dems themselves (who accused GW of being dense and reading the funnies because of the pictures) need to have "widdle pitcher books" to understand what is happening... LOL!
Reply 36 - Posted by: suse, 5/11/2004 9:35:07 AM
sorry for the typos. need my coffee and reading glasses. i tried finding the names but to no avail :-( but it seemed the names had mostly west virginia or virginia connections.
Reply 37 - Posted by: nevernaught, 5/11/2004 9:36:15 AM
Well if those are the new rules then I want to see pictures of...A cowardly Teddy Kennedy and his excellent bridge adventure with a few photos of the deceased.
Robert Byrd in his KKK white sheet outfit while he and other cowards burn crosses in front lawns and also burn black owned houses.
Intern abuse at the Clinton White House with overweight Monica types giving presidential head.
The list is endless.
Reply 38 - Posted by: TnEm, 5/11/2004 9:53:43 AM
We demand to know who the Self-righteous Seventeen are! What did they know and when did they know it?
Reply 39 - Posted by: Allegra, 5/11/2004 10:11:07 AM
I guess this is what Hillary meant when she said this stuff was 'well known'.
Funny, I remember when Juanitta Broadderick made her claim of rape, Eleanor Clift called it 'a stale story'.
Here...Hillary seems to have known about this...and she didn't bring it up or report it or seem to concerned.
A stale story.
Reply 40 - Posted by: fairplay, 5/11/2004 10:34:02 AM
Don't ask! Don't tell!
Reply 41 - Posted by: kiwi2, 5/11/2004 10:39:06 AM
Shame on them.
Shame.
Reply 42 - Posted by: richdet, 5/11/2004 10:53:55 AM
#34/36: my recollection is that a poster pulled together a list speculating who the 17 congressmen might be. The poster did so by looking at the reps for the reservist's district and neighboring districts. (That's the way I remember it anyway.)
It may turn out that the poster's speculations were on target, but I don't believe we have seen any names of the 17 congressmen actually reported by the diligent members of the media. I draw my own conclusions from that omission.
My apologies if my recollection of the origin of the poster's list is faulty.
Reply 43 - Posted by: Texas Pete, 5/11/2004 11:07:21 AM
Anyone with any experience at all with the justice system knows that parading evidence to the press really screws up a trial.
The Congresscritters seem to believe (even though many are law school grads) that face time in front of cameras outweigh the importance of investigations and trials.
Reply 44 - Posted by: pepperblue, 5/11/2004 11:10:23 AM
Reading about these mental giants reminded me of my 3-year old granddaughter. She would rather look at pictures in her books and make up her own story, than listen to the words that tell the real story.
Reply 45 - Posted by: Delilah, 5/11/2004 11:16:49 AM
I have found over the years that 99% of congressional hearings are about grandstanding for the people behind the photographers. All those photographers being allowed to sit in front of the grand inquisitors tells me this is not serious business but show business. It is disgusting!!!
Reply 46 - Posted by: Yorkiemom, 5/11/2004 12:09:22 PM
Wes has a way with words and tells it like it is. Stupid blowhard senators.
Reply 47 - Posted by: jleev, 5/11/2004 12:16:00 PM
Rush just gave the names on the list. Almost all dems inclucing Kennedy, Bayh, Clinton, Byrd. Unbelievable.
2 republicans
Reply 48 - Posted by: richdet, 5/11/2004 12:21:09 PM
Rush just played a tape of the reservist's uncle on MSNBC indicating he contacted the following 15 people, 14 of them Dems:
Jack Reed (RI)
Mark Dayton (Minn)
Byrd (West Va)
Bill Nelson (Fla)
Evan Bayh (Ind)
Mark Pryor (Ark)
Ted Kennedy (Mass)
Ben Nelson (Neb)
Hillary Clinton (you've heard of her)
Joe Lieberman (Conn)
Daniel Akaka (Haw)
Roscoe Bartlett (Md; the only Republican)
Paul Sarbanes (Md)
Jay Rockefeller
Gov Mark Warner (Va)
Reply 49 - Posted by: elsapatriot, 5/11/2004 12:23:09 PM
Rush just listed some of the 17 names that the uncle of the MP being investigated sent info to:
DEMOCRATS - (Sens.) Reed, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Clinton, Ben Nelson, Kennedy, Pryor, Bayh, Bill Nelson, Byrd, Dayton, Lieberman, Akaka, Gov. Warner (VA). REPUBLICANS - Bartlett
According to Rush, only Byrd's office responded saying they don't respond to e-mails that are under 500 words. Rush went on to say that the uncle, after getting no response, contacted Hackworth.
Reply 50 - Posted by: Annie Colorado, 5/11/2004 12:28:41 PM
Jay Rockefeller as well.
Reply 51 - Posted by: richdet, 5/11/2004 12:29:02 PM
I should have indicated "West Va" after Rockefeller's name.
As Rush points out, we probably will never hear about this issue ever again in the media. But, as I posted earlier today, we now understand why the stories this weekend never got around to listing the people contacted by the reservist's family. The uncle explained that they contacted mostly Democrats because the family figured that Dems would be most likely to be sympathetic to his nephew's cause.
It figures that Byrd will not entertain communications from constituents that are shorter than 500 words. He only wants to hear from fellow gasbags.
Reply 52 - Posted by: mabelkitty, 5/11/2004 12:44:16 PM
Offending Congresscritters who should be forced to resign are:
All Democrats except for Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, Sgt. Frederick's congressman.
Senators Jack Reed, Mark Dayton, Robert Byrd, Bill Nelson, Evan Bayh, Mark Pryor, Edward Kennedy, Benjamin Nelson, Hillary Clinton, Joseph Lieberman, Daniel Akaka, Paul Sarbanes, John D. Rockefeller, Governor Mark Warner and Rep. Roscoe Bartlett.
Reply 53 - Posted by: Christie, 5/11/2004 12:52:53 PM
Surprise, surprise!
I don't know about most of those senators but Hilly didn't want to get her buddy, Karpinski, in trouble. As a matter of fact, I think HRC picked the lawyer who she's brought to the talk shows with her. Victim, my patootie.
But seriously, wouldn't Hilly's criticism of the prisons in Iraq be a tad uncomfy for her? After all, she's gonna want to be able to 'get the info' when she's in charge, NO?
#6 says it much better than I...but, there's more here than meets the casual eye. Hilly's choice to be on this committee puts her in the perfect position to throw bombs on Dubya, but could it be that they could explode on Her Grand Thighness?
Reply 54 - Posted by: Allegra, 5/11/2004 12:54:45 PM
Yes, the media will ignore this, because it makes Hillary look BAD.
Reply 55 - Posted by: GoldenSt8r, 5/11/2004 2:00:10 PM
Several of the Senators in today's hearing cited news articles as the basis for their questions. ''I read in the Post over the weekend, blah, blah, blah and I DEMAND to know what you say to that!''
Yet what they say in this article seems quite the opposite. Hypocrites!
Reply 56 - Posted by: Photoonist, 5/11/2004 2:06:02 PM
The only way to get the Dems attention is through pictures, or maybe coloring books. The same way you have to get children's attention.
Reply 57 - Posted by: rectifier, 5/11/2004 2:24:38 PM
For #10,
Perhaps our military leadership knows more about warfare and insurrections than the grossly political body conducting these hearings.
The recent revelation, confirmed by vivid pictures on an internet site, of the beheading of an American civilian contractor, Nick Berg, in Iraq was accompanied by the “vindication” by his murderers that it was the broadcast abuse of Iraqi prisoners that gave them license to kill him.
They may well have murdered him anyway, but it is clear that the unnecessary widespread dissemination of the Abu Ghraib abuses has lent a modicum of justification to these Al Qaida atrocities which began long before Abu Ghraib was occupied by American forces.
Will the MSM, and moreover the unabashed politicking by the Dems who are more interested in replacing Bush than winning a war and saving American lives accept any responsibility?
Of course not!
Reply 58 - Posted by: mama meatballs, 5/11/2004 3:35:48 PM
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!! FIGHT THE MEDIA!!!
Reply 59 - Posted by: janjan, 5/11/2004 4:00:17 PM
Ted Kennedy is a loose-lipped drunk and I wouldn't trust him with anything that hasn't been already been printed in a newspaper - and even then, he isn't likely to 'get it'.
Reply 60 - Posted by: berserker, 5/11/2004 5:02:59 PM
Kennedy reads any script the MSM puts in front of him, it was the media that saved his butt and career; they own him.
Reply 61 - Posted by: brg119, 5/11/2004 6:09:35 PM
Thank goodness we do not to listen to the 'partisian press' all the time anymore. We have Rush, Lucianne. Hannity, Laura Ingles, Ann Coulter, etc.,etc.,. Most of the News Anchors are so crooked anymore they have to swivel into their clothes. IT WILL TAKE MORE THAN PICTURES FOR some ofthese reporters to ever gain credibility, and most of the Main Media is as bad.
Reply 62 - Posted by: commontater, 5/11/2004 7:34:40 PM
Swimmer Kennedy got the info months ago,but without pictures,he could not understand it.
When he saw the pictures,he probably told his staff "Those guys over at Abu Ghraib prison must really know how to throw a party".
Reply 63 - Posted by: bighambone, 5/11/2004 7:52:58 PM
What reportedly happened in those prisons where Iraqis were humiliated by American soldiers is kid stuff compared to what the Iraqis and other Arabs have to doing to Americans just look at the Nick Berg killing as one instance.
Reply 64 - Posted by: thezapper, 5/11/2004 7:56:21 PM
Even after staff members showed Senator Kennedy (D-Chivas) the pictures, he did not immediately click to what he saw. His first intuition was that it was Barney Frank's vacation pictures.
Reply 65 - Posted by: kelcom, 5/11/2004 8:02:34 PM
Have we learned nothing from eight years of the Hillbillies?
This Uncle guy's mistake is he went to the dems with the prisoner abuse story.
The dems reflexively assumed they had been caught in yet another sex scandal, invoked a level pink alert, assumed the 'it's-their-personal-life' posture and used the remaining time to make sure they were not involved.
Comfortable that no former dem presidents, alcoholic dem senators or intern losing dem represenatatives were involved they gave the nod to their buds in the partisan media to release the photos.
End of story.
Reply 66 - Posted by: realrep, 5/11/2004 9:10:39 PM
We need an investigation into the lack of response from these 17 congresscritters!
Reply 67 - Posted by: grey gent, 5/11/2004 9:26:03 PM
Most of the Congressmen contacted by the father are on the Senate and House Armed Forces Committee. I guess they were too busy, or maybe they thought it was all about don't ask, don't tell.
Reply 68 - Posted by: reality, 5/11/2004 10:33:05 PM
No more television in the capitol. It befuddles the brains? of these congresscritters.
Reply 69 - Posted by: pipe, 5/11/2004 11:24:29 PM
We need a major overhaul of our congressmen and senators next November. Make sure you get the votes out...
Reply 70 - Posted by: lelande, 5/11/2004 11:41:43 PM
I think the pictures were taken to build a playing card deck and the Iraqis were promised a deck.
That's as good as the BS in Congress today.
Reply 71 - Posted by: Polecat49, 5/12/2004 12:50:46 AM
It doesn't do any good to notify most of Congress members. unless you build up press coverage first. The only other method is to send big bucks.
Reply 72 - Posted by: Ida Lil, 5/12/2004 1:59:01 AM
Just check out which of these 17 or their aides visited Iraq since January---and the prison. then follow the film and money.
There were no photos until the dems bought and paid for them.
if the so called abusers were into prono activities all it took was a little blackmail.
Now which expert did Kerry send on the fact finding trip to Iraq and run down teresa's donations too?
Demand that the ethics committee try these critters for inspiring to sedition and treason.Then force at least RED TED and OLD BYRD to resign.
