ACLU & ASSAD vs. Reality

John Stephenson writing at Stop The ACLU takes the ACLU to task for "incomplete" reporting and "cherry picking" in the story of the 21 Arabs supposedly "murdered" by Coalition forces over the last two years since the invasion. The ACLU, via "Freedom of Information" requests obtained reports on the deaths, while in custody, of some 44 individuals.

As reported by Fox News:

WASHINGTON � At least 21 detainees who died while being held in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan were killed, many during or after interrogations, according to an analysis of Defense Department data by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The analysis, released Monday, looked at 44 deaths described in records obtained by the ACLU. Of those, the group characterized 21 as homicides, and said at least eight resulted from abusive techniques by military or intelligence officers, such as strangulation or “blunt force injuries,� as noted in the autopsy reports.

In response, Stephenson writes:

Notice the leap to calling these deaths homicides. The ACLU bases these allegations on what? Their own word? They cherry picked 21 deaths from 44, and slapped them with the label of homicide. What I want to know is how this is any of the ACLU’s business anyway, and who is funding this attack on the military. We’ve all seen the photos at Abu Ghraib, and investigations were put into place.

War is ugly, and you can be sure the ACLU, who feel the need to stick its nose in foreign affairs of war, will not be going after any of the killers that sawed off the heads of American contractors, or burned them alive! No, these are the ones the ACLU have decided to defend. How American of them.

Further, the head of the ACLU (it has a head?... ed.) holds forth with:

There is no question that U.S. interrogations have resulted in deaths,� said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU’s executive director. “High-ranking officials who knew about the torture and sat on their hands and those who created and endorsed these policies must be held accountable.�

And, of course, Stephenson responds with:

Oh, now I see! The ACLU are not concerned with soldiers who go overboard. They are concerned about “high ranking officials.� They are concerned about our torture “policies.� You’ve got to be kidding ACLU!

Credible evidence missing:

1) An endorsed policy of torture. Can we please see this policy, or is the ACLU making this up out of whole cloth?

2) High ranking officials knowing about these things and sitting on their hands. Can we please see this evidence presented ACLU?

3) The 21 alleged instances of homicide, at least one of which is being openly disputed by the father of the alleged victim, somebody you wouldn’t exactly expect to be covering for the perpetrators.

In my opinion, the ACLU is full of allegations and empty on evidence.

I can't fault my friend John Stephenson. "So, Roper, what does this have to do with Assad?" you may ask! And well you should, since you are obviously, reading this blog thus you are obviously more intelligent than the average ACLU member. The difference is obvious.

Assad and company have been accused in the murder of former Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri last February. This has been duly reported in numerous publications, with a scathing indictment of the U.N. and Kofi Annan here by James Taranto of the WSJ. Taranto, writing in Best of the Web Today says:

According to the Times, "Mr Annan had pledged repeatedly through his chief spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, that he would not change a word of the report by Detlev Mehlis, a German prosecutor":

But computer tracking showed that the final edit began at about 11.38am on Thursday--a minute after Herr Mehlis began a meeting with Mr Annan to present his report. The names of Maher al-Assad, General Shawkat and the others were apparently removed at 11.55am, after the meeting ended.

Last week we noted an Associated Press report that Secretary-General Kofi Annan had said that "he is determined to keep an upcoming report into the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri from fanning tensions between Syria and Lebanon." Thanks to Bill Gates, now we know how far Annan was willing to go to protect the Syrian dictatorship."

The connection between the ACLU and Assad should be obvious by now. We go to great lengths to investigate and where appropriate, punish malefactors in our military. The UN and Syria, go to great lengths to cover up, hide, obfusticate and deride truth seekers.

To this cabal of true terror, France states, despite the completion of the Mehlis Report, that it is "Too Soon To Sanction Syria." Uh, haven't we been here before? Can you say "Saddam?" How about "Oil For Food?" Can you Say "Give (ineffectual) Sanctions time to work in Iraq?" OK, can you say "Screw the French?" And the ACLU too!