He should learn that if he's going to lie about John Kerry, he needs to nuance it better:
We know how the right-wing blogosphere did their best to turn away from, deny, ignore or minimize the introduction of torture as an interrogation technique by president Bush. We also know that John Kerry focus-grouped the issue and decided not to challenge the president on it once during the campaign. But Eric Umansky shows how the press played its part too.
Oh nice -- comparing John Kerry with right wing bloggers! Here is my e-mail that I fired off to Andrew (thereby missing the first part of JK's speech on C-SPAN -- I'm taping the rest):
Subject: Please -- For the love of God stop repeating this!
Dear Andrew,
Your blog is at its best when it seeks the truth, however grisly or disheartening, and even if the facts aren't in line with everything you had believed. Yet you seem to have a blind spot when it comes to John Kerry. Take your statement here:
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/09/ignoring_tortur.html We also know that John Kerry focus-grouped the issue and decided not to challenge the president on it once during the campaign.
Plain and simple, this sentence is a lie, and in order for you to maintain your integrity, I am asking that you make a correction. John Kerry DID speak out against the torture, the Abu Ghraib scandal, and the abuses at Guantanomo Bay. Period. It is in the archives and it is incontrovertible fact.
Here is your proof:
10/19/04
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46565-2004Oct19.html In a statement drawn up in response to our questions, the Democratic nominee declares that "a Kerry administration will apply the Geneva Conventions to all battlefield combatants captured in the war on terror."
snip
"We will abide by a principle long enshrined in our military manuals," says the Kerry statement: "That America does not treat prisoners in ways we would consider immoral and illegal if perpetrated by the enemy on Americans."
It looks like the Editorial Board at the Wall Street Journal (who think waterboarding is "well short of physical mistreatment") seemed to think that Sen. Kerry was going against the torture:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005836 Mr. Kerry sides against aggressive counterterrorism. Last month he announced that "a Kerry administration will apply the Geneva Conventions to all battlefield combatants captured in the war on terror." This reverses consistent U.S. policy since the Reagan administration to deny terrorists the legal status of honorable warriors. John Edwards has said that a Kerry administration would use the courts-martial that try U.S. servicemen, but not military commissions, for terrorists. This eliminates a significant American advantage in the war for information. Mr. Kerry's policy would prevent the U.S. from employing interrogation methods in Guantanamo Bay that go beyond polite conversation but fall well short of physical mistreatment. Under Geneva, a POW need only provide name, rank and serial number and cannot receive negative treatment for refusing to cooperate. At Guantanamo, by contrast, interrogators can reward cooperators with better food, more creature comforts and favorable plea bargains. Mr. Kerry's policy would dry up our most important method for stopping future terrorist attacks--gaining information from the terrorists themselves.
And here are the articles I sent you back in October 2005, which you have decided to completely forget:
THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ: CAPTIVES; Bush Voices 'Disgust' at Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners
New York Times, Late Edition - Final, Sec. A, p 1 05-01-2004
By THOM SHANKER and JACQUES STEINBERG; Thom Shanker reported from Washington for this article and Jacques Steinberg from New York.
Senator John Kerry, Mr. Bush's Democratic challenger, issued a statement Friday saying: "I am disturbed and troubled by the evidence of shameful mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners. We must learn the facts and take the appropriate action.
"As Americans, we must stand tall for the rule of law and freedom everywhere," Mr. Kerry added. "But we cannot let the actions of a few overshadow the tremendous good work that thousands of soldiers are doing every day in Iraq and all over the world."
And another:
Kerry Urges Bush to Voice U.S. Regret On Iraq Abuse
New York Times, Late Edition - Final, Sec. A, p 32 05-06-2004
By DAVID M. HALBFINGER
LOS ANGELES, May 5
Calling the administration's response to the abuse of Iraqi prisoners "slow and inappropriate," Senator John Kerry urged President Bush on Wednesday to express the nation's regrets and to offer an explanation to the world. But he stopped short of demanding that Mr. Bush apologize.
In his first public remarks about the mistreatment by American captors, Mr. Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential nominee, said the "horrifying" incidents at Abu Ghraib prison, outside Baghdad, were "absolutely unacceptable and inexcusable."
Sen John Kerry urges Pres Bush to express nation's regrets about abuse of Iraqi prisoners and to offer explanation to world, but stops short of demanding apology; calls mistreatment horrifying and inexcusable; responding to question about how he would handle situation, Kerry says situation in Iraq would be very different if he were in office; says Defense Sec Donald Rumsfeld should have notified Congress about events instead of having them find out through news reports; photo (M)
"I believe the president needs to guarantee that the world is going to have an explanation," Mr. Kerry said here at his first news conference in three weeks. He said the abuse had "done a disservice to all our troops" and could put soldiers in Iraq at greater risk, inspire more terrorism and undermine America's efforts in the Middle East.
"I think the world needs to hear from the president that the United States of America regrets any kind of abuse of this kind," he said.
Asked what he would say or do to repair the damage, Mr. Kerry demurred. "Let me just assure you that if I were president, we'd have a very different set of activities going on in Iraq today," he said.
Pressed on whether he believed Mr. Bush should apologize -- as have Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, and Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, the commander of American-run prisons in Iraq -- Mr. Kerry said: "The president of the United States needs to offer the world its explanation, and needs to take appropriate responsibility. And if that includes apologizing for the behavior of those soldiers and what happened, then we ought to do that."
Asked whether he believed that Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld should resign over the scandal, Mr. Kerry noted that he called for Mr. Rumsfeld's resignation months ago over what he called the lack of planning for postwar Iraq.
"With respect to this particular incident, we've got to have the facts," he said. "I want to know, as I think Americans do: Was this isolated? Does it go up the chain of command? Who knew what, when? All those questions have to be answered, so I don't want to shoot from the hip on that."
But Mr. Kerry did single out Mr. Rumsfeld for not notifying members of the Senate about the events at Abu Ghraib even when knowing that the CBS News program "60 Minutes II" was about to report on them last week. He also noted that while an Army report on Abu Ghraib abuses had been "in the pipeline for some period of time," Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday that he "hadn't even read the executive summary."
"I consider that slow and inappropriate," Mr. Kerry said.
And from a town hall meeting:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/08/26/kerry_faults_bush_rumsfeld_leadership_in_iraq_prison_scandal/Kerry faults Bush, Rumsfeld leadership in Iraq prison scandal
By Glen Johnson, Globe Staff | August 26, 2004
PHILADELPHIA -- John F. Kerry yesterday harked back to his service in the Vietnam War to decry the abuses that occurred at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, fault President Bush for failing to punish the wrongdoers, and renew his call for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign because of the problems under his command.
"For any person who has ever served in the military, we all know what 'chain of command' means, we know what accountability and responsibility means, and it's not just the little person at the bottom who ought to pay the price of responsibility," the Democratic presidential nominee said as he opened a town hall meeting intended to focus on job creation and economic issues. "Harry Truman had the sign on the desk and it said, 'The buck stops here.' The buck doesn't stop at the Pentagon."
Kerry's criticism was fueled by two new reports, the first of which faulted members of the administration for creating the environment in which prisoners were allegedly tortured and sexually humiliated. Written by a four-member panel headed by former defense secretary James R. Schlesinger, the report labeled the abuses "acts of brutality and purposeless sadism" and also said, "The abuses were not just the failure of some individuals to follow standards. . . . There is both institution and personal responsibility at higher levels."
The review panel said Rumsfeld and his top military advisers were partly to blame for the abuse, both for failing to set clear standards for prisoner interrogation and for failing to plan for a postwar environment in which the prison guards became overwhelmed by their responsibilities. Nonetheless, all four members of the panel -- who were appointed by Rumsfeld -- expressly stated he should not resign, with Schlesinger telling reporters at a news conference that Rumsfeld's resignation "would be a boon for all of America's enemies."
Another report, written by Army Major General George R. Fay, was released yesterday and recommended punishment beyond the criminal charges lodged against seven military police troops.
Kerry called on Bush to appoint another commission "that evaluates thoroughly all of the chain of abuses that took place, and why they took place, including the civilian side, the legal interpretations, the memoranda that were put out with respect to who was interpreting which law which way, who made what decisions about Geneva Conventions.
"That's leadership, and that's what ought to happen."
I googled some more, and found this:
http://civilities.net/AbuGhraibPetitionTimeline From 2004:
John Kerry, May 5th, at Colton High School in Los Angeles:
"The president of the United States needs to offer the world an explanation and needs to take appropriate responsibility. And if that includes apologizing for the behavior of those soldiers and what happened, we ought to do that."
Kerry campaign, May 7th 2pm email:
"Over the past week we have all been shocked by the pictures from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. But we have also been appalled at the slow and inept response by President Bush, which has further undermined America's credibility in the world and created new dangers for Americans in Iraq. George Bush must fire Donald Rumsfeld.
http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/rumsfeld.php"
Kerry campaign, May 7th 8pm email
"We reached our goal of 50,000 signers in a matter of hours and then blew past it to more than 64,000. So now we're setting a new goal: 100,000."
A few quotes from a NY Times article from 6/16/04 (I'm taking it from a blog post I found since I can't access the NYT archives):
http://incite1.blogspot.com/2004/06/kerry-downshifts-floors-it.html At an airport news conference near Cincinnati, Mr. Kerry also asserted that Mr. Bush had "underestimated the full impact" of the Iraqi prisoner scandal on America's reputation in the world. He said Mr. Bush should appoint an independent investigator to investigate the abuses--someone like Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona--"to prove to the world that this is really not going to be swept under the rug." Mr. Kerry has reportedly tried repeatedly, and in vain, to get Mr. McCain to consider being his running mate.
Mr. Kerry also said: "Torture is not acceptable, period. The United States of America has always been a leader in making it clear to the world that torture is not acceptable."
Thank you for your consideration of letting the truth prevail.
Sincerely,
Beachmom
There were some dissonant moments in his bid for middle-class support; he attended a celebrity fund-raiser Monday night at the sprawling estate of Jon Bon Jovi. And he was asked by a local reporter Tuesday how his championship of the middle class squared with his wealthy wife and lifestyle.
"It's not the size of your bank account," he said. "It's what you feel in your heart and your gut. If it was the size of your bank account, John Kennedy might not have been president. Franklin Roosevelt might not have been president."
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
