Obama orders stop to Abu Ghraib Photos part 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Cynthetiq · 05-13-2009, 10:17 AM

Quote:

View: Obama orders stop to detainee photo releases
Source: CNN
posted with the TFP thread generator

Obama orders stop to detainee photo releases
Obama orders stop to detainee photo releases

* Story Highlights
* NEW: Administration official says prison photos will not be released
* Photos show detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan between 2001 and 2006
* The release is response to lawsuit filed by ACLU
* Pentagon says photos don't represent a systemic problem

From Ed Hornick
CNN

(CNN) -- President Obama has ordered government lawyers to object to the planned release of additional detainee photos, according to an administration official.

The Defense Department was set to release hundreds of photographs showing alleged abuse of prisoners in detention facilities in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"Last week, the president met with his legal team and told them that he did not feel comfortable with the release of the [Defense Department] photos because he believes their release would endanger our troops, and because he believes that the national security implications of such a release have not been fully presented to the court," the official said.

"At the end of that meeting, the president directed his counsel to object to the immediate release of the photos on those grounds. ... [Obama] strongly believes that the release of these photos, particularly at this time, would only serve the purpose of inflaming the theaters of war, jeopardizing U.S. forces, and making our job more difficult in places like Iraq and Afghanistan."

The release is in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. It follows President Obama's decision to release Bush-era CIA documents showing that the U.S. used techniques like waterboarding, considered torture by the current administration.

Photographs released in 2006 of detainees being abused and humiliated at the Abu Ghraib military prison in Iraq sparked widespread outrage and led to convictions for several prison guards and the ouster of the prison's commander.

The Pentagon shut down the prison in the wake of the scandal, but it reopened under Iraqi control this year.

The ACLU said the Pentagon had agreed to release a "substantial" number of photographs by May 28. Officials at the Pentagon have said the photographs are from more than 60 criminal investigations between 2001 and 2006 and show military personnel allegedly abusing detainees.

"The disclosure of these photographs serves as a further reminder that abuse of prisoners in U.S.-administered detention centers was systemic," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU National Security Project. "Some of the abuse occurred because senior civilian and military officials created a culture of impunity in which abuse was tolerated, and some of the abuse was expressly authorized. It's imperative that senior officials who condoned or authorized abuse now be held accountable for their actions."

ACLU attorney Amrit Singh adds that the photographs "provide visual proof that prisoner abuse by U.S. personnel was not aberrational but widespread, reaching far beyond the walls of Abu Ghraib."

But Pentagon officials reject ACLU allegations that the photos show a systemic pattern of abuse by the military.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Defense Department has "always been serious about investigating credible allegations of abuse."

"The policy of the Department of Defense is to treat all prisoners humanely, and those who have violated that policy have been investigated and disciplined," he added.

More than 400 people, Whitman said, have been disciplined based on investigations involving detainee abuse. The discipline ranged from prison sentences to demotions and letters of reprimand.

The Pentagon wanted to prevent the images from being put into the public domain but decided to release them after losing two court cases, according to Whitman.

"We felt this case had pretty much run its course," he said. "Legal options at this point had become pretty limited."

Last month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed concerns about the photo release, saying that terrorist groups like al Qaeda could exploit the photos to recruit terrorists or incite violence.

It's a sentiment echoed by two veteran U.S. senators. In a March 7 letter to the Obama administration, Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, and Joe Lieberman, I-Connecticut, expressed concern over the new photographs.

"We know that many terrorists captured in Iraq have told American interrogators that one of the reasons they decided to join the violent jihadist war against America was what they saw on Al-Qaeda videos of abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib," the senators wrote. "Releasing these old photographs of detainee treatment now will provide new fodder to Al-Qaeda's propaganda and recruitment operations, undercut the progress you have made in our international relations, and endanger America's military and diplomatic personnel throughout the world."

Andrew McCarthy, writing on the Web site of the National Review, issued a harsh warning Tuesday: "American soldiers, American civilians, and other innocent people are going to die because Pres. Barack Obama wants to release photographs of prisoner abuse."

"The photos at issue won't tell us anything significant about prisoner abuse, and they may very well serve to distort reality. What seems certain is that they will get Americans killed," he added.

David Rehbein, the national commander of the American Legion, wrote in the Wall Street Journal last week that nothing good can come from the release of the photographs.

"Other than self-flagellation by certain Americans, riots and future terrorist acts, what else do people expect will come from the release of these photographs?" he asked.

But group such as Human Rights First have argued in the past that releasing photographs of alleged abuse is vital.

The group, in a release on its Web site, says it has set up a nonpartisan inquiry to "evaluate the full cost of abuses, look at how we got there, and come up with safeguards so we don't repeat the same mistakes."

"The U.S. needs to invest in a forward-looking strategy on intelligence gathering that gives interrogators training and guidance on which techniques work, and which techniques -- such as torture -- don't."

Do you agree with the President counsel's statement "only serve the purpose of inflaming the theaters of war, jeopardizing U.S. forces, and making our job more difficult in places like Iraq and Afghanistan."?

Do you think that the photos should be released?

I agree with the counsel. I don't think that it will benefit anyone to releasing the photos. We have a taste of what happened and that is enough. Opening old wounds, waking sleeping dogs.

Personally, I don't believe they should be released. I don't think that it serves anyone to release them at this time. Maybe in the future, as a retrospective after the military actions are completed in the Middle East. Until that time. Keep the photos classified.

ratbastid · 05-13-2009, 10:25 AM

I think that as a nation, we need to confront ourselves about this. Torture, prisoner abuse... None of this is who we say we are as a nation. But it happened. Sweeping it under the rug won't provide us anything but more of the same. We all need to take responsibility for this. All of us. We elected the bastard whose administration started all this, and we didn't storm the mother fucking bastille when we found out this stuff was happening.

Information wants to be free, friends. If it doesn't come out through official channels, it'll come up on some underground journalist's blog. It's just way too important.

Cynthetiq · 05-13-2009, 10:29 AM

The information is already out there, how much more information needs to be there?

What is being swept under the rug?

ratbastid · 05-13-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

The information is already out there, how much more information needs to be there?

What is being swept under the rug?

I'd assert that the information is NOT out there. If it were, there'd be nothing to protect by withholding the photos. Given that, I have no idea what's getting swept under the rug, and neither do you.

Cynthetiq · 05-13-2009, 10:38 AM

you're asserting that the information isn't there, but I'm going to state that they do exist.

First this article from Time.com suggests that Mr. Obama doesn't want it to be swept under the rug.

Quote:

Obama Wants Detainee Photos Blocked - TIME
The Obama official said the president believes that the actions depicted in the photos should not be excused and fully supports the investigations, prison sentences, discharges and other punitive measures that have resulted from them. But the president does not believe that so publicizing the actions in such a graphic way would be helpful.

Second, the cat is already out of the bag, there was torture by the military not just in Abu Ghraib but in other locations. What difference does it make if it was 1 building or 20 buildings? It's still something that needs to be dealt with at a high level to prevent such things from happening. That's something that you can agree with, so what difference does another set of photos make? How do you see it being helpful?

Willravel · 05-13-2009, 10:40 AM

Do you agree with the President counsel's statement "only serve the purpose of inflaming the theaters of war, jeopardizing U.S. forces, and making our job more difficult in places like Iraq and Afghanistan."?
No, he's being a moderate (coward). Our forces are jeopardized by being where they don't belong, not by admitting we have evidence against our own people. Naming (and prosecuting) the guilty here will go a long way to demonstrate that we're not massive hypocrites, and in the long run will likely save lives, or at least prevent deaths.
Do you think that the photos should be released?
Yes. Moreover, I think they should be released in conjunction with subpoenas.

powerclown · 05-13-2009, 11:10 AM

Good for Obama - he gets it. A sensible decision.

Zenturian · 05-13-2009, 11:21 AM

Wow, when Bush said the same thing, he was a tyrant...

Willravel · 05-13-2009, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenturian

Wow, when Bush said the same thing, he was a tyrant...

You should read PowerClown's older posts. He's being totally consistent on the issue. He never had a bad thing to say about Bush's torturing program.

Shell · 05-13-2009, 12:05 PM

Violence begets violence...so to dwell on this, especially with visuals, serves only to "flame the theaters of war" as Obama said. I personally don't want visuals of this nature engraved in my brain because that never goes away. I would have nightmares forever after. I have to protect myself from things like that....not to mention our children.

Strange Famous · 05-13-2009, 12:05 PM

They must be pretty fucking awful.

Obviously Obama made a moral judgment before he was in office, and now he's seen the photo's and I guess made a judgment that it could be bad enough to cause major civil unrest in Iraq he doesnt really have a choice bu to flip flop on it.

Basically I think we can take the fact that they want to keep them under wraps as evidence that the abuses are bad, worse than anything we've seen before, and they are scared of reprisals against their people if it gets out.

The real shame is that the criminals responsible will probably get off very lightly also if they cant afford the risk of what happened getting out by attempting to punish them.

roachboy · 05-13-2009, 12:29 PM

i don't follow the argument the administration is making. it seems to me that this is entirely a bone tossed to the military and intelligence communities; the rationale is most likely some vague thing about "morale"---as if that were the issue at stake in this. so it seems to me a kinda cheap political expedient that's being pitched with a superficial, not terribly coherent argument.

that said, i would prefer to see the photos released as evidence in a criminal prosecution of the architects of the policy. the people who carried out the orders have seemed to me in a more problematic situation from the viewpoint of prosecution---primarily because the united states did not commit the only real crime against humanity, which is losing a war and being occupied by another power.

i agree with the other rb above, that the main effect of this information should be a significant period of reflection and a revamp of rules that would prevent such excesses of conservative enthusiasm from happening again.

Cynthetiq · 05-13-2009, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

i don't follow the argument the administration is making. it seems to me that this is entirely a bone tossed to the military and intelligence communities; the rationale is most likely some vague thing about "morale"---as if that were the issue at stake in this. so it seems to me a kinda cheap political expedient that's being pitched with a superficial, not terribly coherent argument.

that said, i would prefer to see the photos released as evidence in a criminal prosecution of the architects of the policy. the people who carried out the orders have seemed to me in a more problematic situation from the viewpoint of prosecution---primarily because the united states did not commit the only real crime against humanity, which is losing a war and being occupied by another power.

i agree with the other rb above, that the main effect of this information should be a significant period of reflection and a revamp of rules that would prevent such excesses of conservative enthusiasm from happening again.

But doesn't or can't that already happen?

If there becomes video or audio footage, is it required to release that too in order to "reflect and revamp the rules"?

roachboy · 05-13-2009, 12:38 PM

maybe. it's hard to say without knowing the extent of the information, which would indicate the extent of the use of torture.
what about the extrordinary rendition program as well?

i think the issue here is that the use of torture was quite systematic, enough so that any notion of "bad apples" in one place is out the window.

it's because there appears to be not a little in the way of collective denial about this still happening that i think it would be good to continue with the ritual of releasing the information.

but again i don't buy the national security arguments at all.

Strange Famous · 05-13-2009, 12:44 PM

Everyone posting in here, or places like this, have the possibility to make a moral judgment on this.

The President doesnt. He has to make a call that has implications and real results in the world.

If these pictures are as bad as we all must fear, Obama has to judge if they get out they could lead to rioting on the streets of Iraq, the deaths of civilians and American soldiers, even the collapse of law and order in parts of Iraq.

He has to make his decisions in that context... well they get out anyway? What interests are served by admitting the crimes that have taken place? Natural justice DOES matter, but so does the blood of real people. The blood of the victims cries for vengence, but he must fear further violence.

My view would be to release it, because its gone too far and will get out anyway, so I think Obama is wrong in this case... but again its easy for me to to make a call when what I say doesnt matter.

Willravel · 05-13-2009, 12:51 PM

I suspect, as far as the national security argument goes, the opposite is in fact true. They're seeing a cover-up, do you think that will make "them" more or less likely to distrust and dislike us? If we were to have open and public investigations, seeking justice, do you think "they" would be more or less likely to distrust and dislike us? This seems a very, very simple matter.

Strange Famous · 05-13-2009, 01:02 PM

Will, that question is very easy to answer for anyone

If at the moment people in Iraq suspect there were abuses that are being covered up, they will be far less angry than if they see all of the media photographs of Iraqi citizens being brutalized, tortured and killed. Seeing for themselves the images will create rage, a feeling of national humiliation, and very likely reprisals against western forces, western civilians, or a government that is seen as linked heavily to the West.

(And I dont know what these photo's show, but we all must suspect it is very bad... and will include disgusting violence, possibly even against women or teenage boys)

powerclown · 05-13-2009, 01:39 PM

Next, I want to see Obama on an Apologies to America Tour. After going around the world calling America morally bankrupt for our Bush era security policies only to uphold most of them now he's in power, it's only fitting that he owes us a big apology.

Willravel · 05-13-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

If at the moment people in Iraq suspect there were abuses that are being covered up, they will be far less angry than if they see all of the media photographs of Iraqi citizens being brutalized, tortured and killed. Seeing for themselves the images will create rage, a feeling of national humiliation, and very likely reprisals against western forces, western civilians, or a government that is seen as linked heavily to the West.

The problem with this theory is that Iraq doesn't exist in opposite world. They're aware of the people being tortured and killed, in fact there's direct evidence from military and intelligence officers that people we've captured fighting us in Iraq were doing so because of the torture. They're angry that it happens, but more angry that it's allowed to continue. Releasing these photos is a step in correcting the egregious behaviors that "they" hate us for. It's plainly obvious that they would find any movement toward correcting the mistakes or brining those responsible to justice as a positive.

ratbastid · 05-13-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

Next, I want to see Obama on an Apologies to America Tour. After going around the world calling America morally bankrupt for our Bush era security policies only to uphold most of them now he's in power, it's only fitting that he owes us a big apology.

Because you're the Real America, right? Both of you?

For the record, Obama has done a damn-near-180 on most of the so-called War On Terror policies. Throw this one in and it's like a 175.

powerclown · 05-13-2009, 03:46 PM

Oh yeah? 175 degree reversal you say...how do you figure?

Quote:

*Plans to deploy 15,000+ additional troops into Afghanistan.

*Admittance of a nuclear Iran as a significant threat.

*"Residual troop deployment" after official troop removal in 2010.

*Vows publicly to "continue to forcefully pursue radical Islamic terrorists who are intent on launching an attack on America..."

*Forcefully reiterates Israel's right to defend itself.

In substance (the rhetoric is differnt, granted), I don't see too much reversal from Bush's foreign policies in these particular areas, and certainly nowhere near on the level of the CHANGE antiwar platform he ran and won on. Feel free to point out those reversals though, I would be curious to read them.

Willravel · 05-13-2009, 07:03 PM

I'm afraid this thread has to become NSFW:

Prosecution is necessary.

roachboy · 05-13-2009, 07:12 PM

actually, powerclown, if you had the faintest idea what you were talking about it might appear to you more obvious that things have, in fact, changed and changed pretty substantively from the period of the bush people. the rejection of torture as a matter of state policy for example. it is not at all obvious that the obama administration's policy toward israel is going to resemble that of the bush people at all--but you'd have to read a bit of information that does not come pre-chewed by whatever non-sourced conservative source you seem to confuse with something accurate. the policy toward iran really could not be more different than the one-dimensional dick-waving of the bush people. the "residual troop deployment" i assume speaks to iraq, which is entirely a bush fiasco and yet another of the fetid, stupid gifts those idiots left the rest of us that keeps on giving.

i think that there should be prosecution of the architects of the bush people's torture policies.
but i outlined in another thread the problems i see with this happening, and so far it seems to me that what i put in that thread's been pretty accurate.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2009, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

Prosecution is necessary.

You or ratbastid still not explained how MORE of these kinds of pictures changes the landscape of what happened or what can happen in the future.

The only thing I detest about these photos here now is that they are over sized and that they reformat how the thread is producing causing a side scroll bar and breaking up the CSS.

ratbastid · 05-14-2009, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

In substance (the rhetoric is differnt, granted), I don't see too much reversal from Bush's foreign policies in these particular areas, and certainly nowhere near on the level of the CHANGE antiwar platform he ran and won on. Feel free to point out those reversals though, I would be curious to read them.

His platform was against the war in Iraq. He was always very clear that he was for increased presence of force in Afghanistan. It fits your inter-cranial narrative better to have him be a failed antiwar flowerchild, I know, but it's not consistent with what the man SAID.

He's announced plans to close Guantanamo.
He's ended extraordinary rendition.
He's said we're not waterboarding anymore.
The list goes on, but you won't pay it any attention, so why bother.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetic

The only thing I detest about these photos here now is that they are over sized and that they reformat how the thread is producing causing a side scroll bar and breaking up the CSS.

Sorry the evidence of the moral trashing of your country is causing you to have to move your hand a little bit.

That is EXACTLY what I mean when I say that as a nation, we're not confronting reality about this thing. If we really dealt with how much our moral standing, the thing that makes us great and separates us from other nations, got flushed down the toilet, and really dealt with our own complicity in that, then something would have to change about how we operate in the world. But as long as we can have this be a back-of-consciousness nuisance, we never have to do that, and we're guaranteed more of the same.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2009, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

His platform was against the war in Iraq. He was always very clear that he was for increased presence of force in Afghanistan. It fits your inter-cranial narrative better to have him be a failed antiwar flowerchild, I know, but it's not consistent with what the man SAID.

He's announced plans to close Guantanamo.
He's ended extraordinary rendition.
He's said we're not waterboarding anymore.
The list goes on, but you won't pay it any attention, so why bother.

Sorry the evidence of the moral trashing of your country is causing you to have to move your hand a little bit.

That is EXACTLY what I mean when I say that as a nation, we're not confronting reality about this thing. If we really dealt with how much our moral standing, the thing that makes us great and separates us from other nations, got flushed down the toilet, and really dealt with our own complicity in that, then something would have to change about how we operate in the world. But as long as we can have this be a back-of-consciousness nuisance, we never have to do that, and we're guaranteed more of the same.

If it is of utmost importance as you state, why not put up on billboards and every news media/outlet channel, the SAME PHOTOS that exist? Why do NEW ONES need to be the catalyst? You're still not explaining it in any fashion. Because so far you've not furthered your statement except, "because I want it that way."

re: the giant photos I'd say the same thing about GIANT porn, cars, kids, whatever photos. My comment is about how the layout and coding of the site stays, not the content, you as a programmer should understand that.

roachboy · 05-14-2009, 05:58 AM

i think the problem here is pretty simple, and everyone had come down on one side of it or the other so far: either you consider the american security apparatus to be as much about image as substance and so see in the release of these photos a compromise of the image, or you see in the implementation of torture as the official policy of the united states--along with other "extra-legal" treats like extraordinary rendition, as in themselves political and ethical problems that require that we, collectively, address head on.

i am of the latter opinion---it is all to easy for a bureaucracy to institute policies of torture or worse and have that policy appear to be rational and necessary. bureaucracies are stupid machines. the Problem, then, is that the legal, political and ethical frames that are in place were not enough to stop the bush people from implementing torture policies. THAT is the issue, in my view.

the security apparatus approach seems to locate the Problem either inside the bureaucracy itself, and diverts it onto the question of "morale"--often of the same people who carried out the torture---or tries (in my view) to avoid the problem altogether by appealing to the exigencies of war. my objection to both is that the function in different ways to normalize the policy itself--and by doing that, they avoid the question.

there's another problem, which is cyn;s question but turned a little: is there a connection between releasing more photos and the first approach to the questions raised by the policy itself--and on that, i think the answer is circular and a function of which of the two basic positions concerning the problem in general that you adopt.

if that's accurate, maybe we could talk more directly about why these positions diverge as they do.
if that's not accurate, i'd be interested in reading how it isn't...

ratbastid · 05-14-2009, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

If it is of utmost importance as you state, why not put up on billboards and every news media/outlet channel, the SAME PHOTOS that exist? Why do NEW ONES need to be the catalyst? You're still not explaining it in any fashion. Because so far you've not furthered your statement except, "because I want it that way."

The whole truth needs to come out. The whole thing needs to be transparent. Withholding certain pieces of information is NOT transparency. We need to confront the whole of it--including the secrecy around it. More pictures aren't The Answer. A massive shift toward honesty and transparency might be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

re: the giant photos I'd say the same thing about GIANT porn, cars, kids, whatever photos. My comment is about how the layout and coding of the site stays, not the content, you as a programmer should understand that.

What you said was:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

The only thing I detest about these photos here now is that they are over sized and that they reformat how the thread is producing causing a side scroll bar and breaking up the CSS.

If you can honestly look at those photos and have "the only thing you detest" be that they break your layout... well, that's a problem.

I hate images that are wider than my layout. I REALLY hate that human beings have been broken, wounded, and humiliated in my name. I can't fathom that you could even compare the two.

ring · 05-14-2009, 07:10 AM

People reactions, vary widely, upon seeing mans inhumanity to itself.

The shock and horror of it can be overwhelming.

Like this: (warning - these images are graphic.)

Photographs Documenting the Holocaust in Hungary

All the detainee photos need to be released.

Willravel · 05-14-2009, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

You [and] ratbastid

... should become beat cops. I know. Ratbastid could drive a badass muscle car and I could be the funny guy that's trying to get girls.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

still not explained how MORE of these kinds of pictures changes the landscape of what happened or what can happen in the future.

Oh, well that's simple. A lot of people either still don't think we torture, or they think that the stuff we did wasn't that bad. Once the general public is of basically one mind about how bad things really got, the calls for investigations will become louder.

powerclown · 05-14-2009, 07:43 AM

Obama has a far left base that is calling, with complete lack of regard or perspective on national security, for documents and photos to be released in an attempt to somehow use it to prosecute officials of the former administration. They want revenge.

Of course this wont happen because all the release of documents will do is prove a large swathe of Democrats lied all along about their knowledge and involvement, and in an effort to clear themselves from blame, they will conveniently rationalize the interrogation techniques. In doing so, they will also by default, rationalize its use by the Bush Administration.

Which for example Dianne Feinstein (D) did:

Quote:

"I don't want to make an apology for anybody, but in 2002, it wasn't 2006, 07, 08 or 09. It was right after 9/11, and there were in fact discussions about a second wave of attacks"

Which is of course when and why they were implemented by the Bush Administration and apparently memos so far unreleased describe that the techniques did provide information stopping another attack. The left made another impotent attempt at blaming everything on Bush to remove eyes from Obama's missteps, but all it will do is dig a grave for the Democrats.

Now in 2009, releasing the photos will serve no one any purpose other than to get people killed, completely in spite of the outright lie that they'd be used to see if this treatment was of a broader scale and directly sanctioned and called for by former President Bush. I see it as grasping desperately for straws to try and live out the far left fantasies of imprisoning Bush administration officials.

I do hope if President Obama decides to step out of the corner he has painted himself into, he doesn't release the photos. Because if he does, he and all that called for them should be considered complicit in the outcome after the Muslim world is once again whipped into a frothing rage and decides to go bomb some markets and set up some IEDs.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2009, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

The whole truth needs to come out. The whole thing needs to be transparent. Withholding certain pieces of information is NOT transparency. We need to confront the whole of it--including the secrecy around it. More pictures aren't The Answer. A massive shift toward honesty and transparency might be.

What you said was:

If you can honestly look at those photos and have "the only thing you detest" be that they break your layout... well, that's a problem.

I hate images that are wider than my layout. I REALLY hate that human beings have been broken, wounded, and humiliated in my name. I can't fathom that you could even compare the two.

yes, I can say that because I am not looking at the photos nor including content or composition of them in my discussion of the layout, since I'm talking about CSS and the programming of how the display is with respect to images not sized for web forums. Besides that the horrible images, should I also comment on the poor lighting and shameful color correction?

But since you insist that I'm unable to detest something without respect to the content, I must be a horrible person.

Obviously you have no other answer, but "because I want it to be that way." and that's fine.

ratbastid · 05-14-2009, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

yes, I can say that because I am not looking at the photos nor including content or composition of them in my discussion of the layout, since I'm talking about CSS and the programming of how the display is with respect to images not sized for web forums. Besides that the horrible images, should I also comment on the poor lighting and shameful color correction?

But since you insist that I'm unable to detest something without respect to the content, I must be a horrible person.

Obviously you have no other answer, but "because I want it to be that way." and that's fine.

Are you being deliberately obtuse here? Or does it simply not bother you that human beings were tortured in your name? You're the only one who can't see the sand your head is buried in here.

The kind of self-inquiry and soul searching you've done in your 12-step work is exactly what America needs to do about this whole torture/Abu Ghraib/Gitmo situation. It's time for us to really tell the truth on ourselves. This is a unique moment in our history, with a unique opportunity to transform something. That'll only happen if we tell the WHOLE truth.

I don't understand what agenda is behind your denial of that and your dismissal of that point as something you think I want for no reason. You've consistently NOT ADDRESSED the nut of what I'm saying. So either deal with what I'm saying there is to deal with, and deal with it honestly, or continue lying to yourself. No skin off my back either way--I just hope that the rest of America reckons with itself with more honesty in this matter than you have so far.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2009, 08:09 AM

NO, it doesn't bother me, like I've said in other threads about torture. I am not bothered by torture. In my name or not, since I'm not the one doing it, I'm not directly involved in having done it. I am not able to take blame or credit for anything politicians do as individuals. You may wish to carry that burden, I chose not to.

I don't want the American government to torture people, but just like discovering corrupt politicians, it has happened, and will happen again. It's just a matter of time, may not happen again in your lifetime, but probably will happen again since human beings are particularly cruel individuals to other human beings. That's the TRUE manner that Americans need to understand about themselves. Not that "Oh, this is America and we don't do those kinds of things." No, it's America and fucked up people do fucked up things. "Let's try not to be fucked up."

My stance has not changed. I've reconciled this for myself as honestly as I see it. You're seeing it from a political point, I'm seeing it from an anthropological and sociological point.

I'll asking you again, what purpose does it serve to ADD more photos? How does 50 more photos make it better? Once America does your reconcillation, and goes in a positive path, if more photos are discovered, what purpose or point does releasing another 100 photos serve?

there's tons of photos of tortured individuals through the decades, how is another 50 going to make the point different?

Willravel · 05-14-2009, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

Obama has a far left base that is calling, with complete lack of regard or perspective on national security, for documents and photos to be released in an attempt to somehow use it to prosecute officials of the former administration. They want revenge.

"The left" wants torturers to be prosecuted. That's justice, not vengeance, and quite frankly it's a position that is ethically unquestionable. Moreover, as has been beaten into people for years on TFP, torture doesn't work and in fact is more likely to create terrorists than protect us from them. It's a shame that "the right" (you) have a complete lack of regard or perspective on national security.

---------- Post added at 09:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 AM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

You're seeing it from a political point, I'm seeing it from an anthropological and sociological point.

You're seeing it from an anthropological and sociological point, I'm seeing it from a mathematical and physical education point. I think you need to see it from my viewpoint despite the fact that we're posting in Tilted Politics, but I can't explain why.

dc_dux · 05-14-2009, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

Obama has a far left base that is calling, with complete lack of regard or perspective on national security, for documents and photos to be released in an attempt to somehow use it to prosecute officials of the former administration. They want revenge.

Ensuring that the past (any) president and executive branch upholds the rule of law and US treaty obligations is hardly seeking revenge.

Quote:

Of course this wont happen because all the release of documents will do is prove a large swathe of Democrats lied all along about their knowledge and involvement, and in an effort to clear themselves from blame, they will conveniently rationalize the interrogation techniques. In doing so, they will also by default, rationalize its use by the Bush Administration.

What the documents will prove is that the CIA started waterboarding BEFORE (August 02) any congressional briefing (the first in Sept 02). The docs will further prove that the CIA withheld from the Congressional security briefings the fact that the CIA and DOJ IGs questioned the legality of the enhanced interrogation techniques (EIT).

Quote:

Which is of course when and why they were implemented by the Bush Administration and apparently memos so far unreleased describe that the techniques did provide information stopping another attack. The left made another impotent attempt at blaming everything on Bush to remove eyes from Obama's missteps, but all it will do is dig a grave for the Democrats.

There has not been one memo released that suggests that the use of EIT prevented another attack. In fact, the so-called "second wave" attack on the west coast by Jemaah Islamiyah (the Indonesian group with al queda connections) was prevented in the planning stages, in the spring of 02, BEFORE any use of EITs.

You are confusing Cheney's attempt to protect his ass with the factual information released to-date, particularly the declassified portions of the CIA IG report.

Quote:

Now in 2009, releasing the photos will serve no one any purpose other than to get people killed, completely in spite of the outright lie that they'd be used to see if this treatment was of a broader scale and directly sanctioned and called for by former President Bush. I see it as grasping desperately for straws to try and live out the far left fantasies of imprisoning Bush administration officials.

The illegal invasion/occupation of Iraq got people killed...and was cited as a "cause celebre" for terrorist recruitment...as was the treatment of prisoners in Gitmo, Abu Grahib and "black prisons".

I would prefer that the photos be released in a closed session of the appropriate congressional committees or an independent investigator, along with documents that might suggest such abuses was NOT the work of a few low grade prison guards/interrogators, but a policy that was initiated at the highest level (that would be Rumsfeld/Cheney)

Quote:

I do hope if President Obama decides to step out of the corner he has painted himself into, he doesn't release the photos. Because if he does, he and all that called for them should be considered complicit in the outcome after the Muslim world is once again whipped into a frothing rage and decides to go bomb some markets and set up some IEDs.

Obama cannot unilaterally stop the release of the photos. It will be up to the courts, probably the Supreme Court...and his case will be very weak, considering the ruling of the Court of Appeals.

So... the facts pretty much counter every baseless allegation or assumption in your post.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2009, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

"The left" wants torturers to be prosecuted. That's justice, not vengeance, and quite frankly it's a position that is ethically unquestionable. Moreover, as has been beaten into people for years on TFP, torture doesn't work and in fact is more likely to create terrorists than protect us from them. It's a shame that "the right" (you) have a complete lack of regard or perspective on national security.

---------- Post added at 09:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 AM ----------

You're seeing it from an anthropological and sociological point, I'm seeing it from a mathematical and physical education point. I think you need to see it from my viewpoint despite the fact that we're posting in Tilted Politics, but I can't explain why.

I do, I've not discounted your point of view or position. I've simply asked, how will MORE photos make it better? How does MORE photos make the underlying idea of saying that torture is bad and America shouldn't be torturing anyone stronger?

dc_dux · 05-14-2009, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

I do, I've not discounted your point of view or position. I've simply asked, how will MORE photos make it better? How does MORE photos make the underlying idea of saying that torture is bad and America shouldn't be torturing anyone stronger?

The photos having nothing to do with "torture being bad", but are likely to provide further evidence of gross violations of law. Those photos, along with still classified documents, may prove that the actions were sanctioned at the very top of the administration...and this is worth pursuing if we believe we are a country of laws.

Cynthetiq · 05-14-2009, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

The photos having nothing to do with "torture being bad", but are likely to provide further evidence of gross violations of law. Those photos, along with still classified documents, may prove that the actions were sanctioned at the very top of the administration...and this is worth pursuing if we believe we are a country of laws.

That's a reasonable argument, but couldn't that still be accomplished by the Justice Department without releasing the photos to the general public?

Willravel · 05-14-2009, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

The photos having nothing to do with "torture being bad", but are likely to provide further evidence of gross violations of law. Those photos, along with still classified documents, may prove that the actions were sanctioned at the very top of the administration...and this is worth pursuing if we believe we are a country of laws.

Exactly. The point to all of this is about prosecuting those actually responsible, including the former president, vice president, and anyone else indicated by the evidence.

BTW, DC, after going to the Tea Parties, it's nice to know that some people still understand what "no taxation without representation" means.

---------- Post added at 09:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 AM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

That's a reasonable argument, but couldn't that still be accomplished by the Justice Department without releasing the photos to the general public?

There's an element of public pressure necessary to investigations like this. Remember Clinton? Remember the insane public outrage over his sexual impropriety?

05-13-2009, 10:29 AM	#3 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Location: Manhattan, NY	The information is already out there, how much more information needs to be there? What is being swept under the rug? __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

05-13-2009, 12:05 PM	#10 (permalink)
Shell Cheers Location: Eastcoast USA	Violence begets violence...so to dwell on this, especially with visuals, serves only to "flame the theaters of war" as Obama said. I personally don't want visuals of this nature engraved in my brain because that never goes away. I would have nightmares forever after. I have to protect myself from things like that....not to mention our children. __________________ ..."Say what you think. Those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind" ~ Dr. Seuss

05-13-2009, 12:05 PM	#11 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	They must be pretty fucking awful. Obviously Obama made a moral judgment before he was in office, and now he's seen the photo's and I guess made a judgment that it could be bad enough to cause major civil unrest in Iraq he doesnt really have a choice bu to flip flop on it. Basically I think we can take the fact that they want to keep them under wraps as evidence that the abuses are bad, worse than anything we've seen before, and they are scared of reprisals against their people if it gets out. The real shame is that the criminals responsible will probably get off very lightly also if they cant afford the risk of what happened getting out by attempting to punish them. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

05-13-2009, 12:29 PM	#12 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i don't follow the argument the administration is making. it seems to me that this is entirely a bone tossed to the military and intelligence communities; the rationale is most likely some vague thing about "morale"---as if that were the issue at stake in this. so it seems to me a kinda cheap political expedient that's being pitched with a superficial, not terribly coherent argument. that said, i would prefer to see the photos released as evidence in a criminal prosecution of the architects of the policy. the people who carried out the orders have seemed to me in a more problematic situation from the viewpoint of prosecution---primarily because the united states did not commit the only real crime against humanity, which is losing a war and being occupied by another power. i agree with the other rb above, that the main effect of this information should be a significant period of reflection and a revamp of rules that would prevent such excesses of conservative enthusiasm from happening again. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

05-13-2009, 12:38 PM	#14 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	maybe. it's hard to say without knowing the extent of the information, which would indicate the extent of the use of torture. what about the extrordinary rendition program as well? i think the issue here is that the use of torture was quite systematic, enough so that any notion of "bad apples" in one place is out the window. it's because there appears to be not a little in the way of collective denial about this still happening that i think it would be good to continue with the ritual of releasing the information. but again i don't buy the national security arguments at all. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

05-13-2009, 10:25 AM	#2 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	I think that as a nation, we need to confront ourselves about this. Torture, prisoner abuse... None of this is who we say we are as a nation. But it happened. Sweeping it under the rug won't provide us anything but more of the same. We all need to take responsibility for this. All of us. We elected the bastard whose administration started all this, and we didn't storm the mother fucking bastille when we found out this stuff was happening. Information wants to be free, friends. If it doesn't come out through official channels, it'll come up on some underground journalist's blog. It's just way too important.

05-13-2009, 10:40 AM	#6 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Do you agree with the President counsel's statement "only serve the purpose of inflaming the theaters of war, jeopardizing U.S. forces, and making our job more difficult in places like Iraq and Afghanistan."? No, he's being a moderate (coward). Our forces are jeopardized by being where they don't belong, not by admitting we have evidence against our own people. Naming (and prosecuting) the guilty here will go a long way to demonstrate that we're not massive hypocrites, and in the long run will likely save lives, or at least prevent deaths. Do you think that the photos should be released? Yes. Moreover, I think they should be released in conjunction with subpoenas.

05-13-2009, 11:10 AM	#7 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	Good for Obama - he gets it. A sensible decision.

05-13-2009, 11:21 AM	#8 (permalink)
Zenturian Banned	Wow, when Bush said the same thing, he was a tyrant...

05-13-2009, 12:44 PM	#15 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	Everyone posting in here, or places like this, have the possibility to make a moral judgment on this. The President doesnt. He has to make a call that has implications and real results in the world. If these pictures are as bad as we all must fear, Obama has to judge if they get out they could lead to rioting on the streets of Iraq, the deaths of civilians and American soldiers, even the collapse of law and order in parts of Iraq. He has to make his decisions in that context... well they get out anyway? What interests are served by admitting the crimes that have taken place? Natural justice DOES matter, but so does the blood of real people. The blood of the victims cries for vengence, but he must fear further violence. My view would be to release it, because its gone too far and will get out anyway, so I think Obama is wrong in this case... but again its easy for me to to make a call when what I say doesnt matter. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

05-13-2009, 12:51 PM	#16 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	I suspect, as far as the national security argument goes, the opposite is in fact true. They're seeing a cover-up, do you think that will make "them" more or less likely to distrust and dislike us? If we were to have open and public investigations, seeking justice, do you think "they" would be more or less likely to distrust and dislike us? This seems a very, very simple matter.

05-13-2009, 01:02 PM	#17 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	Will, that question is very easy to answer for anyone If at the moment people in Iraq suspect there were abuses that are being covered up, they will be far less angry than if they see all of the media photographs of Iraqi citizens being brutalized, tortured and killed. Seeing for themselves the images will create rage, a feeling of national humiliation, and very likely reprisals against western forces, western civilians, or a government that is seen as linked heavily to the West. (And I dont know what these photo's show, but we all must suspect it is very bad... and will include disgusting violence, possibly even against women or teenage boys) __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

05-13-2009, 01:39 PM	#18 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	Next, I want to see Obama on an Apologies to America Tour. After going around the world calling America morally bankrupt for our Bush era security policies only to uphold most of them now he's in power, it's only fitting that he owes us a big apology.

05-13-2009, 07:03 PM	#22 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	I'm afraid this thread has to become NSFW: Prosecution is necessary.

05-13-2009, 07:12 PM	#23 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	actually, powerclown, if you had the faintest idea what you were talking about it might appear to you more obvious that things have, in fact, changed and changed pretty substantively from the period of the bush people. the rejection of torture as a matter of state policy for example. it is not at all obvious that the obama administration's policy toward israel is going to resemble that of the bush people at all--but you'd have to read a bit of information that does not come pre-chewed by whatever non-sourced conservative source you seem to confuse with something accurate. the policy toward iran really could not be more different than the one-dimensional dick-waving of the bush people. the "residual troop deployment" i assume speaks to iraq, which is entirely a bush fiasco and yet another of the fetid, stupid gifts those idiots left the rest of us that keeps on giving. i think that there should be prosecution of the architects of the bush people's torture policies. but i outlined in another thread the problems i see with this happening, and so far it seems to me that what i put in that thread's been pretty accurate. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

05-14-2009, 05:58 AM	#27 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i think the problem here is pretty simple, and everyone had come down on one side of it or the other so far: either you consider the american security apparatus to be as much about image as substance and so see in the release of these photos a compromise of the image, or you see in the implementation of torture as the official policy of the united states--along with other "extra-legal" treats like extraordinary rendition, as in themselves political and ethical problems that require that we, collectively, address head on. i am of the latter opinion---it is all to easy for a bureaucracy to institute policies of torture or worse and have that policy appear to be rational and necessary. bureaucracies are stupid machines. the Problem, then, is that the legal, political and ethical frames that are in place were not enough to stop the bush people from implementing torture policies. THAT is the issue, in my view. the security apparatus approach seems to locate the Problem either inside the bureaucracy itself, and diverts it onto the question of "morale"--often of the same people who carried out the torture---or tries (in my view) to avoid the problem altogether by appealing to the exigencies of war. my objection to both is that the function in different ways to normalize the policy itself--and by doing that, they avoid the question. there's another problem, which is cyn;s question but turned a little: is there a connection between releasing more photos and the first approach to the questions raised by the policy itself--and on that, i think the answer is circular and a function of which of the two basic positions concerning the problem in general that you adopt. if that's accurate, maybe we could talk more directly about why these positions diverge as they do. if that's not accurate, i'd be interested in reading how it isn't... __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

05-14-2009, 07:10 AM	#29 (permalink)
ring ░ Location: ❤	People reactions, vary widely, upon seeing mans inhumanity to itself. The shock and horror of it can be overwhelming. Like this: (warning - these images are graphic.) Photographs Documenting the Holocaust in Hungary All the detainee photos need to be released.

05-14-2009, 08:09 AM	#34 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Location: Manhattan, NY	NO, it doesn't bother me, like I've said in other threads about torture. I am not bothered by torture. In my name or not, since I'm not the one doing it, I'm not directly involved in having done it. I am not able to take blame or credit for anything politicians do as individuals. You may wish to carry that burden, I chose not to. I don't want the American government to torture people, but just like discovering corrupt politicians, it has happened, and will happen again. It's just a matter of time, may not happen again in your lifetime, but probably will happen again since human beings are particularly cruel individuals to other human beings. That's the TRUE manner that Americans need to understand about themselves. Not that "Oh, this is America and we don't do those kinds of things." No, it's America and fucked up people do fucked up things. "Let's try not to be fucked up." My stance has not changed. I've reconciled this for myself as honestly as I see it. You're seeing it from a political point, I'm seeing it from an anthropological and sociological point. I'll asking you again, what purpose does it serve to ADD more photos? How does 50 more photos make it better? Once America does your reconcillation, and goes in a positive path, if more photos are discovered, what purpose or point does releasing another 100 photos serve? there's tons of photos of tortured individuals through the decades, how is another 50 going to make the point different? __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!